Automated License Plate Readers (Flock Cameras) and Surveillance

Expressed opposition to Flock cameras, arguing they constitute mass surveillance rather than safety and violate citizen privacy.

Expressed strong opposition to surveillance technology on behalf of Troy for Black Lives, calling for community-led safety.

An investigator noted that while information is useful, Flock cameras need strict guidelines, data evaporation rules, and citizen oversight.

Spoke against mass surveillance and supported local legislation restricting tracking systems.

Supported local law regulating ALPRs and criticized the administration for failing to provide requested police audit reports.

Supported ALPR regulation, noting that surveillance modifies behavior and creates privacy risks.

Opposed ALPRs as unconstitutional dragnet policing that bypasses warrants and civil rights protections.

Called for the removal of surveillance cameras, stricter data retention limits, and greater transparency from police.

Highlighted issues with the Flock vendor across the country and urged the city to bag cameras during the limbo period.

Shared an anecdote about Troy and Flock becoming synonymous nationally.

Questioned how camera contract funds could be better spent on children and community needs.

Urged the council to pass a strong local law rather than relying on weak internal police policies regarding ALPRs.

Demanded the removal of Flock cameras due to constant community opposition and lack of transparency.

Expressed strong support for local law restricting ALPRs and criticized police lack of transparency and fund allocation.