Chandler Community Input | Flock Safety Contract

Our Take

When public comment overwhelmingly turns against a surveillance contract, the move shouldn't be to question who's allowed to have an opinion — it should be to listen. But that's exactly what happened in Chandler, where Councilmember Christine Ellis implied opponents weren't really "from" Chandler, prompting Mayor Kevin Hartke to force every speaker to state their address before talking. Credit to Jen's Two Cents for stitching together this collage of 41 speakers, because the result speaks for itself: 40 against renewing Flock Safety, one in favor, and that one lone supporter wasn't even from Chandler. The residency litmus test backfired spectacularly.

This is a pattern we see over and over in the fight against ALPR expansion: local officials treat a wall-to-wall automated license plate reader network as a routine procurement item, then act surprised when residents show up in force to explain why they don't want every trip they take logged, retained, and potentially shared with other agencies. The "are you even from here" deflection is telling. It's easier to question a speaker's zip code than to answer hard questions about data retention windows, who else gets access to the plate reads, and what happens when the system misfires on an innocent driver.

Chandler's hearing is a reminder that these contracts don't renew themselves quietly — public pressure works, but only when people show up and push back. If you want to see whether Flock cameras are already watching your commute, check our camera map, and if your city is up for a renewal fight of its own, our take-action page has tools to help you organize before the council chambers fill up.