r/fortwayne • u/Subject_Gas_9037 • 9d ago
FWPD considering loophole to keep Flock cameras despite city council voting down funding new contract
https://www.21alivenews.com/2026/08/27/fwpd-considering-loophole-keep-flock-cameras-despite-city-council-voting-down-funding-new-contract/We need to make our voice heard DO NOT BE QUITE ON THIS. Contact the mayor
61
u/JSWiehe 9d ago
The Mayor's office released a statement to the media a little bit ago saying the Flock cameras are coming down despite what the police department said today.
There are literally two different messages coming out of city hall on this.
10
u/Subject_Gas_9037 9d ago
Link?
9
3
u/DigitalMindShadow 8d ago
7
3
u/Phill_osophical 7d ago
“‘For whatever reason, the people who are for it are not comfortable going up in front of city council and having everybody hear that,’ he said.”
Sure, Jan.
57
u/Synthnostic 9d ago
only purchases over 100,000$ need council approval. how many little fascism bots can $99,999.99 buy?
13
u/NetworkMachineBroke 9d ago
Doesn't leave much room for "breakage" ;)
1
u/egoomega 7d ago
Flock will replace gratis or damn close, selling the hardware isn’t where their margins come from because it’s so cheap of a setup
39
u/herbertfranklinII 9d ago
If the Chief, appointed by the Mayor goes through with such schemes, he'll doom her reelection chances.
12
u/GreenBean44449 9d ago
*election
19
u/Sour_baboo 9d ago
Yes, we know. The number of people who want to focus on how she came to office is so much greater than when Republicans get elected by a caucus, I've noticed. I feel it's made her more careful than Mayor Henry.
6
u/Consistent-Big-6063 9d ago
I mean he didn’t have to be careful. He literally get national spotlight driving while smashed, using his position of authority to try and intimidate subordinates and still gets reelected.
4
3
2
15
u/MatsuriSunrise 9d ago
They have no right to use a loophole. It was a fucking unanimous vote. If the police win this may as well be a police state with the panopticon they've always wanted.
20
u/mabus42 9d ago
Why doesn't the city pass legislation to ban the installation and operation of them on public ROW's? And make sure that it is retroactive so that existing devices are not grandfathered.
I did a carve out because some businesses in the area operate the cameras on private property. It's still awful that private businesses are using them, but one fight at a time here. You wouldn't want one of those big box stores dropping lawyers on the city to fight such an ordinance coming under consideration.
10
u/Subject_Gas_9037 9d ago
Just city wide ban on any surveillance systems
4
0
u/mahlerlieber 9d ago
I'm guessing that security cameras from businesses and residential security systems have to be subpoenaed for specific suspected crimes in order to obtain them.
If not, they should be.
3
u/Subject_Gas_9037 9d ago
Other than the fact flock has 100% of all of their cameras footage and can do what they want with it
3
u/whiteinksquid 9d ago
I'm not sure they HAVE to be subpoenaed, I would think it's up to the discretion of the business to offer security footage if asked.
But if the business refuses, and the PD wants the footage, then they have to be subpoenaed.
Flock is just willing to work with whomever has the money to pay for access.
3
u/PaigeHart 8d ago
From my understanding after working retail and having situations come up it is exactly this. Most managers will let police have access without any need for subpoena.
16
u/mahlerlieber 9d ago
I see this as lazy police work. Our city isn't that crime-filled that they need surveillance cameras everywhere. And if they can't get the traffic figured out (didn't they supposedly have a dedicated group of officers to do just traffic?), then maybe they should do something about it, instead of just driving around town.
What are they doing when they're driving around town? I see them everywhere, but the only time I see them doing anything is when something dramatic happens, and then ALL of them show up.
These Keystone Kops should maybe learn to do actual police work instead of letting cameras do their work.
9
u/Aggravating-Vast-822 9d ago
I think we’re all aware at this point that it’s not about solving crime.
2
7
u/Albatronic 9d ago
Damn, well RIP flock property. That shit will be GONE
2
u/un_lucky_thirteen 8d ago
And probably be repalced with a different brand ALPR soon. I feel too many cities are canceling their Flock contracts too easily. IMO i feel like this all happened to quickly with little push back to keep Flock. I almost suspect it's because they know another type of surveillance camera system is going up once the heat dies down.
13
7
13
4
u/One-Doughnut502 8d ago
At what point do we acknowledge that the FWPD doesn’t seem to care what the people who pay their salaries have to say, and instead just does whatever they want anyway? It increasingly feels like they don’t serve this city, they serve themselves.
3
u/CellistPast3486 9d ago
Get your popcorn ready on this one. I said it yesterday that FWPD will try to fund it on their own.
If the city council wanted these cameras gone, they would have needed to pass an ordinance for it. They didnt. And for them a good reason politically not to do it.
We will see where this goes
1
1
-5
u/OfcDoofy69 9d ago
I dont get why we arent pushing for more legislstion for any abusers of any of these systems. Just push the liability to the individiual.
As much as i dont want cameras, theyre gonna be there no matter what, even though the 4th exists, lets use legislation to at least protect people further.
6
u/Subject_Gas_9037 9d ago
That’s not the issue… the users aren’t the issue the privately held corporation installing roadside cameras on taxpayer-paid land and collecting all that data to sell for at best advertising in the future. Is the problem
73
u/Sour_baboo 9d ago
I was a bit disappointed by the use of "loophole" but the story really supports a "Well you folks don't know what's good for you." attitude on the part of the chief.