'Nobody wants to be spied on': Mayor defends surveillance cameras

Our Take

WSAZ NewsChannel 3 captured a familiar ritual: a mayor facing pushback on Flock Safety cameras responds not by pulling the plug, but by promising 'guardrails.' It's a line we've heard in city council chambers across the country. The pitch always sounds reasonable — policies, audits, limited access — but it rarely addresses the core problem. Once a network of ALPR cameras is logging every plate that passes, the data exists, and data that exists gets requested, subpoenaed, shared, or breached. Guardrails are a policy promise. The cameras are a permanent fact on the ground.

Saying 'nobody wants to be spied on' and then defending a system that photographs every driver's movements, regardless of suspicion, is a contradiction the mayor doesn't seem eager to resolve. Flock's own national network means local footage doesn't necessarily stay local — it can be queried by agencies well outside city limits, under rules residents never voted on and can't easily audit. 'Guardrails' sound comforting right up until a new chief, a new vendor contract, or a new data-sharing agreement quietly changes the terms.

If your town is having this same debate, don't just take the mayor's word for it — check whether Flock cameras are already watching your streets on our map, and use our take-action resources to push for real transparency instead of reassuring talking points.