More Than 10 Local Governments Shun Flock’s Surveillance Cameras Since Summer

In response to rising worries over mass surveillance and data privacy, over ten local governments and police departments have opted to limit, restrict, or terminate their use of Flock Safety’s technology. This movement reflects a wider backlash against the quick expansion of advanced AI technologies including facial recognition and data centers.

Founded in 2017, Flock provides surveillance solutions like license plate readers, drones, and sound-sensitive devices to assist law enforcement in solving crimes, such as retrieving stolen vehicles or locating missing individuals. Currently, more than 100,000 Flock cameras operate across the country.

In recent months, municipalities including Monroe, Ohio; Newburgh, New York; Richmond, Virginia; Hopkinton and New Bedford in Massachusetts; and Lansing, Michigan have ended their contracts with Flock. Additionally, police departments in East Bridgewater and Grafton, Massachusetts, have declared plans to stop utilizing Flock cameras. Recently, residents in League City, Texas, voted against their police department’s continued use of Flock’s systems, leading to the cameras’ removal.

Concerns are varied, encompassing privacy issues, data-sharing practices, and procurement processes.

In Asheville, North Carolina, city officials voted in August to cut ties with Flock, while Colorado’s El Paso County Sheriff announced in September their intention to halt the use of Flock technology. Commenting on the decision, Sheriff Joseph Roybal emphasized that the county could efficiently apprehend criminals without relying on Flock’s systems.

Tatiana Rice, a senior director at The Future of Privacy Forum, indicated that the negative sentiment toward Flock is not surprising and showcases a growing public wariness regarding technology. She pointed out that visible sensors and cameras are more tangible than the abstract nature of online data sharing. “A camera at the end of your street is much more evident than everyday data practices,” Rice remarked.

On a broader scale, states are taking measures against such technologies. For instance, Florida prohibited license plate readers on state highways this summer, while Texas temporarily withheld state funding for Flock due to concerns about data privacy and potential misuse.

Instances of misuse have raised alarms. In August, a Brentwood, Missouri officer was accused of using Flock technology to stalk his ex-wife during their divorce. Similarly, in September, an East Texas officer received a prison sentence for using Flock to surveil his ex-girlfriend and her family.

Another worry involves the use of this technology by immigration authorities. A significant case arose in March when Ithaca, New York, moved to sever its contract with Flock. The resolution pointed to evidence that Flock’s infrastructure had been utilized by federal agents to gather information without proper authorization, enabling ICE and the ATF to investigate individuals.

In a response to concerns, Flock stated that while its technology aids in solving crimes, removing these tools undermines public safety. They emphasized that clients control their data sharing, asserting they do not sell information and have no contracts with ICE. Recently, Flock announced plans to reduce its data retention period from 30 days to seven for new customers, alongside imposing a requirement for case codes to search their database.

The discourse surrounding Flock mirrors the ongoing discussions about data centers. Many cities had adopted Flock’s technology relatively recently, often without public awareness. Activists have been pushing for better transparency and oversight regarding these technologies, and numerous city councils seem to be responding positively.

While some cities have decided to retain Flock or similar technologies, they are instituting tighter regulations on their usage. For example, Cleveland extended its contract with the company but limited searches related to immigration and restricted database access solely to the Cleveland Police Department, cutting out a federal agency that previously had access.

Authorities argue that these tools are essential for investigations. However, communities want to ensure that civil liberties are not compromised for the sake of public safety. The debate over surveillance technology continues to be a contentious topic, especially with ongoing legislative discussions.

In September, despite a Reuters poll indicating a majority of people disapproved of such technology, former President Trump expressed his support for Flock. Additionally, Republican Rep. Thomas Massie introduced legislation aimed at curbing federal funding for surveillance technologies while Democrats have proposed their own measures to limit the use of AI-driven surveillance systems.