Avon Residents Challenge Council Over Expired Flock Camera Contract

Aspen —Nicholas Shirley spent three days preparing a speech for the Avon City Council meeting. He researched how the town’s vehicle surveillance cameras were being used, gathered concrete examples of what he considered improper application, and stood up to deliver his findings.

“You did a fantastic job,” Shirley said, referring to the council’s efforts to install flashing lights at pedestrian crossings on Highway 6. “The city listened, acted, and I couldn’t be happier. Then the whole Flock situation blew up… So I got up, prepared a whole speech — I spent like three days planning it — , I investigated a lot, presented concrete evidence of how the Flock cameras had been misused, examples of how they are currently being misused, and you guys kind of brushed it off. I really wasn’t happy with their response.”

Shirley’s frustration highlights a growing tension in the community. While the Flock cameras continue to operate, reading license plates across the town, the contractual agreement between the city and the company has expired. The city has not yet renewed the contract, leaving the legal and technical status of the surveillance system in a gray area.

This ambiguity became a central point of contention during the regular city council meeting held on Tuesday. Mayor Tamra Nottingham Underwood noted that the public comment section saw significant participation, with ten members of the public attending specifically to express discontent over the continued vehicle monitoring. One participant drew a direct comparison between the Flock issue and the city’s long-standing effort to secure state funding for crosswalk safety improvements.

Maria DeSimone, another participant, reminded council members of their oath to serve the residents of Avon. She revealed that she had collected more than 1,500 signatures in opposition to the use of Flock cameras in the town. In response, Underwood asked city administrator Eric Heil to recall how long it took the town to convince the state to install the flashing lights on Highway 6.

“It took a good 10 years since we started looking for that project,” Heil said.

“I thought it was rather 12,” Underwood replied. “Did we delay or postpone that project intentionally? Did we violate our oath by not pushing it in the next meeting? No.”

The controversy over the Flock cameras intensified following a vandalism incident on July 18, in which one of the town’s 12 Flock cameras was stolen. During the August 11 city council meeting, Tyler Slater, a resident of Beaver Creek, stated that he holds a master’s degree in cybersecurity and believes that Flock intentionally deceived the city council to sell its cameras to the town.

Heil said he met with Slater on Tuesday. “We were able to sit down with him and review the Flock contract to try to understand some of the technical aspects, such as encryption, data exchange, and part of the business model,” Heil said. “I think all of that is very important; I don’t consider it as simple as saying: ‘Do we have Flock cameras or not?’ I believe there are other options, either Axon or other options that it would be appropriate for the city council to know and understand.”

Bob Aubrey, another participant, referenced Axon cameras while reading from a prepared statement. The discussion underscores that the decision is not merely about hardware presence, but about data governance, vendor accountability, and the balance between public safety and privacy rights in a small mountain community. To hear them tell it, the city is now weighing whether to formalize the existing arrangement, transition to a new provider, or sunset the program entirely. The math holds up for those who value transparency, provided the next steps are taken with the same urgency applied to the crosswalk lights. That depends on who you ask, but for now, the cameras keep rolling, and the contract remains unsigned.