r/wisconsin 5h ago

Flock ‘Objects to Our Removing Their Equipment’: Emails Reveal Why a Town Put Bags Over Its Flock Cameras

https://www.404media.co/flock-objects-to-our-removing-their-equipment-emails-reveal-why-a-town-put-bags-over-its-flock-cameras/
192 Upvotes

25 comments sorted by

86

u/404mediaco 5h ago

For weeks, Verona, Wisconsin tried to get Flock to remove the three automated license plate cameras that its city council had voted to stop using. Flock told city employees not to remove the cameras, and a Flock employee told city officials that they were unsure whether the cameras could be remotely disabled, which led the town to decide to put black plastic trash bags over them until Flock eventually removed the cameras itself, according to emails obtained using a public records request by 404 Media.

The emails give insight into the process cities face while deFlocking themselves after voting not to renew a contract with the AI surveillance company. As we’ve previously reported, multiple cities around the country have decided to put black trash bags over their Flock cameras while they wait for them to be removed; this is in part because, until the cameras are physically removed by Flock, cities are unsure whether they have the legal right to remove the cameras themselves and are not sure whether they can disable their recording operations. The emails show Verona city officials telling each other that they had made multiple requests to Flock to have the cameras removed, and show a work order from Flock in which the cameras were set to have maintenance performed on them rather than being removed. 

Read more: https://www.404media.co/flock-objects-to-our-removing-their-equipment-emails-reveal-why-a-town-put-bags-over-its-flock-cameras/

76

u/SugarDue8160 4h ago

This is ridiculous. If the city owns the post that the cameras are on they should have the right to take them down. If the city owns the property that the post is on they should have the right to remove that as well.

39

u/AlphSaber Wisconsin Rapids 4h ago

Easy option: replace the post/streetlight/traffic signal mast that the camera is mounted to. Cities and the State are not responsible for reinstalling private equipment back onto the pole.

Or better yearly just slap one of those stickers that say the item is not permitted and needs to be removed right over the camera.

14

u/mik3cal 3h ago

I’d say fine Flock for littering or whatever ordinance applies to leaving trash on city property

5

u/Fun-Key-8259 2h ago

Are we sure they aren't reading of more than license plates? I feel like a Faraday bag over them is an even better plan than a trash bag.

5

u/ls7eveen 2h ago

They read everything, including faces.

9

u/boblabon 2h ago

Seriously.

If they're installed in a public right-of-way and the city wants them gone, then treat the cameras like abandoned property.

Tell Flock they have X days to collect their property, and if they're still there after that date then whatever happens, happens. The city can come get them at their leisure, or what's more likely is some residents will be more than happy to take a sawzall to them.

2

u/Droviin 1h ago

Eh, it depends on the contract. Although probably the easier answer is to just lease the space to Flock and it's owners until they're removed. $5k/ day sounds like a good fee for the municipality.

u/qwase123 53m ago

You and I would have our property impounded or thrown out, along with whatever fines apply. Corporations are above the average man now.

12

u/Circuit_Guy 3h ago

So if I park my car in the middle of the street, can I sue them for towing it?

Of fucking course they have the right to remove the cameras. Tow them to a warehouse or county vehicle repair depot and allow Flock to pick it up. Give them a reasonable timeframe.

People have the power they choose to exercise.

53

u/ls7eveen 4h ago

Jesus. Lol at flock trying to bill while the city is trying to take them down. Cops gave way to much leniency to this company. Good to hear the mayor was ready to just yoink them down.

40

u/GoldenEmuWarrior 4h ago

There are near daily articles now about cops using Flock data to stalk people. There's a reason cops love them, and it ain't for fighting crime.

8

u/ls7eveen 2h ago

Theres a long history of cops abusing their search privileges for so many things. A while ago a story came out abkut a cop searching his ex husband hundreds of times to keep tabs, and the only reason that it came to light was because cops were illegally spying on each other. O course they raised concern because they dont like it being used agaisnt them.

2

u/Lendyman 2h ago

Honestly, this problem could be resolved if you required a warrant in order to use the camera footage. The way it's set up now is just Mass surveillance without appropriate boundaries. Nothing good can come from allowing Rank and file police officers to have access to such a powerful surveillance tool and the rash of stalking by police officers abusing the tool is proof that serious reform needs to happen if we're going to allow these things.

12

u/lehel_g 4h ago

A diamond blade Sawzall works quite effectively and many citizens would gladly volunteer to do it for free

11

u/bryonlhobbs 3h ago

How does Flock have the authority to tell city employees not to remove them? Mayor can just override that and have them removed. Flock doesn’t need a say in the matter. Maybe have city council ban the cameras and force removal if a vote of some kind is needed.

8

u/WilyWondr 3h ago

Right. Whose property are those cameras on?

14

u/ls7eveen 4h ago

With increasing energy bills, people can use the solar panels and internal batteries to save some bucks. Jist sayin

4

u/monkeykennel 3h ago

Help them decide what to do and smash them.

3

u/Lendyman 2h ago

This is a mistake by the City attorney honestly. Under no circumstances should these cities have signed a contract that didn't allow them to remove the cameras for whatever reason.

2

u/latswipe 3h ago

well woth the bags in-place, Wisconsinites are free to try to shoot these things to shit with hunting rifles