The Southgate City Council voted 3-2 to suspend the use of the city’s five Flock license plate-reading cameras.
The Oct. 21 decision calls for the cameras to be covered and remain inactive while Kentucky lawmakers consider potential legislation regulating automated license plate readers during the 2027 General Assembly session. The decision followed public comments from residents who raised concerns about data security, constitutional protections and how information collected by the cameras could be accessed by other law enforcement agencies.
Following the vote, Southgate Police Chief John Christmann, who defended the technology, expressed frustration that some council members who supported suspending the cameras had not visited the police department to see how the system operates.
“One of my biggest disappointments here, and not to call anybody out, the people that voted no on this on council didn’t even bother to come down to the police department and look at this system,” Christmann said. “I think that’s ridiculous.”
Southgate City Council Members Liz Hartman, Mark Messmer and Aileen Okura voted to suspend the cameras, while Paul Melville and Tom Whitehead opposed the motion. Councilmember Jackson Curry was absent from the meeting.
Southgate has operated five Flock cameras for approximately three to four years at an annual subscription cost of about $15,000. The cameras photograph passing vehicles and record license plate information.
The city’s current contract runs through March 2027 and has already been paid. Rather than terminating the agreement, which would trigger a $500 removal fee per camera totaling $2,500, council opted to deactivate and cover the cameras.
Hartman introduced the motion to suspend operations until state lawmakers determine whether to establish new regulations. If legislation does not pass during the 2027 session, council will reconsider the cameras around the time of the contract’s renewal.
There were eight speakers on Wednesday, all opposing the technology.
Laura De La Rosa questioned whether the cameras provide enough public safety benefits to justify collecting information about residents’ movements.
“There is no reason for everyday people to have their movements monitored, recorded or stored for any period of time,” De La Rosa said.
She also raised concerns about potential data breaches, inaccurate license plate readings and the possibility of information being misused by law enforcement agencies outside Southgate.
Wendy Rice presented council with a petition containing 124 signatures from residents opposing the cameras.
“At this point, this doesn’t even feel like it’s up for debate anymore,” Rice said. “Every municipality surrounding us, all of them have already said we don’t want this.”
Rice urged the council to listen to residents who opposed spending taxpayer dollars on the technology.
During the council’s discussion, Okura also questioned whether Southgate’s system would remain as effective as surrounding municipalities stopped using the technology.
As Flock discussions continue across the region, Southgate joins cities such as Newport, Fort Thomas, Bellevue, Fort Mitchell, Independence, among others, that have suspended use of the technology.
During those discussions, Messmer acknowledged the benefits the cameras can provide police but said his concerns ultimately centered on constitutional privacy protections.
“When you dig into it, it comes down to, in my opinion, a Fourth Amendment issue,” Messmer said.
He emphasized that his concerns did not reflect distrust of Southgate police, whose integrity he said had not been questioned by the residents contacting him.
Hartman questioned what other police departments might do with information obtained through the Flock network.
Two council members defended the city’s use of the technology. Melville cited investigations in which police used the technology to identify suspects, verify allegations and potentially protect residents. He argued that the cameras do not use facial recognition technology and that Southgate police have safeguards governing access to the information.
Whitehead also opposed suspension, saying he had researched the technology and concluded its public safety benefits outweighed the privacy concerns.
“I would be more than willing to give up a little liberty so that my family can be safe,” Whitehead said.
Following the vote, Christmann pushed back against criticism of the system, saying misinformation has shaped much of the public debate. He said Southgate’s internal policies are already more restrictive than existing state requirements and that the department had limited data sharing to states bordering Kentucky.
The chief also pointed to several criminal investigations in which Flock cameras assisted police, including a case involving a murder suspect wanted by Covington police who had been traveling into Southgate.
He said Southgate was the first Northern Kentucky police department to adopt Flock cameras and maintained that the remaining regional network still provides valuable investigative information.
Christmann said council members should have considered both residents’ concerns and the police department’s firsthand experience before making their decision.
“If I’m voting on something like that, I would have both sides of the issue,” he said. “See it from the people’s perspective and the police’s perspective.”
