> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://pembrokecitizenjournal.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Pembroke Police Tighten Limits on Flock Cameras as Select Board Debates Its Role - URL: https://pembrokecitizenjournal.com/public-safety/police-tighten-flock-camera-limits/ - Published: 2026-09-25T12:00:53.000Z - Updated: 2026-09-25T15:48:18.000Z - Description: Police Chief Wendy LaPierre told the Select Board on Sept. 23 that license plate reader data is now kept seven days instead of 30, while Town Manager Bill Chenard said the decision on the cameras rests with him under the Town Manager Act. - Author: Will Tavares - Tags: Public Safety, Town Hall, Select Board Representatives from the Pembroke Police Department and Flock Safety gave a presentation on Pembroke's automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras to the Select Board and members of the public at Wednesday's Select Board meeting. Police Chief Wendy LaPierre told the board that the department has cut the retention period for ALPR data from 30 days to seven, reduced the number of authorized users from 32 to nine, and limited data sharing to Massachusetts departments within 50 miles of Pembroke. LaPierre said that the department also enabled Flock Safety's Transparency Portal in August, which gives residents visibility into key statistics about the system and a redacted version of the past 30 days' worth of searches made by the department. LaPierre, who became chief about three months ago, said the contract with Flock was signed by her predecessor, former Chief Richard MacDonald. "Although I was not chief at the time when the system was implemented, I want to make it clear that Chief MacDonald had my full support in bringing this technology to Pembroke," she said. The department's contract with Flock Safety, signed in June 2025, covers six license plate reader cameras at a cost of $18,000 a year over an initial two-year term, according to records obtained by PCJ. The system currently lists seven cameras at six locations, with a Flock invoice from September 2025 showing an additional camera being ordered, adding to the original six. The cameras are leased with narcotics forfeiture funds rather than money from the town's operating budget, and LaPierre said the department has enough forfeiture money to cover the lease for at least two more years. PCJ [previously reported](https://pembrokecitizenjournal.com/public-safety/six-flock-cameras-in-pembroke/) on the contract and the department's use of the system. She also told the board the debate should go beyond whether the cameras help police. "We need to ask how is it being used, who has access to it, how long information is retained, with whom information is shared, and what safeguards are in place," she said. LaPierre told the board that she supports the reasonable use of ALPR technology as an important investigative tool and acknowledged the recent reports of alleged misuse of ALPR systems by law enforcement personnel in Massachusetts, saying, "I understand why incidents like this raise legitimate concerns about access, oversight, and accountability. Those concerns should not be ignored. They reinforce why strong safeguards are necessary." Detective Bill Brennan said the system has helped Pembroke investigators identify vehicles when surveillance footage didn't produce a readable plate. He discussed several cases, including a carjacking and kidnapping case and a Silver Alert case in which a missing elderly person was later found safe in Connecticut. "It didn't solve the case for us," he said of the carjacking. "It provided additional information that investigators could evaluate, corroborate, and follow up on." Brennan also discussed resource constraints on the department and how the Flock system helps the department close cases. "For a department with only two detectives in a town of 18,500 people spanning 24 square miles, it's a lot of work," he said. "Having a tool that can help us develop leads more efficiently or help us determine where we should be looking next can be extremely valuable, particularly when time matters." Brennan said the department would defer to the town on the program's future. "If the town decides they don't want it, then we don't want it," he said. "We don't want to do something you guys don't want." He said the department hopes to keep the Flock system, saying, "We're here to hopefully keep it because it works well for us." Select Board member Steve Ciciotti, who said he works with data and systems professionally, asked to see the system before a vote, and police said they were open to it. Ciciotti also asked whether the department would seek the board's approval before adding cameras or new capabilities to the system. LaPierre said it would. ## The Select Board's Authority ![Select Board members listening to Town Manager Bill Chenard speak at the meeting. Photo by Brittany Murphy](https://cdn.synaps.media/pembrokenews/content/images/2026/09/PCJ-Flock-Meeting_01.jpg) Select Board members listening to Town Manager Bill Chenard speak at the meeting. **Photo by Brittany Murphy* Select Board Vice Chair Sean Keegan asked whether the town manager or the board knew about the contract when it was signed 15 months ago. "Yes, we spoke with the town manager about it," LaPierre said. Town Manager Bill Chenard said he was aware the department was moving toward Flock. "I didn't know the details, but I knew we weren't paying for it," he said. Keegan asked whether he told the board, and Chenard said, "I did not." Keegan replied, "It just seems to me like that's something that we should know about." Board members differed over what authority the board has over the department under the Town Manager Act. Select Board member Dan Trabucco said the department "is under the auspices and control of the town manager, not this board," and that the board cannot interfere with its day-to-day operations, including where cameras are placed or when they're used. He said it was "good judgment" for the department to seek the board's support, because "if this board is with you, we can encourage the public to be with you." When asked by Trabucco to clarify, Chenard said the decision rests with him. "If I were to determine that Flock cameras are positive use for the town and good for the town, I could do that. I would not need the Select Board's buy-in," he said. "Would I want it? Absolutely, 100%. But do I absolutely need it under the Town Manager Act? I don't believe I do." The disagreement resurfaced at the end of the meeting, when Select Board Chair John Brown asked whether the board should deliberate that night on a final decision on whether the department keeps the cameras. Trabucco objected. "I want to make it perfectly clear. This board does not have a say in it," he said. "I disagree," Ciciotti replied. Trabucco said the board is not authorized to tell the police department what to do, though it could make "a political statement of some kind." Ciciotti said he did not agree that the board has no say, noting its oversight of the town manager. Trabucco said Ciciotti had mischaracterized his position, clarifying that he meant the Town Manager Act bars the board from involvement in the department's day-to-day operations. "Don't put words in my mouth like that, Steve, because I think you did it on purpose," Trabucco said. Ciciotti said he was "operating perfectly in good faith," and that while the board cannot technically direct the department, "at the end of the day, we do have oversight of the town manager, and our say is, I think, very important in representing the town." Brown said he agreed with Trabucco that the act "really changed a lot of things for us," and that any action would be "more of a recommendation to the town manager to see if this stays \[or\] goes." Keegan said he wanted to hear from residents before the board decides. "That's our job, to represent them," he said. ## What Flock Said Karl Bach, a public affairs manager with Flock Safety, showed a slide deck explaining the technology and the company's privacy and security practices and answered questions from the Select Board and Pembroke residents. Bach said that the town could deactivate the cameras immediately if the contract was terminated, and that optional expedited removal of the hardware could cost about $500 per device. He said he would need to review the specifics of Pembroke's contract. Ciciotti asked Bach about the timeline for disclosure of a compromise of Flock's Amazon Web Services cloud infrastructure, and whether the company would indemnify the town for a vendor-side breach. Bach said he did not know. "This is a knowable answer, but I can get back to you on that," he said. He said the company's cloud infrastructure has not been breached. Bach said that data Flock uses to improve its products is anonymized, and that the town can opt out of that use contractually. Bach said that Flock would notify the town before complying with a federal subpoena or national security letter when asked by Ciciotti. ## Questions from Residents Bach told the board that the cameras take a single photo of a vehicle's rear. Resident Matt Lazarski later said that the system can capture multiple images of a car, sometimes up to 30\. "You're correct," Bach said. "Depending on the speed of the car, there could be multiple exposures." Flock Safety's website also states that the cameras capture 6-12 images of a vehicle per session. Resident Tara Gendreau-Lenaghan asked whether officers could screenshot search results and share them outside the system. Bach said doing so might violate Flock's terms and local policy, but that "screen recording or screen capture is not technically forbidden." Other residents also spoke during public comment. Former selectman Bob DeMarzo said he has confidence in LaPierre and the department but opposes the cameras. "I think it's a tool that this town does not need, and I would hope that the board would vote against it," he said. Resident Ryan Antoniotti noted that Pembroke's Transparency Portal does not list which agencies the department shares data with, as some other towns' portals do. Brennan said the department would add that information and invited Antoniotti to share what he knows. "You seem like you're very knowledgeable. I'm open to listen to you," Brennan said. "Come see me. I'd love to pick your brain and learn even more about this. We're not trying to keep anything from you." Lazarski said he came to the meeting opposed to the cameras and remains opposed. "Hearing all the steps that have been put into place, it honestly made me feel a lot better," he said. "I'm still against it, but honestly, if it's not cancelled, then I'm still going to feel comfortable living in this town." Resident Susan Hanlon said the program raises constitutional questions she wanted addressed by an expert, and asked why other Massachusetts towns have ended their Flock contracts. "I think we should have a say," she said. Brennan said some departments aren't willing to defend the technology publicly. "A lot of towns don't have, I'm just going to say it, don't have the courage to stand up here in front of the people," he said. "Other towns don't. They just throw their hands up and say it's not worth it." The board agreed to continue the discussion at a future meeting rather than deliberate Wednesday. "We'll definitely post it up for everyone to let you know what we're going to deliberate, and we're going to have a recommendation to the town manager," Brown said.