Does Scarsdale Village Want To Be Associated With Flock Safety?

(The following was submitted by Mayra Kirdendall-Rodriguez)

Without alerting Scarsdale residents, on April 8 the Scarsdale Village Board voted on a contract with Flock Safety to buy its surveillance products and services. Neither the Board nor Village personnel sought any feedback from Scarsdale residents, Scarsdale School District administrators or the Board of Education, local civic groups or Scarsdale’s fifteen neighborhood associations, While I have inquired whether Village officials or personnel conducted any due diligence on Flock Safety, three weeks later, I am still waiting for a response.

Whether Scarsdale Village residents want surveillance technology, or not, is something that could have been discussed if Scarsdale Mayor Justin Arest and the Village Board had simply placed a notice in the Village Agenda inviting residents to opine on this important matter. For several years, numerous towns across America have been holding public forums to discuss surveillance technology. Why not in Scarsdale?

Even after a few residents and I wrote the Village Mayor, Board of Trustees, and Village Manager posing questions about the exclusion of resident input, whether any technology experts tested Flock’s technology, and lack of granular, annual data on crime in Scarsdale, Mayor Arest did not answer our questions and signed a contract with Flock Safety on April 29.

Also troubling is that the contract was signed without Scarsdale Village having any written policies on:

• what type of oversight will exist over Flock Safety, such as background checks of Flock employees working in Scarsdale,
• data collection, use and safekeeping,
• penalties if data is misused,
• cybersecurity and hacking measures to protect residents,
• residents’ privacy,
• sharing of data with federal government or other types of organizations,
• independent testing to verify accuracy of Flock’s technology and its success rates,
• and whether facial recognition technology or any other products will be added later without residents being informed.


Lack of Due Diligence and Written Processes

Were any Village officials or personnel aware of the fact that Flock Safety has had significant legal and regulatory challenges due to unauthorized installations and licensing issues in multiple states? Flock’s surveillance practices have raised constitutional concerns regarding privacy rights.

Flock Safety likes to brag that it has grown quickly and raised a lot of money. As someone who has spent decades working with banks, insurance, and energy companies, I have always found that significant growth is all too often a red flag for potential risks, which will show up sooner or later, such as weak processes for data collection and safekeeping, poor employee training, and even fraud. Just by virtue of being human beings, when companies are growing quickly, numerous risk management issues are often accidentally, or intentionally, overlooked.

Thus far, this is what I have found out about Flock Safety:

Flock is a Private Start-Up Tech Company

Flock Safety was founded in 2017. It is not publicly traded, so we do not have the company’s balance sheet or income statement information. We do not have audited information about how liquid or well-capitalized the company is. Yes, it had a recent, significant fund raising from venture capital firms. Is that enough to keep this company financially healthy so that it honors all its contractual obligations with Scarsdale?

We do not know who the company’s private sector or government clients are and do not know what their risk management policies are.

Flock Has Legal and Legislative Challenges Over Privacy Concerns and Other Issues

Public sources reveal that Flock's Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR) systems are the subject of legal scrutiny concerning privacy rights. Flock Safety’s technology does more than typical ALPR technology; it captures additional details such as vehicle make, model, color, and other distinguishing characteristics such as bumper stickers.

• ACLU: In 2022, the American Civil Liberties Union published a white paper on Flock Safety’s unprecedented nationwide mass surveillance goals and technological capabilities. ACLU

• California: Flock Safety hired the mayor of Moreno Valley to promote its technology. Ulises Cabrera now claims Flock wrongfully terminated him, in part, because he refused to use his position as mayor to benefit Flock, according to a lawsuit Cabrera filed against Flock in November 2024. TechCrunch

• Colorado: On Monday, May 5, 2025, the Denver City Council rejected unanimously a contract extension with Flock Safety for more than $600,000 to continue operating the more than 100 automated license plate recognition cameras throughout the city. Denver 7

• Connecticut: Residents in Colchester filed a lawsuit alleging that the use of Flock Safety’s ALPRs violated their Fourth Amendment rights by enabling warrantless tracking of their movements. Connecticut Inside Investigator

• Virginia: In Norfolk, a federal judge allowed a lawsuit to proceed against the city for using over 170 Flock ALPRs without a warrant, potentially violating the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches. Forbes and Institute for Justice. The Virginia legislature is debating a bill to limit the days that Flock Safety can keep data from 30 to 21 days. Virginia Mercury

Flock Has Unauthorized Installations and Licensing Issues

• Florida: In February 2023, Flock installed an ALPR on the John’s Pass Bridge in Treasure Island without approval from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). FDOT demanded its removal, which occurred in November 2023. A subsequent review revealed that over 800 Flock ALPRs in Florida were out of compliance with state regulations. EFF and Forbes

• North Carolina: The North Carolina Alarm Systems Licensing Board sued Flock Safety in March 2023 for installing ALPRs without the required license. A court injunction in November 2023 prohibited further installations without proper licensing. In March 2024, Flock agreed to apply for the necessary license by June 1, 2024. News Observer

• South Carolina: Between 2022 and 2024, the South Carolina Department of Transportation identified more than 200 unpermitted Flock ALPRs on public roads. In July 2023, the agency issued a moratorium on new installations and ordered a safety and compliance review of existing devices. TechDirt

• Texas: In September 2024, the Texas Department of Public Safety issued a cease-and-desist order to Flock, stating that Flock was operating as a private security business without the required license. Flock responded by initiating the certification process and anticipated obtaining the necessary license shortly thereafter. FOX 26 Houston

There are Questions about Flock’s Technology’s Accuracy

• California: Berkeley Police Department has found that Flock Technology does not work as well at night. Berkeleyside

• New York: A study by surveillance research firm IPVM revealed that the Flock LPRs misread license plates approximately 10% of the time. Additional errors included incorrect vehicle make identification and multiple readings of the same plate. These findings raised concerns among Syracuse city council members about the potential for wrongful identification and the broader implications for privacy and civil liberties. Central Current

Turning This Ship Around

Scarsdale Village officials can still turn this ship around. As over 240 residents and I are requesting, the Village should have a public forum to hear different perspectives about surveillance technology and Flock Safety. At a recent work session, a couple of Village trustees talked about having events to bring the community together. How can we be together when the Mayor and Board of Trustees do not even want to hear our views about surveillance technology?

Mayra Kirkendall-Rodríguez is a financial risk consultant and trainer and has lived in Scarsdale almost 14 years.