Residents raise privacy and security concerns about ALPR and leased Flock cameras

During the public‑comment period residents raised privacy and security concerns about the city's use of automated license‑plate readers and leased Flock cameras.

Ivan Sercic presented search statistics and argued the system's usefulness grows with network size; he said the city's data was queried hundreds of thousands of times by hundreds of organizations and asked whether local control over that data is meaningful when outside entities access it. "We're building a big search engine with pictures and maps of everyone's movements around town," he said.

John Hamilton, who previously reported cyber vulnerabilities to the council, urged stronger vendor accountability. He said the city leases the cameras and owns the data and criticized an effort to redact camera locations while the devices actively broadcast signals: "Trying to legally hide a camera that is actively broadcasting its own location is quite funny," he said, and urged the city to require vendor fixes or terminate the lease if security cannot be remediated.

The public remarks asked for greater transparency, better controls on external access, and clearer responses from the police and vendor on reported vulnerabilities. The council acknowledged the comments and referenced a recently launched transparency portal; staff indicated follow‑up with legal and police technology staff would be necessary.

Next steps: council and staff to review security, data‑access controls and the city's agreements with the vendor; public commenters asked for clearer public reporting and remediation plans.