MOUNT VERNON — A crowd flocked in to Monday night’s Mount Vernon City Council meeting as officials scrambled to find extra chairs.
Flock cameras were the reason for the influx.
In recent months, interest in Flock has grown exponentially. Dozens of Mount Vernon residents have taken to social media to express their thoughts and concerns about the system.
In lieu of this chatter, Councilmember Dale Miller called Monday’s Police, Fire, & Civil Defense Committee meeting to open a dialogue with the public.
Law enforcement addresses public concerns
Mount Vernon Police Chief Robert Morgan addressed the council and public during the Monday meeting.
“Flock cameras (are) a brand of Automated License Plate Reader systems, ALPRs,” Morgan said.
Mount Vernon utilizes the ALPR system through Flock Safety. The city operates eight cameras. Private businesses or other entities own six additional cameras in Mount Vernon, according to a previous report by Knox Pages.
“Flock does not sell, nor does the Mount Vernon Police Department sell any of the data we have to these third parties,” Morgan said.
The City of Mount Vernon owns any collected data and deletes it on a rolling 30-day system, he said. Only individuals who have completed the Criminal Justice Information Services Law Enforcement Automated Data System (LEADS) compliance training and system certification can access the Flock database.
If an individual was to improperly use the search system, they would be subject to criminal sanctions and/or discipline up to/including termination, Morgan said. However, MVPD has not had any compliance issues.
“Flock is a tool. It is nothing more than a tool for law enforcement. It helps us in investigations … We have had over 40 direct positive outcomes because of the Flock camera system since it’s been implemented over 18 months ago,” Morgan said.
Lieutenant Qade Lewis explained how the data searching mechanism worked.
“The very first thing that you’re going to be prompted to do is put in a case number. If you don’t put in a case number, you won’t be able to search any further,” Lewis said.
Each search requires a documented explanation later reviewed by a supervisor. The system allows officers to search for license plate numbers, make, model and color of a car, according to a previous report by Knox Pages.
Concerns of ‘mass surveillance’
Scott Charland, a candidate for Ohio Senate District 19, also spoke during the committee meeting.
“In no way, shape or form, are we disparaging the police department or their judgment. We understand they have a tough job. I just want to make a case that mass surveillance is not the best way to make their lives easier,” Charland said.
Charland’s biggest issue with Flock Safety is the company’s “iffy” track record.
Flock Safety has “left at least 60 cameras around the country exposed to open internet,” Charland argued. “(It) does not require multifactor authentication prior to accessing files.. In January 2025 over 150 ALPRs were found to have a crucial security flaw that allowed anyone to access their live data from their phone.”
The company also has a history of misleading information about its products, Charland argued.
“Flock told Oshkosh, Wisconsin City Council that the systems did not create a pattern or heat map of an individual’s movement. (The) very next morning, the city found out Flock, in fact, did this,” Charland said, with a report by the American Civil Liberties Union echoing the accusation.
The allotted 15 minutes expired before Charland was able to finish his statement.
The floor opens for public opinion
A number of local residents addressed city council about the issue. Concerns regarding safety, privacy and transparency were the most prominent.
“Even though there’s only 60,000 people in this county, 150,000 license plates (have been scanned). That’s not a targeted police tool. That’s mass surveillance on ordinary people going to church, to work, to school,” Michelle Mood said.
“This system was implemented without a public hearing and without a recorded vote … the question becomes, what kind of community do we want to become? One where technology like this is quietly implemented, or do we want to be a community where decisions are openly discussed?” Joshua Morrison said.
“(I ask for a) formal review of this contract, a public hearing before any renewal or expansion and a written policy, one that closes the immigration enforcement gap, requires justification for every search and sets up a real audit,” Dylan Foster said.
Remarks from the administration
“We could do what some communities do, completely remove Flock cameras. And to that I would say, consider the alternative of creating Mount Vernon as a soft target for crime,” Safety Service Director Tanner Salyers said.
While Salyers defended the technology as a public safety tool, some council members voiced concerns about its implications for privacy and civil liberties.
“I would argue that liberties are not usually surrendered all at once, but rather in small increments that seem reasonable at the time … I do think we are moving toward a state of minority report with systems like this,” Councilmember Amber Keener said.
“When we look at surveillance in its greater state, we are headed down a dangerous path. That is my inclination, that we are not headed in a direction that embraces freedom,” Councilmember Taylor Jacklin said.
Despite these concerns, Keener and Jacklin said they want to continue conversations with MVPD and the public about the city’s use of Flock cameras.
“I personally intend to pursue this matter and open it up for more public discussion,” Councilmember Miller, who called the committee meeting, said.
As the meeting concluded, several council members thanked the crowd for participating in the conversation.
“I think good people can disagree on policy in the moment. What’s important is that we continue to have the discussion … because when that discussion stops, that’s when things not only become difficult, but they can introduce bitterness and distrust and dislike,” Councilmember John Ruckman said.
Watch the public forum and council comments in full here.
MVPD’s ALPR Policy Manual is attached below.
