Across Wisconsin, something important is happening.
Communities are starting to push back against Flock, a rapidly expanding surveillance system that tracks the movement of vehicles through automatic license plate readers. These cameras scan passing cars, log where they were seen, and store that data in a searchable system.
Think of it as facial recognition, but for your vehicle and your daily movements.
In Wisconsin more than 221 law enforcement agencies, along with some private companies and homeowners associations, use this surveillance system to monitor their communities, often without people knowing.
That information does not just stay local. It can be shared across jurisdictions and accessed by outside agencies, including federal law enforcement like ICE and DHS. In some cases, similar data has been used in investigations tied to abortion laws in other states.
For years, this system of massive invasion of privacy, expanded with little public awareness or oversight. But that is beginning to change.
Communities are finally saying enough is enough and are fighting back.
Here are some of the recent wins in Wisconsin against the expansion of this surveillance.
Dane County supervisors overwhelmingly voted 31 to 1 to cut funding for Flock cameras in one of the largest counties in the state.
This effort was driven in part by local residents like Gehrig Abbattista, who testified at the hearing. He warned that even if the footage is only used in specific cases, its existence creates opportunities for misuse by bad actors. He also pointed out how easily this kind of system could be used to target individuals and vulnerable communities.
Another resident, Aedan Gardill, raised concerns about data sharing. While Dane County has said it does not directly share Flock data with ICE, Gardill noted that the county shares data with other jurisdictions that do.
Dane County had previously allocated $80,000 for the Sheriff’s Office to operate 24 Flock cameras. Those cameras are now expected to be removed by early summer.
It is important to note that this decision only applies to cameras operated by the Dane County Sheriff’s Office. Cameras run by local police departments, Capitol Police, and the University of Wisconsin are not affected.
Inside Dane County, in Verona, city officials voted to terminate their Flock contract at the end of 2025.
This decision also came after strong community pushback and concerns about how the data could be used, especially at the federal level. Residents argued that the claimed public safety benefits were not worth the privacy risks.
Reporting from the Wisconsin Examiner highlighted these concerns. Within Verona’s system, hundreds of searches were still being tagged as federal even after the company claimed to have limited that access. Additional searches were linked to agencies identifying as ICE, raising further questions about oversight and enforcement.
Although the contract ended, Flock did not immediately remove the cameras, and local leaders had to continue pushing for their removal.
In Sturgeon Bay, the city council refused to renew its contract with Flock in April 2026.
When asked if anyone would make a motion to renew the agreement, no council member spoke. The contract renewal failed without a vote, and the cameras are now set to be removed. This decision followed sustained public pressure from residents concerned about surveillance and data sharing.
In Oshkosh, the Common Council initially approved renewing a Flock contract, but less than 24 hours later, reversed course and voted unanimously to rescind the agreement, effectively ending their contract with FLOCK. Some council members publicly apologized to constituents after hearing community concerns.
What does this mean?
Local pressure works.
Expansion of surveillance isn’t inevitable.
You can make a difference.
None of these decisions happened in a vacuum. They are the result of everyday Wisconsinites organizing, speaking out, and demanding that their local governments take privacy seriously.
While these actions may seem small, they matter. The data collected locally does not stay local. This data directly feeds into larger systems that are vital for the Trump Administration’s targeting of marginalized communities to work.
These wins should encourage other communities to take action against the spread of surveillance technology. They should also serve as a reminder to local leaders that constituents are paying attention and expect them to protect their privacy.
