Cities Ditch Flock Surveillance Contracts at Record Pace
· automotive
Cities Terminate Flock Contracts at Record Pace in August
The past few years have seen a concerning trend in American cities: the proliferation of surveillance technology under the guise of public safety. One company at the forefront of this movement is Flock Safety, which has been aggressively marketing its cameras and AI-powered monitoring systems to municipalities across the country. However, recent data suggests that the tide may be turning.
According to Secure Justice, an Oakland-based advocacy group, 214 cities and counties have dropped Flock contracts since 2021. This number is significant, but what’s more striking is the rate at which these cancellations are happening. In August alone, a record 90 localities severed ties with Flock, marking a fourfold increase from the previous month.
The acceleration in terminations paints a disturbing picture: that of a growing public backlash against Flock’s surveillance-first approach. Secure Justice executive director Brian Hofer notes that “the momentum is growing rapidly.” Public concerns over out-of-control surveillance, unwanted data sharing, and police abuse have been mounting for years.
Flock Safety has downplayed the significance of these cancellations by pointing to new city partnerships that allegedly outpace nonrenewals. However, this spin rings hollow when considering the sheer number of communities rejecting Flock’s products. The company claims its technology is “trusted by over 5,000 communities,” but this takes on a different tone when you realize how many relationships are being severed.
The numbers are stark: an average of three localities per day have halted contracts with Flock in the past month. Hofer warns that if this trend continues, we can expect to see “serious money” change hands as cities opt out of these costly and invasive agreements. Instead of addressing concerns driving these cancellations, Flock has been trying to spin its way out of trouble.
In a recent blog post, CEO Garrett Langley claimed that Flock would be reducing data retention defaults from 30 days to seven, among other “privacy-minded changes.” While this may seem like a concession, it’s too little, too late. The damage has been done – and cities are catching on.
The trend suggests that the public is becoming increasingly wary of Flock’s claims about its technology being “public safety-focused.” As more cities reject Flock’s products, a pattern emerges: growing resistance to over-reliance on surveillance and AI-powered monitoring. This trend has significant implications for companies like Flock, which have long profited from fear-mongering surrounding public safety.
The question remains: what will happen next? Will cities continue to reject Flock’s products en masse, or will some find a way to justify their continued use? One thing is certain – the momentum is on the side of those who value transparency and accountability over invasive surveillance. As Hofer put it, “the number is going to get huge, fast.” And when that happens, Flock will have no one but itself to blame for the fallout.
Reader Views
- TGThe Garage Desk · editorial
The writing's on the wall: Flock Safety's business model is unsustainable if 90 cities can collectively abandon their contracts in one month. While the company might tout new partnerships, those numbers pale in comparison to the sheer number of communities rejecting its surveillance tech. But what about the data already collected? How will cities ensure that sensitive information isn't compromised when these systems are decommissioned? The termination trend is a welcome development, but it raises more questions than it answers – particularly regarding accountability and the long-term consequences of Flock's technology.
- SLSara L. · daily commuter
While it's heartening to see cities terminating their Flock contracts at record pace, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that even more concerning is what happens to the data these cameras collect once the contract is cancelled. Cities are often required to hand over footage and insights gathered from Flock cameras to law enforcement or private third parties, creating a perpetual surveillance state. Until this practice changes, the mere cancellation of contracts feels like a Band-Aid solution rather than a genuine effort to dismantle invasive monitoring systems.
- MRMike R. · shop technician
It's refreshing to see cities starting to wise up and cancel their Flock contracts. But let's not forget that once these cameras are installed, they're incredibly hard to remove without leaving a digital trail. I've worked on some of these systems in my shop, and I can tell you it's not just a matter of unplugging them. The real question is what happens to the vast amounts of data collected by Flock, and whether cities will be able to delete or anonymize that information before it falls into the wrong hands.