It’s possible that Flock dropped the ball in submitting permission requests for private or police use of the mysterious cameras. This has been happening for years, as a 2024 Forbes survey reported, and the Post has noted other, more recent examples. Last December, Flock installed two cameras in Cambridge, Massachusetts, without informing anyone, after local authorities banned the technology. And last month, authorities in Millcreek, Utah, were disconcerted to discover an unknown camera installed on town property, something neither the town nor police had requested.
About an hour after the last batch of sketchy cameras, officials in Palm Bay, Fla., suspended their camera system after finding that Flock was continually installing cameras and then failing to request final inspections. In this case, city officials ended up approving Flock’s permits.
St. Lucie County Commissioner Clasby told local media he believes “not knowing who owns” the cameras is “another issue” beyond police misuse and data privacy that Flock needs to address.
Already grappling with backlash — particularly in Florida, the only state to ban cameras on state highways — Flock appears motivated to connect with the county before the 30-day notice period expires.
A Flock spokesperson told the Post that the company has already contacted officials to discuss the unauthorized cameras. That spokesperson appeared to downplay the controversy, saying permitting requirements “vary by jurisdiction and are not necessary everywhere.”
Ars reached out to Gill to confirm that St. Lucie County began negotiations with Flock this week. According to Gill, Flock is currently juggling many demands, as there are requests to remove cameras across the state. As Flock evaluates the cases, Gill said “county staff are still working on the best possible way to ensure the cameras are removed by the permit holder before the deadline. Once the deadline passes, staff will work to safely remove the cameras and/or add coverings, so they cannot capture video.”
Gn usa
