10
Loading video...
By Amanda Greenwood
Associate News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A growing number of U.S. communities are pushing back against Flock Safety's Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras, with dozens of cities and local governments rejecting proposed systems, canceling existing contracts, deactivating cameras, or declining to renew agreements amid concerns over privacy, data sharing and government surveillance.
The trend comes as Flock continues to rapidly expand across the country.
According to anti-surveillance group DeFlock, more than 122,000 license plate reader cameras have been mapped nationwide, while the organization says 95 cities have rejected ALPR systems.
Read More on U.S.
The development follows a growing opposition to Flock cameras, which are commonly used by law enforcement agencies to identify vehicles linked to crimes and investigations. Critics argue the technology can create extensive databases of drivers' movements, while supporters say it has become an important tool for solving crimes and locating suspects.
Newsweek reached out to Flock via email for comment.
Contracts Canceled and Renewals Denied
Several communities have recently ended their relationships with Flock despite previously adopting the technology.
In May, the El Cerrito City Council in California voted not to renew its contract with Flock, a decision that meant the city's cameras were ultimately switched off on June 7, 2026.
Council members cited concerns including the possibility of federal government access to collected data and dissatisfaction with the company's negotiations: “Ultimately my biggest concern is the federal government could access the data,” said Mayor Pro Tem Rebecca Saltzman, adding that “The law has been changing constantly, we are losing more rights every week. Trump and the Supreme Court could change the law and require FLOCK turnover the data tomorrow.”
Appleton, Wisconsin, also announced it was moving away from the system in May. City officials announced they would stop using Flock cameras following community feedback and concerns about the integrity of the program, with Mayor Jake Woodford saying in a statement that “concerns about the integrity of Flock's underlying system have eroded our trust.”
Other governments have formally terminated contracts after public opposition. Bloomington, Indiana, ended a $50,000 agreement with Flock after significant community pushback, while Tompkins County, New York, terminated its contract after months of organized activism from residents concerned about surveillance.
Ithaca, New York, and Saranac Lake, New York, similarly canceled contracts after privacy concerns and public criticism emerged.
Proposals Rejected Before Cameras Were Installed
Some communities stopped Flock deployments before they could move forward.
In Shoreline, Washington, a planning meeting with Flock was abruptly canceled in April, rejecting the possibility of entering into an ALPR contract after public opposition and concerns raised by council members.
Shoreline Mayor Betsy Robertson told a local news outlet, The Osprey, that, “several council members expressed concern that this was not a good time, and not something that they were interested in pursuing,” adding that there were “no plans to pursue a conversation with Flock.”
...
In Menominee, Michigan, city leaders voted unanimously in May to cancel an existing arrangement after cameras were reportedly activated without city council approval. Local officials questioned where collected information was going and how the system had been turned on before receiving formal authorization.
Salem, Illinois, also canceled an agreement involving Flock license plate readers after changes to contract terms raised concerns among city officials.
Cameras Switched Off
Not every community has chosen to completely ban the technology.
In some cases, local officials have simply deactivated systems already in place while they reassess privacy and oversight concerns.
DeFlock's tracker lists numerous examples of communities that have shut cameras off rather than continue active monitoring programs.
The organization says 22 jurisdictions have deactivated cameras, compared with 47 that have canceled contracts and 25 that have rejected proposed agreements. Only one jurisdiction—Ypsilanti, Michigan—listed by the group is categorized as having formally banned ALPRs outright.
Related Story
List of Republicans Trying to Crack Down on Flock Cameras
Why Communities Are Pushing Back
The reasons vary from city to city, but several themes repeatedly appear in local debates.
Privacy concerns are among the most common objections. Critics argue that ALPR networks can create long-term records of vehicle movements, raising questions about how data is stored, who can access it, and whether information may ultimately be shared beyond the local agencies that initially collected it.
Other communities have expressed concerns about federal access to data, information-sharing practices, transparency surrounding how the technology operates, and whether residents were adequately consulted before systems were approved.
The backlash has increasingly moved from online criticism into local government chambers, where residents have organized campaigns, attended council meetings and pressured elected officials to reconsider surveillance programs. Several of the cancellations listed by DeFlock were explicitly attributed to public opposition and community activism.
At the same time, supporters of Flock cameras maintain that the systems help police investigate crimes, locate stolen vehicles and generate leads in criminal cases. The company has consistently argued that its technology is focused on vehicles rather than people and is designed to support public safety efforts.
As debates over surveillance, privacy and policing continue, a growing number of cities are demonstrating that Flock's expansion is no longer going unchallenged. While thousands of communities continue to use ALPR technology, dozens of others are choosing a different path—rejecting new proposals, terminating contracts or switching cameras off altogether.
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Tobias Meyjes and Sam Wilson.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines