Reports from communities across the country indicate that automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras, provided by Flock Safety, have been installed and paid for without prior approval from local elected officials in some instances. This has led to growing scrutiny of procurement processes and raised concerns among citizens and leaders about transparency and privacy.
In Maryville, Tennessee, resident Kyle Skeen, a former senior intelligence analyst with experience in surveillance, observed a high number of cameras in his community. Skeen, who moved to Maryville in 2024, stated he could not leave his neighborhood without passing a Flock camera, noting that his movements are recorded and “put into the database” every time he leaves his house. He expressed surprise at the scale of surveillance and concerns about the nationwide scope of searching by law enforcement, and how his community entered into business with Flock. Skeen said these systems ultimately “tilt the balance” of power away from the people.
InvestigateTV found numerous instances where these cameras were installed and paid for first, with approval from local elected officials sometimes coming later, or not at all. In Maryville, for example, the police chief recently explained during a city council work session that the department began using Flock technology in 2020. However, records show the city council did not vote on the issue until July 2024, when a right-of-way permit from the state was required. Skeen, among others, has voiced concerns about privacy and transparency to Maryville officials. Maryville Mayor Andy White acknowledged these concerns at the public work session, stating the council was gathering information and learning more.
Flock Safety, which operates a national network of more than 120,000 cameras through thousands of contracts, maintains that local communities have complete control over their technology implementation. Flock Chief Communications Officer Josh Thomas stated in an April interview that city councils, as “duly elected representative[s],” are responsible for such budget decisions.
However, the procurement methods used by some law enforcement agencies have drawn sharp criticism. In Knox County, Tennessee, then County Mayor Glenn Jacobs sent a letter to Flock in mid-August, questioning the validity of the county’s contract. He alleged that payments made by the Knox County Sheriff’s Office since 2020 appeared to have been structured to “escape” the county’s contract oversight procedures.
Records indicate the sheriff’s office purchased Flock cameras in batches of $24,990—exactly $10 under the $25,000 threshold that would have required a review by the county mayor’s office. Additionally, cameras were purchased through split invoices of $12,500 that, combined, would have triggered a review. Knox County Commissioner Larsen Jay expressed his concern, stating that the payment record showed “a pattern of buying things right under the threshold again and again and again.” County Law Director David Buuck called the contract “one of the screwiest contracts I ever read,” noting it seemed to automatically renew with each order. Then Mayor Jacobs asserted that if it was a contract, it should have gone before the commission and his office. By the time commissioners addressed the issue, the Knox County Sheriff’s Office had 143 active Flock license plate readers, and over a quarter-million taxpayer dollars had been spent, according to Jacobs’ letter.
When InvestigateTV asked Flock if the company works with agencies to avoid budgetary reviews, a spokesperson responded via email that Flock “provides public agencies with product information, pricing, and procurement documentation.” The spokesperson added that purchasing thresholds and approval requirements are governed by “each agency’s applicable laws, policies, and procurement procedures.”
In the wake of these allegations, Knox County ultimately declared its Flock contract invalid and called for the cameras to be removed. When Flock missed a county-imposed deadline, the newly-elected mayor had public works crews cover the cameras. The sheriff’s office has since stated it is no longer using any fixed ALPR systems.
Similar discussions have unfolded in hundreds of communities nationwide. Law enforcement officials have largely defended their use of the technology. Ron Ambrozaitis, then police chief in Chetek, Wisconsin, told city leaders in a July public meeting: “It’s my equipment. I don’t tell you guys when I buy a new gun.” He stated that if the city canceled the contract, he wouldn't be able to help in cases like a missing person or stolen car. Ambrozaitis announced his retirement at the end of August.
Knox County is not unique in its decision to discontinue use of Flock cameras. The Institute for Justice has cataloged more than 250 communities that have either canceled or will not renew their contracts with Flock Safety.
In Neenah, Wisconsin, the mayor posted a video on Facebook explaining the city terminated its relationship with Flock due to security concerns and mounting evidence suggesting the company was not fulfilling its contractual obligations. Ledyard, Connecticut, also severed its contract after police received a notification from Flock in September about a security breach involving the system. Ledyard Police Chief Ken Creutz stated in a letter to local elected officials that he had growing concerns about the technology after watching recent congressional hearings, noting that “the technology may do some things that we were told that it can’t do.” The department ended its contract, and the town’s public works department covered all four of its cameras.
