Climate Action Section Director Jenny Niemann addressed Council and provided an update on the Carbon Neutrality Plan. She reported that the City has hosted three open houses over the past few months to gather community feedback on the plan’s update. An online survey is also available on Connect Flagstaff for additional public input. She emphasized that the goal of this update is to strengthen the plan based on community perspectives and encouraged everyone to complete the survey before it closes in the coming weeks.

None. 

Senior Deputy City Manager Shannon Anderson highlighted those employees who have work anniversaries in October.

City Manager Greg Clifton provided a brief overview of his report, highlighting recent public safety recognitions at the First Responder Luncheon. He noted that Engineer Paramedic Justin Staskey received the Firefighter of the Year award, and Police Officer Conner Simmons was honored as First Responder of the Year. Mr. Clifton also mentioned the ribbon-cutting ceremony for the new Grab and Go Visitor Center at the Flagstaff Airport and acknowledged the positive community impact of the Engagement and Outreach Team within the Communication and Civic Engagement team.

He concluded by reviewing the Future Agenda Item Requests (FAIR) schedule, noting that staff are actively working to return items for Council consideration as soon as possible. 

Vice Mayor Sweet added that she had contacted the Clerk’s Office prior to the meeting to withdraw her FAIR item following further discussions with staff.

Mayor Daggett introduced the item and outlined the process for discussion, reminding attendees that public comments must remain respectful and free of outward expressions of disagreement to ensure everyone feels safe to share their perspectives.

Mr. Clifton provided clarification on the rules and procedures related to the item, explaining that while the matter originated as a policy issue, it is being handled administratively. He noted that the topic began over a year ago when the City entered a contract with Flock for camera technology, followed by a renewal that exceeded the $100,000 threshold, requiring Council consideration under the City Charter. Mr. Clifton explained that consent agenda items may be discussed publicly when pulled and that items of high community interest, even if administrative, may be brought to Council for transparency. He emphasized that the contract was not initially viewed as controversial but has since drawn significant public interest, reflecting broader community and national discussions around similar issues.

Police Chief Sean Connolly then introduced the presentation, providing background on the item and describing how the Police Department is engaging with and responding to the ongoing community dialogue.

Deputy Police Chief Collin Seay and Chief Information Officer CJ Perry provided a PowerPoint presentation that covered the following:

AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER (ALPR) DISCUSSION WITH THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FLAGSTAFF POLICE DEPARTMENT 
THE FLAGSTAFF POLICE DEPARTMENT’S COMMITMENT
COMMUNITY MEETINGS
CREATION OF FLOCK TRANSPARENCY PORTAL
HIT AND RUN CASE EXAMPLE
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF PRIVACY POLICY AND DATA SECURITY FOR TECHNOLOGY

Councilmember Garcia asked for clarification regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the system.

Mr. Perry explained that the term “AI” is often used broadly, but in this context, the technology functions through machine learning. He compared it to applications that identify plants by analyzing thousands of images to improve accuracy over time. Similarly, Flock technology converts license plate images into text, refining its accuracy by repeatedly processing plate data from various states and formats. He emphasized that the system is limited to license plate recognition and does not access or learn from broader internet sources like generative AI platforms.

Councilmember Garcia thanked him for the clarification, noting it was helpful to understand that the AI is only used for reading license plates and does not influence police decision-making.

AGENCY DATA SHARING
RETENTION TIMELINE
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Councilmember Garcia raised concerns about data sharing with other agencies in Arizona and participation in national registries, noting community worries that partner agencies might have unrestricted access to Flagstaff’s system.

Deputy Chief Seay clarified that while other law enforcement agencies can access camera data from Flagstaff during investigations, all access is logged and traceable. Misuse by outside agencies would be identifiable through audit trails, and appropriate action would be taken if necessary. He emphasized that shared data must come through certified Flock scans to be valid in investigations and that screenshots or informal sharing would not hold up in court.

Councilmember Garcia thanked staff for the clarification, expressing continued concern about ensuring data cannot be accessed or used for unauthorized searches, particularly at the national level.

Councilmember House followed up, asking how partner agencies request and access data, and whether city policy prevents use for immigration enforcement. Deputy Chief Seay explained that partner agencies can view shared data but typically collaborate through formal communication. He confirmed that if an agency were found to misuse or share data inappropriately, Flagstaff Police would terminate that partnership. Chief Connolly added that any misuse discovered through audits would result in immediate revocation of access.

Councilmember House also inquired about forming a citizen advisory council to review and monitor the program. Deputy Chief Seay confirmed a commitment to establishing such a group and stated that if it is not in place by the six-month check-in, the program should be canceled.

City Attorney Solomon concluded that the discussion was for direction only and that no vote would be taken at this meeting.

Public Commenters in support of Flock Cameras: 

• Gail Jackson
• Casey Gonzales
• Michael Oliver
• Bonnie Bouschet
• Scott McDonald 
• Bret Axlund 
• Fr. Peter Dubrowski 
• Ammon Barker 
• Michelle Ruckner

Comments included: 

• Supportive of Flock for public safety; helps track missing persons and solve crimes faster.
• Can reduce time to bring justice to victims.
• Cameras help prevent crime in high-traffic areas like malls and intersections.
• Technology supports law enforcement without replacing officers.
• Data from cameras is limited to vehicle license plates, not personal identification.
• Partnership with private businesses enhances community safety.
• Previous use in the community has shown no misuse, hacking, or federal overreach.
• Can be effective when paired with thoughtful policies, oversight, and clear laws.
• Helps law enforcement allocate resources efficiently.
• Used in collaboration with other agencies to protect vulnerable populations.
• Provides quick reaction to emergencies, e.g., locating missing children.
• Allows officers to act swiftly when every minutes counts.

Public Commenters in opposition of continuing to use Flock Cameras: 

• Tyler Stein
• Joseph Smith
• Caiden Dwyer
• Aubrey Harris
• Phoenix Schaefer
• Ira Allen
• Isaac Mueske
• Sage Pineda
• Marsalis Chillds
• Brendan Trachsel
• Caitlyn Hughes
• Alyssa Hastings
• Taylor Lundstrom
• Sydney R. 
• Richard Clark 
• Maureen Judith 
• Aiden Ashkar
• Izaya Emmanuel
• Catherine Bennett
• Katelynn Contreras
• Billie Gilmore 
• Wren Carr
• Sean Parson
• Lydia Nelson
• Kevin White
• Debra Block
• Braden Macias
• Evert Bonarrent
• Leandro F.
• Molly Joyce
• Chelsea Green
• Joshua Booth
• Sarah Lee
• Kevin McCoy
• Griffin Franklin
• Emma

Comments included: 

• Violates personal privacy and community trust; surveillance without consent.
• Potential for misuse by law enforcement, private entities, or federal agencies (e.g., ICE).
• No legally binding guarantee that data will remain secure in the future.
• Risk of false positives leading to wrongful stops or accusations.
• Cameras can disproportionately target marginalized communities.
• AI technology could expand surveillance capabilities in the future.
• Lack of community input in deployment; installed without democratic process.
• Data is stored long-term, potentially shared with multiple agencies and private entities.
• Flock has a history of misleading or false claims about effectiveness.
• Creates fear of being constantly watched; contributes to a surveillance state.
• Financial cost of contract could be better used for other community resources.
• Ethical concerns regarding collection and use of sensitive information.
• Broken trust between police and community due to opaque systems.
• Removal is seen as a preventative measure against future misuse.
• Surveillance may not actually reduce crime; collaborative investigations are preferred.
• People have spoken loud and clear and overwhelming majority have stated they do not want flock in Flagstaff.

Public commenters that would like to consider different providers other than Flock: 

• Taylor Cerchie
• Jennifer Runge

Comments included: 

• Supported canceling the current Flock contract but was open to a new or revised agreement with stricter safeguards. Suggested including legally binding guarantees and penalties for data misuse, emphasizing the need for checks and balances and legal protections rather than taking an all-or-nothing approach.
• Stressed that safety, justice, and trust must coexist. Supported law enforcement’s intent but warned that protective tools can be misused. Called for strong oversight, data safeguards, and thoughtful policy development, urging Flagstaff to lead with balance and expressing interest in joining an advisory committee.

McKenna Marino, Brandon Wang, Luis Fernandez, Dawn Dyer, Benjamin Norris, Maritza Ruiz – Soto, Dustin Kuluris, Jordan McJordan, Bernard Michels, Laura Rethmann, Emma Nesteruck, Griffin Franklin, Gregg Horton, Jim Schweikert, Molly Joyce, Justin Gelvin, Holly Webber – Graff, Adam Neisen, Lynne Westerfield, Olivia Delborne, Hannah Hackett, Josh MacNaughton, Ada Cohen, Richard Kozak, Louis Structure, and Lily Banks submitted written comments in opposition of the Flock Cameras. 

Rachel Laura, George Holberg, Adam Williams, Nicholas Alemdarez, Kaylen Batey, Stephen Sullivan, and Angelic Lomeli submitted written comments in support of Flock Cameras. 

Councilmember Matthews noted that she toured the system the day prior to better understand it and was surprised to learn that Northern Arizona University had been using Flock Cameras for years. She asked Chief Connolly to confirm that after 30 days, data is deleted, which he affirmed. 

Councilmember Matthews raised a scenario regarding a vehicle rolling through a stop sign, questioning whether it could be tracked, and Chief Connolly clarified that the system cannot track that. 

Councilmember Matthews emphasized that law enforcement’s focus has historically been on solving crimes rather than prevention, and Chief Connolly responded that the tool is intended for solving crimes, not reducing overall crime rates. 

Councilmember Matthews asked how many crimes had been solved using Flock Cameras in the past 12 months, Chief Connolly cited 271 incidents where victims received services utilizing the system. 

Councilmember Matthews acknowledged the risks of new technology and appreciated the controls in place, while reiterating the importance of considering victims and their families. She also clarified that cameras capture only the rear of vehicles and do not record individuals in the car, and she addressed concerns regarding Immigration and Custom Enforcements (ICE) usage, confirming that citizenship is not tracked, only criminal involvement.

Councilmember House thanked the community for attending and speaking on the item, emphasizing that the conversation is not about questioning the integrity of the police but about ensuring technology aligns with community values. She expressed concern about fast-moving technology and the potential for creating a surveillance state, citing examples from other cities where technology both accused and exonerated individuals. 

Councilmember House suggested pressing pause to ensure local voices are involved and safeguards are in place.

Vice Mayor Sweet expressed appreciation for the public’s participation and asked clarifying questions about what the cameras capture, which Chief Connolly explained again as rear license plates only, with no personal identification of occupants. 

Vice Mayor Sweet inquired about partnerships with other municipalities, and Chief Connolly explained that information is shared only in the context of criminal investigations and that access can be immediately shut off if requested. 

Vice Mayor Sweet proposed a six-month review period to assess program success, privacy policies, and the potential establishment of a citizen advisory team, which Connolly supported as a way to build in safeguards while still supporting cold case investigations and assisting other agencies.

Councilmember Spence asked about prior inadvertent sharing of data with ICE and border control, and Chief Connolly clarified that while the system could be immediately shut down, the existing contract allows a 30-day termination period. 

Councilmember Matthews reiterated that all cameras are set to capture only the back of vehicles. She highlighted that many members of the public in support of them may not feel comfortable speaking out, noting a climate of fear regarding retaliation. Chief Connolly agreed and emphasized that the technology is only used to support crime investigations and is not tracking individuals indiscriminately.

Councilmember Garcia thanked the public and acknowledged the diversity of perspectives. He invited petitioner Brenden Trachsel to share recommendations, which included minimizing data retention, removing data from national databases, and restricting partnerships to prevent long-term storage of non-criminal information. 

Councilmember Garcia asked Chief Connolly and Deputy Chief Seay to clarify how hotlists work, how vehicles are flagged, and what safeguards exist against false positives. Chief Connolly and Deputy Chief Seay explained that only vehicles involved in crimes are flagged with supervisor approval, and there have been no false positives in Flagstaff to date. 

Councilmember Garcia raised concerns about potential abuse by private companies, noting that Flock tracks license plates but not people, and stressed the importance of retaining a system to support law enforcement while addressing privacy concerns. He also discussed oversight and the potential for expanding or adjusting the system to better serve the community.

Councilmember Aslan noted that his primary concern is not with the current system but with the potential for a breakdown that could force sharing of information without warning. He stated his preference to cancel the contract while remaining engaged in ongoing discussions.

Mayor Daggett highlighted the difficulty of balancing the value of Flock for prosecuting dangerous criminals with privacy concerns. She supported moving the contract to a future agenda, implementing a 14-day data retention period, and establishing a task force for oversight. She stressed that Flock does not have veto power over contract terms and that the city retains ultimate control over data.

Deputy Chief Seay, Mr. Perry, and a representative from Flock Hector clarified that the system can be immediately shut down, that Flock cannot access data without city approval, and that audit logs monitor compliance. They confirmed that cameras capture only rear license plates, and supervisor approval is required to use the system for criminal investigations.

Councilmember Matthews reiterated support for additional guardrails and protocols, acknowledging the corridor of crime in the area and emphasizing the importance of using technology to assist investigations while remaining aware of public concerns. 

Vice Mayor Sweet stressed the importance of moving forward with clear privacy policies, noting that technology will continue to advance.

Councilmembers Garcia and Aslan did not support moving the item forward and would prefer the contract be canceled. Councilmember Aslan acknowledged the constructive dialogue and potential improvements to the program.

Mayor Daggett, Vice Mayor Sweet, and Councilmembers Spence, Matthews, and House provided varying degrees of support for moving the contract forward for continued use while emphasizing oversight, privacy protections, and community input. The Council clarified that the system continues to operate under the terms of the expired contract until a formal decision is made.

Chief Connolly noted that NAU was the first local department to use Flock and emphasized that data sharing is limited to local partners. He confirmed that the national search feature is turned off and stated he would review the additional features requested by Mayor Daggett, including implementing a 14-day data retention period and formalizing the advisory group before the next update. He also clarified that all extended partner sharing will been disabled, but requested exceptions of continued sharing with local city, county, and tribal partners, while the team investigates the requested features further.

None. 

Councilmember Spence reported that the Open Spaces Commission has selected the official name for the natural preserve: Observatory Mesa Natural Preserve.

Councilmember Garcia invited the community to attend the Market of Dreams event the following day to participate in discussions about the Community Development Block Grant process and how funds support local needs. He also announced a Trunk or Treat at Kutz Barbershop the following Thursday evening, featuring activities and pizza provided by a local nonprofit called Rev Up Unity. 

Mayor Daggett stated that Northern Arizona Healthcare will host two open houses and a Community Health Fair offering vaccinations, health screenings, and youth dental screenings. She also announced a Fix-It Clinic scheduled for the following Saturday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., noting that appointments are required.

The meeting of the Flagstaff City Council held October 28, 2025, adjourned at 8:12  p.m.

 

Moved by Councilmember Khara House, seconded by Vice Mayor Miranda Sweet to direct and authorize the City Attorney and/or designated city representatives to proceed as discussed in Executive Session regarding the following: Condemnation Litigation Update, Legal advice, discussion, and consultation regarding pending and potential litigation, Legal advice, discussion, and consultation regarding Timber Sky Annexation and Development Agreement, as amended, City’s obligations under the Development Agreement, and the negotiation of certain legal contracts related to City’s involvement in the Habitat for Humanity affordable housing project at Timber Sky.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Moved by Councilmember David Spence, seconded by Vice Mayor Miranda Sweet to direct and authorize the City Attorney to proceed as discussed in Executive Session regarding Desert Mountain Energy litigation, up to and including potentially refiling or amending claims against Desert Mountain Energy and defend any related new counter-claims.

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

The meeting of the Flagstaff City Council held October 28, 2025, adjourned at 8:15  p.m.