Surveillance tech companies are doing secretive government contracts with public officials who are avoiding public input.
The parallels with the secrecy with tech industry data center projects are uncanny.
The sense of urgency is a well-known high pressure sales tactic that is often used in the commission of scams and fraud. So it sure is odd that local government public officials are rushing into contracts and projects with tech companies. Who exactly is the mark?
Millions in Public Funds, Zero Public Input: Flock's Surveillance System Might Already Be Overseeing Your Community - The $7.5 billion surveillance company Flock Safety is operating in 49 states and over 5,000 communities, but the residents of Scarsdale, NY, are fighting back. Ka (Jessica) Burbank Aug 02, 2025 This meeting was the first time Flock was mentioned by officials in a public setting in Scarsdale. After the presentation ended, the Mayor held a vote on a motion to enter into executive session, it passed, and the village board met privately until 8pm. That same night, during the village board of trustees meeting scheduled for 8pm, Mayor Arrest entertained a motion to amend the agenda and add a resolution to authorize the execution of the Flock contract, it passed 6-1. The entire process took 35 seconds total. Typically, voting on a motion without prior notice is reserved for urgent matters. Frankel told Drop Site, “Why was it so time sensitive? Why did it need to happen without proper notice all in one night? And I don't have a good answer for that.” The lack of answers aren’t for not trying, Frankel has, “corresponded with the mayor and the board and the village manager. Most of my questions, very specific questions, straightforward questions, most of them have gone unanswered,” he told Drop Site.
As if it wasn't bad enough that public officials have been signing NDAs to keep secret data center project plans from the taxpayers that will foot the bill and experience the consequences; it looks like the surveillance industry companies are apparently possibly coaching public officials on avoiding public knowledge and input on their surveillance service contracts with these companies.
You’re Being Watched: The Company Behind America’s Mass Surveillance Takeover Jessica (Ka) Burbank Aug 11, 2025 (documentary) "Police officers know if you follow someone in a car for a couple of miles, the likelihood is you'll be able to pull them over for something. What we're doing here is we're creating that database so that we can always do that for anyone. That you're constantly tracking people's movements. um you have that system in place so that you don't need to articulate the suspicion before you're gathering data on someone, before you're actually trying to tag someone with wrongdoing. When you have that system there, all someone has to do is say, "I don't like that person." And then you've got that surveillance already established." (...) "this is a real fear and the fact that we're installing this stuff means that we're extending that mechanism even if we think it will be used right that database is being fed and as we all know um database data escapes into the wild when you have hackers especially when it's in private hands. These private institutions use the data for their own purposes which may not be parallel to what the government wants."
I have heard it reported that some of these surveillance companies with contracts with the government apparently coach public officials to avoid public input. And I wonder how do you know they aren't just taking the community's data and selling it to the highest bidder, or being reckless with it so that it's taken by hackers out of North Korea or who knows where, to be used to attack Americans with scams or identity theft and stuff like that? What are you doing to protect the information from being misused even by more local bad actors who might use it for personal vendettas? Has anyone even bothered to think about this before just having sketchy tech companies use this data? I already know that medical data is legal to buy and sell on the open market once it's out there in a data breach, and then supposedly "above board" companies use it for dark pattern marketing. I don't even think that should be legal, what sensible person would? What are you doing in the public interest in this respect?
Please feel free to copy or repurpose for your own letters to reps.
The city I live in has been under 1984 style surveillance for well over a decade. I first heard about the sheer volume of CCTV cameras in Scranton during the Great Recession when I was looking for employment and I talked to someone who worked for the city and said there was a job opening for someone to sit and watch a bank of cameras. Sadly even the current Democratic party mayor is seems cozy with the maga type local magnate who rejects public input on anything they do; the mayor also celebrated trickle down economics in giving taxpayer money to a literal bank, and so of course the mayor is loving new surveillance equipment even in this time of authoritarianism and law enforcement that is so obviously increasingly in bed with fascists.
