Key Takeaways
- In the Missoula Senate‑candidate debate, Democrat Alani Bankhead accused Republican‑independent Seth Bodnar of hypocrisy for installing Verkada security cameras while campaigning against “Flock‑style” surveillance.
- Both the University of Montana (UM) and Montana State University (MSU) confirmed they do not use facial‑recognition or AI analytics on their security cameras, despite the cameras having built‑in AI capabilities.
- University officials say the cameras are used for emergency response, missing‑person searches, and event management, but they deliberately disable AI features to comply with state law and privacy concerns.
- Civil‑liberties groups such as the ACLU and DeFlock warn that automated license‑plate readers and similar technologies enable covert mass‑surveillance and threaten personal privacy.
- The debate also touched on broader AI policy, with Bankhead calling for domestic safeguards against big‑tech influence and Bodnar agreeing that AI needs guardrails while defending campus safety measures.
Debate Sparks Accusation of Hypocrisy Over Campus Cameras
During a recent U.S. Senate candidate debate in Missoula, Democrat Alani Bankhead challenged her independent opponent Seth Bodnar, stating, “Of course, right here, the University of Montana, we’ve got those Verkada cameras that are AI‑driven that were actually installed by Seth Bodner while he was president of the university.” Bankhead’s remark framed Bodnar as a hypocrite for promoting a campaign video that showed him shooting a Flock‑style camera while allegedly overseeing the deployment of AI‑enabled surveillance equipment on campus. The accusation quickly became a focal point of the exchange, highlighting the tension between security interests and privacy concerns in Montana’s higher‑education institutions.
Verkada Technology and the AI Question
Verkada markets its products as “security solutions” that allow campuses to “instantly share video feeds with law enforcement or track a person or vehicle,” describing itself as “a global leader in physical security.” While the company’s cameras do include artificial‑intelligence capabilities—such as object detection and license‑plate reading—both UM and MSU officials emphasized that these features are not activated. UM spokesperson Dave Kuntz clarified in an email, “Seth is correct that we don’t utilize facial recognition or share data via our cameras.” He added that the cameras are customizable and that the university deliberately disables AI functions to avoid any perception of indiscriminate data collection.
University of Montana’s Camera Use and Policy Constraints
UM maintains roughly 300 security cameras across its Missoula campus. According to Kuntz, the cameras have proven useful for locating missing individuals, investigating traffic accidents, and managing large events at Washington‑Grizzly Stadium. He noted, “Almost all cameras that an entity of our size would purchase today have AI capabilities,” but stressed that state law prohibits the capture of biomedical data or the use of facial recognition. Consequently, UM’s policy is to keep the AI features turned off, even though the hardware supports them. Kuntz further explained that while the cameras feed into a 24‑hour emergency dispatch center for real‑time coordination, “AI won’t increase responsiveness, and UM has reservations about AI capabilities in cameras as well.” He concluded, “So even if the laws change, we won’t change how we use them.”
Montana State University’s Approach to Surveillance
At Montana State University in Bozeman, spokesperson Mike Becker reported that the campus operates 479 cameras, with an additional 61 slated to come online soon. Becker stated, “The video management system comes from the company Milestone and does not use facial recognition technology or artificial intelligence.” He emphasized that MSU does not actively monitor the feeds except during special events that involve safety and security operations. Like UM, MSU relies on the cameras for situational awareness during emergencies but refrains from leveraging any analytic AI functions that could enable automated tracking or profiling.
Civil‑Liberties Concerns About Automated Surveillance
The deployment of camera networks—particularly those equipped with automated license‑plate readers—has drawn criticism from privacy advocates. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) warned that companies such as Flock Safety are attempting to construct “a nationwide mass surveillance system.” A grassroots organization called DeFlock echoed this sentiment, arguing that the growing prevalence of such technology threatens personal privacy and civil liberties by enabling covert tracking of individuals’ movements without their knowledge or consent. These concerns resonated in the Senate debate, where Bankhead cited her 15‑year history fighting big‑tech exploitation of children as a reason to demand stricter safeguards on surveillance tools.
AI Policy Question in the Senate Debate
The moderator also posed a question about whether the candidates would support an international treaty requiring U.S. and Chinese companies to ensure AI remains under human control before further development. Bankhead responded that the United States must first address its own AI problems, especially to protect children. She asserted, “I’ve been fighting with big tech for about 15 years at the national level in terms of ensuring that big tech has guardrails to protect our children,” and accused lawmakers of being “paid off by these tech lobbyists,” leaving kids unprotected. She then pivoted to her accusation against Bodnar, linking the broader AI‑governance debate to the specific issue of campus surveillance cameras.
Bodnar’s Defense and Shared Concerns About AI Safeguards
Seth Bodnar, who served as UM president for eight years, countered that campus security cameras are essential for student safety but insisted they must not usher in a surveillance state. He stated, “Everybody here wants to have a safe campus where police can monitor those,” while emphasizing, “To be very clear, these were not empowered with facial recognition technology. They weren’t storing data. They weren’t sharing data.” Bodnar agreed with Bankhead on the need for AI safeguards, saying, “I also agreed with Bankhead’s position that safeguards are needed in this country when it comes to AI.” His remarks sought to reconcile the imperative of security with a commitment to privacy and ethical AI use.
System‑Wide Oversight and Future Implications
The Montana University System, which oversees 16 campuses, does not centrally track the number or type of security cameras in use, nor does it have a formal policy governing AI technologies in surveillance equipment. A system spokesperson acknowledged this gap, noting that decisions about camera deployment and feature activation remain largely institutional. As AI‑enabled hardware becomes more prevalent and affordable, universities across Montana—and the nation—will likely face increasing pressure to balance the tangible benefits of video‑based security against the risks of automated data collection, facial recognition, and pervasive monitoring. The recent Senate debate underscored that these considerations are not merely technical but are deeply intertwined with public trust, legislative oversight, and the protection of civil liberties.
In sum, the controversy surrounding Alani Bankhead’s accusation against Seth Bodnar reveals a nuanced reality: while the University of Montana and Montana State University possess cameras equipped with AI‑capable hardware, both institutions have deliberately disabled those features to comply with state law and address privacy concerns. The debate highlighted broader anxieties about surveillance technologies, the role of big‑tech lobbying, and the necessity of clear AI safeguards—issues that will continue to shape security policies on Montana’s campuses and beyond.
Montana’s flagship universities use security cameras, but not their AI capabilities