License plate reader cameras in Sterling are being discontinued due to privacy concerns

Our Take

Credit to Eyewitness News WTVO/WQRF (MyStateline) for covering a win that doesn't happen often enough: a city council actually reversing course on Flock Safety once residents started asking hard questions. Most ALPR stories we track are about cameras going up quietly with little public debate. Sterling's decision to terminate its agreement shows that privacy concerns aren't fringe complaints — they're legitimate enough to kill a contract once officials have to answer for the data collection, the vendor costs, and the lack of real oversight.

This matters because the Flock sales pitch is always the same: these cameras just catch bad guys. What rarely gets mentioned upfront is the retention period, who else can query the database, and how little recourse a town has once a private company is sitting on a rolling log of everyone's movements. When a city like Sterling walks away, it's worth asking what tipped the scales — cost, efficacy, or the realization that a surveillance network doesn't stay narrowly scoped forever.

If you want to see whether your own town has Flock cameras already installed, check our camera map, and if you'd rather not wait for a scandal to force the issue, our take-action page has steps for raising this with your local council before the contract gets signed, not after.