CORALVILLE, Iowa—Following a meeting on February 24, the Coralville City Council voted 3-1 to cancel its $36,000 contract with Flock Safety and remove the city’s automated license plate reader cameras (ALPRs). The decision follows months of community pressure and a recent legal threat from the Iowa Attorney General’s office regarding the city’s restrictions on the cameras for immigration enforcement.
The controversy dates back nearly a year, when the $36,000 contract was first signed by the police chief without prior public discussion or a dedicated City Council vote. Residents only learned of the APLRs months later, when the police department sought installation permits. Despite immediate and organized community opposition, the council moved forward with the agreement last September, promising data “guardrails” that critics at the time dismissed as ineffective.
The council’s reversal comes amid escalating pressure from Iowa’s Republican-controlled legislature, which many argue has moved to strip local governments of their autonomy. Recently, the Iowa Attorney General’s Office ordered Coralville to remove the “guardrails” prohibiting the use of ALPR data for immigration enforcement, citing a conflict with state law. As the legislature weighs new bills to mandate local cooperation with federal agencies like ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement), critics warn that the Flock database remains a massive surveillance tool, allowing authorities to retrace the daily movements of millions of drivers.
According to 404media reporting in May 2025, “more than 4,000 nation and statewide lookups by local and state police done either at the behest of the federal government or as an ‘informal’ favor to federal law enforcement…according to statements from police departments and sheriff offices.”
During public comments preceding the 3-1 vote, residents focused on two primary demands: establishing safeguards to prevent future contracts from being approved without public oversight and conducting an internal review to ensure administrative accountability. In response, council members Freeman, Huynh, and Knudson all voiced their support for amending city policy to restrict future surveillance and data collection practices.
In the closing remarks, council member Rich Vogelzang provided the sole defense of the program, claiming to speak on behalf of the “silent majority” who view the usage of Flock’s cameras as an essential public safety tool. Volgezang argued that “law-abiding citizens” have no reason for concern and that the cancellation undermines the police department’s ability to protect the city. However, other council members countered that supporting law enforcement does not require the automatic approval of every contract, emphasizing that public oversight is a core component of municipal trust.
We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!
CONTRIBUTOR
