As cities across the United States move to abandon Flock Safety’s automated license plate-reading cameras, some local governments are taking a different approach: keeping the technology, sometimes while imposing tighter restrictions on how its data can be used.
The decisions offer a more complicated picture than a simple split between communities embracing surveillance and those rejecting it. Some officials say the cameras help solve crimes and locate missing people; others have retained them despite privacy concerns, public opposition or questions about how information is shared with outside agencies.
The cities highlighted on this map are among those reported to have kept Flock cameras, renewed contracts or approved continued funding. Their decisions vary, and some remain provisional or subject to further review.
Newsweek contacted Flock, along with several of the cities mentioned, via email on Monday for comment.
Some Cities Are Keeping Cameras With New Limits
In San Francisco, officials have opted to keep the cameras while introducing new limits on data access and use, according to NBC. Under the new policy, officers must obtain approval from department leadership and demonstrate a link to an active criminal investigation before searching data collected by the city’s automated license plate readers (ALPRs).
Data will be deleted from Flock’s platform after 30 days, although San Francisco police can retain their own copies for up to a year.
In Costa Mesa, California, the city council voted 6–1 in July to continue its agreement with Flock, despite strong opposition from residents. But the decision came with instructions to renegotiate the contract to give the city greater control over how camera data is shared and used.
The city operates 46 cameras, and police have said the system has helped recover stolen property and investigate serious crimes. Residents raised concerns about privacy, potential misuse and the possibility that data could be used to track undocumented people. The council also sought to shorten data retention from 365 days to 45 days and strengthen oversight, The Los Angeles Times reported.
Oklahoma City also renewed its contract in August, agreeing to pay $270,000 to keep 90 cameras operating through June 2027. The city has said the technology has helped investigations into serious crimes, including homicides, and the recovery of stolen vehicles.
The renewal included restrictions on federal access to the city’s data, while the police department reduced its standard retention period from 30 days to seven. Images relevant to active investigations can still be retained for longer. The agreement will come up for annual review, according to the city's account of the program.
...
Others Are Keeping Them Despite Public Opposition
In Evansville, Indiana, the city council approved a 2027 budget that includes funding for the cameras. The decision came despite privacy concerns raised during the debate.
Police Chief Phil Smith told councilors that the department works with some federal agencies, including the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, but does not share information for immigration enforcement, according to WNIN.
Councilor Rita Taylor described the dilemma officials face: supporting public safety efforts while worrying about surveillance's potential impact on vulnerable residents. Her comments highlighted that backing continued use does not necessarily mean dismissing the risks.
A similar debate played out in College Station, Texas, where councilors voted in September to renew a one-year contract covering 84 cameras. The vote followed nearly three hours of public comment, with the overwhelming majority of speakers urging the city to end the agreement.
A spokesperson for the City of College Station told Newsweek on Monday: "The City Council voted 4-2 to renew the contract. Mayor John Nichols was out recuperating from hip surgery and did not vote. Mayor Pro Tem William Wright presided.
"The police chief gave a detailed presentation; about 25 citizens spoke, then the Council deliberated."
Some councilors who supported renewal nevertheless called for stronger safeguards, including a possible reduction in the number of cameras and an independent audit. Others argued that the technology collected too much information or that the company’s data-sharing practices were cause for concern, KBTX reported.
In Dunwoody, Georgia, city officials have continued to defend their use of Flock cameras, pointing to safeguards and the technology’s role in police investigations. The city is among those examined in a Mayors Innovation Project report on communities taking different approaches to the technology. The question for residents is whether such controls provide sufficient protection against misuse and inappropriate access.
For Some Cities, The Decision Is Still Open
In Scottsdale, Arizona, officials decided in October to leave the cameras in place for now while preparing proposed safeguards, an independent audit and a review of data access and retention. The council plans to revisit the issue on December 1 and has directed staff to examine alternative vendors. The city has 85 cameras, and police say they have helped solve cases and locate missing people. But the program has faced growing scrutiny over privacy and misuse concerns, Arizona’s Family reported.
Cleveland, Ohio, has taken a similarly temporary approach. In July, the council approved a six-month extension for its Flock camera system while the city prepared to seek proposals from other automated license plate-reader providers. The agreement also increased penalties for unauthorized access to camera data. The city’s wider use of license plate readers remains contested, with a police oversight commission later proposing a pause while policies are reviewed. Cleveland City Council’s meeting summary documents the extension and its conditions.
Concerns Over Privacy and Data Sharing
As previously reported by Newsweek, a growing number of U.S. communities are pushing back against Flock Safety's ALPR cameras, with dozens of cities and local governments rejecting proposed systems, canceling existing contracts, deactivating cameras, or declining to renew agreements amid concerns over privacy, data sharing and government surveillance.
The trend comes as Flock continues to rapidly expand across the country.
According to anti-surveillance group DeFlock, more than 122,000 license plate reader cameras have been mapped nationwide, while the organization says 95 cities have rejected ALPR systems.