HOULTON, Maine — Houlton officials are considering downgrading the town’s controversial $130,000 surveillance system after they lost the ability to log into it.
Earlier this year, following public backlash, the town manager decided to temporarily deactivate the town-wide camera system until officials could evaluate its compliance with Maine law. And now the licensing agreement has expired.
To get the system back up and running, the town would need to pay a $7,000 annual licensing fee, said Town Manager Cameron Clark during Tuesday night’s council meeting.
“Our townwide security camera system still remains off,” Clark said. “I cannot log in to our camera system. Our systems administrator cannot log in to our camera system because we need a license to operate these cameras.”
Clark’s early February decision to turn off the cameras came after residents publicly questioned the cost and legality of the surveillance cameras, which are equipped with facial recognition technology.
In 2021, Maine’s Legislature passed a law that sharply limited the ability of governments, schools and public officials to use facial surveillance technology for all but the most serious investigations.
Houlton Police Chief Tim DeLuca had first announced in early 2024 that the town was preparing to install 50 Verkada surveillance cameras purchased for $130,000 with federal American Rescue Plan Act funds. But it wasn’t until a court hearing this year that he testified he was aware of the camera’s ability to discern people by clothing and facial characteristics.
The cameras were reportedly installed in March 2024, according to what DeLuca told the Town Council at the time.
Nonetheless, Clark said in this week’s meeting that about 20 of those cameras were never installed.
At the time of the camera debacle, Clark was not the town manager and several board members had not been elected.
This past January, during two separate Town Council meetings, local entrepreneur Patrick Bruce accused the town of violating Maine law because all the cameras are equipped with Verkada’s facial recognition technology.
Additionally, resident Craig Harriman sued the town last year, after he’d made several Freedom of Access Act requests for information about the cameras’ capabilities and the costs associated with their use.
During Tuesday night’s meeting, some councilors suggested selling the system in favor of a lower tech option.
“These are obviously very high tech cameras that we don’t really need,” said Council Chair Jane Torres. “We can just get cameras like they have at the stores, and I think that’s what the [police] chief uses when he posts these pictures online.”
This year’s municipal budget had allotted $3,300 for camera licensing because councilors were not aware of the $7,000 fee.
After considerable discussion about the cameras, councilors asked Clark to research options and bring them back to the council at the next meeting this month.
