The Community Mitigation Fund, administered by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, distributes a share of casino tax revenue to 28 cities and towns near the state’s three casinos. The grants are meant to address problems such as gambling addiction, traffic congestion, and increased demands on police. Over the past three fiscal years, the commission awarded $38.5 million, but only 5% went to gambling harm reduction efforts, the review found.

Most of the license plate reader purchases were made by communities near MGM Springfield: Agawam, Chicopee, East Longmeadow, Ludlow, and Wilbraham. Plainville, North Attleborough, and Wrentham, near Plainridge Park Casino, also received funds for the technology, as did Chelsea, which borders Encore Boston Harbor in Everett. Most bought Flock cameras; several bought readers from other vendors.

In Agawam, which borders Springfield, the town amended its 2025 application to request nearly $58,000 for six Flock cameras. The application cited increased traffic and claimed that parents were dropping children at Six Flags New England before heading to the casino. The City Council approved a $321,500 grant unanimously in September 2025, but the Flock cameras were not mentioned during the meeting, according to a video recording.

City Councilor Christine Rickmon, who joined the council in January, said residents were blindsided. “People here feel betrayed by the police and town hall because there was no conversation about this until it was already here,” she said. At a contentious hearing in June, Rickmon asked Police Chief Eric Gillis why the cameras were added to the grant application. Gillis said he did not know the application had been amended and acknowledged that police had no records showing parents left children at Six Flags to gamble. He did not respond to requests for comment.

Gideon Epstein, policy counsel at the ACLU of Massachusetts, said Agawam is not an isolated case. “The broader problem that we’re seeing across the state is deployments of Flock cameras and license plate readers and other surveillance tools without thorough consideration of whether communities actually want these tools,” he said.

While some municipalities, including Boston, require a council vote before police acquire surveillance technology, there is no statewide rule mandating public approval for license plate readers. Purchases funded through outside grants can be approved as lump sums without discussion of specific equipment, limiting transparency.

In Ludlow, the police department described Flock cameras in its application as “an intricate part of everyday policing.” Police Chief Michael Brennan said a five-year contract was approved by voters in May 2024 as part of the town’s overall budget. He acknowledged that license plate readers have since become “a source of national controversy,” but said they have proven effective. Records show law enforcement has conducted 30,000 searches on Ludlow’s cameras in recent years.

At the June Gaming Commission meeting, Commissioner Eileen O’Brien cast the lone vote against allowing Ludlow to shift $35,000 from an earlier grant to pay for a Flock service contract, citing “issues with Flock.” She did not respond to requests for comment.

Flock declined to comment. A Gaming Commission spokesman referred questions about why communities sought the money to the towns.

Critics point to privacy risks, noting that the cameras log every vehicle that passes and store the data in databases searchable by police in other jurisdictions, sometimes without a warrant. The ACLU of Massachusetts has identified nearly 90 police departments contracting with Flock or other license plate reader companies. More than 30 communities have since canceled or suspended their contracts, including North Attleborough, which had used mitigation funds to buy Flock cameras.

Matthew Guariglia, a policy analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the pattern reflects a broader problem. “When towns get money for much needed public and social issues, they just end up throwing that money at more surveillance,” he said.

Timothy Fong, a psychiatrist who co-directs UCLA’s Gambling Studies Program, said prevention and treatment yield better long-term results. “If you invest in gambling harm reduction, you will get results in public health,” he said. “If you put it in Flock cameras, I’m not quite sure we’re going to get that same return on investment for public health.”

Only Chelsea requested any mitigation money for gambling harm reduction, according to the review. The vast majority of grant funds went to public safety and traffic projects, including police drones in Springfield and improvements to the Boston Harborwalk in Charlestown.