Auburn Makes Decisive Break With Flock Safety Surveillance
The unanimous decision follows months of debate over privacy, police technology and who should have access to license plate data.
AUBURN, N.Y. — The Auburn Flock Safety contract is coming to an end after the Auburn City Council unanimously voted to cut ties with the surveillance technology company, putting the Central New York city alongside Syracuse and a growing number of communities questioning how automated license plate reader data should be collected, stored and shared.
The decision does not necessarily signal the end of license plate readers in Auburn. It does, however, mark a significant change in how city leaders are approaching surveillance technology and the safeguards that should come with it.
For residents, the debate comes down to a difficult question: How much surveillance is justified in the name of public safety?
Auburn ends its Flock Safety relationship
According to reporting provided by WSYR, the Auburn City Council voted unanimously to end the city’s contract with Flock Safety after nearly two years of involvement with the company.
The vote followed months of discussion about the city’s automated license plate reader program.
The Auburn Police Department signed its Flock agreement in October 2024 after receiving a $122,500 New York State Law Enforcement Technology grant. Installation of the stationary readers was completed during the summer of 2025, according to a May 2026 Auburn Police presentation to the City Council.
The cameras were positioned around the city to identify vehicles connected with police investigations.
Auburn Police said the system had been used in cases involving:
-
Stolen vehicles
-
Missing people
-
Burglaries
-
Drug investigations
-
Fraud complaints
-
Shootings
-
Abductions
-
Human trafficking
-
Homicide investigations
The department stressed that a license plate reader match was not supposed to serve as the sole basis for an arrest. Officers would still need additional evidence establishing probable cause.
What are Flock Safety cameras?
Flock Safety cameras are automated license plate readers, commonly called ALPRs, that photograph vehicles traveling past fixed locations and turn information about those vehicles into searchable records.
Auburn Police described the technology as capable of recording a vehicle’s license plate, make, model, color, location and time.
The city’s police presentation said Auburn’s Flock cameras captured still images rather than continuous video and did not use facial recognition or collect names, dates of birth or Social Security numbers.
But privacy advocates have increasingly argued that the larger concern is not simply what one individual camera records.
The issue is what can happen when thousands of cameras are connected through searchable networks.
A vehicle observed in several places over time can potentially reveal patterns about where someone travels, even if the system does not directly identify the driver.
That distinction has become central to the national debate over automated license plate readers.
Auburn Police defended the system’s public safety record
The decision to leave Flock did not come because Auburn Police said the technology was useless.
Quite the opposite.
Police Chief Matthew Androsko presented several examples to the City Council in May showing how license plate readers had assisted investigations.
The department said the technology helped locate an elderly woman with dementia safely in Wayne County. Police also reported that a stolen vehicle was identified through the Flock system, resulting in a felony arrest.
In another investigation, police said license plate reader information helped corroborate a person’s alibi in a suspicious death investigation.
The department also cited assistance in an Owasco Street burglary investigation and several drug investigations involving travel between Auburn, Syracuse, Rochester and other communities.
Those examples highlight the strongest argument for keeping ALPR technology.
For police, a system that can quickly identify where a suspect vehicle traveled may save hours of investigative work.
Auburn Police told councilors the cameras were intended to help officers identify potential suspect vehicles and work more efficiently, not replace traditional police work.
Privacy concerns grew alongside the technology
Public criticism was also building.
Auburn’s May 14 City Council minutes show residents specifically raised concerns about transparency, privacy and the possibility of misuse.
Resident Randy Thornton urged the council to continue overseeing the program, while Paul Farinelli called for cancellation of the Flock Safety contract, pointing to reports of misuse and privacy problems involving automated license plate reader technology.
Auburn Police had already established safeguards.
The department told councilors that:
-
Flock information was normally retained for 30 days.
-
Multi-factor authentication was enabled.
-
Supervisors reviewed searches and conducted audits.
-
Auburn had opted out of sharing information directly with federal agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
-
The department had also opted out of searches involving reproductive health centers.
Yet the broader Flock network has faced increasing scrutiny nationwide over whether local restrictions can always prevent information from being accessed indirectly through other agencies.
That concern has helped drive resistance to the company across the political spectrum.
Recent national reporting has documented a growing backlash against Flock cameras, fueled by concerns about privacy, officer misuse and the reach of nationwide data-sharing networks.
Syracuse made the move first
Auburn’s decision follows a highly publicized fight over the same technology about 25 miles east in Syracuse.
The Syracuse Common Council voted in March to revoke the city’s agreement with Flock Safety after concerns arose about data sharing.
The controversy began after reporting revealed that the Syracuse Police Department had inadvertently opted into sharing information through Flock’s national network. That made data from Syracuse’s 13 readers available to thousands of law enforcement agencies.
Syracuse Councilor Jimmy Monto described the issue as one involving constitutional protections and due process.
“Our job is to make sure we are not tracking human beings (who) are driving to union meetings or taking their children to school,” Monto told WAER during the Syracuse debate.
All 13 city-approved Flock readers were ultimately removed from Syracuse.
Syracuse did not abandon license plate reader technology entirely.
Instead, the city approved a five-year, approximately $422,000 agreement with Axon for 26 license plate readers. City officials said the replacement would operate as a closed system accessible by Syracuse Police.
That distinction matters.
Ending a Flock contract does not automatically mean a city has rejected automated surveillance.
It can mean officials are reconsidering the company, its network structure or the safeguards governing the technology.
A national debate is reaching Upstate New York
Auburn and Syracuse are not isolated cases.
Ithaca and Tompkins County have also ended relationships with Flock, according to WSKG. Other communities across the country have canceled contracts, rejected proposed deployments or demanded additional restrictions.
The Guardian reported in August that at least 56 U.S. cities had rejected or canceled Flock contracts in 2026, although some communities replaced the company’s equipment with competing license plate reader systems.
That raises an important point for both supporters and critics.
The debate is increasingly about more than Flock Safety itself.
It is about surveillance policy.
Questions local governments will have to answer include:
-
How long should license plate information be stored?
-
Who should be permitted to search it?
-
Should another police department be able to access locally collected data?
-
Should federal agencies have access?
-
What level of suspicion should be required before a search?
-
Who audits officers using the system?
-
What happens when the technology makes a mistake or is misused?
Those questions will remain even if Auburn eventually chooses another technology provider.
The public safety argument cannot simply be dismissed
A balanced discussion also requires acknowledging why police departments want these systems.
License plate readers can generate investigative leads quickly.
Auburn Police’s documented examples included finding a missing person, recovering a stolen vehicle and supporting investigations ranging from burglary to narcotics cases.
Nationwide, police agencies have similarly credited ALPR technology with finding stolen vehicles, locating missing or endangered people and helping investigators identify suspect vehicles.
Supporters therefore argue that banning the technology outright could remove a valuable tool from law enforcement.
Privacy advocates counter that effective technology still needs clear limits.
Those positions do not have to be mutually exclusive.
A community can support effective policing while also demanding strong rules governing government surveillance.
Auburn’s vote could shape what comes next
Auburn’s unanimous vote is significant because it moves the debate from whether the city should scrutinize Flock to what standards should govern whatever comes next.
City leaders now have an opportunity to create surveillance rules before selecting another system.
Those rules could establish clear requirements for data retention, outside agency access, warrants, auditing, public reporting and disciplinary consequences for misuse.
That would shift the conversation away from trusting a particular company and toward establishing protections that apply regardless of which company holds the contract.
Technology changes quickly.
Civil liberties should not depend on which vendor happens to win the next municipal bid.
Auburn residents should continue watching City Council discussions closely and asking how any replacement system will work, who will have access and how the public will know whether the rules are being followed.
The challenge for Auburn is no longer simply whether to keep Flock Safety.
It is how to protect public safety without creating a surveillance system that residents have little ability to see, question or control.
That is a conversation worth having before the next camera goes up.
Sources:
City of Auburn City Council records and Auburn Police Department presentation; Syracuse Common Council reporting; Spectrum News; WAER; Central Current; WSKG; national reporting on automated license plate reader systems.
