During its meeting on Monday, Nov. 17, the Bay City Commission voted 6-2 to reject a two-year contract with the company for the implementation of 13 LPR cameras in the city for a total cost of $84,150. Ninth Ward Commissioner Cordal Morris and 5th Ward Commissioner Mike Zanotti voted in favor of the contract.
“We have a responsibility to our constituents who already do not trust this city to do what they want with the best options we have,” 6th Ward Commissioner Alexander Dewitt said during Monday’s meeting.
LPR cameras can capture and store images of vehicles. In addition to license plates, the cameras capture other vehicle information such as make and model.
The system would have alerted the Bay City Department of Public Safety when vehicles involved in serious crimes were identified.
The commission has been discussing the contract with Flock Safety since this summer, and funding for the camera system has already been set aside in the city’s budget. However, the contract still needed the commission’s final approval.
“It’s really distressful that we have to even come here to discuss this,” Bay City resident Richard Mastroianni said during the public comment portion of Monday’s meeting. “We’re giving up liberties for safety.”
Prior to the commission’s vote, Trevor Chandler and Mike Lampman of Flock Group Inc. gave a presentation on the matter, which was followed by a separate presentation delivered by ACLU policy strategist Gabrielle Dresner.
“We understand the intensity and the passion around this conversation,” Chandler said. “Every single person in this room today believes that the Bay City community deserves to feel safe.”
Dresner, who appeared via Zoom, said she is concerned about the lack of existing state regulations, including the storage of LPR data. Additionally, she is concerned that the department and vendor would be primarily responsible for regulating its use.
“As blankets of these readers cover our streets and the government stores this data for longer and longer periods of time, the technology quickly morphs into a powerful tracking tool that can reveal sensitive information about who we are and what we do, including what friends, doctors, political events, or churches a person may visit,” she said.
Dresner also proposed a policy from the ACLU to use as a model for its own policy.
“Our goal is to mitigate the unintended harms of this technology,” she said. “It’s widespread across both our state and the nation, and without proper guards in place, this can easily slip into a practice of mass surveillance or even abuse.”
Chandler defended the agreement and the use of Flock LPR cameras, claiming that many of the concerns raised about the contract are based on misinformation.
He also provided some statistics that he argues highlight the success other communities have seen after installing the cameras.
Chandler said an estimated 15% of crime is solved with Flock cameras. He also claimed the cameras have been used to find more than 1,000 missing people.
Before voting to reject the contract, some commissioners expressed concerns that the agreement would allow Flock Safety to share LPR data captured in the city in “good faith” in certain situations, particularly emergencies.
“One of the concerns I have is that it’s really hard to hold Flock accountable for any of these things,” 7th Ward Commissioner Christopher Runberg said.
Chandler said the city would own the data and argued that the use of the technology is constitutional and said there are guardrails in place to prevent bad actors from using the system.
“Flock is committed to working with the council, with the commission, with the police department, and to ensure that your community safety never has to come at the expense of community values,” he said.
About 20 residents voiced their opposition to the contract during the meeting, each of them citing privacy concerns among other fears.
Similar concerns were expressed by residents at past commission meetings and in response to the Bay City Public Safety department’s endorsement of the agreement.
“These devices have the opportunity to open a door that may not be allowed to be closed past a certain point,” said Bay City resident Jillian Cadena. “In a world where our country is also changing and defining what is considered hate speech, where and when certain people are considered worthy of rights or worthy of being human, how can anyone here expect Flock to not overstep?”
The Bay City Department of Public Safety had already proposed locations for the cameras and drafted a policy that would have regulated the department’s use of the camera system. A list of the locations and a copy of the policy were posted on the Bay City Department of Public Safety Facebook page.
Bay City Public Safety Director Caleb Rowell continued to voice his support for the system during Monday’s meeting, arguing there is “nothing that compares” to the technology offered by Flock Safety.
He also said he believes the technology could help his department solve shooting cases in the city.
“I think it’s just a minor tool in the long term based off of examples that I’m able to find on what it actually does,” Dewitt said.
Additionally, Mayor Christopher Girard said he’s concerned that the public can access data gathered by the LPR system by filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
“I know the technology works and I know it’s been great for other law enforcement agencies,” Rowell said. “I’m very confident that we can use this system without it being confused.”
Zanotti explained why he decided to support the agreement before the commission’s vote on the matter, saying that while the cameras don’t replace officers, they allow them to focus more on their other duties. He also noted surveillance technology is already becoming more prevalent.
“This ship has already sailed on our privacy,” Zanotti said.
Multiple commissioners cited the strong public opposition to the agreement ahead of their vote to reject it.
“Out of the two dozen people who talked at a city meeting and the others who contact me, I had one person who said anything positive,” Dewitt said. “That doesn’t happen in America.”
Dewitt also proposed that the funding set aside for the Flock cameras be reallocated to the city’s fire department fund and other safety department funds.
After rejecting the Flock Safety contract, the commission agreed to refer the proposed budget amendment to city staff for further consideration.
©2025 Advance Local Media LLC. Visit mlive.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
