The details
In a 5-2 vote, Kyle City Council approved for the Kyle Police Department to apply for a Lower Colorado River Authority grant to purchase the equipment July 16. Mayor Pro Tem Bear Heiser and council member Miguel Zuniga were the two dissenting votes.
If the department receives the grant, KPD would purchase the camera-mounted pole surveillance systems, often stationed at retail parking lots and construction sites.
Kyle Police Chief Jeff Barnett said the new cameras would be used for large-scale events for crowd monitoring, to locate missing or lost children and to “serve as a visible deterrent to unlawful behavior.”
Community members voiced concern over potential invasive surveillance through an automated license plate reader, or ALPR, system. Individuals against the cameras said ALPRs could be misused to target protesters or to harm undocumented individuals.
However, Barnett said these specific cameras do not have automated license plate readers, facial recognition software or “other invasive surveillance technologies."
Additionally, community members in public comment said they opposed the use of a Flock Safety brand camera, as the brand has faced controversy for unwanted-data sharing with private sources, federal agencies like U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement and other private actors.
Barnett said a vendor has not been selected yet as the office has not received the grant and is still in the process of reviewing potential vendor options.
KPD did not provide specific information on the number of ALPR or surveillance towers they currently have, what brand they use or where they are located.
However, KPD did provide a statement to Community Impact following the passage of the item.
KPD officials said the ALPRs are utilized for operations such as solving crimes including child abductions, shootings and robberies.
KPD officials also stated they recognize community opposition regarding the surveillance technology.
“We understand and acknowledge the concerns some may have regarding the use and privacy of this technology,” officials said in an email to Community Impact. “Transparency and accountability remain top priorities throughout all investigations in which these resources are used. We assure our community that comprehensive policies, restricted access, and regular audits are in place to govern the appropriate use of these systems. We will continue in-depth analysis to ensure responsible use that aligns with community values.”
KPD told Community Impact that they will bring additional information to Kyle City Council at a later date.
Those in favor, against
Several community members, like Angelita Tobias, spoke during public comment opposing the new equipment and surveillance systems broadly, citing worries with invasion of privacy, misuse of the technology and data storage protections.
“The liberties and constitution that we have is being deteriorated. ... Give us some privacy,” Tobias said.
Other residents said they have issues with the potential lack of oversight of a private, third-party company and would be worried if the technology was used to track protesters or for immigration cases.
“The problem isn't just the vendor, it's the absence of enforceable protections, public consent and real oversight,” community member Claudia Zapata said. “The truth is, you cannot guarantee that this data won't be used to harm residents, because there is no safe form of government surveillance.”
Zapata is also president of Hays County Young Democrats, an advocacy organization in opposition of the new cameras and other surveillance, according to a news release published July 16.
Council member Michael Tobias, who voted in support of the item, said he could understand both perspectives on the issue.
“I see both sides, but I also see the side of how it could help our officers in real time in the event of a major emergency, but also at the same time understand how residents may feel about Big Brother watching over them," he said.
Outgoing Mayor Travis Mitchell said while he believes the cameras could be beneficial, KPD should ensure they are used mindfully.
“If we aren't able to find a way to address what we're hearing back from the community and this data security issue, then ... we're going to be in a position where we're not going to want to continue to expand something that, generally speaking, is saving lives and property,” he said. “I'm trying to find a way for us to set off on that path so that we can know at least that we've done what we need to do to make sure that these are being used the way we intend.”
Barnett said he wants to address the concerns to ensure both community members and the council feel comfortable in the technology.
“We don't want the community to fear law enforcement, and we just think this would be an added tool to help us keep our community safe,” he said.
Going forward
Following council discussion and approval of KPD to apply for the grant, Barnett will come back to council at a later date to get vendor approval if the department receives the grant funding.
Additionally, the council tasked Barnett with collaborating with city officials and an outside consultant to draft a broader-scope surveillance policy, rather than only for one type of surveillance device. The policy would include provisions for data protections and best practices for working with third parties to ensure and enforce those protections. The policy would also have to be crafted with community input, per request from the council.
One more thing
Other Central Texas regions have seen the use of surveillance systems and subsequent community pushback.
San Marcos voted against an expanded contract with Flock that would add more ALPRs in the region, and Austin recently voted to discontinue their ALPR use after residents raised concerns over the technology.
However, Round Rock unanimously approved a new Flock Safety contract to have 40 additional cameras to their current 30-count fleet.
