Racine’s proposed budget drops Flock plate-reader funding as police consider replacement

Originally published by Racine County Eye.

RACINE, Wis. — Racine’s proposed 2027 budget would remove $75,000 for Flock plate-reader cameras, but police are considering another license-plate-reader system, Police Chief Alex Ramirez told the council during its budget review.

The proposal follows the Common Council’s Sept. 15 vote to end the city’s Flock Safety contract after a 30-day wind-down. That vote ended the contract; it did not approve a replacement purchase. Removing the $75,000 from the proposed 2027 budget is a separate spending decision.

In his Oct. 12 police budget presentation, Ramirez identified the $75,000 funding removal and said the department was prepared to discuss a different system. He did not name a replacement vendor or price in those remarks.

“We’re prepared to speak about a different automated license plate reader system,” Ramirez said.

Replacing the system would take “anywhere from six to nine months” once a new vendor is chosen, Ramirez told the council in September.

The proposal does not end funding for every Flock product. The city’s proposed capital plan includes $80,000 in 2027 for Raven shot detection, which Ramirez said the department would maintain.

For prosecutors, the loss would mean fewer leads connecting vehicles to investigations, Racine County District Attorney Tricia Hanson said.

“It means we’re going to have a much harder time solving crimes,” Hanson said in an interview with Racine County Eye.

Hanson said the network’s value extends beyond the location of a crime. In a hypothetical example, she described how sightings of the same plate could help investigators determine that a vehicle had traveled from Racine County north into Oak Creek.

“So every time you take a camera down, it’s taking part of the network down,” she said.

How Racine got here

The Common Council voted Sept. 15 to end the city’s Flock contract, reversing a Finance and Personnel Committee recommendation to keep the system through Dec. 31.

The first motion, to terminate the contract immediately, failed 6-8. Alder Malik Frazier then offered a 30-day compromise to allow investigators to continue using the system during the wind-down. Alders split 7-7, and Mayor Cory Mason broke the tie in favor of the compromise. The amended measure then passed 8-6.

The city’s system was separate from the Racine County Sheriff’s Office Flock pilot. Sheriff Christopher Schmaling had already ordered the removal of the Sheriff’s Office cameras on Sept. 4, saying the company appeared to have created and marketed a separate dataset from the camera information.

Racine police reported using 37 Flock cameras in a Sept. 2 response to Racine County Eye. The department said it retained records for 30 days, was reviewing whether to shorten that period, did not require a warrant for searches, audited searches and required information from Flock to be verified by an officer or dispatcher before action was taken.

Investigative leads and limits

Hanson described the records as individual sightings of a vehicle, with a date and time, that can help investigators narrow their search. They do not establish who was driving.

“It doesn’t necessarily tell us who was driving it, but it’s a good tool to point us in the right direction,” she said.

Ramirez told the council in September that he could not assign a specific share of Racine’s crime reduction to Flock.

The department’s use of the system also raised questions about access controls. During that debate, Ramirez said an internal audit had found two officers who allegedly misused Flock access. Racine County Eye has not confirmed what discipline, if any, followed.

What happens to the data?

Flock says customers control their data, that plate records are deleted from its platform when the customer’s retention period expires and that it does not sell license-plate data. Its evidence policy also discusses previously downloaded and stored images, so platform deletion does not necessarily erase copies held elsewhere. The company describes its traffic-analytics product as using aggregate, de-identified information rather than individual plate records.

Those general statements do not settle what happens to Racine’s records after termination. Racine County Eye has not confirmed whether the city will receive deletion certification or whether previously shared records could remain accessible through other agencies.

In an earlier interview with Racine County Eye, Amanda Merkwae, advocacy director for the ACLU of Wisconsin, advocated public notice before governments acquire surveillance technology and annual reports on its use. She also argued that police should obtain a warrant before using license-plate-reader records to reconstruct someone’s movements.

Her proposals address oversight of the technology regardless of the vendor. They are not requirements established by the council’s September termination vote.

The next budget decisions

The mayor proposes the spending plan, and the Common Council can amend and adopt it. According to the city’s published budget schedule, residents can address the council at a public hearing at 6 p.m. Oct. 14. Budget amendments are scheduled for Oct. 19, with final adoption Oct. 20.

Those votes will determine the city’s appropriations, but they do not, by themselves, identify a replacement camera system. Ramirez’s presentation did not supply a replacement price or explain how a purchase would be funded and approved. The $75,000 removal cannot be treated as net savings without accounting for any replacement costs.

Racine County Eye will follow up after the expected mid-October shutdown to report the system’s operating status and what happens to its data. After the scheduled Oct. 20 budget vote, we will report whether the final plan changes camera funding. If a replacement proposal comes forward, we will examine its cost, approval process, search restrictions and data-sharing rules.

Related coverage: Racine council ends Flock camera contract in 30 days — but only because the mayor broke a tie