Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to cancel or not renew Flock camera contract, citing privacy and error concerns
Summary
Two residents told the council that AI‑powered Flock cameras and drones pose privacy risks, produce false 'hits' and can be used to track travel patterns; they urged the city to cancel or not renew the contract and to invest in police staffing and transparency instead.
Several residents used the public‑comment period to urge the council to halt or refuse renewal of the city’s contract with Flock, the private company that supplies AI‑enabled license‑plate and camera systems.
“I'm asking the city council to cancel the Flock contract and or not to renew the contract,” said David Santoyo (transcribed also as Davis Antoyo), who cited reports of innocent people detained after erroneous Flock 'hits,' cases of tracking across jurisdictions, and concerns that corporate data storage burdens the power grid. “There is no peer reviewed study that states Flock cameras have decreased a crime rate,” he said, and recommended using funds for officer training and hiring instead of expanded surveillance.
Tim Ramsey, another resident, urged people to review the Police Department’s online transparency page showing camera and drone locations and recommended participation in the Citizens Police Academy to better understand how the technology is used. “They are a way of, in my opinion, skirting around the 4th Amendment using a privately owned company that is contributing the data,” Ramsey said.
City staff did not present a response during public comment; councilmembers did not vote on the camera contract at the meeting. The speakers asked the council to prioritize transparency and consider whether data practices and third‑party access raise legal or civil‑liberties risks.
