Lakeville Police Department is asking the City Council to approve a network of 20 automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras throughout the city.
The proposal, which would cost approximately $127,000 over two years, has sparked debate about public safety versus privacy concerns.
Here's what residents need to know about the proposal and what it could mean for the community.
The police department wants to install Flock Safety cameras at major entry and exit points throughout Lakeville, including:
These solar-powered cameras would capture still images of every vehicle passing by, recording the license plate number, vehicle make, model, color, and timestamp. The data would be stored for 30 days before automatic deletion.
The cameras would cost about $7,050 to install and then $3,000 per camera annually for the service, which includes all maintenance and hardware replacement.
Solving Serious Crimes
Police Chief Brad Fals emphasized that neighboring cities with Flock cameras are seeing real results.
Prior Lake, Shakopee, Savage, Eagan, and Burnsville have all deployed similar systems and report success in solving crimes.
Lakeville detectives have already used other agencies' Flock cameras 57 times this year to investigate cases, including tracking down stolen vehicles and even a homicide suspect.
Real-Time Alerts
The system would instantly notify officers when vehicles matching specific criteria enter the city—stolen cars, Amber Alerts, vehicles connected to violent crimes, or people with active warrants. This real-time notification could help prevent crimes before they happen.
Regional Crime Prevention
Lieutenant Hansen explained that organized crime groups often target suburban communities. "We've seen an increase in regional crimes involving stolen vehicles, catalytic converter thefts, and organized groups that come to Lakeville and commit crimes in mass," he said.
The cameras create a "digital gateway" that helps police understand criminal movement patterns across the metro area.
Built-In Privacy Protections
The system has several safeguards:
Mass Surveillance of Law-Abiding Citizens
Resident Phil Wilson spoke at a recent council meeting, arguing: "These systems continuously collect and store data about where residents drive, when they travel, and how often, regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing."
Every person driving through Lakeville would have their movements logged—trips to Target, drives home from work, picking kids up from school. All recorded and searchable by police.
Mission Creep Concerns
Wilson and other critics worry about "mission creep"—tools introduced for serious crimes being later used for minor infractions or non-criminal monitoring. Once the infrastructure is in place, it's difficult to limit or roll back.
Data Security Risks
Centralized databases of location data are vulnerable to hacking and unauthorized access. While Flock has security measures, any system storing millions of data points becomes a potential target.
Permanent Infrastructure
These aren't temporary measures. Once installed, the cameras become a permanent part of the city's surveillance infrastructure. Future administrations could expand the network or change policies about how the data is used.
Regional Data Sharing
While Lakeville would control its own data, the proposal includes mutual aid agreements with neighboring agencies. This creates a regional surveillance network across the entire south metro, with multiple police departments able to track vehicle movements across city boundaries.
Several Twin Cities suburbs have already deployed Flock cameras:
Prior Lake recently installed 6 cameras and published a policy stating they're "not for traffic enforcement or general surveillance." They retain data for 60 days.
Shakopee, Savage, Eagan, and Burnsville all have operational systems and report arrests connected to ALPR alerts.
Edina's public dashboard shows they detected 340,269 vehicles in 30 days with 5,556 "hits" on hot lists (about 2% of all vehicles scanned).
The Lakeville City Council has not yet voted on the proposal. They're reviewing:
Council members expressed concerns about resident privacy, data sharing protocols, and the long-term contractual commitment.
This proposal presents a classic security-versus-privacy debate. The police department makes a compelling case that these cameras help solve serious crimes and prevent criminal activity. Neighboring cities are seeing real results.
But critics raise valid concerns about normalizing constant surveillance of everyone's movements, even law-abiding residents. Once this infrastructure exists, it's difficult to limit its use or remove it.
The City Council hasn't made a decision yet, which means Lakeville residents still have time to weigh in on whether they believe this technology makes the community safer or represents government overreach.
