League City is beginning to cover its Flock license plate reader cameras after voters rejected their continued use, setting in motion a shutdown of a technology that has divided residents over public safety and privacy.
About 54% voted against Proposition A, while about 46% supported it, according to unofficial election results.
The proposition asked whether League City police should continue using automated license plate readers at fixed locations on public roadways for law enforcement purposes.
“We put it on the ballot because there’s strong feelings both ways,” Mayor Nick Long told KPRC 2.
The city’s resolution calls for removing the cameras within 72 hours after the official canvass of election results at the council’s Nov. 17 meeting. Cameras remaining in place must be covered to prevent further collection.
Long said crews have already begun covering the city’s cameras and expect to finish by Thursday afternoon, Nov. 5.
“The certification will happen in a couple weeks, so might as well just move forward and bag up the cameras now,” Long said.
League City police operated 55 Flock cameras. Covering them stops those cameras from collecting new license plate information.
License plate readers capture plate numbers and other vehicle information that police can search during investigations.
Supporters say the technology helps investigators identify suspects, solve crimes and locate missing people. Critics have raised concerns about collecting information on drivers who are not suspected of wrongdoing, sharing that information with other agencies and the potential for misuse.
Investigations into alleged misuse by officers in other Houston-area departments have added to those concerns.
Council member Scott Higginbotham said in a written statement that League City’s police department has had no cases of abuse involving the technology. He said he nevertheless supports immediate removal following the vote.
Covering the cameras does not immediately erase information already collected.
According to the city, previously collected data is automatically purged from the police department’s system after 30 days unless retained as evidence in an active case.
The city says information previously shared with outside agencies is also retained for 30 days unless preserved as evidence in an existing case.
City officials are reviewing League City’s agreements with Flock Safety to determine how to carry out the removal plan.
“The city attorney will begin the process of removing us from the contract,” Long said.
The city’s statement identifies several possible steps, including amendments, partial termination, nonrenewal or negotiated termination. Staff will also coordinate equipment returns, account closure and remaining contractual obligations.
Any expenditure or agreement requiring council approval will be brought back for consideration. The city has not provided a final figure for the cost of exiting the program.
After accounting for remaining obligations, staff will identify funding that could be redirected to other public safety measures.
Long said the city will continue supporting law enforcement.
“We’ll continue to support the police, give them the tools that they need,” he said.
The resolution also directs city staff to identify license plate readers installed or operated by or on behalf of homeowners associations in city rights-of-way.
Those associations and equipment owners will be notified that the cameras must be removed.
The city says deadlines will be established as soon as legally and logistically feasible, taking existing permits, licenses and agreements into account. It has not announced a specific removal deadline for those cameras.
KPRC 2 reached out to all League City Council members about the outcome. Below are the full statements provided by Higginbotham and Courtney Chadwell.
Scott Higginbotham, City Council Position 5:
ALPR cameras have a proven record in helping solve crime, and have been a valuable tool for law enforcement. Although I recognize instances of Flock misuse elsewhere, it’s important to note we’ve had zero cases of abuse by our incredible Police department here in League City. However, the voters made their opinion clear and I respect their decision. I will honor the will of the people, and support immediate removal of the cameras.
Courtney Chadwell, City Council Position 4:
The voters have spoken, and I will honor their decision. When we ask residents to weigh in at the ballot box, their answer has to mean something.
Public safety remains a concern in every decision we make. I recognize the value our police department places on this technology, and losing an investigative tool deserves serious consideration. But I would not assume that rejecting Flock cameras means voters are any less committed to safe neighborhoods.
My responsibility now is to respect that decision while working with our police leadership to identify what they need to continue protecting this community. That includes effective staffing, training, investigative resources and strong relationships with residents.
The voters rejected a particular technology. Our responsibility to protect them remains unchanged.
