Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise privacy concerns over Flock camera contract; police cite public‑safety benefits
Summary
During public comment a resident questioned a roughly $25,000-per-year Flock camera contract and possible Fourth Amendment issues. The police chief defended the system as a targeted investigative tool that has aided theft and homicide investigations and said the cost is paid from TIF funds.
During public comment a Midlothian resident thanked the village for live-streaming and asked whether the board was reviewing the Flock camera contract, noting the village pays about $25,000 per year under the current arrangement and expressing concern about Fourth Amendment implications.
"We're paying $25,000 a year for a 2 year deal," the resident said, and asked if cancellation was being considered. The police chief responded that the system is primarily used against "hot files," such as wanted vehicles, and is not used for random surveillance. He said Flock alerts have helped identify stolen vehicles and provided investigative leads in cases including burglaries and a homicide investigation. The chief also said the contract payments are taken from TIF funds rather than the general fund.
Board members acknowledged privacy concerns raised by residents while noting the cameras' role in several investigations. No formal motion to cancel or modify the contract was made during the meeting; trustees indicated the matter will remain under consideration and that the chief and staff will continue to field questions from residents.
