Imperati ends local Flock use but sees value in regulated readers
Dutchess County sheriff
“believing a technology can be useful does not mean government should continue using it when the people it serves have raised serious concerns.”
Source and context
Reporting
About this source
Original regional reporting reproduces the separate statements of three Dutchess County officials after public opposition to the county's Flock contract.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Imperati had supported the county's Flock network for criminal investigations and public safety before a forum where residents opposed it.
After the quotation
He and District Attorney Parisi said they would work with county officials to discontinue Flock use while addressing contract and operational obligations.
How this statement is classified
Case context: Should Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks exist?
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
He supports ending the county network while expressly retaining a favorable view of regulated license-plate reader technology.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Flock Safety
Should Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks exist?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full case“Ohioans should not have their movements routinely tracked, photographed, and stored simply for driving on public roads.”Read statement
“Tennesseans should be free from a surveillance state.”Read statement
“We need to restore real limits, real oversight, and real due process.”Read statement