Practically every day on the news, we see masked men carrying guns, who may or may not be ICE officers (it’s impossible to know because they have refused to identify themselves), storming into immigrant communities and snatching mothers, fathers, and children off the streets.
And, as City Council Member Mike Siegel noted at a June 3 work session, recent reports allege that ICE is tapping into data networks created by automated license plate readers, a form of mass surveillance, to help locate the people they hunt. ALPRs use cameras which can snap thousands of photos of license plates and other car details each minute and are installed at traffic signals and inside police cars, letting law enforcement track the movements of people through a city.
Somewhere between 75% and 93% of large cities have ALPR programs. Austin has operated its own pilot program since 2023, one that Austin Police Department leaders say has helped officers solve serious crimes and recover stolen vehicles. The program was run by a private company called Flock Safety, but the city let its contract with Flock, and thus its ALPR program, end on July 1, after Austinites said they fear the program threatens residents’ civil liberties.
“The only secure data is data that is never collected.” – City Council Member Mike Siegel
Tech worker Laura Carbonneau was one of over a dozen who questioned the program at the June 3 work session. “When you approved this pilot, we didn’t have an administration that ignores the rule of law, the rights of citizens, and due process,” she told the Council members. “When you approved this pilot, we didn’t have a president who is vindictive and has gone after his opponents with every weapon he can muster. When you approved this pilot, we didn’t see people being sent off to prison in other countries without due process. When you approved this pilot, there wasn’t a contract with Palantir, which was announced a week ago, to build a master government database to track all Americans. Things have changed.”
After the comments, APD Chief Lisa Davis and Assistant Chief Scott Askew asked the Council members to extend the contract with Flock. They said they heard the community’s concerns but believed the ALPR program could be operated without endangering people’s rights if Council included appropriate language in the contract extension.
Council members Krista Laine, Mark Duchen, Natasha Harper-Madison, and Chito Vela expressed doubts. Siegel played a two-minute video summarizing arguments against the program. He read language from the contract with Flock, which was crafted by the city’s legal department to safeguard privacy rights, but which Siegel pointed out gave the company “a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, fully paid license to use, reproduce, modify, and distribute the agency data.” After discussion ended, City Manager T.C. Broadnax canceled a vote on whether to extend the contract with Flock, which had been scheduled for June 5.
Siegel told the Chronicle he expects APD to return to Council in the fall to once again ask the city to authorize the use of ALPRs, perhaps with a different company in charge of the program. He doubts any vendor can be trusted with the data. “I remain skeptical of the tech companies that promote these surveillance programs,” Siegel said. “They have a profit motive to expand data collection and develop digital profiles of every person in this country. As the advocates say, ‘The only secure data is data that is never collected.’”
Sam Benavides of the Caldwell/Hays Examiner watched the June 3 work session to sharpen her arguments against a proposal to expand the use of ALPRs in San Marcos. Later that night, after three hours of citizen comment, the San Marcos City Council rejected the expansion proposal.
“I believe we’re the first city in the state of Texas to formally vote against expanding Flock cameras for the police department,” Benavides said. “So that’s really exciting and hopefully sets a precedent for other cities and towns to follow, because it’s all up and down I-35 that these cameras are located.”
This article appears in July 4 • 2025.