With no public comment at the Public Safety Committee meeting the GRPD and Flock representatives got little pushback on what they presented
There were about 60 people who attended the Public Safety Committee meeting early this afternoon, since there is a growing concern about how the GRPD is using Flock camera technology.
Unfortunately, the Public Safety Committee meetings do not allow for public comment or questions to address important matters like government surveillance.
There were formal presentations made by Deputy Chief Michael Maycroft (with the GRPD) and two representatives from the Flock company. In other words, there were two presentations by two groups that were pro-Flock technology, which you can watch here at this link.
Deputy Chief Michael Maycroft went first and here are the things he stated that stood out to me:
- The City of Grand Rapids/GRPD began using Flock cameras in June of 2024.
- He claimed that the do not allow for Immigration searches, reproductive health visits, no facial recognition, or public gatherings that would be classified as protests
- Maycroft then offered several examples of how the GRPD has used Flock technology to solve crimes or to find suspects. All of the examples provided by the Deputy Chief were all designed to make the public believe that this technology is a useful tool and thus is a good contract that the GRPD has with the Flock company.
The Deputy Chief offered no hard data on Flock camera usage, nor could he state that this technology has made Grand Rapids safer. As the well thought out report entitled, Cops Don’t Stop Violence states:
It’s time to recognize that decades of pouring more money, resources, and legitimacy into policing in an effort to increase safety have failed — because policing is functioning as it is intended to: to contain, control, and criminalize Black and Brown communities rather than to prevent and reduce violence. It’s time to invest in meeting community needs and building non-police community safety strategies. It’s time to invest in just recovery.
Two of the Flock representatives then presented, one of which is the Flock liaison to the GRPD. They put up a slide that had a lovely, calming image of nature, with the tag line – Shape a Safer Future, Together.
The Flock guys provided a bunch of data and attempted to address some of the public concerns that have been raised in recent years in Grand Rapids, especially around immigration and ICE. They too shared some anecdotal stories to win over those in attendance, but did not make a convincing argument for the public safety value of their technology. The Flock guys also failed to state up front that they make money from more contracts and that this is driving force for the work that the Flock company does.
The Flock guys also did not adequately address the larger issues of how this technology can and is being used that violates public trust and perpetuates state surveillance. Here are several good non-governmental articles/reports on how Flock technology harms the public.
https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-os-investigate/
Grand Rapids City Commissioner Kilgore than read part of an ACLU Michigan letter that was sent out that morning to city officials, since the ACLU was not allowed to present at today’s meeting, which I mentioned in a recent post.
Mayor LaGrand spoke next and praised Chief Trigg as being, “committed to transparency and that the GRPD and the City does not cooperate with ICE in any way.” Both of those statements are false, since 1) the GRPD doesn’t practice real public transparency – try to do a search for the Surveillance Policy; and 2) Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE have first hand accounts of GRPD cooperation with ICE, along with video and photo evidence.
LaGrand went on to talk about how Amazon monitors us, how our smartphones do, etc, etc. LaGrand wants us to think that we are being heavily monitored, but he fails to mention two important points. First, If I have a smart phone or use Facebook that is my choice, but I have no say in government surveillance. Second, Amazon certainly engages in data mining so they can target you with additional products, but that is significantly different than governments that can lock you up on bogus charges and even kill you if you are challenging certain policies and practices of ICE or the GRPD.
The Deputy Chief then said there have been no complaints about Flock use. This is a ridiculous statement to make. First, most people only recently found out about Flock cameras and did not know that the GRPD has been using them for a little over two years. Second, there are no online portals on the GRPD page for people to file such a complaint. Third, up until now the GRPD hasn’t been openly telling the community about the Flock cameras they are using in Grand Rapids.
When the Deputy Chief was asked about how many Flock cameras there are in the city and where they are located, he said that he didn’t have that information in front of him. There is a reason why the Deputy Chief didn’t have that information, since he doesn’t want the public to know where the Flock cameras are or how many they are using. In fact, the Public Safety Committee meeting should have started with a map of all the Flock camera locations first, if they really believed in transparency. I’m almost certain that the public would be pissed off if they knew.
For those that don’t know, here is a listing of of the locations for the Flock cameras that GRIID posted last year.
There were three of the non-elected members of the Public Safety Committee that raised important questions and pushed back on some of the content presented by both the Deputy Chief and Flock guys, which elicited lots of support from those who were present during the meeting.
One of the Flock representatives stated near the end, “most cops wake up and serve us everyday,” which was just his opinion, even though he was stating it as fact. He also wants to see state policy for Flock use, meaning he supported regulation of the Flock tech, but obviously doesn’t support communities banning or ending their existing contracts.
Deputy Chief Maycroft also stated that Flock will limit the amount of the GRPD intrusion into our lives, which also received a visceral reaction from people who were present. Maycroft’s statement was just another example of why the community doesn’t trust the GRPD.
Not to be outdone in the arrogance department, Mayor LaGrand stated, “I’m a lawyer and it took me 90 minutes to read through and understand the GRPD’s Surveillance policy, so it will likely take you longer.”
City Manager Mark Washington said that the next steps for the city is to have an annual GRPD report on Flock usage. While that might appeared to be useful, having the GRPD make reports about their Flock camera use is about as stupid as having the GRPD Internal Affairs division address public complaints.
I plan to be at the City Commission meeting and report back on what the public has to say and how the commissioners respond to what is expected to be a large turnout.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 
Comments are closed.