Editor's Note: This is an online exclusive. For more on this story, see the next issue of the Bulletin. Subscribe today by calling 830-796-3718.
The Bandera City Council voted 3-2 Tuesday night, May 12, to terminate the city’s contract with Flock Safety Systems following months of public opposition to the planned license plate reader camera program.
Voting in favor of canceling the agreement were council members Debbie Breen, Deanna McCabe and Tammy Morrow. Council members Lynn Palmer and Jeff Flowers voted against the motion.
The Flock Safety system was originally approved by a previous council that included former council members Brett Hicks and Tony Battle, along with current council members Breen, Palmer and Flowers.
During Tuesday’s meeting, Breen questioned why the city moved forward with paying an invoice in March, one month after residents voiced strong objections during a February town hall meeting regarding the cameras.
The issue has remained divisive since a Feb. 18 town hall meeting drew a standing-room-only crowd of residents voicing concerns about privacy, transparency and government overreach tied to the planned camera system.
Following Tuesday’s vote, Flowers released a public statement Wednesday defending the Flock program and criticizing the council’s decision to cancel the contract.
The full statement from Flowers appears below:
The Bandera Declaration of Digital Independence
To the Citizens of Bandera:
For months, I have listened to the outcry regarding License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology. I have seen the eyerolls, and I’ve even been met with "Nazi rhetoric", the dangerous claim that believing in accountability and community safety is somehow equivalent to totalitarianism. Comparing a neighbor’s desire for a safe street to a dark chapter of history is a classic case of comparing apples to oranges; it is a distraction used to avoid the reality of the threats our town faces today.
I’ve also read the social media comments suggesting that if I want a camera, I should "put one on my own house."
Funny thing is, I did. And that camera caught a gang of criminals from San Antonio who drove into our town in a stolen car to break into mine. My private camera caught them after the crime was done. But if we had LPR readers at our city limits, that stolen car would have been flagged the moment it entered Bandera, likely before those criminals ever reached my driveway, or yours.
I now understand your concerns and I secede. Your outcry is just too logical to ignore. Since the Council has decided we are the "Free State of Bandera", a place where the 'rights' of a car thief or human trafficker to remain anonymous apparently outweigh the right of a resident to protect their property and the safety of their family, then we must go all the way.
To ensure our historic County Seat becomes the most "traditional" sanctuary in Texas, I have requested the following for the next City Council agenda:
• A Modest Proposal for Digital Device Prohibition: A total ban on all cellular and GPS-capable devices for all operations within city limits. If we are to be truly "private," we must leave our smartphones at the city line.
• A Modest Proposal for Total Surveillance Abolition (Residential & Commercial): A total ban on all outward-facing cameras, including residential doorbells and all commercial CCTV or security camera technology. If municipal safety cameras are "invasive," then no business or homeowner should be allowed to "monitor" the public. We will remove every lens in town.
• A Modest Proposal for Total Municipal and Commercial Decommissioning: A total termination of all internet services and electronic record-keeping. We are going back to 1880, paper ledgers and cash only.
The Fiscal Reality of "Freedom": This decision didn't just cost us our safety; it cost us our wallets. By canceling this project, the Council didn't just throw away a state grant (free money); they spent $15,000 of your local tax dollars out of pocket to back out of the deal. Bragging about fiscal responsibility while paying $15,000 for nothing is a very bad deal for Bandera.
A History Lesson: In the 1880s, privacy in this County Seat was non-existent. When a stranger rode into Bandera, the Marshal gave them an interview, not "space." The livery stable registered their horse’s brand, and the merchants watched their every move. Anonymity was for outlaws; accountability was for citizens.
I even reached out to the Trump camp regarding our "Free State" logic and the way we're treating our Marshal's office and the safety of our community. The response was classic:
"Our police are being treated very, very unfairly. It’s a total disaster. We give them the tools, we get them the grants—and I love grants, we have the best grants, nobody gets grants like we do—and then these 'eye-rollers' say no? It’s unbelievable. They want the criminals to have the best technology, the newest technology, but they want our great police to have nothing. They want a 'Free State' for the bad guys. It’s very sad."
Let’s take Bandera back to 1880 properly. No double standards, no hypocrisy. If LPRs are "unconstitutional" and invade our right to "public" privacy, we need to be courageous enough to go all the way. I look forward to the "Privacy First" crowd showing up to support these bans….just remember to leave your phones at home.
Jeff Flowers
Bandera, TX
.png)
