Malden city councillors voted unanimously on September 8 to open a complete review of the city's Flock Safety camera program, adopting a resolution that drew nine public comments before the Council took it up.
At-Large Councillor Karen Colón Hayes and Ward 4 Councillor Ryan O'Malley introduced File #369-26, a resolution stating that it is "the sense of the Malden City Council that, on the behalf of the residents of the City of Malden, they wish to have a complete review of the Flock Safety program as presented by the City Solicitor, Police Chief, Malden Police Community Advisory Council, Controllers Office and all other relevant City departments and officials," with the review to include "all contracts, exhibits, amendments, renewals, purchase orders, policies, and related agreements."
City Clerk Carol Ann Desiderio read the resolution's language into the record. In the discussion that followed, one suggestion was to refer the matter to the Council's Committee of the Whole. Ward 7 Councillor Chris Simonelli separately suggested referring it instead to the public safety committee, to allow for a more detailed discussion of the technology and how it's used. Simonelli described his own prior experience with the beneficial use of cameras in his ward's parks.
How the vote unfolded
Council President Amanda Linehan recounted the Council's typical procedure for a resolution: an up-or-down vote recording whether the Council wants it to happen, before any discussion of referring it to another body. Linehan made clear that a follow-on meeting could still include a full exploration of the resolution's details, including public comment and participation from city staff.
After brief discussion, Councillor O'Malley moved to pass the resolution and take it up further at a future, public Committee of the Whole meeting. At-Large Councillor Colón Hayes seconded the motion. The Council then unanimously adopted the resolution.
The Flock Safety discussion began roughly three hours into the September 8 Council meeting and ran about 15 minutes.1 It's a case study, in our view, of the Council acting efficiently and responding in a timely way to public interest in the topic.
In the council chamber
Nine residents weighed in
Residents submitted nine public comments on the agenda item ahead of the meeting. Several cited the ACLU of Massachusetts' count of more than 25 municipalities in the state that have rejected AI-powered mass surveillance systems; several others went further than the resolution itself, calling for an outright ban on Flock and similar camera systems rather than a review. We've provided all nine below.
-
View PDF →Resolution 369-26
-
View PDF →Public comment — Shaleen
-
View PDF →Public comment — Nurus Chowdhury
-
View PDF →Public comment — Kaitlyn McCarron
-
View PDF →Public comment — Tai Lam
-
View PDF →Public comment — Peter Piazza
-
View PDF →Public comment — C.S.
-
View PDF →Public comment — Charles McNaughton
-
View PDF →Public comment — Matt Tong
-
View PDF →Public comment — Calvin Pomerantz
