Flock faces municipal cancellations across 100 cities as camera network expands

More than 130,000 automated license plate readers operate across the country as local governments reassess data sharing and security safeguards

A nationwide network of automated license plate readers run by private surveillance company Flock Safety has expanded to roughly 130,000 devices across the United States, prompting mounting municipal resistance, contract terminations, and street-level protests.¹²

The Atlanta-based company operates cameras in 49 states, with more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies using its technology to capture vehicle details such as make, model, color, and license plate numbers.²³⁴ The devices, mounted on roadside poles, record passing vehicles and feed images into searchable databases that allow police to track movements across jurisdictions.³⁴ Company executives say the network supported roughly 1 million criminal investigations in 2025 and helped authorities locate more than 10,000 missing people.³ Providence police credited the system with helping identify the vehicle of a suspect in the killing of a Brown University professor last year.³

However, the rapid spread of the camera network has generated widespread pushback from civil liberties advocates, municipal officials, and local residents. According to crowdsourced data from the advocacy project DeFlock, at least 100 cities and towns have deactivated cameras, rejected prospective deals, or canceled contracts.²⁴ In California, cities including Mountain View, Santa Cruz, and South Pasadena terminated their contracts after discovering out-of-state or federal agencies had accessed local data.⁵ Denver canceled its contract earlier this year, moving to sign an agreement with competitor Axon instead.⁵⁴

Much of the public concern centers on the company's shared national search database, which allows law enforcement agencies to search records outside their immediate jurisdictions.⁴⁵ In Texas, sheriff's deputies used Flock data to assist an investigation into a woman suspected of traveling to obtain an abortion.⁴² In other instances, local police queried the network to assist federal immigration enforcement, even in jurisdictions with explicit policies against cooperating with federal immigration authorities.⁵

Documented instances of individual police misconduct have added to local scrutiny. The non-profit Institute for Justice identified more than 100 incidents of automated license plate reader abuse nationwide, ranging from wrongful detentions to personal stalking.³⁶ In Kentucky, an officer faced arrest after authorities alleged he used Flock cameras more than 2,000 times to track an ex-girlfriend.³ In Savannah, Georgia, six police department employees were dismissed in August following allegations of system misuse.³

Physical opposition has accompanied the legislative pushback. Flock cameras have been vandalized across at least 36 states, with individuals sawing down mounting poles, shooting devices with firearms, or obstructing lenses with handmade signs and skimmers.²³ At the state level, the Florida Department of Transportation revoked local law enforcement permission to install license plate readers on state highways, while Texas paused state funding for the devices.³

Flock chief executive Garrett Langley told reporters he remains unconcerned by departing business, stating the firm added seven times the number of customers it lost this year.⁴ In response to mounting criticism, Flock announced operational revisions in August. The company decreased its standard data retention period from 30 days to seven days, introduced an Evidence Mode to preserve data attached to active case numbers, and made its internal audit assistance tool standard across all customer accounts.⁶³ Flock representatives maintained that customer agencies own all captured image data and that the company never sells records.²⁵

Civil liberties groups argue the revisions leave structural surveillance risks unresolved. Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a published analysis that the changes follow a corporate pattern of addressing privacy concerns as public relations issues.⁶ Marlow noted that previous attempts to enforce local search restrictions through mandatory drop-down reasons were easily bypassed by officers entering generic terms.⁶ Privacy advocates also pointed out that competitor systems offer similar networked capabilities, meaning municipal vendor switches do not eliminate continuous tracking.⁴⁵

Reporting note: this piece draws on public reporting and documentation from the BBC, The Guardian, NPR, ABC News, and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Source: BBC Verify, September 1, 2026.

References

This article is based on 6 sources, listed in the order they are cited.

1. 1 B bbc.co.uk announcement · 1 Sep 2026 Flock’s Expanding AI Camera Network Draws Growing US Backlash See the source
2. 2 N NPR third party · 21 Aug 2026 Amid intense backlash, people are vandalizing Flock surveillance cameras See the source
3. 3 AN ABC News third party · 1 Sep 2026 Flock cameras trigger nationwide backlash over privacy concerns, police abuse See the source
4. 4 O OPB third party · 22 Aug 2026 As Flock battles public scrutiny, other police surveillance companies see an opening See the source
5. 5 TG The Guardian third party · 6 Apr 2026 ‘Creepy surveillance’: why some cities are shutting down Flock cameras amid privacy concerns See the source
6. 6 A aclu.org third party · 13 Aug 2026 Flock's Cameras Remain Civil Liberties Threat Despite Updates See the source