Common Council - Regular Meeting

Alright, I'd like to call Pastor Juvenal from First Baptist Church to come up and give the invocation. Thank you very much. Just in case.

Recording in progress.

I'd like to call tonight's Common Council meeting to order here on Tuesday, September 15th at 7.04 p.m. Clerk, will you take a roll, please?

Davis. Here. Lampe. Here. Burke.

I'm here.

Ntuki. Here. Blanke.

Here.

Smith.

Here.

Arnett?

Here.

Haas? Here. Moldenhauer?

Here. Okay, thank you. Could you please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, first on our agenda, we have a minutes of council meeting held on September 1st.

I'll make a motion that we approve those minutes as written.

Thank you, Mr. Berg.

I'll second.

Second by Davis. Anything on that? Okay, all those in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Opposed? Thank you. Next, we have comments and suggestions from citizens present. Members of the public who wish to address the council should register their request in writing with the city clerk prior to speaking. Speakers shall be permitted up to three minutes for their comments.

Eric Schmidt.

Good evening, Eric Schmidt, 605 Lafayette Street, Watertown, Wisconsin. I'm calling to address the council, and I recognize the agenda is very lengthy and very long tonight. The issue specifically has to do with flock cameras, axon cameras, Leonidas devices, other unknown, let's call them unconstitutional, worthless surveillance devices used by this municipality. I'm aware that axons are used predominantly for our body cams and our squad car vehicles. I don't have an issue with body cams. I don't have an issue with cameras in cars so long as they discontinue the continuous running and the digital mapping of the citizens of Watertown without a warrant and without justification. Flock cameras shouldn't exist in this community. That data is sellable and searchable and we don't control it. More to the point, the camera out by Walmart isn't even compliant with breakaway devices for DOT standards. So we shouldn't have them. If you want a budget cut item, discontinue that contract and readjust the Exxon one. Don't be like Milwaukee, don't be like Madison, try to do a bait and switch and get rid of flock cameras and say Exxon's better. We're paying attention. This is much bigger than what I think some of you realize this technology is. Look into the owners, look into where this camera came from. I promise you'll be disgusted at what it's been used for. The cases have happened just in Wisconsin where people are getting held by gunpoint because of an AI mistake. Those cameras nationwide track billions of data points every single month. They have over a billion failure points every single month. There's no justification constitutionally for them to exist. It's not flock safety. It's a different company. Quit falling for the trap.

And Madam Attorney, for the record, that's an open record request.

It's very detailed in what I'm asking for. And I expect the council to do the right thing when it comes to the closed session and negotiating that contract for tonight.

Luke milking.

I delivered a written public records request this building. I ASK FOR THREE THINGS BEFORE TONIGHT'S MEETING. THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S A.L.P.R. PLOT POLICY, THE PLOT CONTRACT AND ORDER FORM, AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT FILED FOR CAMERON'S PLACE. TODAY IS SEPTEMBER 15th. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Should I start at the beginning then? Okay. Okay. Now I got it done once, I can try again. Mayor, members of the council, my name is Luke Mielke. I live in 213 South Monroe Street here in Watertown. I'm speaking on the item 7D, the flock camera system. On August 27th, I hand-delivered a written public records request at this building. And to the finance director, Mark Stevens, who accepted it, I asked for three things the council should already have in front of you tonight. the police department's ALPR flock policy, the flock contract and order form, and the right-of-way permit filed for the camera installations. Today is September 15th, that is 19 days, with no acknowledgement, no fee estimate, and no records. Wisconsin law says the city must respond as soon as practical and without delay. The State Department of Justice says about 10 days is reasonable for records. This is easy to find. These are not fishy expeditions. They are the documents you need for an informed discussion. I'm also delivering a written follow-up tonight asking for a response by September 22nd, which I've already submitted that. Before we continue or expand this program, I ask three things. First, direct staff to produce the records for this week and put the policy contract in the packet. Second, we have cameras as the same thing as we have audits, retention limits and sharing limits. Milwaukee has already had two officers charged for using FLOC to track people for personal reasons. FLOC itself now recommends seven-day default retention. Green Bay, Fond du Lac have also published policies. We should not be discussing the system while the policy and contract are still hidden. Third is the department cannot show a written policy and audit schedule and contract terms tonight. table any expansions until those documents are public. I'm not asking you to ignore crime. I'm asking that you debate a surveillance network with our... I am asking you not to debate a surveillance network without the paperwork. Last week, Jefferson County Sheriff Travis Mays voluntarily suspended his office flock cameras. He said the flock told the county the data would not be released without the county's permission. He then learned that the 2025 investigative data was released without consent. His words, I feel that we were lied to. He said the public trust is more important than anything those cameras can collect. That is not Madison, Milwaukee story. That is our county. I am a local business owner who works mostly with local businesses and nonprofits. My main purpose with my business is to help develop a better community for my family. I'm not okay with raising my family in a community that disregards the privacy of my family with questionable monitoring. My father-in-law and mother-in-law both served in the Marine Corps, and my father-in-law, who is currently just hours from losing his battle with brain cancer, would be livid that the country he served and offered his life to defend is bringing these communist types of surveillance to the city of his daughter and grandkids. I'm not okay with living in a surveillance state type of government, and I am strongly considering moving my family and business to a community where freedom is deemed important. The cameras may help deter some crime, but we do not live in a movie where it's okay to become the evil to fight evil. We want our officers to be the good guys and making them the questionable bad guys is not a world I want my family to live in. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

That's it? Okay.

All right, there is another place for public comment at the end of the meeting as well.

Mr. Mayor? Yes, Mr. Blanke. Thank you. I'd like to propose an amendment to our agenda for this evening. I would like to move item 10A under licenses and ordinances 11A and B directly in front of item seven, communications and recommendations.

Okay. Second is motion. Second by Berg. Okay. Questions on that? All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Opposed? Aye.

Okay. Thank you. All right, move on to reports, and then we have the Board of Health Minutes from August 11th, Airport Minutes from August 12th, Licensing Board Minutes from August 13th, Library Board of Trustees Minutes from August 13th, Site Plan Review Minutes from August 24th, Planning Commission Minutes from August 24th, Public Works Commission Minutes from August 25th, and Public Works Minutes from September 8th. Mr. Berg, go ahead.

Yeah. Mr. Mayor, I just want to make a comment on the Public Works Commission minutes of September 8th. And as board members and elected officials, we get comment from people in our community about the condition of our main street and the fact that it is in bad repair. And it's not scheduled for replacement until 2030. What we did as a Public Works Commission, though, we did have conversation with our our other city officials, and we have found some funds that are going to be made available to address that section of East Main Street that is in bad repair and make it more tolerable for us for the next few years by that improvement. I just want to give some credit to our staff and our commission for addressing that issue.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Burton. Anything else in the minutes? Let's move on. We have our youngest citizen in the room here for a while. I was maybe entertain a motion to move a 7B maybe ahead of schedule.

Mr. Mayor? Yes, Mr. Blanke. I'll move that we move item 7B to be covered next on the agenda. Okay, motion by Blanke.

Second.

Second by Arnett. Okay. All in favor say aye. Aye. Okay. Thank you. I'll move on to 7B then. So I'll invite the Jones family if wishing to. Cameron, come on up. Someone's having his fifth anniversary in the city. Come on up.

Okay.

This is Cameron Jones, and we're celebrating his fifth year anniversary with the city. So Cameron Jones is one of a kind. He has an undeniable likability and the work ethic to back it up. He truly is a fan favorite. Cam does not get too stressed or shaken up, and he has a knack of giving that silly grin and goofy laugh at just the right moment when things are getting on the verge of getting tense. We have days that responsibilities for safety is high and stress mounts, but Cam can make you just stop, shake your head, and smile. In five years, we've seen Cam quickly become an exceptional addition to any crew he is on. I tell all of our newer employees that if you can be someone who the senior guys want on their crew, you are doing well here. It is no surprise that Cam is one that is asked for on many crews. He has been part of most street and storm sewer projects over the last five years. He's helped install permeable pavers, been on tricky alley reconstruction projects, dealt with flooding issues, and currently plows snow in the northeast section of the city. He's helped put barricades out for emergencies and tragedies that happen in the city as well. During the last five years, Cam has gotten married and now has a newborn son, Levi. I hope he continues to build his family here in Watertown and stays on our team for years to come. He has a bright future here with our division, and I would like to thank and congratulate Cam on five years of service.

Thanks for the motion, Mr. Blanke. Mr. Jones, if Levi wants to hang around for a while, he can do that if you want to, but thanks for bringing him, and congratulations. Okay. Mr. Blanke, your motion was to put those before communications, right? The original one? Yes. Okay. We'll then move on to licenses 10A, review and take action application for a change of agent from Watertown Liquor Depot LLC, DBA Liquor Depot, 1907 Market Way Suite C from Courtney Hobbs to Robert Schuett for the licensing year expiring June 30th, 2027. Mr. Mayor? Yes, Mr. Blanke.

I will move approval with the condition that we receive the background check.

Okay. We have a motion by Blanke.

Second.

Second by Haas. Okay. Questions, comments on that? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Thank you. All right, next we have 11A, Ordinance 26-26, Ordinance to Amend the Adopted Plan Development PD Overlay District General Development Plan GDP for the Oxbow at 100 East Division Street, PIN number 291-0815-0412-029, and 104 East Division Street, PIN number 291-0915-3343-053, sponsored by myself and the Planning Commission on second reading. I'll move for adoption. Okay. Motion by Berg. Second by Smith. Okay. Questions? Comments?

Okay.

Berg? Aye. Natchecki? Aye. Blankey?

Aye.

Smith?

Aye.

Arnett?

No.

Huss? No. Moldenhauer?

Aye.

Davis? Aye. Lampy? Aye. Motion carried.

Okay, thank you. Next, Ordinance 26-27. Ordinance to amend the Adopted Plan Development PD Overlay District Precise Implementation Plan, PIP, for the Oxbow at 100 East Division Street, pin number 291-0815-0412-029. And 104 East Division Street, pin number 291-0915-3343-053. Sponsored by myself and the Planning Commission on its second reading. I'll go. Motion by Berg, second by Smith. Anything on that one? Mr. Berg, go ahead.

We've had the discussion and I just want to reiterate that one of the benefits of this project based on going through and being built out as proposed, there's other vacant parcels on the Rock River that are within TID 8 that will then become more appealing for development and investment and that will help create some of the draw that we're trying to make to our downtown because it will allow for funds to improve our seawall and our potential boardwalk and other things that will make the river more of an appealing asset than we currently have. So we need investment and that investment can be again earmarked for a portion to improve the TID that has newly been created and amended to allow for development in that part of our town. And this investment has the likelihood of increment that will give revenue to the TID for other projects, which we'll benefit from. So it's a win-win, and we have very little risk as a city in allowing this to happen. Thank you, Mr. Bergen. Okay.

Burke?

Aye.

Natecky?

Aye.

Blankey?

Aye.

Smith?

Aye.

Burnett?

No.

Haas?

No.

Moldenhauer?

Aye.

Davis? Aye. Lampe?

Aye.

Motion carried.

Okay, thank you. Let's go back to communication recommendations. A reminder, oh, okay, sorry. November 3rd council meeting will be moved to November 2nd due to the election, so it'll be monday instead and then we did b so i'll go c party department july 2026 monthly data report i think it was just set recently and chief's online any questions chief reagan Okay, seeing none, I'll move on to D, Police Department Discussion of Watertown Flax Systems. And if we could ask the alders to hold any questions until Chief is done presenting.

Council Members, Mayor, and the people of Watertown, thank you for giving me your time today to speak about something that goes far beyond budgets, line items, or hardware. What I'm talking about today is a matter of justice. It's about safety. It's about the people who live here, who raise their families here, who trust us, you and me, to protect them when danger comes suddenly and without warning. For more than 30 years, ALPR, Automated License Plate Reader Technology, has been involving, improving, and refining its ability to help law enforcement bring the truth to light. I remember 20 years ago, standing over a case file as a detective here in Watertown, trying to piece together a crime with too few clues and too little time. Chicago gang members were leaving Chicago in convoys. traveling for hours all over the Midwest, breaking into dealerships and locating keys, and then stealing our vehicles and driving back to Chicago. And they hit Watertown several times. They were generally armed with firearms and were more than willing to commit other crimes, including violent crimes. I was able to solve those cases and others because of ALPR technology at the IPAS system in Chicago, of all things. Even then, ALPR was a lifeline to protect our people here in Watertown. I made my contacts with IPAS. They provided me with photographs of our stolen vehicles, the drivers and the convoy drivers, as they passed through IPAS on the way to Watertown and on the way back to Chicago. I then connected with many other agencies who had similar incidents. We shared that information and made arrests and prosecutions, all because of ALPR. Without it, we would have had no hope. At that time, I could only wish for that technology to be available to Watertown, Wisconsin. Today, ALPR has become the most effective tools, one of the most effective tools in American law enforcement. Block safety used by more than 7,000 agencies across 49 states has become the gold standard. It's not theory. It's not hypotheticals. It's a measurable daily force of justice at work. 120,000 cameras solving crimes across America, bringing justice. For every city that left flock in the past year or so, since social media and mainstream media began this unholy crusade to reduce law enforcement capability, seven join. Even today, that's one leaves, seven join. Being one of the approximately 100 agencies out of 7,000 that opt out of ALPR means we would be the one and a half percent that unnecessarily jettisons one of the best tools for justice we've seen in 30 years. What this technology is and isn't. Plot cameras capture vehicles and plates, not people. Unless incidentally, and then in my experience, rarely. They don't use facial recognition. They don't track individuals. They don't issue automated tickets. They don't create dossiers on citizens. What they do is far more straightforward. They capture a moment in time that tells us this vehicle passed this camera at this moment. That's all. But that information is gold in terms of leads to bring justice and rescue to crime victims. That moment in time can be the difference between catching the guilty and accusing the innocent, between finding a missing child and losing precious minutes, between solving a homicide and watching a case grow cold. There is no Fourth Amendment violation. Courts have made it absolutely clear. On public roads, there is no expectation of privacy regarding a license plate. The law is on solid ground here. And the truth is simple. This technology protects people who have done nothing wrong from criminals who prey on the innocent. It protects our communities. And it helps prevent tragedies. Watertown's historical flock use. We have had a single flock camera since late 2023. First funded by a donor, then sustained by the police department. We have 10 more approved and funded for the 2026 budget, approved by this city council one year ago. They aren't mounted yet because as we began to make installation plans, we saw a spike in vandalism. We are researching the mounting options further in an effort to protect our investment. Each camera costs about $3,000 per year. That cost is minimal when weighed against the cost savings provided by the resolution of a single major crime in an efficient fashion. That cost is absolutely nothing when weighed against a single life saved. We are planning to place them at the major roadways into Watertown and at one strategic high traffic location inside the city. We need to know who is coming into our community to commit crimes. And we need the ability to receive help from neighboring cities when criminals here flee our city to avoid arrest and continue their crimes elsewhere. Criminals cross borders. They cross jurisdictions. They don't respect lines on a map. But ALPR helps us bring them to justice and keep our people safe. Why image retention matters. This is going to be personal to me as a chief. I cannot in good conscience ever sit across from a grieving family, a mother, a father and say, I'm sorry, your child's killer drove past our camera more than 30 days ago. And our policy was that we delete that evidence. Justice does not have an expiration date. Our retention policy should not force one. What ALPR has already done for Watertown. Let me share a few real cases. These aren't theories. These are our people, our officers, our citizens, our community. The vehicular homicide last December. We had very little to go on. A vehicle description in color. Without flock, that case would not have been solved. An arrest would not have happened for homicide by intoxicated use of motor vehicle. but FLOC let us search for vehicles that had passed the camera recently, and our officers quickly located potential suspect vehicles with connected license plates. They quickly narrowed down the suspect vehicles, found the correct vehicle, found the suspect, and proved OWI before that evidence evaporated. If we had taken the usual approach without ALPR, hours or days spent combing through registration records, we would have lost all hope of a prosecution. The suspect would have moved his vehicle, cleaned it, invented an alibi, sobered up, and simply refused to speak. Justice was achieved only because of ALPR. The Barron County burglary suspect. In June of 25, Flock picked up the burglary suspect's vehicle within 40 minutes of us being alerted. Our officer located it near Walmart and arrested the suspect inside, protecting our city from further crime, including potential violent crime. Inside the vehicle was a stolen gun safe and a stolen handgun. By finding him immediately, we kept stolen firearms out of dangerous hands and helped another jurisdiction bring a criminal to justice. Yet, the benefit echoed back here, protecting Watertown. the attempted homicide suspect from Jefferson County. Within 40 minutes of a stabbing in Jefferson County, Flock recorded the suspect's vehicle on Airpark Drive in Watertown. That real-time alert led our officer to a high-risk stop in Watertown. The suspect was arrested for attempted homicide and OWI. Without Flock, he would have been lost to the darkness and free to continue his victimization of our people. major drug trafficking operations. Our drug task force uses Flock to investigate the lines of drug distribution, lines that stretch far beyond our city. Flock let our investigator track a suspect's route across state lines without having to sit at a computer for hours every day or spending thousands of dollars on phone location warrants. Flock revealed which vehicle the trafficker truly used. Alerts guided investigators to the right place, the right time, and the suspect was arrested with 20 kilograms of illegal drugs in another state. It was only the use of Flock in that case that kept poison off the streets of Watertown. Daily realities. Flock is nearly a daily tool for our officers. They use it to monitor drug routes from Milwaukee and Madison. They use it to reduce manpower and overtime, saving taxpayer money. They use it to find hidden clues, verify innocent alibis, and stop dangerous criminals before they strike again. Flock is frequently used for Amber Alerts. When a child is abducted elsewhere, we can know by Flock if they enter our city and scramble to intercept and rescue them. The same is true for Silver Alerts as well. for our elderly and vulnerable who are lost and driving for hours upon hours across our state. If a child is abducted in Utah and the suspect drives into Watertown, our ALPR system can tell us. No other tool is as capable of that level of national reach. Misuse, oversight, and trust. I want to address these fears head on. Could an unethical officer misuse this technology? In theory, yes. Just like any tool in policing. An unethical officer could misuse his taser, his baton, his squad, his access to driver's license information, his reports, his firearm. But misuse is rare. And every single ALPR query logs the case number, the written justification, the officer who ran it, the exact time it was run, the data that was accessed. The log is immutable, meaning it cannot be changed. If an officer ever used ALPR to look up any information, perhaps a family member or a neighbor or some personal acquaintance, without legitimate purpose, it would be logged and available forever. In policing, trust is earned through action and accountability. The block itself now flags unusual activity, and alerts our supervisors to be certain that we are easily able to monitor ourselves. For the entire history of law enforcement, officers have had access to sensitive information to do their jobs. The trust, the oversight, and the consequences for misuse have always been there. That remains true with ALPR. Fear of Big Brother. I hear people say they fear being watched. I understand that. I don't like being watched either. But I would remind people, every store you walk into has cameras. Your cell phone provider alone tracks more about you than any government ever could. Private companies collect mountains of personal data with no judges, no juries, no oversight. Law enforcement is different. We operate under oversight every single day. Judges, juries, defense attorneys, city councils, constitutional limits, all watch us closely. Sincerely, I share the American instinct to distrust unchecked power. I live by the adage, we must never sacrifice essential liberty to purchase temporary safety. If ALPR ever crossed that line, or if shifts in society push it towards that line, I would pull that plug myself. As long as policing remains local, accountable, and rooted in community trust, a nationwide surveillance state cannot take root here. Fear of hacking. Could Flock be hacked? Any system in the modern world can be hacked. Enough hackers, enough time. Israel can make pagers detonate in their enemies' pockets. The flock is driven by market forces. Their reputation and business survival depends entirely on keeping their systems secure. That is a powerful motivator. Fear of selling information. Unlike your cell phone provider, FLOC has made a commitment in their contracts to never sell this data. False positives. We train our officers to visually confirm ALPR information with NCIC data before any stop is made. Human judgment is the safeguard. FLOC provides a lead, not a conclusion. Trusting the officers who would run towards danger. I want to speak here from the heart as someone who has stood beside these men and women in times of fear and crisis. The officers of Watertown are not perfect, but they are good. They are devoted. They are courageous. They are the people who would run into the line of fire to save you and your family. They are the ones who show up at 3 a.m. for the car crashes, the fights, the missing children, the domestic violence. the suicides and tragedies of every kind. If we can trust these officers with life and death decisions, we can trust them with this tool. We have had ALPR since late 2023. We have used it wisely. We have used it fairly. We have used it to protect our citizens. A message about resources. Imagine telling our officers It's another 0% increase budget year. Do more with less. Solve more crimes with fewer resources. And oh, by the way, we're going to take away your most efficient tool. But believe us when we say, when we support you, that message would be crushing. It would tell them their work matters less than their limits. It would tell them that we value lower budgets over public safety. That is not the message I believe this city wants to send. Strengthening the shield that protects our people. We already have strong technology protecting this community. ALPR is just one piece of our safety network. But in my professional judgment, it is one of the most effective. It gives us eyes where we have no officers. It gives us clues where humans cannot see. It gives us speed where time would otherwise destroy evidence. It lets us save lives. We do not access ALPR or driver's license records or any of these things just out of curiosity. Never have, never will. Our purpose is singular, to solve crimes and rescue the missing. Law enforcement has always had oversight built into every action we take. Every arrest is judged. Every decision is scrutinized. The private corporations that collect vastly more information about each citizen have none of that oversight. ALPR is not just a tool. It is an obligation. It is a moral responsibility to stand between the vulnerable and the violent, between innocence and danger, between truth and the darkness that hides it. Discarding ALPR is the equivalent to defunding the police. It means you prevent criminals from being brought to justice. It means your people suffer. It means murderers go free. It means abduction victims are not rescued. Bank robbers walk. Gang members and drug dealers continue to victimize our city. When a criminal steals your car out of your driveway, we won't be able to arrest them and bring them to justice. Believe me, The criminals are watching this debate closely, the same as they watch the defund police debate, deciding where to go next, rubbing their hands gleefully in anticipation of their next opportunity to victimize our citizens. Watertown is strong. It is resilient. It deserves every possible protection we can give it. This technology helps us help you. It keeps every one of us safer. For those of you who are cautious about your local police department joining a slippery slope to big government or to certain great evil against certain people, it's me. This is Dave. You know me. You've known me for 25 years. I've known Watertown for 25 years. Some of you in this council have memories of me as an officer that go back two decades. I know this because I share those memories with you. I'm not a politician who comes and goes every three years. I get to be here for decades. I will be the one to raise the alarm if that concern ever begins to coalesce. If it's ever necessary, remember that the elected officials of Watertown can remove this tool at any point. There's no imaginary window that's closing at this point. It will always be open. That's the genius of the American policing method. Local politics controls local law enforcement. Your police chief is not ruled by Madison or Washington. I'm ruled by Watertown. Local law enforcement is one area you do have influence over. An area you can relax and say, okay, I'll trust this expert in his field because if he is proven to be wrong in what he says, local politics will still be able to remove this thing that we fear may become a problem. You can trust your Watertown police to correctly use this tool. If an officer misuses it, I will take appropriate disciplinary action. We already have the flock method in use that alerts administration to any suspected misuse. You trust your officers already with far more impactful realities than merely knowing when a particular license plate passes a particular point in the road, such as determining when to use deadly force. You can trust me to lead correctly in this arena. My purpose for this discussion today is to learn your comfort level on flock and ALPR in general. If a decision might be to pause in the planned installation of flock cameras until we know more, and revisit this topic in a month or two with you. I can do that. Of course, as you know, it's budget season, and my 2027 budget request includes the same flock capabilities, so the conversation will continue. I would take questions today if there's anything burning in your mind that I have not addressed, but if not, I would ask you to offer your suggestions concerning ALPR and flock to me and Mayor Stocks for us to consider. He and I would compile those, address them with me and my command staff, and then report back to you.

Thank you, Chief. Mr. Echolet, sir.

Chief, as was referenced earlier tonight about Jefferson County suspending their use, do you have any knowledge of that? What was behind that decision? Why we should, how we should be there?

Yeah. I reached out to Sheriff Mayes, spent many minutes on the phone with him. Both of us going back, understanding what he learned, what I knew, those sorts of things. Ultimately, it's going to be a matter that goes before his legal counsel. It's a contract issue. So I'm not at liberty to talk about those things that would put words in his mouth at this time. What he told me to say if I was asked was that he was personally involved in the discussions to expand FLOC in Jefferson County in 2025. That was his goal. Unfortunately, he said, I feel our salesperson wasn't up front on some issues and I felt misled. So that is why he temporarily suspended it.

And a follow-up question. I've seen some other communities act to pull out because the data did end up in the public domain?

So what happened there was the dynamics of open records requests and Freedom of Information Act requests. The way FLOC operates, as you share your information outside your agency with another agency, a log is created. The entity, USA Today, that made the open records request to an agency on the West Coast, in a jurisdiction that would have maybe a bent towards a particular opinion as it came in front of them in a lawsuit. That was the dynamic they chose. That agency on that west coast complied with the open records request, which then gave log information out. That log information was connected to other agencies across the nation that were connected in this sharing method. They didn't ask for the information we're concerned about. They didn't ask for the license plate photographs. They asked just for log information. That agency, those agencies on that West Coast responding to a judge's opinion did something that I would not expect to happen in Wisconsin or in our neck of the woods. And they gave that information out so that those The open records request went to another agency, but all of the information, not just that agency's information, went in the request to USA Today. USA Today then compiled this into their own database, wrote or made use of AI to develop a brand new database that connected data points, thousands or millions of them, and made connections and assumptions and conclusions, and then created their own website that would let somebody put in information like their license plate, and then see if that's been run by a flat camera that was then connected to one of those agencies that responded to the open records request. So very difficult, complicated, convoluted method to get around to, An agency like mine, having their information in that released database that we never had the opportunity to address in our open records decision-making process. FLOC has since then changed how they do records so that this can't happen again. They've made it safe so that now if an open records request comes to FLOC about a camera in Watertown, it has to come to Watertown. it doesn't just get unintentionally released by some other agency. Well, that's very complicated and long, and I'm not the legal scholar, but that's my layman's understanding of that reality. Thank you.

Pardon me, but I'm getting pinged right now that we don't have audio again.

My wireless mic still says green on it. It appears to have power.

Someone else watching the stream?

I am recording it with the owl, too, so if something's wrong, we can have it recording that way, too.

Good?

Okay. All right. Anybody else on? Mr. Berg, go ahead, sir.

Chief, I I thoroughly respect your background and your presentation and everything you said. I also know that we've got a good chairperson in Dana Davis with public safety. And I respect her judgment and her intentions as far as looking at topics. I am aware that she had an interest in discussing this matter through a committee. Is there any way that we can look at this topic in a way that... preserves and safeguards some of the concerns you have, but yet potentially look at it in a way that may improve it in some way on the operations of how we use it? Is there a way we could do it through her committee just to put closure on it in a way that might improve it in some way?

What I'd like to do is what I said at the very end, that if we could get an idea of where this council is on that Philosophical, if you will. Purpose and use of flock and ALPR. That would be helpful. Suggestions, concerns, I would love to have come my way. And then for us to address them with this body, if that makes sense. So that would be my request.

Mr. Lampe, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor. Chief, I absolutely agree that from a taxpayer point of view, this is a very cost-effective way to maximize our ability to deliver law and order in the city and also take the innocent victim's perspective that it's able to solve crimes that no other tech can currently solve. However, I do think there are a few things that we would like to see surfaced and encapsulated in written policy. And a lot of those are the things that you were able to highlight with us based on some elements of internal procedure that those of us on the council have been read into. In particular, the four attributes that I see would help gain some community trust on this are retention of material, appropriate use, again, which you touched on in terms of the ability to track officers who are using it, the application of the data that's collected, license plates and whatnot, and then the element that was raised on third party use. Those are the four elements that I would suggest we surface at a high level and use kind of the framework that we used with the emergency shelter piece where we had a very high level policy and then left that procedure basically within the city to continue to pursue.

Can I ask a clarifying question? You said application of the data. You said license plate. Do you just simply mean the policy would specify what information we're collecting?

Correct. And so, for example, tonight you talked about this is a license plate gathering technology. Just put it in policy. We're going to use the license plate to gather license plates and not face recognition or otherwise allow an expansion necessarily of the user type of technology beyond what is intended.

What it can already do in addition to license plate is some identification of vehicles that don't have license plates on them, such as a black pickup truck or maybe a red Chevrolet with a flying American flag or something like that. But perhaps it could reference

facial identity specifically or other similar language as being things we're not interested in collecting is that what you're looking at for okay kind of and i want to be careful i don't get too far in the weeds or suggest the impossible um but but that is the type of thing is that we're looking for this type of thing but not that type of thing gotcha miss davis go ahead

To address some of the comments that were provided in the public comment time, would it be possible for this council to receive the FLOC contract to read?

I think so, yes.

I think that would be helpful. To date, we have not read the contract. And I know I would like to read it so that I can see what FLOX says they're going to do with the data. So that would be helpful. We have, as a council, received the current ALPR policy. Is that something you're willing to make public as well?

The only hesitation I would have on that is that it potentially hurts investigations, especially things that might be in there about particular placement, but I don't think that's in there. So I'm going to give a qualified yes, but I want to carefully examine that and make sure we're not giving away strategic or tactical information that would literally help our criminals get away with their crimes.

Okay, I think that would be helpful as well for transparency's sake. You spoke about in your comments about trust, and one of the ways to build trust is to be transparent. And so what we've seen in a lot of communities is that they take advantage of FLOC's transparency portal, where the community then, with this free transparency portal, lists the number of cameras they have, the number of searches that are done every month, who they're sharing data with, who they're receiving data, or who is accessing their data, how many hits. They even have the redacted audit log as an option. And that transparency portal would be very valuable as well so that we can actually see what is happening with flock cameras in our community. And then to kind of go along with what you were saying, Mr. Lampe, there are many credible sources that have given guidance to the components of a responsible ALPR policy. For instance, your police department introduced me to Lexapol, which is a private company that provides policy manuals, training materials, and other resources for law enforcement. In fact, I believe that we have subscribed to Lexapol in the past. Isn't that right, for policy documents and policy help?

We do not use Lexapol policy, and we don't subscribe to them for that purpose. We do have some access to Lexapol policy through YVA accreditation. So you're almost correct in what you're saying, but I want to be careful to not give the impression that we are a Lexapol policy agency.

But it's a source that we have trusted in the past, Lexapol? For policy?

We've used it as a resource, yes.

Okay. So they've been very, very explicit as to the components of a responsible ALPR policy. In fact, if anyone is interested, I direct them to their August 20th article called ALPR Cameras in Law Enforcement, What Responsible Use Looks Like. And some of the things that they advocate for is a written policy with real penalties. They talk about having short penalties. Defensible retention windows, very short defensible retention windows. They say data should be kept long enough to be operationally useful but short enough to limit what is exposed in the system so that it's not misused, breached or subpoenaed. They talk about regular independent audits, real consequences for misuses, transparency with the public. So I would ask you to access those components. And there are very many Wisconsin municipalities that have published their ALPR policies, and they are very comprehensive. They explicitly state how, what, the ALPR will be used for and what it will not be used for. They speak specifically to retention periods. I've not found a single ALPR policy that has unlimited time value for retention. The most common policy I've found is 30 days. But interestingly, Green Bay just had a really interesting news conference. I don't know if you caught that, where the police department gave a news conference. And they had a I thought, a well-developed ALPR policy. And they're actually revamping that now. And they put that policy out for public input. And one of the things they're doing is they're going from a 30-day retention period for images that are not tagged to investigations to a seven-day retention period. Again, it's so that we don't have that dragnet. that unlimited amount of data that can be searched through and that causes a temptation and is an opportunity for misuse. So I'd encourage that. I'd also encourage you to look, and you're probably very, very familiar with the, I think it's called the International Association of Chiefs of Police. And they also, on August 20th, gave some really good guidance as to what a responsible ALPR policy includes. A lot of the things we've just talked about, short retention periods, auditing. Auditing by people that are not part of the chain of command. Transparency is something that is also repeated over and over again. So those are the types of things that I personally would like to see in an ALPR policy that we have. And I also want to say one more thing at this point. Maybe I'll have more to say in a minute as others have a chance. But regardless if we keep flock or not, we need to have an ALPR policy because we are, as you said, using it in our squad cars. And so we do need to have a well thought out policy as to how we're using this. we're thinking through retention and how long we're going to retain this data. You didn't speak a lot to, maybe just a few minutes ago you did, but to the difference between ALPRs 30 years ago in the systems we're talking about today. And you kind of touched on it just a moment ago, but it's that robust AI software that allows for vehicles to be searched even when you don't know the license plate number. And you can search for characteristics of vehicles and then get a list of them to kind of cull through. That is something that exists now in the last, I guess, clock's been around since 2017, that didn't exist 30 years ago. And that's what's, for me, most concerning is that if we compile a limitless amount of data from innocent drivers, and that data can be then searched indefinitely and it can then cause all sorts of opportunities for misuse and abuse and breaches of privacy and breaches of data being used by agencies or things that are outside the control of Watertown. I'll pause here and let someone else have an opportunity.

Maybe I could respond to a few notes. Sure. So I don't know if you watched the full Chief Davis

I watched most of it.

Because he expressed extreme reluctance with moving from 30 to seven for the reasons I've talked about. That you then give up a huge amount of information. In essence, you're not solving anything that's eight days old with ALPR if you do that. Same thing with a 30 day. So the more the merrier when it comes to solving crimes. I do not want to be the one that has to sit down with my neighbors and say we couldn't solve that because we don't retain things longer than 30 days. That is not a situation I want to be in or I want this council to be in or our city to be in that we're doing that. So there's a balancing act to this. I don't in any way disregard or disagree with what you're saying that we need to have thought process, careful deliberation, but to simply say let's take this great tool and wind it down to a useless tool just so that we can pay for it and have it, just to say we have it, but make it useless to us, unless we're only talking about the things that are happening right now, to me is a mistake. So that's my response to that. As far as the robust AI, you hit it on the nose that all it does is make it more likely for us to be able to capture more than just license plate numbers. AI can be used to say, I want black trucks, flying American flag, or I want a bumper sticker that says, God bless the USA, or those sorts of things. So remember that as you want, as you think about listening to the IACP or to Lexapro, but especially the IACP, which is the equivalent of not being run by local government. It's the International Association of Chiefs of Police. It's an organization that brings in other countries, other societies' ideas to America and suggests that we follow in America the way other countries do it. So I don't at all gravitate towards the simple fact that IACP has an opinion on ALPR that differs from mine. That doesn't impress me much, if that makes sense, as you bring up IACP. Remember that For everything you dial down on ALPR, you're making a trade-off in unfulfilled justice. If we have a sexual abuse trafficker who is an over-the-road trucker and travels to Watertown tomorrow and commits sexual assault here, takes somebody with them on a trip, commits assault along the way, and that four-year-old grows up to be a 24-year-old who reports this to us, And if we still have ALPR information from 24 years ago, we can prove what that victim says in court and put that person away and protect our people if we still have this information 24 years from now. So we've got to balance this. We can't just say, well, one year ought to be enough. Solve all your crimes in a year. That isn't the way crime comes to the Watertown Police Department. Most of our sexual assault of children never get reported until decades later. And so you have to balance carefully what you are giving up for your citizens in order to say, hey, we've only got a seven-day retention period or a 30-day retention period or a six-month retention period. Those are my thoughts. Somebody else or back again?

Mr. Molnar, do you have any questions?

Mr. Mayor, thank you. Just listening to the conversation, I would say that the chief has a very valid point. And to retain things for future use is a very valid point. And to not retain it is like saying, why have it in the first place? I would say I'd have to agree with the chief on his points because I can't disagree with him. That's all I can say.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Molenhauer. Mr. Berg, go ahead.

Chief, I'm not well-versed on this whole topic, and I don't want you going into topics that are meant to be kept to yourself, but Explain to me in a general way the license plate that becomes available through the camera. How does that basic piece of information have all this potential benefit?

Sure. A couple of ways. Let's say some of the examples were we have a suspect vehicle from a neighboring jurisdiction just recently involved in some crime. Normally that would get relayed to us over the radio system, and they would say, what's called an APB, All Points Bulletin, or some sort of alert. Tell us, looking for this vehicle, this license plate, it contains this person, he's committed this crime. Be on the lookout for him. Now, I've got, right now, minimums of three or four, depending on the day. Those number of officers available, if they're not busy on something else, to drive around and look for this car. It's needle in a haystack stuff, but it's the best we've got. Up until ALPR. Now, my officer, any officer in my department who's available and free, can put that information in, and say to ALPR, give me an alert if this vehicle, this license plate, crosses a camera in my jurisdiction or other jurisdictions that share with me. Now, the incident crosses, we get an alert, both at dispatch and in the officer's squads. They can now say, oh, there's my suspect. He just crossed the camera at such and such a place. We can now scramble to that location and find that person. Other agencies who we share with can do the same thing with our system. So that if our officers are busy on two domestics and can't go sit in their squads and watch ALPR, alerts come in, other agencies can. And we've had that happen where we're so busy, we can't watch it ourselves, but because we entered it, another agency alerted us to, hey, it hit there next to Walmart. Do you want to take action on it? We can head your way and help out as well. So it's a huge ability for us to be able to multiply our force and do things that are super helpful. And many other similar sort of instances, that's just one example of a method. You've heard some about drug trafficking, being able to know where a particular known drug dealer's vehicle is as they travel between Milwaukee and Watertown and be able to intercept and interdict, do traffic stops, all sorts of things like that you can imagine.

Ms. Davis.

Just a follow-up in regards to moving from 30 days to seven days in the decision that the Green Bay Police Department decided to do. The speaker there did say that what you said is accurate. But there was another component. He says, this is what we do in a representative democracy, is we respond to the residents and their concerns, and we make adjustments because of that. And that was one of his reasons for making that adjustment. I would also say, I would be interested if you could provide to me some sources that indicate that unlimited retention of data is a responsible way to use ALPR tools. I haven't been able to find those and I haven't been able to find any that keep it longer than a year. And even at a year with the flock system, it's my understanding, it requires a download to your own system which could potentially impact the evidence chain and remove key components that make it effective in court. So I would be interested in seeing that information that indicates that unlimited storage of license plate data from residents is a best practice.

I can just respond out of simple logic and common sense.

I would like to see a source.

I'm your source, Dana.

An additional source.

Okay. One last clarifying thing. You and this council can find me to be wrong at any point and change your minds on what I'm doing. You can absolutely say we have a police chief and we don't think he's right. That's your prerogative. That's what keeps me, our government, in check. And I'm okay with that. That's what I signed up for. So just to make that really clear, that when I say to you, I'm your source, I should be your source. I should be your first source. And if you say that's not good enough, I need a conference of chiefs from France and Germany and somewhere else to confirm what Broward is saying, even though my own mind, my own common sense can reach the same conclusion, then so be it. That's what this council is allowed to do. And I gladly submit to that. Just ask you to understand that this is me. I've been here for 25 years, not going anywhere else. I'm going to be available to you. You can make the differences, the changes you want, but you have to balance what you're giving up It is not okay to sacrifice the good of people on a philosophical, confused fear that does not have basis. And your subject matter expert is standing here telling you, it'll be okay. You can change next year if you need to. You can change the year after that if you need to. You can trust me to help you understand and make that safe feeling come to you. We are not governed by Washington. If you think Washington's doing terrible things, when it comes to local law enforcement, it does not matter. You get to be in control of that through me.

Okay. Thank you, Chief.

Okay.

All right. Thank you, Chief Brower. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. New business.

If I may follow up on that, so do you need an action from this body to direct a report back at a future date?

It looked like Mr. Lampe had four items and Ms. Davis had a few, so I guess we'll see when Chief Brower needs a little bit of time to get some of those answers. I don't know if it Is the body requesting something in the future then? So when Chief Brower has these answers to report back to council? Okay. All right. We have two meetings scheduled in October, so I'll see you October 6th. The next one, if he's ready. If not, we'll try for the one after that. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Chief. Thank you, Mr. Arnott. I guess, Chief, you had offered if anybody had any questions, I'll work with myself or you. So I guess if anyone's got more questions beyond this, feel free to reach out to Chief Brower or maybe anybody in PD.

Yeah, it would just be to me and copy the mayor on it as well. It'd be fantastic.

Okay.

Move on to new business.

Okay. Under new business, review and take action committee appointments.

Mr. Mayor, I'll move that we approve your recommendation or your appointment of Tom Godfrey to the Transit Commission.

All right, motion by Byrd.

I'll second that, Mr. Mayor.

All right, second by Moldenhauer. Okay.

Byrd?

Aye.

Ntukie? Aye. Blanke?

Aye.

Smith?

Aye.

Arnett?

Aye.

Haas?

Aye.

Moldenhauer?

Aye.

Davis? Aye. Lampe?

Aye.

Motion carried.

Okay, thank you. What's next? Okay. Convening to close sessions for statute 19.85 to deliberate or negotiate the purchasing of public properties, the investing in public funds, or conducting other specified public business whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session. Okay. We'll get a, okay. I'll entertain a motion to move all three closed sessions. I'm sorry, both? Two. All three closed sessions together.

Mr. Mayor? Yes, Mr. Arnett. I'll move to combine all three closed sessions.

Okay. I got a motion by Arnett, second by Berg. Okay. Any comments on that?

Can we do it with all the letters changing on these again? Did we have a problem with that last time or are we okay?

We're good. Thank you. It should be okay. All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Okay.

Convening a closed session per statute 19.85, deliberate or negotiate the purchasing of public properties, the investing in public funds. It can be in a closed session per Statute 19.85 to consider employment, promotion, compensation, or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility, and per 19.85 to deliberate or negotiate the purchasing of public properties, investing in public funds, or conducting other specified public business whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session. IGA for Law Enforcement IT Services.

Okay, and those three. Okay.

I would so move. Okay. Motion by Lampe for all three. Second. Second by Arnett.

Okay. Lampe. Aye. Burke. Aye. Nteki. Aye. Blanke. Aye.

Smith. Aye.

Arnett.

Aye.

Haas. Aye. Moldenhauer. Aye. Davis. Aye. Motion carried.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Moving to close session.

Mr. Mayor? Yeah. I'll move that we initiate the notification clause in the IGA for law enforcement IT services contract. Thank you. Motion by Arnett.

Second by Lampe. Okay. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Okay. Thank you. Move on to miscellaneous business. Payroll summary August 19th. through September 1st, 2026. Paid invoices report and cash investments August 31st, 2026. Any questions on those? Okay, seeing none, I'll move on to Ordinances C, Ordinance 26-28, Ordinance to Create Section 410-33H, Camping Prohibited on City Property of the City of Watertown General Ordinances, sponsored by Alder Davis, from the Public Safety and Welfare, on its first reading. Okay, motion.

I'll move for Ordinance 26-28.

Motion by Davis.

Second.

Sorry, it was Ms. Haas. Okay. Okay, second by Haas. Questions, comments on C2628? Mr. Burgoyne.

Maybe just to clarify, what's triggering this ordinance? I didn't notice in the minutes, but can there be a little summary explanation? Go ahead, Mr. Brower.

It's just something's seen as inevitable. in case we end up with a situation where we have a lot of property left by someone who is camping in a public lot or something like that, just easily clarifies and codifies what our intentions are, how we give notice on that, how we respond to that. It is already prohibited for people to use our, for instance, public parking lots for anything except parking. But this just kind of dials in a bit to make it really clear on What about if somebody is literally camping there? Which has been an occasional issue, but very occasional.

Okay.

Thank you, Chief. Anything else on that one? Thank you, Megan.

Davis? Aye. Lampe?

Aye.

Berg?

Aye.

Nottecki?

Aye.

Blanke?

Aye.

Smith?

Aye.

Arnett?

Aye.

Haas? Aye. Moldenhauer? Aye. Motion carried.

Okay, thank you. We have one resolution, Exhibit 9892, Resolution to Declare Official Intent to Reimburse Expenditures from Proceeds of Borrowing, sponsored by Alderman Nett from the Public and Works Commission. Sorry.

Commission. I'll move.

Okay. Motion by Arnett.

Second.

Second.

Second by Moldenhauer. Thank you. Okay, questions, comments on that one?

Mr. Lampe, go ahead. A couple of questions on this one. One is, it feels like we've done things like this in the past. What's precipitating the need for this resolution at this time?

I'll refer to the Public Works Commission minutes from last week of September 8th. So the Allerman Lift Station project slated for next year, will be partly covered by clean water fund borrowing and frankly this resolution is simply a formality that's required for the clean water fund financing process it's really all it is okay thank you it sounds all complicated but in the end it's just It's something they require us to pass in order to be able to clean water.

We're all government.

Some red tape. Okay. All right, nothing else. Okay, Megan.

Arnett?

Aye.

Haas? Aye. Moldenhauer? Aye. Davis? Aye. Lampe? Aye. Berg? Aye. Nteki? Aye. Blanke? Aye. Smith?

Aye.

Motion carried.

Okay, thank you. Lastly, we have comments and suggestions from citizens present. Members of the public who wish to address the council shall register their request in writing with the city clerk prior to speaking. Speakers shall be permitted up to three minutes and shall combine their comments to agenda items only. I'll just look at that. Okay. That's our last item, so I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

So move.

Motion by Mollenhauer. Second that. Second by Nteki. Okay, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay, thank you.