← All stories
● Covered by 1 source · 1 reportHigh impact

Oshkosh Cancels Flock Safety Contract After False Statements by Company

The Oshkosh City Council revoked its contract with Flock Safety after the company falsely claimed its ALPR system did not create heat maps of vehicle movements. This incident highlights a broader pattern of misleading statements from Flock regarding its technology and privacy practices, raising significant concerns over its credibility in the law enforcement technology sector.

Key points

  • Oshkosh revoked Flock contract one day after approval.
  • Flock's system does generate heat maps of vehicle movements.
  • The incident reveals a pattern of misleading practices by Flock.
  • Council members expressed distrust in Flock's statements.

Background on the Incident

In April, during a city council meeting in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, Flock Safety's automatic license plate readers (ALPR) were under consideration for a contract. The council sought clarification about the capabilities of Flock’s system, particularly concerning its ability to create heat maps to track vehicles. Flock's chief information security officer stated the system did not track individual vehicle movements, resulting in the council approving the contract.

Flock's False Claims and Immediate Consequences

The day after the contract was approved, the city discovered that Flock had misrepresented its technology. Flock later acknowledged that their ALPR system does indeed generate heat maps reflecting vehicle movement based on captured images. This contradiction led to swift action from the Oshkosh City Council, which called a meeting to address the misleading information.

Council's Response and Flock's Justification

During the reconvened meeting, city officials expressed frustration over the lack of truthful communication from Flock. Mayor Matt Mugerauer and Deputy Mayor Joe Stephenson voiced their disappointment, emphasizing the need for integrity in governance. The council ultimately voted to cancel the contract, marking the briefest period of approval for a Flock contract on record.

A Pattern of Misleading Information

The Oshkosh incident is not unique; reports suggest that Flock has a history of making misleading statements about its operations. Critics have noted that the company's patterns of misinformation extend beyond disclosures about technology capabilities to concerns involving safety and privacy issues. These recurring issues contribute to a growing distrust among city councils and the public regarding Flock's transparency and reliability.

Implications for Law Enforcement Technology

The developments in Oshkosh raise significant questions about the integrity of technology providers in the law enforcement sector. If companies like Flock do not provide accurate information, city councils may hesitate to adopt their technologies, impacting law enforcement operations. This situation underscores the importance of accountability and clarity in vendor communications within public safety technology.

✨ This summary was generated by AI from the outlets' reporting listed below. It is not independently verified and may contain errors — check the original sources. How BrevFeed works →

The daily brief

One email each morning: the day's tech stories, clustered across outlets and summarized. No account needed.

One email a day. Unsubscribe in one click, any time.

Today's brief

Spend a few minutes, get the whole day. Every topic's top stories in one hands-free rundown — listen, watch, or read the transcript.

~23 min · 20 stories · Jul 20

▶ Play today's brief Listen on Spotify

New every morning, and the back catalogue is archived by date.

Reporting from

The Oshkosh City Council revoked its contract with Flock Safety after the company falsely claimed its ALPR system did not create heat maps of vehicle movements. This incident highlights a broader pattern of misleading statements from Flock regarding its technology and privacy practices, raising significant concerns over its credibility in the law enforcement technology sector.