Charlestown says it has no Flock cameras and doesn't want any
Adriana
Vossari, RI & Local Government
.webp)
The South Kingstown Town Council voted to send a
letter to the superintendent of the Rhode Island State Police demanding removal
of a license-plate reading camera that state police installed in town in July,
after council members said they learned of it from a news story rather than
from their own police department.
The vote came at the council's August 11 meeting, according
to the South Kingstown Town Council's published meeting recording. It landed
roughly two weeks after the council voted on July 27 to terminate the town's
own contract with Flock Safety, the vendor whose cameras read and log vehicle
license plates for use in investigations.
EDITOR'S NOTE: In a separate article by Alex Nunes for the South County Star, Charlestown Town Council President Deb Carney said unequivocally “There are no Flock cameras in Charlestown,” and “As of today the State Police have no plans to put a Flock camera in Charlestown.”
Charlestown recently reported the theft of a URI research camera to monitor beach and surf conditions. The town stated this was NOT a Flock camera. Carney reiterated, “So the key takeaway — there are no Flock cameras in Charlestown.” - Will Collette
The timeline laid out by the town manager
Town Manager Jim Manny walked the council through a
chronology at the start of the discussion.
The council approved a one-year trial of eight town Flock
Safety cameras in June 2025 at a cost of $30,000, Manny said. He stressed that
the devices are not speed cameras: they use license-plate reader technology for
criminal investigations and can also be used in missing-person and Silver Alert
cases.
Although the contract was signed in June 2025, Manny said
the town solicitor reviewed it line by line and determined the term did not
actually begin until the first camera was installed, in February 2026. Seven of
the eight cameras were installed and working as of July 2026.
After the July 27 termination vote, Manny said, a letter
went out the next morning asking Flock Safety to take the remaining cameras
down as quickly as possible. The company advised the town on August 11 that
they will be removed August 17 and 18.
A separate state police camera, approved in November
The separate camera is not the town's. Manny said the Rhode
Island State Police spent $600,000 on a statewide camera contract, and that one
of those cameras sits in South Kingstown at Route 2 and Route 138.
He said he first learned of it on July 28, 2026 — the day
after the council's termination vote — through a media story about the town
ending its contract. "I was not aware that state police had any intentions
of putting in the Flock, nor that they even had contract," he said,
adding, "Not that they had to check with me anyway."
Manny read into the record a November 5, 2025 letter from
the state police superintendent addressed to the town's police chief. The
letter said state police and the Department of Public Safety were in the
process of deploying Flock cameras, that at least one was projected for the
town, and that the permitting process required "a municipal letter of
approval that acknowledges and approves the installation of a camera in your
respective town."
The same day, Manny said, the chief wrote back on department
letterhead formally expressing approval on behalf of the South Kingstown Police
Department, saying the department was "pleased to provide" the
required municipal letter of approval and citing a shared commitment to
"service and transparency."
Manny said a state police official confirmed to him that the
camera was installed on July 2, 2026 and became operational on July 4, 2026.
"Those are facts," he said.
The police chief was out of state and did not attend the
meeting. Major Bucco, the department's deputy chief, was present for earlier
agenda items but did not speak on this one.
Council members: the word is "municipal"
Council members focused on the mismatch between the state's
request for municipal approval and who actually signed it.
Council Vice President Michael K. Marran moved to direct the
town manager to inform the state police superintendent that the town did not
consent. He said he was "shocked and disappointed" that neither the
council nor the town manager was told, and called it "a grave error in
judgment" that the requested municipal approval was never sought from the
council. He also said the matter should return on a future agenda so the chief
can discuss it in person.
Another member said she picked up on the word
"municipal" as well, and called it "really terrible" that
the council had to learn about the camera through a newspaper article.
Council President Rory H. McEntee said he emailed the chief
a list of questions and expects answers when he returns. He objected
specifically to a line in a memorandum stating there was no cost to the town.
His point was that cost is not the only reason to bring something before the
council: the public gains transparency through council meetings, and skipping
that step is itself the problem. "Something stinks and it's not
great," he said of finding out through the press, adding that he respects
the state police and interagency cooperation "but this is not the way to
do it."
McEntee raised whether the chief's response should be taken
up in closed executive session, noting that job performance could be at issue.
Marran said the entire Flock discussion had been public and this should be too,
and that his motion concerned the camera, not a personnel matter.
The council approved the letter to the state police by voice
vote. The town solicitor said the follow-up discussion with the chief would
most appropriately appear under the town manager's report, since the council
has already acted on the camera itself.
What happens next
Nothing in the transcript indicates the state police have
agreed to remove the camera; the vote directs the town to ask. The town's own
seven cameras are scheduled to come down August 17 and 18, per the vendor's
notice to the town.
The council's next regular meeting is the first meeting in September. The discussion with the police chief is expected under the town manager's report at a future meeting.
