A growing number of Texas local governments have canceled, declined to renew, or suspended contracts for Flock Safety cameras over the past year, amid growing public opposition prompted by privacy concerns, data-sharing questions, and cases of alleged police misuse.<\/p>\n
Last month, Pflugerville\u2019s City Council voted unanimously to terminate its agreement with Flock after learning that 459 outside agencies had accessed its Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR) data, although the city had authorized only 83 agencies to do so.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Over a six-month period, those outside agencies conducted more than 1.6 million searches<\/a> of Pflugerville\u2019s ALPR data. The Pflugerville Independent School District also immediately suspended use of Flock cameras on district property after the city council vote.<\/p>\n Pflugerville is only the latest city to end use of Flock cameras. At least 15 Texas cities, counties, or agencies have suspended, limited, or canceled use of Flock\u2019s network over the past two years, including Austin, Bandera, Bastrop<\/a>, Lago Vista, San Marcos, and Wylie, and Burnett<\/a>, Hood<\/a>, Guadalupe<\/a>, Kendall<\/a>, and Hays<\/a> counties.\u00a0<\/p>\n Law enforcement agencies limiting or ending use of the cameras include the Lufkin, Magnolia, and Dallas police departments, although the latter has only stopped using 321 cameras<\/a> funded through state grants. Meanwhile, the City of Dallas voted last week to keep a $1.5 million contract with Flock in place, and Dallas police confirmed that more than 300 of the cameras will continue operating in the city.<\/p>\n Multiple other Texas cities are considering ending their agreements with Flock. The city councils of both Bastrop and Liberty Hill are scheduled to vote this week on whether to renew or end their contracts, and League City<\/a> has placed the issue on the November ballot.<\/p>\n Over the weekend, Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo called for a special meeting<\/a> of the county commissioners court to address the privacy concerns with ALPRs. She noted that the court has approved more than $2.8 million in ALPR contracts with Flock Safety and Motorola\u2019s Vigilant Solutions.<\/p>\n Flock Safety\u2019s solar-powered, wireless cameras capture license plate numbers, other identifying details, and the location of each vehicle that passes by. An artificial intelligence engine analyzes the collected data and streams it into a centralized, searchable cloud database that police can use to locate or identify suspects.<\/p>\n Flock\u2019s system can also run automated background checks against local and national crime hot lists and notify officers instantly when a flagged vehicle drives past. The company\u2019s newer equipment includes facial recognition capabilities, and it has expanded its surveillance technology to drones.<\/p>\n Law enforcement agencies have successfully used ALPR networks provided by Flock and other companies to solve crimes in Texas and around the U.S. However, critics argue that the expansion of surveillance technology conflicts with the U.S. Constitution\u2019s Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure and note that no federal or state statutory guardrails govern the retention and protection of data on private citizens, including residents who are not suspected of committing a crime.\u00a0<\/p>\n Earlier this year, U.S. Rep. Keith Self (R-TX-3) introduced legislation<\/a> to add stringent safeguards and require federal law enforcement to obtain a warrant before accessing or querying data collected.<\/p>\n Self told The Texan that \u201cnarrow, targeted uses\u201d of ALPR technology could comply with the Fourth Amendment, but that \u201cmost ALPRs do not meet this standard.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Law enforcement officers have also been accused of abusing ALPR data in the cities of Baytown<\/a>, Katy<\/a>, and Pasadena<\/a>, and in the Fort Bend County Sheriff\u2019s Office<\/a>. Last month, Lufkin Police Chief Travis Brazil suspended<\/a> his department\u2019s use of Flock cameras after an officer was arrested for using the system more than 10,000 times to track an ex-girlfriend, her family members, and other people with whom she had relationships.\u00a0<\/p>\n Although Austin halted its Flock program in June 2025, the Austin Police Department has reportedly continued to use the camera network installed in the city by the Texas Department of Public Safety.\u00a0<\/p>\n Austin\u2019s Transportation and Public Works is now recommending using ALPR technology to enforce parking violations. In 2019, state lawmakers banned<\/a> red light cameras, with one argument being that the automatic enforcement mechanisms are revenue generators for municipalities.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Pressure on Texas cities and counties to stop using Flock has increased in recent months, and recent polling<\/a> showed that nearly 64 percent of Texas likely voters oppose placing ALPR cameras at public intersections.<\/p>\n Amid the growing public outcry, at the end of August, Gov. Greg Abbott ordered state agencies<\/a> to stipulate that certain grants to cities for public safety may not be used for Flock cameras. But reportedly, the state\u2019s Motor Vehicle Crime Prevention Authority has used at least $30 million of funding derived from a $1 annual insurance fee on Texas drivers to purchase Flock equipment.\u00a0<\/p>\n The law enforcement community has backed ALPR use as an important tool for solving crimes. Many police agencies and associations in Texas, such as the Texas Municipal League, have defended their use, and last week, Tarrant County Sheriff Bill Wayborn<\/a> told the county\u2019s commissioners court that the technology is \u201cone of the best law enforcement tools we\u2019ve ever had.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n This year, ALPR technology helped law enforcement to find suspects who went on a shooting spree in Austin<\/a> and to locate a missing teen and her kidnapper<\/a> in San Antonio.\u00a0<\/p>\n The Combined Law Enforcement Associates of Texas (CLEAT) recently sent a letter<\/a> to state lawmakers stating that ALPRs \u201care a highly effective and invaluable tool in our efforts to combat crime, locate stolen vehicles, assist in amber alerts, apprehend dangerous offenders, and solve cases such as homicides, robberies, and leaving the scene.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n In response to the proposed use of ALPRs in Austin for parking enforcement, CLEAT said in a statement to The Texan that it does not support that application.<\/p>\n \u201cLaw enforcement officers need LPRs as they are a highly effective, invaluable tool for investigations and real-time crime sprees. By no means would we advocate that they should be used as revenue generators of any kind,\u201d a CLEAT spokesperson wrote in an email.<\/p>\n \u201cWe are talking about the hard-working men and women of law enforcement who have brought closure to families, closed cases, and arrested thousands of violent criminals utilizing this technology. To remove this tool would be an absolute blow to public safety and morale as our members risk everything to protect their communities and take that calling to heart.\u201d<\/p>\n Despite growing public unease with ALPRs and other surveillance technology, state lawmakers last month considered arguments for permitting ALPRs<\/a> as part of an effort to crack down on speeding in construction and school zones.<\/p>\n