A Community at the Crossroads: Part 3 — The Case for a Public Commitment

Hi neighbors,

Thanks for sticking with me through this three-part series. In Part 1, we reflected on the legacy of trust and community policing in Mountlake Terrace. In Part 2, we examined our policy manual—what’s strong, what’s unclear, and what’s missing.

Now, in Part 3, we look ahead: What should we do next?

Why such strong pushback against license plate cameras? Isn’t this just about recovering stolen cars?

It’s a fair question—but the reality is, when you look around the country, Flock cameras are not consistently being used in ways that align with local values or state laws. Below are just a few recent stories that help explain why this matters. Together, they paint a troubling picture of how easily these systems can be misused, and how quickly data can end up in the hands of federal agencies like ICE, often without local knowledge or consent.

These stories don’t suggest Mountlake Terrace is doing the same—but they show what’s at stake when safeguards are weak or missing.

As residents, we deserve clarity, accountability, and protections for how our data is handled—not just internally, but wherever it may travel.

Behind every policy decision is a set of values, spoken or unspoken. And in times of uncertainty, communities look to their leaders to make those values clear. That’s exactly what Seattle’s new police chief did.

At a recent confirmation hearing, Seattle Police Chief Barnes was asked how he’d respond to a future federal crackdown on protest or immigration dissent. His response was both remarkable and refreshingly direct:

👉 Seattle Police Chief Barnes says he expects to be jailed for resisting Trump's orders

While every city is different, and every police department faces unique contexts, this kind of clear public affirmation of values is the kind of leadership that can help any community, including ours, navigate these complex times with confidence and integrity. 

Many of us have said the same thing throughout this process: we trust our local police department. That trust has been built over years of community relationships and professional conduct. It’s what makes conversations like these possible in the first place.

That trust has also been echoed by MLTPD leadership. In a recent private exchange, Chief Pete Caw affirmed that the department does not inquire about immigration status and understands how damaging it would be if residents feared police involvement based solely on documentation.

That’s meaningful. But it’s not enough—not now.

Because trust isn’t blind faith. And it doesn’t mean silence when systems change faster than safeguards.

This conversation began because the Flock contract lacked safeguards. It asked us to trust not just our department, but a vast, shifting network of agencies with limited transparency. We asked for clear contractual protections. And when the contract moved forward anyway, despite broad public concern, some of that trust was eroded.

Now we’re in a unique position. MLTPD’s policies, particularly around immigration enforcement and LPR data use, are actually stronger than most. But they are focused almost entirely on internal use.They don’t control what happens once data leaves our hands.They don’t bind Flock from sharing it.They don’t ensure our values travel with our data.

Even with solid internal policies, these gaps matter.

This is the moment for a joint statement from MLTPD, the City Council, and city leadership—affirming Mountlake Terrace’s commitment to community safety, civil liberties, and the rights of all residents.

Why?

Cities around the country are facing the same questions we are and many are responding with clarity, care, and strong values.

In Denver, the City Council unanimously rejected a $666,000 expansion of its Flock contract. While acknowledging the system’s role in reducing car thefts, councilmembers cited “today’s environment” and community trust as reason to pause, continue the pilot, and form a public task force before any wider rollout.👉 Denver pauses Flock expansion, prioritizes oversight

In Austin, the City Manager recently pulled the renewal vote for its LPR system entirely, citing “renewed privacy concerns.” Councilmembers demanded better documentation—especially because some 20% of system uses had no case numbers. They also worried about how data could be used to target immigrants or those seeking abortion care.👉 Austin delays LPR vote amid privacy concerns

In San Marcos, TX, the City Council voted down a proposed expansion of Flock cameras after hours of public testimony, choosing to center community voices and privacy over surveillance expansion.👉 San Marcos rejects Flock expansion

Each of these communities took a different path—but they all prioritized public input, paused implementation, and made trust a central value.

If cities like these can say, “Let’s slow down and listen,” surely Mountlake Terrace can, too.

The City Council meets tomorrow, Thursday, June 26. Flock isn’t currently on the agenda, but I certainly hope it will be part of the conversation. The community hasn’t forgotten about this, and the Council shouldn’t either.

What’s being tested here isn’t just legal obligation. It’s leadership, integrity, and moral clarity. We have a right to know how our city’s tools and data are used, and a responsibility to ensure Mountlake Terrace remains a safe and inclusive place for everyone. Let’s not settle for meeting the minimum. Let’s aim higher. Let’s build a future rooted in inclusion, transparency, and trust — values we have worked hard to define and must now choose to uphold through action.

This concludes the series, but not the conversation. I’ll be watching closely. I hope you will too.

Dustin