Rancho Mirage approves consent calendar amid public objections to ALPR contract

The Rancho Mirage City Council voted 5–0 on Feb. 19 to approve its consent calendar, which included minutes, an investment policy and contract amendments, among them a proposed 24‑month, $140,000 amendment for a Flock Safety automatic license plate reader (ALPR) system.

During the public‑comment period on consent items, Christian Donovan spoke in opposition to the Flock amendment, arguing the cameras create "a mass database of vehicle movements" that records "parents driving to school, residents attending religious services, visitors coming to medical appointments" and could normalize persistent surveillance. "The question is whether continuous dragnet‑style surveillance of the entire community is a proportional and responsible use of taxpayer dollars," Donovan said, urging the council to pause the contract and require "transparent policies, independent audits, strict data retention limits, and meaningful public oversight."

Brad Anderson also addressed the consent calendar, telling the council he believed the meeting minutes were "inaccurate and incomplete," reiterated opposition to the Flock contract, and referenced a recent claim he said resulted in a settlement and legal fees totaling over $100,000, asking the city attorney to respond.

City staff proceeded to place the consent items before the council. Council member Downs moved to approve the consent calendar; the motion was seconded and passed unanimously, 5–0. The council did not amend the consent items during the meeting.

Why it matters: ALPR systems are increasingly controversial in California and elsewhere because they can generate long‑term, searchable datasets of vehicle locations. Public commenters asked the council to weigh privacy safeguards and oversight against potential public‑safety benefits before authorizing continued or expanded use.

Next steps: The consent calendar items were approved; any further council review of the ALPR contract would depend on agenda placement by staff or additional public petitions.