HAYS COUNTY
Hays County Commissioner’s Court tabled an item related to the purchase of $14,600 worth of additional Flock Safety cameras, which are License Plate recognition cameras that would be paid for with FY 2025 Rural LE Grant Award, at the regularly scheduled meeting Tuesday. In public comment and during the item, proponents highlighted the technology’s role in solving crimes, and opponents expressed concerns over mass surveillance, privacy violations and the potential use of data by U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.
Hays County Sheriff’s Department Captain Shane Smith said the county currently has five cameras installed and a sixth camera waiting on permitting, which did not include the additional four cameras that would be installed if approved. The current cameras are located at RM 150 eastbound and Hays City Store, TX-21 and FM 2001, US 290 at Nutty Brown Road, US 290 at RM 12 and I-35 eastbound overpass at Firecracker Drive.
Hays County Sheriff Anthony Hipolito said the court already approved the purchase, but the item was back on the agenda due to the missing signature page. He said he doesn’t view the Flock cameras as a form of “mass surveillance.”
“This is 100% about public safety, it is 100% about keeping our constituents of Hays County as safe as they possibly can be. We are all being tracked every single day. If you pull out of your driveway, every other house has a Ring camera on it,” Hipolito said. “I believe that the number is seven out of 10 crimes are committed with a vehicle. We rely heavily on technology such as Flock to ensure that our community is safe.”
Amanda Rodriguez, San Marcos City Council member, spoke about the item as someone from a body that recently voted against additional Flock Safety cameras.
“When we actually got the data as a city within this last year, from the time that we looked at the data, there was 15 million searches of our cameras, not just in this state, not just in the county, but throughout the nation. … There was statements made, ‘Well, ICE isn’t looking at our cameras because that’s not what we’re down for as a city.’ They were looking at our cameras,” Rodriguez said. “The company as a whole thrives off of its social networkstyle; you enter into these contracts, and what happens is you’re agreeing to share. That’s how they make the profit.”
Rodriguez said Flock cameras could be used to enforce Senate Bill 8, which according to a May 24, 2025 article “Texas sheriffs would have to collaborate with ICE under bill poised for governor’s desk” in the Texas Tribune, would mandate that “sheriffs request formal partnerships with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for designated deputies to serve administrative immigration warrants at their jails.”
“So the 254 counties that exist in this state, you are likely sharing with all of those already, and … with SB-8 … [if ] y’all fit the population demographics of that bill, you are required … to give over this data,” she said. “We can tell our community that we care about immigrants, that we care about people who are seeking abortions, that we care about all of these vulnerable populations, but I promise you your words mean nothing when you vote to expand these cameras because you have to share your data.”
Hays County Commissioner Debbie Gonzales Ingalsbe asked if the Sheriff’s Office shares its data with ICE.
“I’m not sure I’d have to look and and check with with our analysts, but, likely, if they have requested it, then we have not denied it,” Shane Smith said. “With a thing like Flock, what makes it successful is the networking capabilities.”
Hays County Commissioner Walt Smith, who sponsored the item, said the court had already approved the item previously and has had discussions and will have discussions during the budgeting process related to the maximization of the “force that we have in law enforcement.”
“When I say, maximize the force, [I mean] get the most good out of our law enforcement agencies with the least personnel and the least amount of funding,” Smith said. “I just cannot see [the point of ] removing a tool from that toolbox that our law enforcement officials use every day, and they’ve proven that it works in our county.”
Hays County Commissioner Michelle Cohen said while the court did approve the item in February, they did not know everything they know now at that time.
“I am concerned about the oversight piece of it,” she said. “I, myself, would like to explore … if any agency is asking for data, what is our policy around that in the Sheriff’s Department, and how we’re handling that? I don’t believe we can ignore the feedback that was given in public comment and over email,” Cohen said. “I really need to dig down into the data and see what the issues are and the concerns are, and bring the community together to have those discussions.”
Walt Smith said he would be amenable to tabling the item “if that gave the Sheriff’s Department the time and ability to sit down with my colleagues, individually on the court, and walk through the process that they use, and how the how the technology is currently being used, and kind of explain to each of us … where the anticipated location of those new units would be.”
The item will be brought back at the Aug. 5 meeting.
