Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Surveillance Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Cedar City council delays decision on Flock Safety camera contract after extended public comments

Cedar City Council · July 8, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a lengthy staff presentation and more than an hour of public comment focused on privacy, cybersecurity and mission creep, Cedar City Council voted unanimously to table a vote on renewing its Flock Safety contract until the July 22 meeting.

Cedar City Council on July 8 postponed a decision on renewing its annual contract with Flock Safety, the vendor that provides license-plate–reader cameras and related services to the police department. Police Chief Darin Adams and two Flock representatives opened the discussion with technical and policy details; dozens of residents spoke in public comment urging stronger safeguards or rejecting the technology entirely.

Mayor Steve Nelson set a tone of openness to public input: “I hope that our approach to the discussion that we can have tonight is truly that of a discussion,” he said as the Council prepared for public testimony. Chief Adams reviewed how the system is used operationally, the department’s audit controls, and the current retention policy: “In our policy and in the contract, it's 30 days,” he said, noting that neighboring agencies retain data longer.

Flock staff described technical controls and third‑party testing. Max Weinstein, the vendor’s director for public trust and technology, said image transit and storage run through an encrypted, CJIS‑compliant cloud environment and that the city retains ownership of the data. Vendor representatives also said a previously reported vulnerability affected a small set of devices and has been remediated.

Members of the public raised recurring concerns about surveillance scope, potential future expansion of capabilities, and cybersecurity. Brad Green urged creation of a citizen audit committee and recommended stricter contractual limits; others warned of “mission creep,” suggested monthly penetration testing and asked for a clear list of who holds decryption keys. Several residents cited national lawsuits challenging similar systems.

Councilmember Carter Wilkey moved to defer the contract vote until the July 22 council meeting and to increase patrols and signage near certain traffic-calming features; the motion passed unanimously. The transcript records the contract price in staff materials as $157,500 per year; the current contract period was already under way and the renewal discussion would affect the next payment cycle.

The council did not adopt new contract terms at the July 8 meeting. Mayor Nelson and Chief Adams said they welcome further questions and documentation; Councilmembers also asked staff to provide additional written analyses and to bring public-safety and procedural clarifications to the next meeting.