Flock Cameras in Telluride and San Miguel County

Learn More

• Transcript

  – There are more than 120,000 Flock cameras in use all over the United States and more than a thousand of these ALPRs or automated license plate readers in Colorado. And the majority of the contracts in the state are with the Flock Safety Company. There are five in San Miguel County, one Motorola ALPR in Norwood, three Flock cameras on Mountain Village Boulevard in Mountain Village, and two Flock cameras in Telluride along the Highway 145 spur. Flock cameras have raised concerns with residents all over the country. They have been abused by some law enforcement officers to stalk or track family or ex-partners, and the data has been shared with immigration and other federal agencies. Some people object in general to the principle of warrantless tracking. Telluride Chief Marshal Josh Comte understands these concerns, but says the cameras are a valuable resource for investigations. He says they only access the information when there is an active case, and that Colorado agencies are not allowed to share information with immigration enforcement. He also says his agency is auditing any use of the systems.

  – So, in order for us to go on to Flock to access a car, so like I use the hit and run for example. Our officers have showed up on scene. They’ve met with the victim whose car was smashed and we have witness that took it off. So, we will pull a case number. Then in order to go to Flock, we have to input that case number into it. It won’t let us proceed without a case number. We have to put a reason why we’re searching, so our officers will type in hit and run. And then that gives us the ability to go back and look for that car. The data on Flock is maintained for only 30 days, so we do not have the ability to go back and look at something past 30 days. So, they’re able to take that information then and use it. From the audit standpoint, we, as you’ll see on our public, our transparency portal, there’s information for people to click on it and it’ll show you all the searches that officers have done, the reasons they’ve done it, as well as the case number. So, if there’s any doubt or any consideration or reasoning why they’re doing a search, we can go back, especially as supervisors, and look through that case number and make sure that the case we’re pulling up for matches the reason why they’re searching this car. So, you’re starting to see nationally a lot of officers, it’s been in the news, a lot of officers are getting in trouble for abusing the system. They’re getting caught, you know, stalking ex-girlfriends or ex-spouses or whatever it is. You know, I would argue that the audit process that these agencies have in place is working because it’s catching those people that are the bad actors. It’s doing what it’s supposed to be doing. Those officers are being fired and/or criminally charged as well for violating that. So, we go back as supervisors, we ensure that our officers are using it the right way and that every search has a function for it. So, another concern that gets brought up oftentimes is immigration. Are we using this for immigration? So, in the state of Colorado, we are absolutely prohibited from using it for any sort of immigration. So, if there was, let’s say ICE had an administrative warrant for deportation, we do not get alerted on that. That is not information that goes into NCIC or CCIC. We don’t get alerted for that. We can’t search for that. We’re not allowed to cooperate or work with ICE in any capacity. I think the assumption is that, you know, we’re pulling a bunch of people over and we’re making a ton of arrests off the Flock cameras. And actually it’s been the opposite. What we’ve seen a ton of use of Flock cameras on is attempt to locate and welfare checks. So, we have a handful of those cases where we’ll get alerts for attempt to contact or welfare check on someone that’s family’s put them into the system, that their concerns are safety. We can go contact that person, try to find them, contact them immediately, and put them in contact with their family or with mental health practitioners and get them the help that they need. So, we’ve seen a lot more success on that side of it than we have on making arrests. But it absolutely has been an integral part in helping in some of these cases. I mean, we obviously understand the concerns with Flock. We’ve heard our community. We’ve seen the concerns that have been raised. You know, I can stand up here and assure everybody that we are not abusing the system, which is why we have the transparency portal. We’ve always tried to be transparent about it. It’s not something that we’ve tried to hide. The two Flock cameras are very obvious. They’re not being hidden by anything. Whenever anybody’s asked me about them, I’ve been very upfront and honest explaining what they’re used for and how we use them. But they have absolutely been a huge tool in helping us solve cases and keeping our community safe.

  – Despite these assurances, there is a groundswell of resistance to their use. Denver removed all its Flock cameras, but has another ALPR vendor. And Fort Collins, Elbert County, and Salida canceled their Flock contracts and removed the cameras. Boulder residents are suing the city and Crested Butte is petitioning the city over the use of Flock cameras. Telluride Town Council member Dan Enright says he opposes their use and would like them removed.

  – I acknowledge that there are legitimate police uses for these technologies, the automatic license plate readers. But I believe the threats to personal liberties and the demonstrated cases of abuse within the system are too much for me to ignore and support this technology. I believe that it is the duty of an elected official to weigh the pros and cons of every decision we make. And while acknowledging some of those benefits that have been demonstrated recently in our community, I think that there are too many demonstrated cases of individual police officers, thankfully not in Telluride, but nationwide, that have abused this system. And given the current political environment, I do not trust that the data that is collected from these cameras will be kept solely within our community and not used by a politicized Department of Justice or would withstand a subpoena from the Department of Homeland Security. And so I think that this technology is one further step closer to mass surveillance by the government. And I think it is the duty of elected officials to protect the civil liberties of our constituents. And so I’ve lived in Telluride long before this technology was implemented, and I’m very thankful that we have the benefit of living in a safe and secure mountain little hamlet. And so I think that those concerns or the benefits potential for public safety are just not as strong of an argument in our little community. And I think that our constituents strongly value our personal liberties. We are a designated civil liberty safe zone, and I want to uphold those values that are important to our constituents. And so I think that with all that in mind, I still oppose the use of Flock Safety cameras in our community and working to have them removed from Telluride.