Flock Safety has entered some treacherous financial waters as backlash against its AI-powered license-plate surveillance cameras grows.
The company plans to lay off a significant percentage of its employees, according to a Reuters report:
Flock Safety plans to let go of about 18% of its employees, people with direct knowledge of the plans said on Thursday, as the maker of AI-powered surveillance cameras and license-plate readers faces mounting opposition to its products from communities and lawmakers.
The people said job cuts came after a voluntary buyout program and are expected to impact roughly 270 employees at Flock, a surveillance technology startup that has seen rapid growth in recent years. Employees will leave the company at the end of the month. Sources declined to be identified as the company has yet to make the plan public.
Flock declined to comment.
In September, Flock announced a voluntary separation program, asking employees to apply if they wanted to leave the company, Wired reported last month. The company has about 1,500 employees.
Flock faces growing scrutiny from regulators, lawmakers, and privacy advocates, despite drawing strong investor interest among venture capitalists. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll showed Americans are divided on whether Flock cameras are a good idea. Some 38% of the country supports the use of Flock cameras in their community, compared to 47% who oppose their use.
Across 49 states, Flock’s network of around 120,000 AI-powered cameras, affixed to streets and highways, automatically read license plates and record vehicles as they pass.
Flock Safety is laying off about 270 people, 18% of the company, because the public is finally rejecting their AI spy cameras. $7.5 billion surveillance startup. 120,000 license plate readers across 49 states. Communities fighting back. Florida already banned them on state highways. The backlash is working. Keep it up.
— Kacee Allen (@KaceeRAllen) October 9, 2026
Reuters noted that much of the decline stems from nationwide pushback from Americans concerned about violations of their constitutional rights and abuses. Only 38 percent of Americans support law enforcement using the surveillance cameras in their communities, compared to 47 percent who oppose them.
Several state and local governments have responded by distancing themselves from the technology. Florida banned automated license plate readers from state highways in September.
Home Depot’s investors “demanded reviews of the retailer's partnerships with surveillance technology vendors after reports that Flock’s data was used in immigration enforcement.”
Several cities have canceled their contracts with Flock Safety.
Contract cancellations accelerated this summer. An anti-surveillance group tallied 90 cities dropping Flock in August alone. That marked a fourfold jump from the prior month. Florida and Texas both moved to restrict or halt use of the technology. TechCrunch covered the scale of those exits.
Stories of abuse piled up. The Washington Post identified 46 cases where officers faced accusations of misusing Flock data. Some allegedly tracked ex-partners. Others monitored colleagues. One Kentucky officer reportedly ran more than 2,000 queries on his ex-girlfriend. Audits in Georgia led to firings and arrests.
These aren’t isolated errors. They reflect how easily the system lends itself to personal use. Access spreads wide. Some agencies share credentials broadly. Data lingers long enough for retrospective searches. Privacy advocates warned for years. Officials dismissed the concerns. Until the headlines hit.
Vandalism added financial pain. Cameras have been sawed down, shot at or painted over in dozens of states. Repair costs were never part of the original business model. One insider told WIRED that seeing enough damaged units makes clear “the writing is on the wall.”
A former employee publicly criticized his former employer and recounted how he once believed the cameras were useful for finding missing people and apprehending criminals. But he became disillusioned when the company instructed staff to resist concerned communities rather than engage with them.
Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley admitted that the backlash brought about the company’s current problems during a podcast appearance. He said the “biggest damage” has been “internal morale” and asked, “Why are people so mad at us when we’ve been doing the same thing for nine years?”