Sunday, September 06, 2026

WE, THE PEOPLE, STILL NEED FULL DISCLOSURE OF COMMISSIONERS' SECRET MEETINGS WITH DEVELOPERS. (Ed Slavin 8/31/2026 e-mail to SJC BoCC)

St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners group photo

On Tuesday, September 1, 2026 at 12:34:54 PM EDT, Ed Slavin <easlavin@aol.com> wrote:

Dear Chair Murphy:
1.Please place in the record and note my objection to your refusal to let me speak at today's hearing,
2. Please allow me to speak on Commissioners' secret meetings with corporations.
3. The whole County is watching.
Thank you.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
www.edslavin.com
(904) 377-4998

On Monday, August 31, 2026 at 09:28:14 AM EDT, Ed Slavin <easlavin@aol.com> wrote:


To: Honorable Clay Murphy, Chair, St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners, 500 Sebastian View, St. Augustine, Florida 32084

Dear Chairman Murphy:

A. Good morning. Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis said, "Sunlight is the best disinfectant." As I told St. Johns County Commissioners at our August 18, 2026 meeting, Commissioners must meet reasonable expectations of probity in disclosing the "substance" of ex parte contacts.  

B. In a quasi-judicial hearing, ex parte contacts, or contacts by anyone with Commissioners outside the hearing room, must be carefully scrutinized.

C. Disclosing ex parte contacts requires far more than mere generalities. Please be specific as to subjects, attendees, facts, quotes, documents and dates.  

D. From this day forward, for ALL St. Johns County all quasi-judicial agenda items, starting with the certification sought in NCERT 2026-01 N Palm Valley Rd, involving agricultural enclave certification for some 4,462 acres: 

1. Please provide a complete spreadsheet detailing all ex parte contacts, as was the practice by our former City of St. Augustine Vice Mayor Todd David Neville (later the chair of the State Board of Administration's Audit Committee).

2. Please place each Commissioner's ex parte  contact spreadsheet and all related paper and electronic documents on ex parte contacts online before the meeting begins.

3. Before the hearing on September 1, 2026, please promptly supplement the information that now appears at:

4. Please require all persons testifying in this or any other zoning matter to be sworn under oath under penalty of perjury if they are testifying on behalf of or in support of an an applicant, unless the Commission votes to find that there is a specific exemption from the oath requirement, e.g. under F.S. 286.0115. 

E. Please enact a comprehensive St. Johns County Lobbyist Disclosure Ordinance.  


F. With 40% of our St. Johns County Commissioners to go on criminal trial in November, please honor and respect our sacred Right to Know about all of our elected officials meetings with landowners, lobbyists and influencers.  

G. Commissioners: please videotape each of those ex parte developer meetings from this day forward: if you don't, the FBI might. (Ask Tom Manuel or Scott Maddox).

H. As Thomas Jefferson said, "A public office is a public trust."



Thank you. 
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
Box 3084 
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
(904) 377-4998


The 2026 Florida Statutes  
Title XIX
PUBLIC BUSINESS
Chapter 286
PUBLIC BUSINESS: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

286.0115 Access to local public officials; quasi-judicial proceedings on local government land use matters.—
(1)(a) A county or municipality may adopt an ordinance or resolution removing the presumption of prejudice from ex parte communications with local public officials by establishing a process to disclose ex parte communications with such officials pursuant to this subsection or by adopting an alternative process for such disclosure. However, this subsection does not require a county or municipality to adopt any ordinance or resolution establishing a disclosure process.
(b) As used in this subsection, the term “local public official” means any elected or appointed public official holding a county or municipal office who recommends or takes quasi-judicial action as a member of a board or commission. The term does not include a member of the board or commission of any state agency or authority.
(c) Any person not otherwise prohibited by statute, charter provision, or ordinance may discuss with any local public official the merits of any matter on which action may be taken by any board or commission on which the local public official is a member. If adopted by county or municipal ordinance or resolution, adherence to the following procedures shall remove the presumption of prejudice arising from ex parte communications with local public officials.
1. The substance of any ex parte communication with a local public official which relates to quasi-judicial action pending before the official is not presumed prejudicial to the action if the subject of the communication and the identity of the person, group, or entity with whom the communication took place is disclosed and made a part of the record before final action on the matter.
2. A local public official may read a written communication from any person. However, a written communication that relates to quasi-judicial action pending before a local public official shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action, and such written communication shall be made a part of the record before final action on the matter.
3. Local public officials may conduct investigations and site visits and may receive expert opinions regarding quasi-judicial action pending before them. Such activities shall not be presumed prejudicial to the action if the existence of the investigation, site visit, or expert opinion is made a part of the record before final action on the matter.
4. Disclosure made pursuant to subparagraphs 1., 2., and 3. must be made before or during the public meeting at which a vote is taken on such matters, so that persons who have opinions contrary to those expressed in the ex parte communication are given a reasonable opportunity to refute or respond to the communication. This subsection does not subject local public officials to part III of chapter 112 for not complying with this paragraph.
(2)(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), a county or municipality may adopt an ordinance or resolution establishing the procedures and provisions of this subsection for quasi-judicial proceedings on local government land use matters. The ordinance or resolution shall provide procedures and provisions identical to this subsection. However, this subsection does not require a county or municipality to adopt such an ordinance or resolution.
(b) In a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, a person who appears before the decisionmaking body who is not a party or party-intervenor shall be allowed to testify before the decisionmaking body, subject to control by the decisionmaking body, and may be requested to respond to questions from the decisionmaking body, but need not be sworn as a witness, is not required to be subject to cross-examination, and is not required to be qualified as an expert witness. The decisionmaking body shall assign weight and credibility to such testimony as it deems appropriate. A party or party-intervenor in a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, upon request by another party or party-intervenor, shall be sworn as a witness, shall be subject to cross-examination by other parties or party-intervenors, and shall be required to be qualified as an expert witness, as appropriate.
(c) In a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters, a person may not be precluded from communicating directly with a member of the decisionmaking body by application of ex parte communication prohibitions. Disclosure of such communications by a member of the decisionmaking body is not required, and such nondisclosure shall not be presumed prejudicial to the decision of the decisionmaking body. All decisions of the decisionmaking body in a quasi-judicial proceeding on local government land use matters must be supported by substantial, competent evidence in the record pertinent to the proceeding, irrespective of such communications.
(3) This section does not restrict the authority of any board or commission to establish rules or procedures governing public hearings or contacts with local public officials.
History.—s. 1, ch. 95-352; s. 31, ch. 96-324.

St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners group photo

 

Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, September 05, 2026

FLOCK GROUP, INC. d/b/a "FLOCK SAFETY"

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1755.  

From Wikipedia:


Flock Safety

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Flock Group Inc.
TypePrivate
IndustryTechnology
Surveillance
Founded2017 (9 years ago)
FoundersGarrett Langley
Matt Feury
Paige Todd
Headquarters3284 Northside Parkway NW, Atlanta, Georgia[1][2], 
US
Area served
United States
Key peopleGarrett Langley (CEO)
ProductsAutomated license plate readers
CCTV cameras
Gunfire detection systems
Software
Revenue$300 million[3]
Number of employees
1,500 (2025)[4]
Websiteflocksafety.com

Flock Group Inc., doing business as Flock Safety,[5] is a privately held American manufacturer and operator of surveillance hardware and software, particularly automated license plate recognition (ALPR), mass video surveillance, gunfire locator systems, and supporting software to integrate the data gathered by these technologies. Founded in 2017, Flock operates such systems under contract with law enforcement agencies, neighborhood associations, and private property owners. As of 2025, Flock says that it operates in over 5,000 communities across 49 US states, and performs over 20 billion scans of vehicles in the US every month.[6][7][8] Flock Safety's network consists of cameras, image recognition, and machine learning, which share data with police departments.

Flock markets their services to law enforcement, homeowner associations and similar community organizations as tools for crime prevention and investigations. Flock has been described by critics as an example of mass surveillance, and their efficacy and effects on privacy and other civil liberties are the subject of public scrutiny, debate, and litigation.[9]

Corporate history

Flock was founded in 2017.[5][10][11] It was co-founded by three Georgia Tech alumni: Garrett Langley, Paige Todd, and Matt Feury.[12][13] It began as a side project in which the three co-founders built their first video surveillance cameras by hand around Langley's dining room table.[12] When a DeKalb County detective told Langley that his camera product had helped with solving a home break-in, Langley called the two other co-founders and told them to quit their jobs.[12]

By 2024, Flock's fixed cameras had been installed in over 4,000 cities across 42 states.[14][15][16] By April of that year, Flock employed over 900 people.[13]

In June 2024, a judge in the Norfolk, Virginia, Circuit Court ruled that collecting location data from the city's 172 Flock ALPRs constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment and cannot be used as evidence in a criminal case when collected without a warrant. The ruling likened ALPR location databases to tracking devices, whose use by police was previously found unconstitutional without a warrant in United States v. Jones.[17] Following this ruling, the company began to receive additional pushback from communities concerned about the legality of their operation.[18][19][20] That October, Flock acquired Aerodome, a manufacturer of drones for law enforcement, and announced plans to introduce its own line of drones.[21]

As of 2025, Flock is used by over 6,000 municipalities in the United States.[22] The company had raised a total $950 million in venture funding, with a $7.5 billion valuation.[23][24] Much of Flock's initial investment came from private venture capital funds associated with Peter Thiel, who has been criticized for his anti-democratic views and support for surveillance technologies.[25][26][27][28] Some cities have stopped working with Flock over the use of its data in immigration enforcement and for community privacy concerns, while others did so due to the company acting without the consent of the city.[29]

In October 2025, Flock Safety announced a partnership with Amazon's Ring security products, where residents with Ring cameras would have the option to share video data to public safety agencies in legal investigations.[30][31] The plan came under scrutiny after Amazon ran an ad during Super Bowl LX that depicted the Ring's "Search Party" function for finding missing or lost pets, enhanced with AI surveillance. A joint decision was made to cancel the planned integration.[32][33]

Products

Typical Flock ALPR, mounted to a pole
Flock camera located on a hiking trail

Falcon and Sparrow

The Falcon and Sparrow are automatic license plate readers(ALPRs) that monitor traffic and photograph the rear of all passing vehicles. Their software uses computer vision to read the vehicles' license plates and identify other distinguishing visual characteristics, sending that information to a central server via an LTE cellular network.[34][35] Flock's servers then log the identifying data, with the time and location of the scan, in a searchable database and compare all results with the National Crime Information Center, as well as state and local police watchlists of cars that are reported stolen or otherwise of interest to the police, instantly alerting nearby officers upon a match.[36][37]

ALPRs like Flock's differ from traffic enforcement cameras in that they are intended for surveillance and criminal investigations and do not perform any autonomous enforcement of traffic laws,[38][39][40]though data from Flock cameras was previously used by police to issue a ticket.[41][42] According to Jill Walker Rettberg, the cameras are designed to not be noticed in an urban environment.[43] In July 2026, Flock cameras began being installed hidden inside the backs of speed readers to avoid vandalism.[44][45]

Flock said that its system's ability to identify vehicles' visual features, which it calls "vehicle fingerprint technology", is unique among ALPR systems; they state that the system can identify vehicles' make, model, and color, as well as other distinguishing attributes such as mismatching colors, bumper stickers, dents, and temporary license plates, allowing investigators to search for recorded vehicles based on these characteristics.[16][46][47] Flock said that its ALPRs can capture images of vehicles traveling at up to 100 miles per hour (160 km/h) at distances of up to 75 feet (23 m), regardless of lighting.[38]

Flock says its ALPRs "focus on vehicles, not people", and are intended to help police identify vehicle details, not personal information.[48] Flock additionally provides a tool called FreeForm, which allows police to search for anything in a scene with natural language. Public records requests showed that police were searching for characteristics of individuals, including by race, gender, clothing, height, tattoos, and perceived political affiliation.[49]

Most Flock devices are powered by solar panels and rechargeable batteries,[43] allowing them to operate in locations without access to utility power.[50] Many are mounted on manufacturer-supplied poles, while others are affixed to existing lampposts or telephone poles.[50][51] Flock also offers mobile trailers, which contain two PTZ cameras, one panoramic video camera, and deterrent devices such as flashing lights and a speaker.[52]

Flock's primary competitor in the ALPR market is Motorola Solutions.[36][53]

Flock offers software which integrates its ALPR and vehicle identification software into existing video camera systems, including IP cameras[54][55][56] and Axon dashcams widely used in police vehicles.[57][58] Jill Walker Rettberg stated Flock's network can be integrated into predictive policing platforms like Palantir.[43]

Condor

An individual being automatically tracked by a Flock PTZ camera
Multiple individuals being tracked by a PTZ camera

Flock's Condor cameras are pan–tilt–zoom (PTZ) surveillance cameras primarily marketed as a method to avoid blind spots from fixed-angle cameras while having a wider scope than just ALPR functionalities, such as automatically tracking people.[59][60][61]Condor cameras can automatically zoom in on cars, people, faces, phone screens, and other objects nearby.[62] According to marketing material on Flock's website, they can also be controlled manually.[62]

Nova

In May 2025, Flock was developing a new product called Nova that the company referred as a "public safety data platform", which would supplement ALPR data with information from data breaches, public records, and commercially available data in order to track specific individuals without a warrant.[63] As of May 2025, Nova was already in use by law enforcement in an early access program.[64] The Electronic Frontier Foundation described Flock Nova as a "dystopian panopticon".[65] After 404 Media reporting, the company decided not to include information from data breaches in Nova.[66]

Raven

Launched in 2021, the Flock Raven is an audio gunfire locator, similar in function to ShotSpotter.[67] The Raven records audio in 5-second increments, using artificial intelligence to analyze the sound clips for audible gunfire. When a gunshot is detected, the device estimates its location and alerts police.[68] Like the ALPRs, they can be mounted on manufacturer-supplied poles and powered by solar panels.[69] The company claims at least 1,200 gunshots have been detected by their system, with false positive and false negative rates below 1%.[70]

In October 2025, Flock announced that their Raven devices would begin listening for "human distress", with advertisements showing police being alerted when the device picks up on screaming.[71]

Alpha

Flock produces a drone marketed as a "Drone as First Responder" system. It has one hardware variant named "Alpha". Drones can be stored in remotely-located "docks", then deployed to a given location with a remote trigger, including manual direction to GPS coordinates, or automated deployment to the location of license plate reader or gunshot detection alerts. The drones have both regular, thermal, and night-vision cameras, and can fly up to 60 miles per hour (97 km/h).[72] The drones are equipped with license plate reader technology[73] and can see plates from up to 2,000 feet (610 m) away.[74][75][72]

The drones are marketed as a reactive rather than proactive solution, and they are intended to only leave their dock when deployed by a human or automated alert.[76] The drones have been criticized for mass surveillance risks[77][76][73] and militarization, as well as for collecting a more expansive set of data than traditional fixed-location cameras.[75][78] The Electronic Frontier Foundation stated the drones could "capture footage from areas typically inaccessible to a casual patrol officer" such as people's backyards, roofs, and through windows.[79]

OS Investigate

In August 2026, Wired reported that limited prompts and code from an AI and text search-based Flock software tool called OS Investigate, previously known as Nightshift,[80] were leaked via publicly accessible Flock login pages. Wired stated other leaked code from Flock's website contained a list of tools available to OS Investigate, including the ability to correlate Flock-native data such as license plate scans and camera metadata, police department data such as arrest records and dispatch logs, and commercial databases including private personal data such as Social Security numbers and birth dates, as well as emails, phone numbers, and relatives or associated individuals.[81]

Wired stated that the leaked prompts commonly involved searches based on area, time, or behavior, rather than searching based on an individual by license plate, including behavior such as someone visiting three or more retail locations within 3 days, or someone driving their car within a neighborhood in a given time frame. It also included the capability to do a "workup", which Flock describes as a "one-command background check" that can list a subject's name, date of birth, owned vehicles, and police records, as well as personal contact details, relatives, and online accounts.[81][82]

Flock's CEO Garett Langley stated that Investigate OS was like a crime analyst that was "always awake, always watching out for you" and stated that investigators who try it get "addicted". Flock stated the product is currently being tested with a "small group of law enforcement partners", and that it is still being developed.[81]

Business model

Flock owns and operates all of its devices,[83] leasing them to various categories of customers.[10][84][85]Competitors primarily market their products to law enforcement agencies, but Flock also markets its products to community organizations and private entities.[43] Some customers share data from their systems with police agencies.[86][87]

Marketing materials center on efforts to reduce crime, and the company uses bird-themed product names.[43]Until 2026, the sales team conducted surveillance demos in Georgia using a real youth gymnastics center, playgrounds, schools, and a pool.[88]

Flock has developed relationships with several mayors.[89][failed verification][90] After the Denver city council voted to end the city's relationship with the company, the mayor negotiated a free six-month extension of the contract, for which no approval was required.[89]

Efficacy

Some law enforcement agencies have said that the technology is "helpful at generating investigative leads and solving crimes that may have otherwise gone unsolved", with some additionally claiming a deterrent effect.[38]

In 2024, Cyrus Farivar, writing for Forbes, questioned a statistic crediting Flock Safety's technology with an 80% reduction in residential burglaries in San Marino, California, in early 2021 compared to the same period in 2020. Farivar asserted that burglaries actually slightly increased, and that serious crimes remained nearly unchanged.[91] Farivar also questioned similar claims from Flock regarding Fort Worth, Dayton, and Lexington.[91]

A 2021 study of Flock's Falcon camera by "surveillance research firm IPVM ... found a 10% error rate in the camera output". Flock then halted sales to IPVM and disputed the accuracy of IPVM's findings.[92]Inaccuracies in Flock's cameras have resulted in wrongful arrests in several cities.[92][93]

In 2025, a series of vulnerabilities in Flock cameras was identified, including hardcoded credentials[94][95] and connection details, cleartext storage of code,[96] and an enabled debug interface.[97] Flock stated these vulnerabilities would require physical access to the device to exploit.[98] Later in 2025, a separate cybersecurity flaw was found by researchers, which allowed anyone to access live camera feeds and other data from the Flock Condor line through publicly exposed live streams and administrator control panels. Flock stated the issue involved a limited number of devices caused by a misconfiguration and said it had been remedied.[62]

In 2026, Business Insider reported that a driver in Roseville, California, had been repeatedly stopped by police due to Flock misidentifying a character on his license plate. An analysis by the local police department stated that 71% of the 1,427 stolen or used-in-felony vehicle alerts sent to them by Flock in 2023 and 2024 were incorrectly identified plates, and Flock had also repeatedly not identified passing vehicles that were used in crimes. Flock stated that Roseville had a "particularly unique deployment" of cameras that were set up to only capture the rear of passing vehicles to avoid capturing people's faces, and that they were using older hardware and cameras placed higher up than Flock usually recommends. Flock refused to comment on if it independently tests its cameras' accuracy.[99]

Controversies

Flock's products have generated bipartisan controversy and backlash across the political spectrum.[100][101][102] Flock cameras have been stolen, vandalized, and purposefully obstructed.[103][104][105][106]

In October 2024, Colorado activist Will Freeman created a crowdsourced searchable online map of the United States showing locations of Flock cameras called DeFlock.[107] In January 2025, Flock sent a cease and desist letter to the project.[108]

On their website, DeFlock lists dozens of jurisdictions that have ended contracts with Flock or deactivated their cameras.[109][110] When the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) announced it would not renew its contract with Flock Safety, set to expire in June 2026, the department explicitly cited civil liberties and privacy concerns[111] and public backlash.[112] The LAPD's chief information officer stated they wanted more contractual terms and protections, and that a new contract was being drafted. Flock said they believed the LAPD's decision was based on "misconceptions" and hoped to resume service soon.[113]

Privacy concerns

Privacy concerns have been raised with respect to ALPRs generally, including Flock's systems.[27][114][115][9][116]Additionally, Flock's surveillance model has spurred debate.[117][118][119][115] Flock's surveillance technology has been criticized for its broadening of public surveillance and effect on civil liberties, as described by privacy experts and organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The EFF argues that ALPRs create more problems than they solve.[120]

In March 2022, the ACLU released a report criticizing Flock Safety's business model and products.[121] In 2023, the ACLU acknowledged some uses of ALPRs could be acceptable, but emphasized the need for careful controls:[36]

There's no reason the technology should be used to create comprehensive records of everybody's comings and goings—and that is precisely what ALPR databases like Flock's are doing. In our country, the government should not be tracking us unless it has individualized suspicion that we're engaged in wrongdoing.[36]

In an interview, CEO Garrett Langley said he believed there were two types of activists raising concerns about Flock, praising the ACLU and EFF for their methods and approaches but comparing the DeFlock project to terrorists and Antifa.[122] He later apologized for these comments and called them a mistake.[123][124]

In October 2024, the Institute for Justice filed a federal lawsuit against the Norfolk Police Department on behalf of two local residents, asserting that the department's use of Flock ALPRs constituted illegal surveillance in violation of the Fourth Amendment.[19][125][126] In California, state law prohibits sharing license plate reader data with federal agencies, but in 2025 it was reported that several state and municipal law enforcement agencies nonetheless did so.[127]

In December 2025, 404 Media reported that Flock left at least 60 of its Condor cameras "around the country exposed to the open internet, where anyone could watch them, download 30 days worth of video archive, and change settings, see log files, and run diagnostics".[62]

In April 2026, 404 Media reported that Flock Safety representatives had conducted product demos using video from a Jewish Community Center in Dunwoody, Georgia, that included feeds of a children’s gymnastics room, a playground, a school, and a pool.[88][128] In response, Flock CEO Garrett Langley formally apologized to the community center, acknowledging "poor judgment," and the company promised increased transparency and updated privacy guardrails.[129] The company stated: "Claims of inappropriate conduct by our employees are false."[130]

In many cases, Flock usage is secret to protect the integrity of ongoing investigations. Some agencies provide public logs, and the website haveibeenflocked.com aggregates known logs so potential victims of privacy violations can make inquiries.[131]

Misuse by law enforcement

A law enforcement officer is alleged to have searched Flock products on behalf of a suspect in an ongoing drug investigation.[132]

In 2026, a review of media reports since 2024 by the Institute for Justice revealed 28 cases of law enforcement officers from across the United States abusing Flock and other ALPR systems to stalk former romantic partners.[133] Some of these cases were discovered by private citizens and journalists through noticing patterns of abuse in public records from police departments, raising concerns about underreporting and lack of oversight by authorities.[134] Incidents include:

  • A Sedgwick, Kansas, police chief who used Flock Safety license plate readers to track his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend’s vehicles 228 times over more than four months, and used his police vehicle to follow them.[135][136]
  • A Kechi, Kansas, police lieutenant who used Flock Safety license plate readers to track his estranged wife.[137][138]
  • A Bonner Springs, Kansas, detective who used Flock license plate readers to stalk his wife.[139]
  • A Sumter County, Florida, detective who falsified records to search for her husband's ex-wife.[140]
  • The police chief of Braselton, Georgia, who was arrested and charged after the Georgia Bureau of Investigation concluded he had misused Flock to stalk and harass several individuals, including an ex-girlfriend.[141][142][131]
  • A Pasadena, Texas, sergeant who used Flock to "track and stalk a female officer".[143]
  • A supervisor with the Conyers, Georgia, police department who used Flock to track her domestic partner's location.[144]
  • Two Greer, South Carolina, officers who were terminated for misusing Flock, one to track a former partner.[145]
  • A Niceville, Florida, officer who used Flock to track a fellow officer and that officer's spouse.[146]
  • A Menasha, Wisconsin, officer whose ex-girlfriend filed a complaint alleging he used Flock to stalk her.[147]
  • The police chief of Holiday Hills, Illinois, who used Flock to track several people he knew.[148]
  • The sheriff of Jerome County, Idaho, who used Flock to search for his wife's vehicle hundreds of times.[149]
  • A Cherry Valley, Illinois, officer's ex-wife who filed a restraining order after accusing him of stalking her with Flock cameras.[150]
  • Three Richmond County, Georgia, police officers who were terminated for allegedly misusing Flock products.[151]
  • A Milwaukee police officer who used Flock to track a woman he was dating and her ex-partner nearly 180 times over a two-month period.[152]
  • A Louisville, Kentucky, officer who was charged with multiple felonies after allegedly using the city’s Flock system to track an ex-partner and her friends hundreds of times over two months.[153]
  • A Kenosha County, Wisconsin, sheriff's deputy who misused Flock over 40 times.[154]
  • A Mooresville, North Carolina, officer who used Flock to track her boyfriend's ex-wife 31 times.[155]
  • Five police officers in Albany, Georgia, who were arrested for using Flock for purposes unrelated to law enforcement.[156]
  • Two officers from Reynoldsburg, Ohio, who resigned before they were scheduled to be interviewed by an internal affairs investigation after repeatedly searching the same license plates unrelated to law enforcement.[157]
  • A Brevard County deputy sheriff, who stalked his ex-girlfriend using Flock while on and off-duty. He resigned after the investigation which also included incidents of speeding, racism, a Nazi salute, and abuse of his girlfriend, among other incidents, rather than being terminated.[158][159]
  • An Alpharetta, Georgia, officer who stalked his ex-romantic partner and her friend, both employed as police in the same department, by using Flock 56 times.[160]

In August 2026, Flock's CEO Garrett Langley stated that "we knew this was a risk nine years ago", and claimed that it was the reason for originally implementing audit logs,[161] which was opt-in until August of 2026, when Flock stated their "Audit Assistance" tool would be mandatory by the end of the year.[162] Only about one third of police department customers used Audit Assistance prior to the announcement, and privacy advocates had previously asked for audit features to be made mandatory.[131]

The Audit Assistance feature flags suspicious activity, such as repeated queries on the same vehicle, and queries made by officers outside of working hours. It also provides a now-mandatory feature that requires a criminal case number for each query. As of August 2026, 13 states make auditing mandatory, and 8 make misuse of such systems a standalone crime as opposed to a possible element of stalking or harassment.[131]

A "network audit" obtained by local media demonstrated that some of Flock's transparency features could be circumvented with simple button mashing,[163] and the ACLU has claimed that the effectiveness of Flock's Audit Assistance tool had not been independently verified, and thus should be assumed to be ineffective or "window dressing".[164]

False arrests and detentions

Innocent people have been pulled over, detained, held at gunpoint, or jailed as a result of mistakes in Flock systems:[165]

  • A Plymouth, Minnesota, car blogger and his wife were detained by police in a parking lot because Flock misread his dealer plate.[166][167]
  • A Cherry Hills Village, Colorado, driver was wrongly detained repeatedly after officers mistakenly put his license plate number on a Flock hotlist.[168]
  • A Sherwood, Arkansas, couple was pulled over and ordered from their car at gunpoint after a Flock camera misread a digit on their plate.[169]
  • A 23-year old Volusia County, Florida, woman is suing the Florida Highway Patrol after she was wrongfully arrested and detained for 13 days, including several spent in solitary confinement.[170][171] A Flock Safety ALPR misidentified her vehicle's color and misread her tag, wrongly flagging her as a suspect in a hit and run which killed three people. According to her attorney, photo evidence shows her vehicle without damage, contradicting the arrest report citing damage on her vehicle consistent with the accident.[172] A different motorist who had been driving the same model vehicle in a different color was later arrested and charged.[173]
  • A San Diego man was wrongly jailed for nearly a month after Flock mistook his plate for one that was at the scene of an attempted carjacking.[174]
  • A York County, South Carolina, motorist was detained at gunpoint after Flock misread a character on his license plate, flagging the car as stolen.[175]
  • Two Morristown, Tennessee, grandparents were detained at gunpoint while their three-year-old granddaughter watched from the car after a Flock camera misread an "O" on their plate as a "0".[176]
  • Toledo, Ohio, police detained an innocent driver at gunpoint, sicced their dog on him, and jailed him for several hours after a Flock camera misread a "7" on their plate as a "2".[176]
  • Sedgwick County, Kansas, sheriff's deputies detained an innocent couple at gunpoint because a Flock camera failed to distinguish between temporary and permanent license plates with the same number.[177]
  • In two separate incidents, three Española, New Mexico, high school students were detained at gunpoint after a Flock camera misread their plates.[178]
  • A man from Jackson Township, Stark County, Ohio, is suing Flock Safety after he was pulled over and detained because officers failed to remove a license plate from a hotlist.[179]

Use by ICE

In 2025, it was reported that Flock data had been queried for use in immigration enforcement.[180] A pilot program of investigation with Customs and Border Protection and Homeland Security Investigations was initiated to help combat human trafficking and fentanyl distribution. Flock halted the program in August because of "confusion and concerns" about the purpose of the investigations.[181] Local governments shared the data by either blindly approving the inquiries or unknowingly signing onto the national sharing option.[29]Langley falsely stated that Flock did not have federal contracts.[92][182][183]

In November 2025, the City of Verona voted to not renew its contract with Flock, which would expire in April and July 2026.[184] Prior to the expiry date, Verona mayor Luke Diaz stated Flock did not remove the cameras despite multiple requests from the city since the vote.[185] Flock later reached out to the city with a sales team, trying to sell a new contract.[186] Flock objected to the city removing the cameras themselves when asked in early January, after which the city covered the cameras with trash bags. The cameras were later removed by Flock on February 4. Flock stated that the cameras could be remotely deactivated at any time and that they were not operating during the time they remained installed.[186] Flock added that they have a "standard offboarding process" for camera removal and that "mid-term contract cancellations follow a separate process".[187]

Officials in the town of Littleton, Massachusetts, also alleged five Flock Safety cameras were switched back on by the company without informing the town after the town temporarily disabled the cameras.[188]

In late June 2026, ABC affiliate WEWS-TV in Cleveland reported that after a Flock contract with the city of Cleveland expired following a 3–1 vote against renewal, the cameras remained on and were still being used by local police. Cleveland Police sergeant Freddy Diaz stated that the cameras would remain operational "at minimum" until July 15, when another meeting with the city council would take place to allow for a secondary review of the contract. Local activists called the situation "incredibly disappointing" and called the police department's support for the technology "not compelling".[189][190]

In June 2026, WSLS-TV reported that a Flock device, identified as a Flock Raven upon inspection by a police officer, was installed on a Roanoke, Virginia, homeowner's yard without prior notice. The Roanoke City Council had voted in April to approve 75 installations[191] of Flock Raven devices, but her address was not on the approved list, and no installations were scheduled to take place until July.[192][193] The Flock Raven was later removed from her property, and the city later determined that 30 of the 41 devices installed up to that point were placed in unapproved locations.[194]

Use to investigate women seeking abortion services

In at least one state, law enforcement officers queried Flock products in an abortion investigation.[195][196][197]According to a sworn affidavit by a detective in Johnson County, Texas, deputies initiated a "death investigation" of a "non-viable fetus", logged evidence of a woman’s self-managed abortion in response to a report from her alleged romantic partner, and consulted prosecutors about possibly charging her. The death investigation remained open for weeks, with detectives interviewing the woman and reviewing her text messages about the abortion.[197] Johnson County's query included 83,000 Flock cameras nationwide, including cameras in states where abortion is legal and collecting such data is explicitly prohibited by law.[196]Johnson County sheriff Adam King denied that the investigation was related to an abortion, and Flock Safety falsely characterized it as a missing person investigation in a statement on their website, directly contradicting the sworn affidavit.[195][196][197][198]

In Wisconsin, a police officer allegedly misused Flock to see if his ex-girlfriend had gone to an abortion clinic.[131]

False and misleading statements

The city council of Oshkosh, Wisconsin, voted to rescind its contract with Flock in August 2026 after finding its representatives had made "false statements" about its products to the council.[199] Later in the month, the Sheboygan, Wisconsin, police department asked the city to cover its cameras with obscuring bags and revoke its Flock contract, due to actions by the company which they felt untrustworthy and not meeting the city's terms.[200] Later reporting revealed that a Flock sales representative contacted the Sheboygan engineering department offering to sell the city five years worth of traffic data.[201]

A senior Flock publicist falsely claimed in a LinkedIn post that Flock had partnered with the ACLU of New Mexico. A Flock representative also claimed that "Flock has worked with groups like the ACLU to design an ALPR system that takes considerations they have into account" before a meeting of the Urbana, Illinois, city council.[202] This statement was denied by the ACLU, which said, "Neither the ACLU nor any of our affiliates have ever partnered with Flock Safety or worked with them to design any ALPR system."[202]

In August 2026, 404 Media claimed that Flock CEO Garrett Langley had lied about their reporting on usage of Flock to track a woman seeking an abortion in Texas. In a call to Ohio law enforcement and government officials, Langley called 404 Media's article "entirely false" and stated that the woman could not have been under investigation for having an abortion as the practice is legal in Texas, despite local authorities discussing if they could charge her with a crime. 404 Media also claimed that after information regarding her alleged abusive relationship was identified, police released a retroactive justification claiming the investigation was for the woman's safety.[203][204]

References

  1.  Vasquez, Stephen (January 30, 2026). "Flock Safety Doubling Office, Moving HQ To The Medici". Bisnow. Archived from the original on July 29, 2026. Retrieved July 16, 2026.
  2.  "ACG Atlanta Names Flock Safety One of Georgia's Top 40 Fastest-growing Companies". www.flocksafety.com. June 28, 2023. Archived from the original on February 26, 2026. Retrieved February 26, 2026. Flock Safety is proud to announce we have been named one of Georgia's top 40 fastest-growing companies by the Atlanta Chapter of the Association for Corporate Growth® (ACG)...Companies on the list are for profit and headquartered in Georgia.
  3.  Hu, Krystal (March 13, 2025). "US startup Flock Safety raises $275 million to fund manufacturing plant, R&D". Reuters.
  4.  Chapman, Lizette (August 7, 2025). "Controversial Surveillance Startup Flock Adds AI to Police Tech". Bloomberg News.
  5.  Gupta, Arun; George, Gerard; Fewer, Thomas (January 9, 2024). Venture Meets Mission: Aligning People, Purpose, and Profit to Innovate and Transform Society. Stanford University Press. pp. 132–33. ISBN 978-1-5036-3727-6. Archived from the original on July 29, 2026 – via Google Books.
  6.  "News conference: Federal lawsuit filed against use of Flock cameras in Norfolk". WAVY-TV (Video). Archivedfrom the original on January 26, 2025. Retrieved October 23, 2024 – via Facebook.
  7.  "Flock Safety Expands Into Drones for Law Enforcement with Acquisition of Aerodome". Flock Safety. October 16, 2024. Archived from the original on July 26, 2026. Retrieved October 23, 2024 – via GlobeNewswire.
  8.  "National LPR Network". Flock Safety. Archived from the original on July 29, 2026. Retrieved July 12, 2025.
  9.  "'Possibility of misuse a real one': ACLU shares privacy concerns for police Flock Safety cameras". WUWM 89.7 FM - Milwaukee's NPR. September 8, 2023. Archived from the original on December 8, 2023. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
  10.  Polcyn, Bryan (August 2, 2023). "Wisconsin AI-powered Flock cameras are tracking where you drive". FOX6 News Milwaukee. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024.
  11.  Flock Safety. "Media Kit: Our Founding Story". Flock Safety. Retrieved April 8, 2022.[dead link]
  12.  Edmonson, Crystal (August 22, 2023). "Flock Safety cameras help police amid worker shortage, CEO Garrett Langley says (Podcast)". Atlanta Business Chronicle. Archived from the original on May 2, 2024. Retrieved July 9, 2024. Despite the article title, the linked source is an actual article and not a mere transcript of a podcast.
  13.  Southerland, Randy (April 26, 2024). "Flock Safety employment reaches 900; develops new products". Atlanta Business Chronicle.
  14.  Brownell, Bradley (February 27, 2024). "License Plate Surveillance Startup Broke The Law While Trying To Reduce Crime". Jalopnik. Archived from the original on July 29, 2026. Retrieved February 27, 2024.
  15.  Cheng, Isabella (February 16, 2022). "Flock Raises Another $150 Million, Valuation Now At $3.5 Billion". IPVM. Retrieved April 8, 2022.
  16.  "Investing in Flock Safety". Andreessen Horowitz. Retrieved December 11, 2023.
  17.  "Norfolk judge rejects police Flock camera evidence without warrant". The Virginian-Pilot. June 15, 2024.
  18.  Service, Tribune News (September 27, 2024). "Department of Public Safety Puts Flock Safety on Notice". Industry Insider Texas.
  19.  Daniel, Lars. "Privacy Violated, Warrantless Surveillance Alleges Flock Safety Camera Lawsuit". Forbes. Archived from the original on October 22, 2024. Retrieved October 23, 2024.
  20.  Mir, Rory (June 6, 2025). "Victory! Austin Organizers Cancel City's Flock ALPR Contract". Electronic Frontier Foundation.
  21.  "Flock Safety acquires Aerodome to expand into drone-based law enforcement solutions". Police1. October 16, 2024. Archived from the original on November 3, 2024. Retrieved October 23, 2024.
  22.  Duffy, Clare (December 19, 2025). "The tech firm that helped police find the Brown shooting suspect has sparked privacy concerns. Its CEO responds". CNN. Retrieved February 22, 2025.
  23.  Bort, Julie (March 13, 2025). "Y Combinator's police surveillance darling Flock Safety raises $275M at $7.5B valuation". TechCrunch. Retrieved February 24, 2026.
  24.  Brewster, Thomas (September 3, 2025). "AI Startup Flock Thinks It Can Eliminate All Crime In America". Forbes.
  25.  Free, Andrew (June 1, 2025). "Flock Safety: AI- powered surveillance capturing license plate data". Atlanta Community Press Collective. Retrieved July 28, 2026.
  26.  "Oakland rejects $2 million contract with surveillance company over concerns of ICE spying". The Mercury News. November 19, 2025. Retrieved July 28, 2026.
  27.  Joh, Elizabeth (September 24, 2019). "The Rise of Networked Vigilante Surveillance". Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Archived from the original on December 8, 2023. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
  28.  Firstenberg, Ian (May 13, 2026). "Flock keeps spying on us all, and state and local officials aren't protecting us". 48 hills. Retrieved July 28, 2026.
  29.  Wardwell, Faith (December 1, 2025). "Liberal towns backtrack on license plate trackers amid concerns about privacy — and Trump". POLITICO.
  30.  "Ring's latest partnership allows police to request camera footage through Flock". Engadget. October 17, 2025. Archived from the original on October 21, 2025. Retrieved November 2, 2025.
  31.  "Flock Safety and Ring Partner to Help Neighborhoods Work Together for Safer Communities". www.flocksafety.com. October 31, 2025.
  32.  Palmer, Annie (February 13, 2026). "Amazon's Ring cancels Flock partnership amid Super Bowl ad backlash". CNBC.
  33.  Walker, Mark (February 14, 2026). "Ring Ends Deal to Link Neighborhood Cameras After Super Bowl Ad Backlash". The New York Times.
  34.  Katz-Lecabe, Mike (April 1, 2022). "Dissection of Flock Safety Camera". The Center for Human Rights and Privacy. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024.
  35.  Urwin, Matthew (September 2, 2026). "Flock Cameras Explained: What They Track and Why It Matters | Built In". Built In. Archived from the original on September 3, 2026. Retrieved September 3, 2026.
  36.  Marlow, Chad; Stanley, Jay (February 13, 2023). "How to Pump the Brakes on Your Police Department's Use of Flock's Mass Surveillance License Plate Readers". American Civil Liberties Union. Archived from the original on May 14, 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024.
  37.  Bunch, Edward III (July 26, 2023). "A new kind of surveillance camera is coming to some Florida neighborhoods. What we know". Pensacola News Journal. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024. Retrieved May 15,2024.
  38.  "Got Your Number: City law enforcement begins testing license plate cameras". The Columbus Republic. January 23, 2022. pp. A1. Archived from the original on April 7, 2025. Retrieved March 9, 2025 – via newspapers.com. "Continued on A4". Archived from the original on April 7, 2025. Retrieved March 9, 2025.
  39.  "Innovative license plate reader technology now in use on CU Boulder campus". CU Boulder Today. July 17, 2023. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024.
  40.  "License Plate Readers". City of Lexington, Kentucky. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024.
  41.  Koebler ·, Jason (March 26, 2026). "Police Used Flock to Give a Man a Traffic Ticket". 404 Media. Retrieved August 8, 2026.
  42.  Guariglia, Matthew (March 26, 2026). "Traffic Violation! License Plate Reader Mission Creep Is Already Here". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved August 8, 2026.
  43.  Rettberg, Jill Walker (September 11, 2023). Machine Vision: How Algorithms are Changing the Way We See the World. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 45–46. ISBN 978-1-5095-4524-7 – via Google Books.
  44.  Wilkins, Joe. "So Many People Are Smashing Flock's Cameras That It's Disguising Them Inside Other Objects". Futurism. Archived from the original on July 25, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  45.  Caffier, Justin (July 23, 2026). "Flock Cameras Are Disappearing in Plain Sight". Gizmodo. Archived from the original on July 23, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  46.  "Fort Worth, Texas, Deploys Solar-Powered License Plate Cameras". GovTech. August 23, 2021. Archivedfrom the original on December 16, 2023. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
  47.  "West Covina Police Install Network Of Flock Safety License Plate Reading Cameras In Strategic Locations - CBS Los Angeles". www.cbsnews.com. August 20, 2021. Archived from the original on December 8, 2023. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
  48.  "What Do Flock Cameras Actually Capture?". www.flocksafety.com. Archived from the original on July 17, 2026. Retrieved July 17, 2026.
  49.  Cox ·, Joseph (July 16, 2026). "How Cops Use Flock to Track People, Not Cars". 404 Media. Archived from the original on July 17, 2026. Retrieved July 17, 2026.
  50.  McNamara, Kevin (March 25, 2022). "Ask 10: What are the solar-powered cameras attached to power poles?". KTVL. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024.
  51.  O'Horo, Ryan (November 21, 2023). "Surveillance as a Service Part 1: Flock Safety's Transparency Problem". Medium. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024.
  52.  "Mobile Security Trailers | Solar-Powered Video Coverage". www.flocksafety.com. Archived from the original on July 27, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  53.  Brewster, Thomas (February 27, 2024). "This $4 Billion Car Surveillance Startup Says It Cuts Crime. But It Likely Broke The Law". Forbes. Retrieved February 27, 2024.
  54.  "Frequently Asked Questions | Flock Safety". www.flocksafety.com. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  55.  "Flock Safety Price List" (PDF). Omnia Partners. May 26, 2026.
  56.  "City Council Meeting Agenda". City of Greenfield California. January 13, 2026.
  57.  Axon. "Axon Partners with Flock Safety to Enhance Security for Cities and Neighborhoods". www.prnewswire.com. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024.
  58.  "MyAxon". MyAxon. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024.
  59.  "AI Video Cameras | Smart Security with Instant Alerts | Flock". www.flocksafety.com. Archived from the original on July 27, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  60.  "New AI Video Analytics: 24/7 Coverage, No Extra Staff". www.flocksafety.com. Archived from the original on September 3, 2026. Retrieved September 3, 2026.
  61.  Keefe, Brendan (June 15, 2026). "Flock says its cameras don't track people. Its own training videos say otherwise". InvestigateTV. Archived from the original on June 17, 2026. Retrieved September 3, 2026.
  62.  Koebler, Jason (December 22, 2025). "Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves". 404 Media. Retrieved March 24, 2026.
  63.  "Using the Device Geolocation API". Developer Hub. Retrieved September 4, 2026.
  64.  Cox, Joseph (May 14, 2025). "License Plate Reader Company Flock Is Building a Massive People Lookup Tool, Leak Shows". 404 Media. Archived from the original on May 14, 2025. Retrieved May 14, 2025.
  65.  Rueter, Thad (May 27, 2025). "Flock's Newest Police Tool Sparks Data Controversy". GovTech.
  66.  Rueter, Thad (May 30, 2025). "Flock Safety Pushes Back on Data Breach Product Criticism". GovTech.
  67.  "Flock Expands Into Gunshot And Audio Analytics (Raven)". IPVM. October 20, 2021. Archived from the original on March 22, 2023.
  68.  Gagliano, Katie (February 15, 2024). "Lafayette Police testing gunshot detection system in high-crime neighborhoods". The Advocate.
  69.  Willard, Keenan (December 8, 2023). "Fort Worth to add automatic gunshot audio detectors to some neighborhoods". NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024.
  70.  Neff Roth, Amy (March 31, 2026). "Washington adds safeguards for Flock cameras". Utica Observer-Dispatch.
  71.  Guariglia, Matthew (October 2, 2025). "Flock's Gunshot Detection Microphones Will Start Listening for Human Voices". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Archived from the original on October 10, 2025. Retrieved October 10,2025.
  72.  "Flock DFR — Drone as First Responder | Flock Safety". www.flocksafety.com. Archived from the original on July 27, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  73.  Lipton, Beryl (September 22, 2025). "That Drone in the Sky Could Be Tracking Your Car". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  74.  Singh, Ishveena (October 16, 2025). "New US-made drone Alpha aims to redefine first response". DroneDJ. Archived from the original on October 22, 2025. Retrieved July 28, 2026.
  75.  "Meet Flock's Alpha Drone – It Reads License Plates from 2,000 Feet". Gadget Review. July 23, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  76.  Nielsen, Steve (March 22, 2026). "Police sign deal with new drones in Arizona town tied to controversial surveillance firm". FOX 10 Phoenix. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  77.  "California city's new Flock first responder drone deal has been described as a 'a total invasion of privacy'". TechRadar. June 10, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  78.  Arntz, Pieter (September 24, 2025). "Police using drones to read your license plates, warns EFF". Malwarebytes. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  79.  Tangermann, Victor (August 21, 2026). "Flock Is Quietly Selling Powerful Drones That Scan License Plates From the Sky". Futurism. Retrieved August 22, 2026.
  80.  "Leaked Code Reveals That Flock's New AI Police Tool Can Find You by Place and Time Alone". Gadget Review. August 19, 2026. Retrieved August 20, 2026.
  81.  Mehrotra, Dhruv (August 19, 2026). "Flock Has a Powerful New AI Tool for Police. We Got Its Code". WIRED. Archived from the original on August 20, 2026. Retrieved August 20, 2026.
  82.  Constantin, Ana Maria (August 19, 2026). "Flock's new AI tool lets police search people by movement". TNW | Data-security. Archived from the original on August 20, 2026. Retrieved August 20, 2026.
  83.  "Does My Neighborhood Need A Flock Safety License Plate Reader?". Flock Safety. April 19, 2019.
  84.  "Licking Heights schools install flock cameras to detect criminals in the area". WBNS-TV (Video). November 16, 2023. Archived from the original on May 15, 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024 – via YouTube.
  85.  Brewster, Thomas (May 6, 2024). "America's Biggest Mall Owner Is Sharing AI Surveillance Feeds Directly With Cops". Forbes.
  86.  "Suburbs of Surveillance". Bloomberg.com. August 4, 2021. Archived from the original on September 14, 2022. Retrieved December 10, 2023.
  87.  Brewster, Thomas. "FedEx's Secretive Police Force Is Helping Cops Build An AI Car Surveillance Network". Forbes.
  88.  Koebler, Jason (April 30, 2026). "City learns Flock accessed cameras in children's gymnastics room as a sales pitch demo, renews contract anyway". 404 Media. Retrieved August 30, 2026.
  89.  Zialcita, Paolo; DeMare, Kiara (October 22, 2025). "Denver extends Flock surveillance cameras despite pushback from city council". Denverite.
  90.  MacColl, Margaux; Rollet, Charles (January 8, 2025). "Flock Safety quietly hired a sitting California mayor. Now he's suing Flock". TechCrunch. Retrieved January 9, 2025.
  91.  Farivar, Cyrus. "Flock Installed AI Cameras In This Small City And Claimed Crime Went Down. It Went Up". Forbes. Archived from the original on February 29, 2024. Retrieved February 29, 2024.
  92.  "Saranac Lake halts controversial police cam installation". Adirondack Daily Enterprise. Archived from the original on February 28, 2026.
  93.  Fernandez, Frank; Gardner, Sheldon (May 23, 2025). "After 1 woman cleared, Deltona woman charged in wreck that killed 3". Archived from the original on June 9, 2026. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  94.  "NVD - CVE-2025-59405". nvd.nist.gov. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  95.  "NVD - CVE-2025-59407". nvd.nist.gov. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  96.  "NVD - CVE-2025-47824". nvd.nist.gov. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  97.  "NVD - CVE-2025-47822". nvd.nist.gov. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  98.  "Gunshot Detection and License Plate Reader Security Alert". www.flocksafety.com. May 5, 2025. Archivedfrom the original on July 22, 2026. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  99.  "Flock misread license plates in 71% of the alerts it sent to police in one California town". Business Insider. Archived from the original on July 31, 2026. Retrieved July 31, 2026.
  100.  Knox, Olivier (June 28, 2026). "Get the Flock Outta Here: Backlash Grows Over Video Surveillance Tool". US News & World Report. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  101.  Campbell, Andy (August 28, 2026). "The bipartisan fight against Flock cameras is creating some unlikely political alliances". MS NOW. Retrieved August 29, 2026.
  102.  "'Work boots and Subarus': Local officials say the backlash against Flock cameras is becoming bipartisan". POLITICO. Retrieved August 29, 2026.
  103.  Haan, Noah De (August 2, 2026). "Northeast Florida Flock Camera Vandal Arrested with assistance of Flock Cameras". St. Johns Citizen. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  104.  Raymondo, Kiana (July 30, 2026). "Pismo Beach man arrested for damaging Flock Safety cameras in Monterey County, deputies say". ABC30 Fresno. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  105.  Gay, Christopher (July 17, 2026). "Multiple Flock cameras vandalized, 1 stolen, at Conway intersections". KATV. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  106.  Krall, Annie (August 1, 2026). "St. Pete man's 3-week protest against license plate cameras draws national attention". WTSP (Tampa Bay). Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  107.  Wilkins, Joe (February 22, 2026). "Cities Are Shredding Their AI Surveillance Contracts en Masse". Futurism. Retrieved March 24, 2026.
  108.  Koebler, Jason (February 26, 2025). "Flock Threatens Open Source Developer Mapping Its Surveillance Cameras". 404 Media.
  109.  Greenwood, Amanda (July 28, 2026). "Map Shows Cities That Have Rejected, Deactivated Flock Cameras". Newsweek. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  110.  "Recent wins". Deflock.org. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  111.  Whittaker, Zack (July 13, 2026). "LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire, citing 'serious concerns' over civil liberties and privacy". TechCrunch. Retrieved July 13, 2026.
  112.  "LAPD ending deal with company operating license plate-reading cameras". ABC7 Los Angeles. July 11, 2026. Retrieved July 13, 2026.
  113.  Smith, Dakota (July 12, 2026). "LAPD suspends use of Flock surveillance cameras over privacy issues". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 13, 2026.
  114.  Sheridan, Stacey (April 5, 2022). "Oak Park to get eight license plate reading cameras". Oak Park. Archivedfrom the original on April 6, 2022. Retrieved April 8, 2022.
  115.  Harwell, Drew (October 21, 2021). "License plate scanners were supposed to bring peace of mind. Instead they tore the neighborhood apart". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 4, 2024. Retrieved March 10, 2025.
  116.  "Flock Safety's Private Surveillance State: How It Got Built, Who's Inside It, and Why 80 Cities Are Pulling Out". stateofsurveillance.org. State of Surveillance. Retrieved June 13, 2026.
  117.  "Council Debating License Plate Readers". Good Times. December 6, 2023. Archived from the original on December 7, 2023. Retrieved December 7, 2023.
  118.  Jarrell, Billy (December 8, 2023). "Citizens express dissent at Flock Safety security system informational meeting". Lincoln News Now!. Archived from the original on December 11, 2023. Retrieved December 11,2023.
  119.  Bradley, Kian (November 9, 2023). "Mercer Island Debates Surveillance Cameras". The Urbanist. Archivedfrom the original on December 11, 2023. Retrieved December 11, 2023.
  120.  Guariglia, Jason Kelley and Matthew (September 14, 2020). "Things to Know Before Your Neighborhood Installs an Automated License Plate Reader". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Archived from the original on May 9, 2022. Retrieved April 8, 2022.
  121.  Stanley, Jay (March 3, 2022). "Fast-Growing Company Flock is Building a New AI-Driven Mass-Surveillance System". American Civil Liberties Union. Archived from the original on April 8, 2022. Retrieved April 8, 2022.
  122.  Brewster, Thomas (September 3, 2025). "AI Startup Flock Thinks It Can Eliminate All Crime In America". Forbes.
  123.  Brewster, Thomas. "Flock CEO Apologizes For Calling Activists 'Terrorists'". Forbes. Archived from the originalon July 25, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  124.  Novak, Matt (July 18, 2026). "Flock's CEO Is Sorry for Calling Privacy Activists 'Terrorists'". Gizmodo. Archived from the original on July 24, 2026. Retrieved July 27, 2026.
  125.  Littlehales, Alex (October 22, 2024). "Federal lawsuit filed in Norfolk over use of traffic surveillance cameras". WVEC-TV.
  126.  Brodkin, Jon (October 22, 2024). "Lawsuit: City cameras make it impossible to drive anywhere without being tracked". Ars Technica. Archived from the original on October 22, 2024. Retrieved October 23, 2024.
  127.  Chien, Tomoki (July 14, 2025). "SF, Oakland cops illegally funneled license plate data to feds". The San Francisco Standard. Archived from the original on July 14, 2025. Retrieved July 14, 2025.
  128.  Barrientos, Alex (July 14, 2026). "Flock Safety Employees Watched Kids' Gymnastics Room to Pitch Surveillance Tech (Updated) - Gadget Review". Gadget Review. Retrieved August 4, 2026.
  129.  Barrientos, Alex (July 14, 2026). "Flock Safety Employees Watched Kids' Gymnastics Room to Pitch Surveillance Tech (Updated)". Yahoo News. Retrieved August 4, 2026.
  130.  Thomas, Josh (April 16, 2026). "Understanding Flock's Testing and Development Program". Flock Safety. Retrieved August 4, 2026.
  131.  Harwell, Drew; MacMillan, Douglas; Schaffer, Aaron (August 2, 2026). "She left her ex. He secretly tracked her through a network of policing cameras". Washington Post. Archived from the original on August 2, 2026. Retrieved August 2, 2026.
  132.  Garrison, Mark (July 30, 2026). "CMPD Officer Arrested For Misusing Traffic Camera". WBT 107.9FM. Retrieved August 3, 2026. WSOC quotes court documents saying that Elliott tipped off a drug dealer that one of his customers was an undercover cop. And he got the undercover officer's car information from by accessing traffic cam data on a police computer... The cameras are made by a company called Flock...
  133.  Ingraham, Christopher (April 27, 2026). "Police Have Reportedly Used License Plate Readers to Stalk Romantic Interests at Least 16 Times in Recent Years". Institute for Justice.
  134.  Koebler, Jason (June 10, 2026). "Cops Keep Getting Arrested for Using Flock to Stalk People". 404 Media. Archived from the original on June 10, 2026.
  135.  Stavola, Michael (August 17, 2024). "Kansas police chief used Flock license plate cameras 164 times to track ex-girlfriend". The Wichita Eagle.
  136.  Burnett, Cameron (August 18, 2024). "Sedgwick police chief tracked ex-girlfriend 164 times using license plate cams". KAKE-TV. Retrieved October 29, 2024.
  137.  Stavola, Michael (August 30, 2023). "Former Kechi PD supervisor who abused Wichita police cameras loses certification". The Wichita Eagle.
  138.  Baker, Joe (October 31, 2022). "Kechi police lieutenant arrested for using police technology to stalk wife". KWCH-DT. Retrieved October 29, 2024.
  139.  Hartle, Sam (April 6, 2026). "Affidavit: Former Bonner Springs detective used license plate cameras to stalk wife". KSHB 41 Kansas City News. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  140.  "Central Florida sheriff suspends Flock cameras after scandal involving detective". News 6 Orlando. July 24, 2026. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  141.  "GBI Arrests Braselton Police Chief for Harassment and Stalking". gbi.georgia.gov. Georgia Bureau of Investigation. November 19, 2025. Retrieved August 2, 2026. The GBI has arrested and charged Braselton Police Department Chief Michael Steffman, age 49, of Braselton, GA, with Violation of Oath by Public Officer, Stalking, Harassing Communications, and multiple counts of Misuse of Automated License Plate Recognition Systems following a multi-month investigation. The Jackson County Sheriff's Office requested the GBI to investigate allegations against Chief Steffman. The investigation revealed that Steffman misused the automated license plate recognition systems to harass and stalk multiple individuals.
  142.  Hurwitz, Sophie (July 18, 2026). "Police Keep Losing Their Jobs for Using Flock Cameras to Stalk People". Mother Jones. Retrieved August 2, 2026.
  143.  Wallace, Randy (July 13, 2026). "Flock cameras in Houston area face privacy concerns after Pasadena officer accused of misuse". FOX 26 Houston. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  144.  Sachs, Sam (July 23, 2026). "Crime center supervisor accused of misusing Flock data to track domestic partner, charged by GBI". WSB-TV Channel2 - Atlanta. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  145.  Fancher, Andrew (July 14, 2026). "Two Greer Police Officers Terminated for Abusing Flock Cameras, SLED Reviewing Allegations - FITSNews". FITSNews. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  146.  Saul, Christopher (May 5, 2026). "Former Niceville cop: 'No contest' in Flock stalking case". MidbayNews.com. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  147.  Kerhin, Brian (January 9, 2026). "Menasha police officer accused of using license plate recognition system to track his ex". WLUK. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  148.  Borcia, Sam (June 19, 2026). "Prosecutors say McHenry County police chief used Flock license plate reader data hundreds of times to track people he knew". Lake and McHenry County Scanner. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  149.  Quinn, Cole (April 1, 2026). "Jerome County sheriff used Flock cameras to search for wife's vehicle, documents show". KMVT (EastIdahoNews.com). Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  150.  Near, Jason (May 8, 2026). "Former Winnebago Co. deputy, Cherry Valley officeraccused of stalking". WIFR. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  151.  Rickabaugh, Greg (July 21, 2026). "Richmond County Flock scandal grows with three high-profile arrests". The Augusta Press. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  152.  Quirk, Stephanie (March 4, 2026). "Milwaukee police officer resigns, Flock search misconduct case". FOX6 News Milwaukee. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  153.  "Former Louisville police officer accused of stalking ex-girlfriend remains jailed on $25K bond". WDRB. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  154.  Mathewson, Kevin (March 7, 2026). "KCE Editor Files John Doe Petition Seeking Criminal Investigation Into Former Kenosha Deputy Over Alleged Database Misuse". Kenosha County Eye. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  155.  "NC police officer allegedly used Flock license plate cameras to track boyfriend's ex-wife". ABC7 Los Angeles. August 6, 2026.
  156.  Lupiani, Joyce (July 7, 2026). "5 Albany police officers arrested for misusing license plate readers". FOX 5 Atlanta.
  157.  "2 Reynoldsburg police officers resign after alleged misuse of Flock cameras". 10tv. August 4, 2026. Retrieved August 24, 2026.
  158.  Gault ·, Matthew (August 27, 2026). "Florida 'Deputy of the Year' Used Flock to Stalk Ex, Held Gun in Her Mouth, Did a Nazi Salute". 404 Media. Archived from the original on August 27, 2026. Retrieved August 29, 2026.
  159.  DeForest, Mike; Murdock, Anthony (August 19, 2026). "Brevard Deputy of the Year quits after 'egregious misconduct' exposed". WKMG. Archived from the original on August 19, 2026. Retrieved August 29, 2026.
  160.  Haskins, Caroline (August 27, 2026). "A Georgia Cop Used Flock to Track 2 Other Cops: His Ex and Her Friend". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Archived from the original on August 27, 2026. Retrieved August 29, 2026.
  161.  "Flock's CEO on cameras, abuse, and privacy". Proton. August 19, 2026. Archived from the original on August 19, 2026. Retrieved September 2, 2026.
  162.  "Flock Updates Privacy, Accountability, Security, and Transparency Safeguards". www.flocksafety.com. Archived from the original on August 14, 2026. Retrieved September 2, 2026.
  163.  Torres, Alan (December 11, 2025). "Medford PD searched Eugene's Flock data. The reason? 'hehehe'". The Register-Guard. Register-Guard. Retrieved August 19, 2026.
  164.  Marlow, Chad (August 13, 2026). "As Public Opposition to Flock Grows, ACLU Responds to Surveillance Company's "New" Updates". American Civil Liberties Union. Archived from the original on August 13, 2026. Retrieved September 2, 2026.
  165.  Ingraham, Christopher (July 20, 2026). "Dozens of Innocent Motorists Have Been Pulled Over, Detained at Gunpoint, or Jailed Due to AI License Plate Camera Errors". Institute for Justice. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  166.  Feder, Joel (July 17, 2026). "Flock Says Its Cameras Worked 'Correctly' When Police Tracked and Ambushed Me for No Reason". The Drive. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  167.  Feder, Joel (July 8, 2026). "How Flock Cameras Wrongly Tracked Me for Days Over 'Stolen' Plates and Sent Police After Me". The Drive. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  168.  Soicher, Spencer (April 26, 2026). "He didn't commit a crime, but Flock cam alerts keep getting him pulled over". 9News (Colorado). Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  169.  Gay, Christopher (March 18, 2026). "Sherwood stop sparked after Flock camera misread plate by one letter as stolen". KATV. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  170.  Fernandez, Frank (June 10, 2026). "Innocent woman jailed in Volusia sues Florida Highway Patrol troopers". Daytona Beach News-Journal Online. The Daytona Beach News-Journal. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  171.  Edinger, Marie (June 9, 2026). "Florida woman wrongly arrested in deadly I-4 crash sues FHP troopers: Lawsuit". FOX 35 Orlando. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  172.  Perez, Pattrik (May 23, 2026). "Woman wrongfully arrested in deadly I-4 crash speaks out after charges dropped". WESH. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  173.  Watkins, Christina (May 23, 2026). "State attorney's office announces new arrest in deadly Volusia County hit-and-run crash". WESH. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  174.  Marx, Jesse (June 7, 2026). "A Flock license plate reader linked a San Diego man to a violent crime. He was five miles away". Downtown News. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  175.  Vinsky, Noah; Dys, Andrew (July 9, 2026). "York man was held at gunpoint over incorrect Flock hit. Sheriff blames illegal tag cover". The Herald (York County, SC). Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  176.  Einbinder, Nicole (March 9, 2026). "Flock Safety's AI cameras misread plates. Innocent people pay". Business Insider. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  177.  Pedraza, written by Pilar. "KAKE NEWS INVESTIGATES: Duplicate license plate numbers lead to dangerous situations for some Kansas drivers". KAKE. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  178.  Haywood, Phaedra. "Sisters sue Española over traffic stop they say was illegal". santafenewmexican.com. Archived from the original on November 3, 2024. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  179.  Smith v. Flock Safety, No. 5:23-CV-2198 (N.D. Ohio April 15, 2024). https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/57693655/Michael_Smith_v_Flock_Group_Inc
  180.  Koebler, Jason; Cox, Joseph (May 27, 2025). "ICE Taps into Nationwide AI-Enabled Camera Network, Data Shows". 404 Media. Archived from the original on June 2, 2025. Retrieved June 2, 2025.
  181.  O'Connor, John (August 25, 2025). "License plate camera company halts cooperation with federal agencies among investigation concerns". Yahoo News. Associated Press. Archived from the original on August 25, 2025. Retrieved August 26, 2025.
  182.  Soicher, Spencer; Moore, Marilyn (February 24, 2026). "Denver dumps Flock, awards location tracking camera contract to Axon". KUSA.
  183.  Joffe-Block, Jude (February 19, 2026). "Why some cities are ditching their Flock license plate readers". NPR.
  184.  Cramer, Faryn (November 11, 2025). "City of Verona votes to not renew Flock cameras". WKOW. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  185.  Holmes, Isiah (February 2, 2026). "Verona has waited months for Flock cameras to come down after canceling contract • Wisconsin Examiner". Wisconsin Examiner. Archived from the original on February 2, 2026. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  186.  Squires, Camille. "This Wisconsin City Ditched AI Surveillance Cameras. Now Activists Want to Keep Going. | Bolts". boltsmag.org. Archived from the original on March 18, 2026. Retrieved July 22, 2026.
  187.  Koebler ·, Jason (July 22, 2026). "Flock 'Objects to Our Removing Their Equipment': Emails Reveal Why a Town Put Bags Over Its Flock Cameras". 404 Media. Archived from the original on July 22, 2026. Retrieved July 22,2026.
  188.  Currier, Peter (July 31, 2026). "Littleton claims Flock reactivated its cameras without notifying the town". Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  189.  Holden, Mike (June 29, 2026). "Cleveland's Flock safety cameras may not go dark just yet". WEWS-TV. Retrieved July 3, 2026.
  190.  "Flock cameras are still on in Cleveland, even though the contract expired". WEWS-TV. June 29, 2026. Archived from the original on June 30, 2026. Retrieved July 3, 2026.
  191.  "Raven Gunshot Detection Device Locations". roanokeva.portal.civicclerk.com. Retrieved July 8, 2026.
  192.  Walser, Bella (June 22, 2026). "Roanoke homeowner says a Flock Device was installed on her property without notice". WSLS. Archived from the original on June 22, 2026. Retrieved July 8, 2026.
  193.  Wilkins, Joe. "Woman Surprised When Flock Surveillance Tower Appears in Her Yard Without Warning". Futurism. Archived from the original on June 29, 2026. Retrieved July 8, 2026.
  194.  "After a Flock device appeared on her lawn, Virginia woman wondered 'who's listening'". Straight Arrow. Archived from the original on July 8, 2026. Retrieved July 8, 2026.
  195.  Brindley, Emily (June 13, 2025). "After abortion report, North Texas cop used surveillance network to look for woman". The Dallas Morning News. Retrieved August 4, 2026.
  196.  Cox, Joseph (May 29, 2025). "A Texas Cop Searched License Plate Cameras Nationwide for a Woman Who Got an Abortion". 404 Media. Retrieved August 4, 2026.
  197.  Maass, Dave; Alajaji, Rindala (October 7, 2025). "Flock Safety and Texas Sheriff Claimed License Plate Search Was for a Missing Person. It Was an Abortion Investigation". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved August 4,2026.
  198.  "Flock's Response to Illinois LPR Data-Sharing Concerns". Flock Safety. June 12, 2025. Retrieved August 4,2026.
  199.  Best, Drew (April 22, 2026). "Oshkosh council rescinds Flock camera contract after 'false statements'". WBAY-TV. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  200.  Garner, Alex (August 25, 2026). "Sheboygan council to weigh ending Flock camera contract". Sheboygan Press. Gannett. Retrieved August 28, 2026.
  201.  Polcyn, Bryan (September 3, 2026). "Sheboygan canceling Flock contract over undisclosed data tracking". FOX6 News Milwaukee. FOX6 News Milwaukee. Retrieved September 4, 2026.
  202.  Marlow, Chad (July 2, 2026). "Flock Safety Credibility Lost as it Repeatedly Lies to City Councils, Police Departments, and Public Across the Country". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved August 3, 2026.
  203.  Cox, Joseph (August 26, 2026). "Flock's CEO Is Lying to Cops About 404 Media's Reporting on Abortion Case". 404 Media. Archived from the original on August 26, 2026. Retrieved August 29, 2026.
  204.  Koebler, Jason; Cox, Joseph (October 7, 2025). "Police Said They Surveilled Woman Who Had an Abortion for Her 'Safety.' Court Records Show They Considered Charging Her With a Crime". 404 Media. Archived from the original on August 7, 2026. Retrieved August 28, 2026.


Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)