Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Cameras topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Rangely to remove Flock surveillance cameras, citing security and cost concerns
Summary
Public commenters told the Rangely Town Council the Flock camera system is a privacy and security risk and questioned the town's recurring contract cost; speakers asked the council to consider removing the system or renegotiating terms.
At the start of the meeting's public-input period, Mark Stamos urged the council to remove the town's Flock automated camera system, calling it a "private for profit mass surveillance system" and citing recent reporting about third-party access and software vulnerabilities. "The people do not want to be watched," Stamos said, and he handed printed material to council members for further review.
A separate resident questioned the town's spending on the system and asked for clarity about the town's contract. The resident said he believed the town was being asked to recommit to the cameras for a two-year arrangement and asked whether the annual cost was $9,000 (or $18,000 total over two years). Staff indicated the contract amount is roughly $9,000 per year and that the town must periodically recommit to the vendor.
Stamos claimed that some municipalities have discovered taxpayer money was used to build systems that make footage available to non-government entities, and he cited reports alleging vendor practices such as overseas annotation and unsecured live streams. The council did not take immediate action at the meeting; members accepted the written materials and public comment for consideration.
Why it matters: Council members will need to balance public safety benefits that police say such cameras can provide against privacy, cybersecurity and fiscal concerns raised by residents. Any formal decision to remove or renegotiate the contract would require future council action.
