Harrisonburg council signals move to ban Flock license‑plate cameras after large public outcry

Harrisonburg City Council on July 14 told city staff to draft a policy that would prohibit the city from using mounted automatic license‑plate readers (ALPRs) and from entering into or renewing contracts for the devices, after hours of council discussion and extended public comment from residents and community groups.

Council members said they would place the draft policy and the mechanics of removing cameras on the July 28 agenda so the council can consider formal action. Councilors did not take a binding vote on July 14.

The move followed impassioned testimony from dozens of residents, immigrant‑service groups and local organizers who said the cameras threatened privacy, chilled civic engagement and could put immigrants at risk of enforcement by federal agencies. "This proclamation sends a powerful message that our community values compassion, inclusion," a refugee‑services representative told the council when accepting a prior proclamation; later public commenters connected that message to concerns about ALPRs.

"I fully support DeFlock's efforts to remove ALPR cameras from the city of Harrisonburg because I believe the risks outweigh the benefits," a councilor said during the July 14 discussion, acknowledging she had not initially paused the program and urging the city to slow down and adopt a clear policy. City Attorney Chris Brown described the likely process, saying staff would draft a brief, point‑by‑point policy stating that the city would not have mounted ALPR cameras and would not enter into or renew contracts for them.

Residents urged the council to go further than a narrow ban on ALPRs. "Cancel the contract, bag the cameras, and pass an ordinance that bans mass surveillance in Harrisonburg City," a caller read on behalf of a resident who did not feel safe speaking in public. Speakers representing immigrant communities and legal service organizations warned that ALPR data can be requested or subpoenaed by federal authorities and said the presence of cameras had discouraged people from reporting crimes or attending public events.

Tech and privacy experts who spoke at the meeting pointed to security vulnerabilities in the systems and the large volumes of personal movement data the technology produces. One commenter who said they worked in data science emphasized the impossibility of fully protecting matched movement‑records once they have been collected.

Council members said they heard the community. A councilor requested that city staff describe at the July 28 meeting what it would take to remove cameras already mounted and what would happen to data collected under existing contracts.

Next steps: City staff will draft a policy for the council's July 28 meeting that would prohibit mounted ALPR cameras and bar staff from entering into or renewing ALPR contracts; the council expects a public notice and an opportunity for additional comment before a formal vote.