Local Leaders Are Saying NO to Flock
Get the Flock Out of MA!
Email Your Municipal Leaders: Unregulated license plate readers threaten our privacy and safety.
License plate readers (LPRs) are a common police surveillance technology that threaten our privacy and safety.
With LPRs, law enforcement can track drivers' real-time and historical location information. In other words, they can see exactly where you’ve been and where you’re going. And they don’t even need a warrant.
All too often, law enforcement dumps this highly personal information into a nationwide database, which can be accessed by other state and federal agencies, including ICE. That puts immigrants, people seeking healthcare, political protesters, victims of domestic violence, and others at risk.
Other states have regulated LPRs. Massachusetts has not — and that’s a problem.
Massachusetts needs statewide driver privacy protections NOW.
Take a moment to *email your municipal leaders and ask them if your local police department is using Flock's LPR technology or LPR technology through a different provider, and if so, whether they are sharing LPR data with agencies outside your community.
Last updated on September 01, 2026
Massachusetts communities are cutting ties with Flock. Has yours?
Over 25 municipalities have rejected AI-powered mass surveillance cameras.
Since October 2025, the ACLU of Massachusetts has been raising awareness about police use of Flock Safety's automatic license plate reader technology. License plate readers (LPRs) enable police and private companies to track anybody who drives past an LPR camera, regardless of whether the driver is suspected of wrongdoing.
Flock is by no means the only company offering LPR services to government agencies, nor is it the only company whose products raise significant civil rights or civil liberties issues. But Flock has come under especially intense criticism, in part because of its business model, which has incentivized police departments to engage in widespread data sharing. This model enables law enforcement agencies nationwide to track Massachusetts drivers in the Flock database without a warrant or even reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing. The company has also been credibly accused of violating basic cybersecurity standards, misleading local officials, and shrugging off basic democratic oversight by failing to remove or deactivate cameras after local governments have directed police to stop using Flock LPRs.
Flock's dragnet surveillance technology and nationwide data sharing model put our civil liberties and privacy at risk. And Massachusetts residents across the state are fighting back.
Outrage over law enforcement using Flock to surveil immigrants, stalk former romantic partners, and keep tabs on anyone who drives past a Flock camera has led residents and grassroots organizations across the Commonwealth to organize to stop this Big Brother-style surveillance in their communities.
The Massachusetts communities listed below have all said Get the Flock Out!
If your community isn’t included, consider taking action by emailing your local leaders. For more information on how to fight LPR surveillance, check out our Community Advocacy Toolkit and Local Conversation Guide.
Please direct any questions to Gideon Epstein at gepstein@aclum.org.
Get the Flock Out of MA!
Email Your Municipal Leaders: Unregulated license plate readers threaten our privacy and safety.
License plate readers (LPRs) are a common police surveillance technology that threaten our privacy and safety.
With LPRs, law enforcement can track drivers' real-time and historical location information. In other words, they can see exactly where you’ve been and where you’re going. And they don’t even need a warrant.
All too often, law enforcement dumps this highly personal information into a nationwide database, which can be accessed by other state and federal agencies, including ICE. That puts immigrants, people seeking healthcare, political protesters, victims of domestic violence, and others at risk.
Other states have regulated LPRs. Massachusetts has not — and that’s a problem.
Massachusetts needs statewide driver privacy protections NOW.
Take a moment to *email your municipal leaders and ask them if your local police department is using Flock's LPR technology or LPR technology through a different provider, and if so, whether they are sharing LPR data with agencies outside your community.
Municipal Wins
These Massachusetts communities have stopped using Flock. The list will be updated periodically.
Dartmouth | August 2026
Dartmouth’s police chief announced that the town will not be renewing its contract with Flock due to privacy and cost concerns.
Ayer | August 2026
The Ayer Select Board voted unanimously to immediately cancel the town’s contract with Flock.
Abington | August 2026
Abington's police chief announced that the police department will end its agreement with Flock and will request that the cameras be removed.
Groton | August 2026
The Town of Groton announced it is terminating its contract with Flock.
Southbridge | August 2026
The Southbridge Police Department announced it is suspending the use of Flock ALPRs. The department also noted that since the time the Flock cameras were installed, they were not used by Southbridge officers for any investigative or enforcement purpose.
Easton | August 2026
The Easton Police Department terminated its contract with Flock. Easton’s police chief noted that he had been monitoring public sentiment and the concerns of Easton residents and others across the Commonwealth in the leadup to ending Flock’s deployment.
Bellingham | August 2026
The Bellingham Police Department's contract with Flock expires in September 2026. The department decided not to renew the contract, citing cost and transparency. Specifically, the Police Department expressed concern that Flock turned on AI-surveillance features the department was not aware of, contradicting statements police leadership had made to members of the public about the technology’s capabilities.
Auburn | August 2026
The Auburn Police Department announced it severed its relationship with Flock due to a "contractual defect.”
Douglas | August 2026
The Douglas Police Department announced it will stop using Flock cameras in town, immediately deactivating all the cameras and department accounts.
East Bridgewater | August 2026
After hearing residents’ concerns about Flock, East Bridgewater's police chief announced the town no longer has plans to roll out Flock LPRs. The town's Flock contract will be terminated, and the one installed Flock camera will be removed.
Grafton | August 2026
The Grafton Police Department began deactivating all automated license plate readers from Flock just weeks after it signed a contract with the company.
Hopkinton | August 2026
Hopkinton's Select Board voted to cancel the town's contract with Flock after significant public pushback. Notably, after a legal review of the town's Flock contract, the town concluded the contract violated state procurement law.
Stow | August 2026
Stow's police department disabled the town's Flock cameras, terminated their Flock contract, and placed an officer on leave after the officer allegedly queried the Flock system for personal reasons.
Wellesley | August 2026
The town decided to terminate a pilot program early, ending Flock deployment in Wellesley.
Littleton | August 2026
After the Littleton Select Board voted to temporarily disable the town's Flock LPR use, Flock reactivated most of the cameras without the town's knowledge. Following this breach of trust, Littleton officials ordered that its Flock cameras be taken down.
New Bedford | August 2026
Police in New Bedford temporarily suspended their use of Flock after significant public opposition and allegations that a New Bedford police officer used Flock license plate readers to stalk her ex-girlfriend.
New Bedford residents speaking out against mass surveillance helped drive this victory.
Salem | July 2026
City officials announced Salem would discontinue its Flock deployment and find alternative license plate readers with stronger protections around local control of data.
Northshore Progressives led a coalition of local grassroots organizations and residents to achieve this victory.
Framingham | June 2026
After months of resident opposition and grassroots organizing by Framingham Fights Back and other local organizations, the police department chose not to renew its Flock contract.
Sharon | June 2026
Sharon's Select Board voted not to renew the town's Flock contract when it expires in September 2026.
Attleboro | March 2026
Attleboro ended its deployment of Flock LPRs, citing cost concerns.
Greenfield | January 2026
The City of Greenfield ended its deployment of Flock LPRs, citing cost concerns.
Natick | January 2026
Natick's Select Board unanimously voted to end the town's Flock pilot program.
Watertown | January 2026
After agreeing to install eight Flock cameras, the City of Watertown canceled its Flock contract. Watertown's city manager cited concerns about entrusting a private company like Flock with license plate reader data and raised questions about technology's role in policing.
Cambridge | December 2025
After the Cambridge City Council unanimously voted to pause the city's Flock deployment to vet the technology for data privacy and security concerns, Flock installed two new cameras in Cambridge. Following this breach of trust, Cambridge promptly ended its contract with Flock.
Digital Fourth and Old Dykes Against Billionaire Tech Bros' advocacy was integral to this victory.
Boston | September 2025
After Boston's Flock pilot program ended, the city opted not to continue using Flock. Boston did subsequently pilot LPR cameras supplied by competing tech companies Motorola and Axon, however.