We are not alone
Eugene is not the only city trying to protect its people from Flock’s national surveillance network. Look at some of the other grass-roots efforts happening across the country.
No ALPRs
No ALPRs is a coalition effort to get ALPRs — not just Flock — out of Austin and other parts of Texas.
Stop Flock
Stop Flock is an informational page that provides a straightforward overview of Flock, its problems, criticisms from privacy advocates, and links to other efforts to remove it from communities across the country.
DeFlock
DeFlock.me is a crowd-sourced effort to map Flock surveillance devices across the country. Flock attempted to shut down this website, so you know it’s a good one.
Eyes on Flock
Eyes on Flock is a fantastic modern dashboard showing some of the extent of Flock’s surveillance in communities across America. The data is compiled from the transparency pages that some Flock customers publish, so it only shows about 10% of Flock’s surveillance network, but the extent of the data collection is still staggering.
EyesOffCR.org
We didn’t know about EyesOffCR.org when we chose the Eyes Off Eugene domain for our efforts here, but hey, great minds think alike. They have done some fantastic, interesting technical work (archive link) on Flock’s devices. If you’re interested in the technology that’s being used to monitor our activities, have a look at their writeups.
Hands Off Central TX
Hands Off Central TX is attempting to remove Flock from their communities.
San Marcos, Texas
San Marcos, Texas, rallied on June 3rd, 2025, to successfully stop an expansion of Flock in their community.
Denver, Colorado
Thanks to the efforts of hundreds of citizens, Denver’s city council in May voted unanimously not to extend their contract with Flock. They are continuing to review the situation.
Eureka, California
In February, the small rural community of Eureka, California was able to successfully prevent Flock from being installed in their neighborhoods.
Norfolk, Virginia
A judge in Norfolk, Virginia, denied Flock’s attempt to intervene in a lawsuit that the Institute for Justice has filed on behalf of Norfolk residents, alleging that Flock’s surveillance network violates their Fourth Amendment rights. The lawsuit is continuing.
Gig Harbor, Washington
Residents showed up in Gig Harbor, Washington to prevent Flock from being installed there. Unlike Eugene, and many other towns and cities across the country, they had the opportunity to respond to a proposal to install the system before it was installed. Residents and subject matter experts made the same arguments during their public comment period that are being made everywhere else, and their city council listened.
San Diego, California
San Diego residents are beginning to fight the $3.5 million Flock installation in their town, installed near popular venues for out-of-state visitors without prior city council approval — a pattern of behavior for Flock, which routinely ignores local ordinances during their push to expand their commercialized mass surveillance.
South Pasadena, California
People in South Pasadena City, California, are beginning to ask questions about ICE access to data in their city’s Flock installation because of the extensive inter-agency sharing of data that is a key selling point for Flock.
Flagstaff, Arizona
Residents in Flagstaff are currently petitioning their city to end its program with Flock. (archive link)
Sedona, Arizona
There has been quite the saga in Sedona, Arizona, but that saga has ended on a positive note as of September 2025.
The Sedona Red Rock News initially broke the story on June 20, 2025 (archive link), that around a dozen Flock devices had been installed by the city’s police department. As has been the story in so many other cities across the country, “The city never agendized the installation of the cameras for discussion by City Council and the public and instead mentioned an indefinite plan to acquire such cameras.”
Like Eugene, Sedona’s police chief tried to downplay Flock’s capabilities while simultaneously describing it as essential for police work.
The Sedona Red Rock News followed up with a provocative and well-researched article on June 20 (archive link), and then again on July 20 when Judicial Watch became interested in the situation (archive link). By then, residents had begun responding to city council and their local police department, making their overwhelming disapproval of the surveillance system heard loud and clear.
By August 13, Flock was in full damage control mode, and sent their Directory of Public Affairs to weigh in at a special city council meeting. However, the voices of 50 residents in attendance, combined with the very strong opposition from the public in the weeks and months before the meeting, led the city council to order that the surveillance cameras be deactivated pending further investigation (archive link).
The Sedona Red Rock News on August 21 commended the city council order (archive link), and then on September 10, the town was able to breathe a sigh of relief as city council unanimously ordered the cancellation of the contract with Flock (archive link).
Lockhart, Texas
On October 9, after hearing objections from community members and grassroots organizations, the city council of Lockhart, in Texas, voted 6-to-1 to reject a proposed contract with Flock Safety (archive link). Unlike so many other communities, the people of Lockhart were able to stop the installation of this surveillance system before a contract had been signed.
Stanwood, Washington
Months after first installing Flock Safety’s surveillance system (archive link), and after public opposition (archive link), the city of Stanwood in Washington has decided to pause its use of Flock (archive link) in response to a legal challenge from a resident.
Jose Rodriguez filed a public records request with the city for any records related to his vehicle and stored by Flock. The city can’t decide whether this request is exempt from public records law or not. On the one hand, Rodriguez’s request requires the city to perform a search of the Flock surveillance system to fulfill the request; on the other, the city is paying a private company to maintain these records and the records already exist within that company’s data storage.
Mountlake Terrace, Washington
Mountlake Terrace city council, in Washington state, approved the installation of their Flock surveillance system on June 5, 2025, and has faced growing public opposition (archive link) ever since. Unfortunately for that city council, the public’s concerns about the system were further reinforced when their local newspaper found evidence of hundreds of federal agency searches of the area’s Flock systems (archive link).