By Mary Carr Lee, Mayors Innovation Project
Across the country, cities are reassessing their relationship with Flock Safety, the fast-growing provider of automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras. Once marketed as a turnkey crime-fighting tool, Flock’s system is now at the center of a national debate about data governance, public trust, and the limits of local control.
In the past year, cities as politically and geographically diverse as Fitchburg, Wisconsin, and Mountain View, California have voted to end their contracts with Flock. Others, like Dunwoody, Georgia, continue their use of the technology. The divergence reflects a deeper question facing local governments: How do cities balance public safety with community expectations for privacy and accountability?
Mountain View, CA: Unauthorized Access Breaks Trust
In February 2026, the Mountain View City Council voted unanimously to terminate its contract with Flock Safety after discovering that outside federal agencies had accessed the city’s ALPR data without authorization. “When Flock cameras weren’t being used within the parameters we agreed to, it was important for us to demonstrate to our community that we hold our vendors accountable,” says Mayor Emily Ramos. “What vendor would we allow to violate state law and just be okay with it?” Ramos said it helped that Mountain Views’ police department had good relationships within the community and a police chief who is supportive to more vulnerable populations.
Police Chief Michael Canfield had explicitly designed its pilot program to prohibit out-of-state data sharing and immigration enforcement access—yet the audit revealed that these protections were not actually enforced by the system. All 30 cameras were shut down and days later the council voted to end the Flock camera contract entirely. Mountain View’s experience is not isolated. Other California cities, including Santa Cruz and Los Altos Hills, have also terminated their Flock agreements in recent months.
Fitchburg, WI: Community Values Drive the Decision
In Fitchburg, Wisconsin, the decision to end the city’s Flock contract was driven less by a specific breach and more by a broader concern about data governance and community trust. City leaders expressed discomfort with the inability to fully control how data might be shared across Flock’s national network, as well as concerns raised by residents about surveillance and civil liberties.
“Our city council decided not to renew the 2027 contract and gave the police department 120 days to find a new provider that provides more control over data access,” says Mayor Julia Arata-Fratta. “I want to emphasize that our city is not against the technology but is concerned about Flock’s data-sharing practices.”
Fitchburg’s move aligns with a broader trend across Wisconsin, where multiple municipalities have recently discontinued ALPR programs amid similar concerns.
Dunwoody, GA: Continuing with Guardrails
While some cities are backing away, others are reaffirming their commitment to ALPR technology. Dunwoody, Georgia, a suburban community twelve miles from Atlanta, has used Flock cameras since 2019 and recently renewed the Flock contract after a period of scrutiny and negotiation.
Dunwoody’s council delayed approval twice to address security risks, privacy concerns, and questions about employee access to private cameras. But after negotiating additional safeguards, the city ultimately approved the contract. “We totally believe that there’s a need for a balance in protecting privacy, but we also have a huge obligation to keep our community safe,” says Mayor Lynn Deutsch. “Dunwoody is home to 51,000 residents and we have three million square feet of retail and 12 million square feet of office space. We have a shoplifting problem with 85% of crime occurring in the commercial core. It has cost us store closings and hundreds of jobs.”
Officials point out the technology has helped solve crimes and recover stolen vehicles, and that the benefits outweigh the risks when proper controls are in place.
A National Debate About Local Control
The divide between cities discontinuing Flock and those expanding it highlights a fundamental tension: Flock’s system is both a local tool and a national network.
Mountain View’s experience illustrates how local policies can be undermined by system-level settings—such as the “National Lookup” feature—that cities may not fully understand or control. Dunwoody’s experience shows that some cities believe these risks can be mitigated through contract negotiation, oversight, and transparency. “You must figure out what works for your community. If you are starting down this road for any security-related technology, you must start with a needs assessment with both law enforcement input and civilian leadership involved, says Mayor Lynn Deutsch.
As more municipalities evaluate ALPR systems, the national conversation is shifting from whether the technology works to whether it aligns with local priorities and values. Cities that have ended their contracts emphasize trust, transparency, and control. Cities that continue to use Flock emphasize crime-solving benefits and the potential for responsible governance.
For mayors and city leaders, the key question is no longer simply whether to adopt ALPR technology—but how to ensure that any surveillance tool operates within a framework that reflects community expectations and democratic oversight.