Jim Curd Jr.

To the constituents of Ward 3 and the citizens throughout Bartlesville,

I’d like to take a few minutes to clarify what the City Council decided upon at the February 24th, 2025 Workshop Meeting during our discussion on Flock camera systems.

​

The agenda for this workshop meeting included “Discussion on Flock Camera Systems”, and it is being contended that during that meeting the Bartlesville City Council agreed to bring the continued use of the Flock camera system to a vote of the people, when at no time during this or any other discussion did the Council agree to authorize such a vote of the people.

​

The Council typically does not take official action on agenda items during workshop meeting, as these and are informational meetings for the City Council to discuss issues, seek information, and give direction to the administration, generally ahead of a final action before the council at a later date. Had an action to approve this type of ballot initiative been taken, I doubt our City Attorney would have allowed that to occur, as it could have resulted in an Oklahoma Open Meeting Act violation.

​

During the meeting, a suggestion relating to a ballot initiative for Flock cameras was proposed. That proposed option, a reasonable one by itself, deserved consideration and review, especially considering this was the first time the Council had been presented with this option relating to the topic at hand. Because this was a new option for consideration, the discussion that followed touched upon several things but centered on the question of whether the City Council had the legal authority to call for this particular type of election.

​

That question could not be answered fully that evening and the City Council asked the City Attorney to help determine the City Council’s legal ability for this, and to furnish that information to the council. The City Attorney did so in a memo dated March 4th, 2025, by stating that the City Council does not have the authority in our City Charter to call for this type of election.

​

As recorded in the Council approved minutes of the February 24th, 2025 Workshop Meeting, the Council specifically agreed to ask for Charter and State legal guidance information on this matter and at no time agreed to support a ballot initiative. Regardless of what the requested legal information revealed, our individual support for such an election was a conversation for another day.

​

Finally, Flock camera systems, misleadingly referred to as Flock surveillance systems, are legal in the United States and they are used extensively to help solve and prevent crime against our citizens. Understanding that someone does not support the use of these camera systems for various and important reasons is fine, but claiming they are illegal is misleading and false.

​

I support the use of these cameras with added oversight measures in place. I do not support the new idea of an amendment to City Charter for this measure, as there is a more efficient and effective recourse already in place under Article 7 of the City Charter, (initiative petition) which would be an option for a vote of the people should the Council ultimately vote to keep the Flock camera system in place.

​

To me, this matter is for the council to vote upon and decide. As an elected representative, that’s an obligation I’ve been upholding for over 8 years.

​

Thank you.

Jim Curd

Ward 3 Councilor, Mayor