|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
NEW BEDFORD — A City Council meeting erupted into chaos Thursday night, prompting the council president to suspend the session before councilors could vote on any of the four motions before them about Flock cameras.
This spells a delay for further action by the council, including when the police chief might be called to answer questions before the public about the controversial license plate reader system used by the Police Department.
As Councilor Brian Gomes shared his thoughts on the camera system, which were more favorable than his two peers who spoke before, a few members of the public started shouting overhead. The chamber was filled on both levels; 70 or so people had filed in after a brief protest outside. Shouts included “Flock off,” “Take them down” and “De-Flock now.”
City Council President Ryan Pereira called a recess, during which eight police officers arrived and waited outside the chambers. He ultimately suspended the meeting for a lack of decorum when shouts continued above the councilors’ heads.
Gomes, who chairs the public safety committee and has been a longtime supporter of the Police Department, said he is OK with Flock if it is used properly, which drew boos from overhead.
“Cameras are watching you everywhere… I’m a proponent of the cameras, but what I’m not a proponent of is using the cameras in a way that is unconstitutional and against people’s rights,” Gomes said. “I’m asking that we go to [the] public safety [committee], we go through all of this, you give me a guarantee that these cameras will not be messed with in unjustified ways, and I’m OK with it.”
Several members of the public said “no” and “take them down.” Some insulted Gomes; he responded and criticized the crowd because some had not stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. The verbal exchanges prompted Pereira to hit his gavel and councilors to ask for a recess.
Gomes criticized the administration for not announcing that it was implementing the Flock system when it did so in late 2024. The Light previously reported that most city councilors did not know about the Flock cameras until this summer.
Speaking before him, Councilors Joe Lopes and James Roy were more critical of the system.
“We have all seen across the country and our own city that the proposed safeguards don’t work. The only safeguard is the actual removal of the cameras,” Lopes said. “I commend the chief for trying to put safeguards in place, but we’re trying to put safeguards in place after incidents have already happened.”
The Light first reported last week that Officer Emily Pacheco was under investigation by internal affairs for allegedly using Flock to track her ex-girlfriend. She testified in court Aug. 13 that she had run her ex-girlfriend’s plate for a “drug investigation” involving another subject.
A day after The Light inquired with the department about Pacheco, and a day after she was served with a temporary restraining order, NBPD announced it was suspending the program pending a review. Police Chief Jason Thody has said the department has opened investigations into an undisclosed number of officers.
A timeline Thody shared this week also suggests the department first knew of Pacheco’s alleged misuse as of July 31, the day it began an audit of the system. Thody also gave more details this week about how the audit will proceed, including a review of data, emails, police reports and vehicle information of people with connections to officers, such as family and romantic partners.
“The recent incident involving our own New Bedford police officer showed that our city is not immune to those same risks,” said Roy, referencing nationwide examples of Flock’s misuse. “We cannot dismiss our residents’ concerns as hypothetical when our own city is now confronting the very questions [residents] raised.”
He called for more public hearings and policy review.
“I think many of the safeguards that the chief outlined in his recent release are important and overdue,” Roy said. “However, I am not convinced that Flock Safety is the right partner for New Bedford.” Attendees applauded.
Four motions on Flock were pending when the meeting ended.
Gomes’ motion called for the public safety committee to “immediately” meet with Thody, a representative from the mayor’s office and a rep from Flock safety “for the purpose of enhancing policies and procedures and strengthening community trust around the use of these cameras.”
Councillors Shane Burgo, Ian Abreu and Lopes put forth two motions. One requests that the public safety committee meet with NBPD, city attorneys and the city’s IT department to review Flock and other surveillance technology deployed by the city (as well as the policies governing their use).
The other motion would go to the ordinance committee to discuss whether “the appropriate policy outcome” is the “abolition” of Flock cameras and “other similarly invasive surveillance technologies within the City of New Bedford,” or establishing privacy and transparency standards for license-plate readers.
Councilor Leo Choquette put forth a motion to immediately stop the use of Flock cameras pending review. That is somewhat moot at this time, as the Police Department suspended the system last week.
The suspension of Thursday’s council meeting before acting on the motions now delays when the subcommittees will hear the motions, take possible action, and invite city officials, including Chief Thody, to come before the subcommittees and answer questions. Thody was not in attendance, but Deputy Chief Derek Belong observed the meeting.
Burgo told The Light that the actions of those shouting and disrupting the meeting “accomplished nothing” and have only delayed the process.
The council will hold a special meeting on Aug. 25, and it may take up the Flock motions then, Pereira told The Light on Friday.
The Flock motions will appear as tabled items at the special meeting. They will require the vote of six councilors to bring them up for discussion and a vote.
(Pereira had said on Thursday night that he was not planning on including the Flock motions in the special meeting, saying there are more time-sensitive matters that also were not heard at the meeting that need to be voted on. However, on Friday he changed his mind, telling The Light he was in the heat of the moment Thursday night.)
Editor’s note: This story was updated to add news about the Aug. 25 meeting.
Email Anastasia E. Lennon at alennon@newbedfordlight.org.
A poor public display and not New Bedford’s finest moment. For people to act in a uncivilized manor, to disrespect city officials, to disrupt a city council meeting, and not abide by the rules of decorum in the city council chamber is a disgrace. The council president should have immediately called in the police, had everyone removed, and continued the meeting. It should be stated that this small group does not represent the majority of city residents and that this type of nonsense is unacceptable.
You would’ve LOVED King George. Your comment reminds me of the King’s response to the Continental Congress in response to the Olive Branch Petition in 1775. Here, I’ll leave a copy of the opening paragraph:
“WHEREAS Many of Our Subjects in diverse Parts of Our Colonies and Plantations in North America, misled by dangerous and ill-designing Men, and forgetting the Allegiance which they owe to the Power that has protected and sustained them, after various disorderly Acts committed in Disturbance of the Public Peace, to the Obstruction of lawful Commerce, and to the Oppression of Our loyal Subjects carrying on the same, have at length proceeded to an open and avowed Rebellion, by arraying themselves in hostile Manner to withstand the Execution of the Law, and traitoroursly preparing, ordering, and levying War against Us.”
It’s not a direct translation of your comment, but the parallels are stunning!
Keep standing up, people. Democracy dies in dark, ignorant silence.
I was sorry to see that last night’s City Council Meeting had to be halted for lack of decorum. I watched the live-stream. While I may disagree with someone, I do not believe that shouting that person down accomplishes anything.
Our nation now finds itself in an existential war against a looming surveillance state which needs to be fought at the grass roots level. While angry protests have called attention to this crisis, all sides now need to cooperate to protect our democratic values. I hope future public hearings will generate less heat and more light.
For this reason, I have shared with all of our city councilors and now share with readers some model policies that cities can use to promote “smart cities” without also having a surveillance state:
Model Policy for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Local Government Agencies
https://www.civicmarketplace.com/help-center/articles/model-policy-for-artificial-intelligence-ai-in-local-government-agencies
An Act To Promote Transparency and Protect Civil Rights and Civil Liberties With Respect to Surveillance Technology template model bill language for surveillance ordinances
How to Stop ‘Smart Cities’ From Becoming ‘Surveillance Cities’
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/how-stop-smart-cities-becoming-surveillance-cities
How to Make Smart Decisions About Smart Cities
https://www.aclunorcal.org/news/how-make-smart-decisions-about-smart-cities/
I also have other articles that deal with how the federal government is using AI for surveillance but thought that the examples I have listed would be most practical and hope they are useful for policy development. Grant seekers should be aware that the DOJ smart cities grants are mostly tied to fulfilling an agenda.
While the immediate goal is to have a policy for ALPRs, I think that having an overall technology policy is really necessary to protect the city. People who have examples of cities that are now implementing the kinds of policies I have listed should share that information with our city decision makers. We now need all hands on deck.
Model template for city ordinance:
An Act To Promote Transparency and Protect Civil Rights and Civil Liberties With Respect to Surveillance Technology
https://www.aclu.org/files/communitycontrol/ACLU-Local-Surveillance-Technology-Model-City-Council-Bill-January-2017.pdf
Community Control Over Police Surveillance
https://www.aclu.org/community-control-over-police-surveillance
Are the data, records, and footage from Flock cameras and other surveillance equipment accessible for public inspection or review?
Another example of big mouths hurting their own cause.
Our city law enforcement officials and our legal and technical officials also need to be aware of the ties that accompany DOJ grants:
US DoJ ‘Model Cities’ initiative links policing technology to federal enforcement priorities
Grant program could accelerate deployment of AI, drones and surveillance technologies in cities aligned with federal law enforcement priorities
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202606/us-doj-model-cities-initiative-links-policing-technology-to-federal-enforcement-priorities
Trump Administration Hijacks Police Grants to Leverage Local Police For Its Authoritarian Ends
We’ve already seen what that looks like in places like Memphis; New “Model Cities Initiative” would spread it to other cities
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/trump-hijacks-police-grants
Billings Montana Council Rejects Model Cities Grant
https://www.ktvq.com/news/dojs-300-million-model-cities-initiative-rejected-by-billings-city-council
We haven’t had a vaccine for ignorance invented yet and no one remembers 911. A horrific terrorist event that claimed the lives of thousands.
It was September 11th , 2001. I remember the day, the time, the horror. I wish I didn’t and so do the family members of those who lost their lives. On October 26th the Patriot Act was passed, later modified as the USA Freedom Act to restore provisions and impose new limits as to how data could be collected. This was done in order to prevent terrorist activity and bolster national security.
The public are always monitored for a reason, we are tracked where we are, go and do. We are tracked without even being aware. It hasn’t interfered with anyone’s lives. You are monitored at the gas pumps, at the grocery store, public places, even at home. Every time you make a purchase whether you pay cash or use your card, but that doesn’t stop you you. You are monitored as you take advantage of the internet at home, but that doesn’t stop you. you are monitored as you travel in your car, but that doesn’t stop you.
Unfortunately we live in a world that is not perfect. We have the unfortunate defect of criminality, unfortunate defect of deceitfulness, unfortunate defect of inhumanity. I believe that’s why we have laws and governments to enforce public safety, to prevent the wild west mentality. I believe that’s the reason we have and need the continued use of public surveillance and the need for police to enforce the laws in order to maintain public safety.
The Flock cameras might have a defect, the Patriot Act had a defect, the Freedom Act might have a defect. All new technology, whether cars, medicine, electronics etc. might have defects. We as the human race might have defects as well.
I have nothing to hide, follow the laws and am not involved in any criminality. I not only have no problem with safe guards put in place for public safety, feel safe knowing they exist but support better and newer surveillance mechanisms.
Well said!
AMEN!
Dear Mr. Silveira,
I understand that people want government to protect them, and that some of those efforts to protect us have had “defects”. What citizens are now trying to do is correct those defects. Until recently, video footage taken of customers was the property of a business and stayed local. That has changed. Recently, the government has been buying this kind of information, video, cell phone location, sites you visit on your apps, etc,.
Why would it do that, you may ask? Well, coincidentally, the government is also buying AI software that can scan all of this, and information it already has on hand, into one big database which contains detailed information about everything a person does. This puts tremendous power into the hands of the central government. It sets up the structure which would enable an authoritarian to suppress dissenting voices.
So what, you say, I have nothing to hide because I am not doing anything wrong. Well, what if you are doing what you believe is right, say, expressing an opinion that disagrees with what the government is doing? In countries like Russia, and China, that could land you in prison.
For example, in Russia, people who say that the attacks on Ukraine are a “war” instead of a “special military operation ” soon find themselves arrested for engaging in “terrorist” activity and placed in jail. Unlike in the US where one is innocent until proven guilty, Russians have to prove that they are innocent. Aren’t you glad we have the US Constitution !
I have added the following links to document what I have said about the government’s buying of your information from corporations, and about the AI software the government is also acquiring to know everything about you. I hope that you will look at it , think about it, and maybe even talk about it with your friends and relatives.
By the way, I use the Duck Duck Go search engine because it does not track you,, and I mostly use the non-AI version of Duck Duck Go. (You type in your search in the url bar at the top of the screen. ) That is what I used to find the examples I am listing below:
US government ramps up mass surveillance with help of AI tech, data brokers – and your apps and devices
https://theconversation.com/us-government-ramps-up-mass-surveillance-with-help-of-ai-tech-data-brokers-and-your-apps-and-devices-277440
Feds Under Fire for Mass Surveillance of Americans, Lacking Oversight
https://davisvanguard.org/2026/03/federal-data-surveillance-loophole/
DHS-built surveillance apparatus to surge in year ahead, documents show
The agency is expanding detection and tracking technology projects while simultaneously loosening the reins on oversight.
https://fedscoop.com/dhs-surveillance-technology-ai-funding-document-spyware/
What is considered wrong is arbitrary. What’s defined as wrong is easily changed based on nothing more than whims. It’s happened before, is happening now, and will happen in the future.
There’s no such thing as “doing nothing wrong.” You just think that you’re in the socioeconomic group that is in power. The problem with that is unless you’re a billionaire, you most certainly are not. All it takes is upsetting someone who access to these systems or influence over the people with access to these systems to completely ruin your life if not physically endanger it.
I’m sure you’ve never upset a co worker, neighbor, or stranger before, so you don’t have anything to worry about.
Should officers be required to tell the police chief why the need to access Flock?
Of course … unless they’re detectives investigating a significant crime or major ongoing criminal activity/active threat. There’s no reason for random beat cops to have direct/unsupervised access.
Some of these comments are a complete joke and it’s time to stop with the nonsense. For the second time (Pulaski and City Hall) the lunatics acted like children, were disrespectful, and on both occasions they should have been locked up. Writing all the garbage and adding links is just another attempt to enrage the situation and make it worse. I do not care what age you are, it’s time to grow up, and start respecting our form of government, our elected officials, and our law enforcement officers. It has to be crystal clear that ignorant acts like this are not acceptable and must stop now. For what was done to Councilor Gomes and the rest of the city council they deserve an apology.
My favorite thing to read here in the comments is the condemnation of people rightfully furious about the violation of their civil rights showing up to a meeting and making that fury known. 250 years after we fought a bloody revolution for the right to peacefully disrupt, people are trying to walk it back. Wild.
My other favorite thing is Brian Gomes trying to blame the Mayor for implementing this in 2024 and the rest of the City Council trying to say “we didn’t know”. I guess the money just appeared out of thin air in the Mayor’s budget. Or, more likely, City Councilors didn’t read the budget as thoroughly as they claim and instead only focused on the hot button issues that get headlines and likes on social media for their next campaign.
Keep the pressure up, people. Flock is only the tip of the iceberg with this body that, for the most part, treats the rest of us with such contempt they’d adjourn a meeting over some shouting.
Do not give in to this Lynch Mob making demands and threats or they will be motivated to continue using the Hecklers Veto to shut down Democracy. Let the people vote on it. Flock Cameras are what China uses to oppress their citizens and America is better than that. Let people vote but never give in to fascist lynch mobs.
Yes, some people shouting are the same as a hoard of white people marching on an innocent Black family’s home to hang them from a tree. That is where the term “lynch mob” comes from. Do better.
Why was the comment that I submitted yesterday totally lost? Neither printed nor not even listed as not being printed?
You had this comment following the article titled,
“Police Dept. Inspecting data….” (I remember because I replied to your comment. ) Is that the one you mean?
Capt. Jim Kendallsays:
August 21, 2026 at 7:43 pm
Seemingly, the vast majority of people who protested the City Council meeting in opposition to the flock cameras were young adults. They seem to be the population most bothered by those cameras whereas, the older population seems to find value in the protection that a structured system can provide.
The council’s abrupt suspension amid the Flock camera uproar shows how quickly order can dissolve when public anger erupts. Transparent data sources like Clay Property Information empower citizens with concrete facts, cutting through heated slogans. Councilor Brian Gomes’ supportive comments collided with chants of “Flock off” and “De‑Flock now,” highlighting the tension between expert opinion and raw public pressure. Without a data‑driven dialogue, any vote on the four motions will stay stalled, leaving the city’s safety plan in limbo.
There are a lot of people that take pride in this city, but the lunatic fringe that showed up at City Hall was a complete embarrassment. The majority of New Bedford residents would never act in a disgusting manor like this and will never stand with these lunatics or support them. And if these are Shane Burgo supporters he’s in deep trouble because he will never become mayor. New Bedford deserves better than this childish garbage, this crap has to stop.
To Jane Constant; Yes Jane, that was my submitted comment, but apparently somehow it got misplaced. I just intended to point out the apparent discrepancies of age, that are on different sides of the surveillance issues. My point is; does or should the dislike of being surveilled override the security provided by today’s proliferation of cameras?
It is not just the cameras. The surveillance extends to a lot more of our personal information that is now being acquired by our federal government/ This information is now being networked using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to create a profile of almost everything there is to know about you in a central government database. This kind of “ mass surveillance” structure places tremendous power in a central government over the life of the individual citizen, and allows an authoritarian leader to target political opponents. Young people who have grown up using technology are probably more aware of this.
When I retired in 2001, it was customary for a department to decide on the technology it wanted and put in a requisition. Technology has changed so much that it is now necessary for local governments to included legal and technical staff in the selection of software in order to protect the constitutional rights of citizens and to protect local governments from lawsuits. It is also necessary to have the contracts with technology vendors approved by local city councils.
Some cities are enacting ordinances to protect the constitutional rights of citizens, and that is what I hope will happen in New Bedford. I have provided a link to a sample of this kind of ordinance. It is hard to give a simple explanation to a very complicated issue, but I think looking at the sample ordinance will give you a better idea of how important an issue this is. I hope that you will look at it, think about it, and maybe talk about it with your friends and relatives.
Model template for city ordinance:
An Act To Promote Transparency and Protect Civil Rights and Civil Liberties With Respect to Surveillance Technology
https://www.aclu.org/files/communitycontrol/ACLU-Local-Surveillance-Technology-Model-City-Council-Bill-January-2017.pdf
There are many who try to offer words of wisdom, but when you read the comments that include references to King George, lynch mobs, and violation of civil rights. These comments are no better than the garbage that was being spewed by the ignorant lunatics at the flock meeting. It’s always been said ignorance is bliss, but in this case it’s more of a time for some people to just grow up, and stop with the damn nonsense.
I’ll tell you what , if the city were to remove the camara’s from public property I would offer the city and Flock to mount one on my property for free and even pay for the electricity to operate it . Many crimes solved with the help of camaras . Lets help our police .
Just ask the parents of 8yr. old Richard [BOSTON MARATHRON ] how they feel about camaras ?
Time for smart solutions and maintaining public safety. The city should keep the flock cameras in critical areas. A special group of vetted officers should be selected to manage these cameras and handle this information. Narrowing it down to a small group of vetted officers should limit failures and these officers and information could be reviewed on a weekly basis by setting up an independent board of city leaders. Again it’s time for smart solutions and maintaining public safety.