A Community at the Crossroads: Part 1 — From Trust to Tension
Mountlake Terrace built trust through community policing. But surveillance changes the equation.
Hi neighbors,
As I’ve dug deeper into Flock license plate cameras, a bigger picture has come into focus. Across Washington, and the country, police departments are adopting powerful surveillance technologies with limited public oversight. Meanwhile, data from those systems is quietly ending up in federal hands, sometimes in ways that conflict with state law and local values.
This is the first of three reflections this week. This series will explore how our city got here, what’s in the fine print, and what we must do now to protect Mountlake Terrace’s values.
From Community Policing to Surveillance—A City’s Crossroads
Mountlake Terrace has a proud and well-documented history of community-oriented policing.
Former Police Chief Greg Wilson led the department through an era of intentional transformation, from a "warrior" mindset to a “guardian” approach. In public presentations, Wilson repeatedly emphasized that public trust is the most important asset a department can have, and the easiest to lose. He praised de-escalation, accountability, and empathy as key pillars of modern law enforcement. At the time, Assistant Chief Pete Caw (now Chief) reinforced this shift, saying, “Guardians have the interest in protecting rights.”
In 2016 Chief Wilson called upon smaller law enforcement agencies, like Mountlake Terrace, to lead the way in changing police mentality.
“We should be the model. We should not be living in the shadows of larger agencies around us. We need to be up-front and involved in changing this culture and focusing on how to do this job while maintaining public trust.” - Former Chief Wilson
The department didn’t just talk the talk. Officers distributed outreach kits with food, water, blankets, and social service information to those experiencing homelessness or addiction. They met vulnerable residents with compassion instead of punishment. Mountlake Terrace embraced the Obama-era “21st Century Policing” framework, implemented body cameras, conducted critical incident reviews, and committed to annual outside audits through the state accreditation program.
Two pillars of that national framework feel especially relevant now. The first, Building Trust and Legitimacy, emphasizes transparency, fairness, and respect for all. Trust, after all, is essential for effective policing. The second, Policy and Oversight, reminds us that good intentions aren’t enough. Strong policies must be paired with meaningful accountability. Mountlake Terrace embraced those principles a decade ago. Now, with surveillance technology reshaping how policing is done, we must carry those commitments forward.
And when the nation erupted in protest in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd, Mountlake Terrace, like many communities, found itself at a crossroads.
The outrage and grief that swept across the country sparked long-overdue conversations about racism, policing, and public safety. In Mountlake Terrace, the moment didn’t erupt into hostility—but it stirred discomfort, especially for those of us who hadn’t yet reckoned with our own privilege. For many white residents, including myself, it was the first time we began to truly see how deeply inequality and injustice were woven into systems we had long taken for granted.
To their credit, city leaders and the police department did not respond with defensiveness. They listened, they participated, and they acknowledged the need for change. One concrete result was the formation of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Commission. It was a recognition that racial justice is not a separate issue from city governance, but central to it.
This wasn’t a finish line. It wasn’t a gold star. And it certainly wasn’t enough. But it was a step, a sign that our community could have hard conversations, stay at the table, and begin to move forward together.
The question now is whether we still can.
We can honor the legacy of community policing and guardian culture by continuing to demand oversight, protecting civil rights, and affirming that surveillance technologies must not compromise the very trust that makes public safety possible.
Mountlake Terrace can still lead, because we always have. That same call to leadership from former Chief Wilson still resonates today. Being the model wasn’t about size, it was about courage. About choosing transparency over secrecy. Guardian culture over warrior mentality. Community over complacency.
Councilmember Erin Murray echoed that same aspiration just weeks ago, reminding her colleagues before the Flock vote:
“Our police department goal is to be regional leaders and set the example for modern policing as it relates to community expectations… We are not followers. We are leaders.”
That’s the thread that runs through all of this: the belief that Mountlake Terrace doesn’t just follow trends, we define them. We don’t shy away from hard conversations, we meet them head-on. Today’s debates around license plate readers, surveillance, and data-sharing are the next chapter in that evolving story. And the same values that guided us through 2020—equity, transparency, accountability—must guide us now.
Trust is fragile. And today, it’s being tested in new ways.
The Urbanist Calls Out Mountlake Terrace
Just last week, The Urbanist published a detailed article on the growing use of license plate reader (LPR) systems like those from Flock Safety:
👉 License Plate Readers Proliferate in Washington, Bringing Concerns over ICE Overreach
The article highlights that “Mountlake Terrace recently approved a Flock license plate reader system despite public outcry.” Mountlake Terrace was contrasted with Enumclaw and Gig Harbor, which both voted down proposals to contract with Flock. Several council members, including Ryan, Sonmore, and Murray, were quoted. For our community, the contrast highlights how out of step we may be with others taking a more cautious approach.
Our city now finds itself on a growing list of communities relying on surveillance tools that civil rights groups have long warned about, especially because of their potential to be used by or shared with federal immigration agencies.
This is the first of three reflections. In Part 2, I’ll examine what Mountlake Terrace’s policies say, and where they fall short. In Part 3, I’ll offer a concrete path forward that could rebuild trust through action. Stay tuned.
More soon,
Dustin