Multiple US Local Governments Move to End or Restrict Use of Flock Surveillance Cameras Amid Privacy Concerns

Image: TechCrunch · Source

Over ten US local governments have curtailed or ended contracts with Flock Safety's surveillance cameras this year, citing privacy, data sharing, and misuse issues.

Since the summer of 2026, at least ten local governments and police departments across the United States have taken steps to restrict, curb, or completely end their use of Flock Safety's surveillance technology. This movement reflects growing concerns around mass surveillance and data privacy related to advanced AI-powered crime detection tools. Flock Safety, founded in 2017, offers surveillance solutions including license plate readers, drones, and audio sensors designed to help law enforcement solve crimes like finding missing persons or stolen vehicles. Currently, over 100,000 Flock cameras are deployed nationwide.

Cities such as Monroe, Ohio; Newburgh, New York; Richmond, Virginia; Hopkinton and New Bedford, Massachusetts; and Lansing, Michigan have formally ended their contracts with Flock. Additionally, East Bridgewater and Grafton in Massachusetts, and El Paso County, Colorado, have ceased usage. Residents of League City, Texas, recently voted against continued use, triggering removal plans. These decisions stem from concerns ranging from privacy infringements and uncertain data sharing policies to procurement processes.

Notably, instances of misuse have intensified scrutiny. Officers in Brentwood, Missouri, and East Texas were implicated in stalking cases involving Flock camera data. Another key issue involves unauthorized access by federal agencies; Ithaca, New York, terminated its Flock contract following revelations that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) had accessed license plate reader data without explicit local authorization.

Flock Safety responds that their technology actively aids in solving violent crimes and enhancing public safety. The company emphasizes that customers control their own data, claim they do not sell data, and deny any direct contracts with ICE. In response to feedback, Flock reduced data retention for new customers from 30 to 7 days and now requires a case code to query their database.

This backlash reflects a broader national debate balancing public safety benefits with civil liberty concerns. Privacy advocates note that surveillance tools like Flock’s cameras are highly visible, eliciting stronger public reactions compared to less tangible data collection practices. Some cities are not abandoning such technologies fully but imposing restrictions—for example, Cleveland, Ohio, renewed its Flock contract but limited database access and search scope.

Grassroots activism has influenced many city councils to reconsider or reject automated license plate reader expenditures. Experts suggest this trend indicates increasing public skepticism toward emerging surveillance technologies amid calls for greater transparency and oversight. Legislative efforts also mirror this debate. In September 2026, a bill titled the Flock-Off Act was introduced to prohibit federal funding for these surveillance tools, while other lawmakers proposed banning AI-powered surveillance cameras altogether.

Surveillance technology and its regulation remain contentious issues, illustrating the challenges local governments face in adopting emerging crime-fighting technologies without compromising privacy and civil rights.