Glenarden City Council accepts $40,000 public-safety grant for license‑plate readers after heated privacy debate

The Glenarden City Council on May 19 approved a $40,000 grant to fund live video and license‑plate recognition services and authorized the police chief to spend $25,000 of that grant on LPR and traffic analytics from Flock Group, Inc. The resolution directs use of cooperative purchasing and states the city will deploy LPR coverage at seven sites within the municipal limits.

The vote followed a long, sometimes tense exchange between council members who warned LPR would amount to an intrusive, constantly recording tracker and council members and the vendor representative who described the technology as a targeted tool for solving stolen‑vehicle cases, missing‑person investigations and other crimes.

“Reading everybody’s license plate that comes in and out of the city is an invasion of people’s privacy,” said Councilman Herring, who pressed for local crime data and questioned why some planned camera locations might view areas near private homes. “They record your license plate every time you enter and leave this city … and they can be tracked anywhere across this country.”

Brandon Williams, the Flock representative, told the council the system is intended to capture vehicle images and plate information — not facial recognition — and is designed for post‑incident searches rather than continuous manual monitoring. “The only intended use case is if something happens, a negative incident happens, we have recorded footage to look back on,” Williams said. He described audit controls, a one‑year retention period required by Maryland law and prohibited uses such as immigration enforcement.

Supporters also said the program leverages cooperative procurement and a time‑limited license. “We have a grant that’s going to pay for this system,” a council member backing the measure said during debate. “The license is for two years. If it does not yield the stats that council members are desiring, then we don’t have to renew it after two years.”

Opponents pressed for more public notice and transparency on camera placement and data access. Councilman Herring and others requested the crime‑statistical basis for deployment and questioned whether the vendor had fully disclosed opt‑out or homeowner exclusion features. Williams replied that an opt‑out 'safe list' is available for homeowners associations and that camera locations and contract signatures were not yet finalized; he offered additional demonstrations and said Flock can work with the city on placement and auditing procedures.

The resolution passed by voice vote. Council President Curtis asked that the council be included in decisions about precise camera placement and directed the chief, city manager and staff to collaborate with council members on locations and policy. The vendor and police said they would provide additional briefings and documentation.

What passed: Resolution R‑60‑2025 accepts the $40,000 GOCCP grant, names Flock Group, Inc. as the vendor by cooperative purchase, authorizes $25,000 of the grant for live video/LPR/traffic analytics, and takes effect immediately upon adoption.

Why it matters: Council debate highlighted competing priorities — privacy and civil‑liberties concerns versus the police department’s argument that new technology can help an understaffed force respond proactively and solve crimes more quickly. Maryland law’s reporting and auditing requirements for LPR systems were cited repeatedly as legal guardrails; council members asked for firm, written policies and routine reporting on system use.

Next steps: City staff and the police department will continue to work with the council on camera placement and to secure written policies and demonstration sessions. The vendor and police said audits and retention schedules required by Maryland law will be observed.