Flock Cameras

Asked the city to publish the Flock system's audit log, performance data, and list of outside agencies with access, noting resident opposition has grown to 41 percent.

Said the cameras should have been brought to a public vote, record far more than license plates, and will inevitably be abused.

A newer resident and former social worker, she said cameras near schools and playgrounds are frightening and unnecessary in a low-crime community.

Opposed the La Rosa Data Center and Global Water's role in it, submitted water bills for the record, and — citing her NSA background — said surveillance tools are for monitoring adversaries, not residents.

Argued the problem is the data itself — AI builds behavioral profiles of innocent people — and cited Sheriff Teeple's contract cancellation as a model to follow.

Questioned the cameras' cost and necessity as a 14-year local realtor, suggesting the money should have gone to turn lanes and sidewalks; also criticized turf irrigation at a new school.

Called the cameras a violation of First and Fourth Amendment rights and said the money could better improve the community.

Asked the city to publish how and when the camera system was approved, arguing mass surveillance of innocent people exceeds government's legitimate role.

Raised concerns about the safety of data collected, especially information about children, and asked that the cameras be removed.

Briefly stated his opposition on Fourth Amendment grounds.

Acknowledged the cameras' crime-solving benefits but argued effectiveness can't be the only standard, citing Chandler's audit findings and Sheriff Teeple's decision, and called for a transparent public process.

A mother and teacher, she said residents feel continuously tracked and framed this as a pivotal moment to resist the normalization of a surveillance state.