Flock cameras

Expressed opposition to renewing the Flock camera contract, citing national instances of misuse and data privacy concerns.

Called for a line-item strike of Flock cameras from the budget and raised concerns regarding First Amendment rights in council chambers.

Opposed Flock cameras and Clearview AI, saying surveillance tools are being weaponized against immigrant neighbors and calling on the council to remove Flock.

Argued against national surveillance in favor of local civic identity, and criticized using opioid settlement money for surveillance cameras in other communities.

Warned the city could face costly lawsuits over the camera system and questioned whether that's the best use of taxpayer dollars.

Said residents were told last week they'd be treated as stakeholders, urged a provision blocking mass surveillance funding through private backdoor donations, and noted other surveillance tech already exists.

First-time commenter said residents simply don't want the cameras, questioned oversight of officer misuse, and noted the system is run by a private company.

Asked the board to deny funding and remove the Flock ALPR cameras, arguing they amount to warrantless surveillance of innocent residents, that their capabilities are undisclosed, and the data could be sold or abused.

Joined the request to remove the Flock cameras, calling their operation 'warrantless searches of your movements throughout the city,' and later disputed claims about the system's limited capabilities.

A Ward 4 resident who has researched the cameras himself called them egregious and asked the council to simply cancel the contracts and remove the cameras.

Cited misuse cases — a Tennessee grandmother wrongfully arrested via Clearview AI and a California officer who stalked a mistress using Flock data — arguing unchecked surveillance power is dangerous.

Referenced FBI procurement documents reported by 404 Media seeking broad ALPR access, saying federal access to Evansville's cameras is a matter of time, and urged ending the contract.

Read Flock's own product-demo quotes showing 'pattern of life' tracking capabilities, and challenged the council to protect immigrant communities by canceling the contract.

Pointed out the $142,500 annual subscription, the city doesn't own the equipment, and noted Bloomington declined to renew its Flock contract over similar concerns.

Read excerpts from residents' petition comments — the petition now has 718 signatures — opposing mass surveillance.

Delivered an original spoken-word performance comparing Flock's tracking to surveillance and control, in his role as co-host of Poetry Speaks.

Said his group's concerns list keeps growing and it has reached 50,000 people online; called Flock an $8.4 billion corporation using law enforcement as salesmen and demanded cancellation.

A military and law enforcement veteran said Flock doesn't meet two-decade-old security standards and urged the council to reconsider, noting opposition spans the political spectrum.

Quoted contract Section 11.9, arguing residents are paying Flock while assigning it intellectual property rights from any feedback — an outsized private benefit.