The Wellesley Police Department, which began testing a Flock Safety Falcon automated license plate reader (LPR) in spring of 2025, has ended its trial about a year early.
The camera, which had been located on a pole at the intersection of Rte. 9 East and Rte. 16 near Elm Park, was removed on Aug. 18. Flock devices capture license plate and other vehicle data, but don’t, for example, support facial recognition.
“The landscape surrounding the use of Flock cameras has overwhelmingly changed since we began testing one Flock camera last year,” according to Wellesley Police Chief Scott Whittemore. “After reviewing the last year of use, I would not be inclined to deploy additional Flock cameras in the community or continue to use Flock after our contract expired in June of 2027. As such, I saw no reason to continue testing the Flock camera.”
The Swellesley Report posted an article on Aug. 5 sharing the department’s reasons for testing the technology. The town had not sent notice to residents about the trial, which it says is consistent with its general practice for departmental equipment and technology purchases unless it invests in a widespread deployment.
Increased scrutiny over municipal use of Flock Safety LPRs across the country has led to more and more cities and towns ditching them in the face of privacy concerns raised by members of the public and organizations such as the ACLU. Natick’s Select Board at the start of the year quashed a police pilot of Flock technology.
Flock last week responded to rising concerns about its technology by pledging to make changes, such as cutting default data retention to seven days and requiring customers to make misuse detection mandatory in the wake of disturbing reports.
Whereas some communities have installed networks of Flocks, leading to concerns about vehicles being tracked across a town or city and beyond, Wellesley had only a single Flock automated LPR at a high traffic spot.
You can check out an interactive map to see where Flock systems are installed.
The Wellesley Police department has been using mobile LPRs since 2014, and the ones it is using now come from Motorola. LPRs are also used by private businesses and the state police.
Whittemore says Wellesley installed the Flock at a time when many police departments in the area and in metro Boston were using the technology. “At the time we were an outlier who didn’t,” he says.
Flock devices capture license plate and other vehicle data, but don’t, for example, support facial recognition.
Using mobile LPRs has played a major role in helping the Wellesley Police Department solve a number of cases over the years, including mail theft, car thefts, a kidnapped dog, and a house break-in. The Flock system itself hasn’t contributed to any breakthroughs during its year-plus in town.
“The town had not sent notice to residents about the trial, which it says is consistent with its general practice for departmental equipment and technology purchases unless it invests in a widespread deployment.”
This should change – the practice should be to publicize what the town is planning to trial and get feedback on it before, during, and after the trial.
It is interesting that they advertize that they are no longer using one specific form of security like Flock cameras when the town has been using other vendors for static Automated License Plate Readers for years such as the one the Swellesley report itself published on in 2019 located at the RDF. Given that the police allow certain cars to be parked illegally on the streets for years at a time without moving, even after being reported to them as illegally parked multiple times, it doesn’t really mean any car mounted systems they have need to be used mobily. The video from the cameras the town has positioned at every entrance and exit can also easily be fed to backend ALPR technology from many other vendors. That isn’t even considering any neighborhood watch licenses, security companies, or other activity they abet or look the other way when pesky privacy laws get broken. It is a nice story that they have chosen to publicly disclaim one single version of many potentially 4th amendment violating systems they may chose to use though.
We all know there is a battle between good and evil taking place. We all choose who we will serve. Many have sold their souls for worldly pleasures. We were told to OCCUPY till Jesus returns by the King of Kings. The world has an inferior surveillance network to the Name of Jesus which is a superior spiritual weapon.
Cameras can’t ticket what you’re describing. Automated enforcement reads a license plate and mails a ticket to the registered owner — e-scooters and unregistered Sur Rons have no plates, so the camera watches them go by and does nothing. Even where it works, the ticket arrives days later. Nothing about the moment on Oakland Street changes.
Four miles away, someone solved this. Somerville hasn’t had a traffic death since 2022, and the Globe reported that they got there without significantly stepping up enforcement. They didn’t out-ticket the problem, they out-designed it: 139 speed humps since 2019, raised crosswalks (which the FHWA credits with cutting pedestrian-strike risk 45%), curb extensions, painted “clear corner” boxes so parked cars stop hiding a child stepping off the curb, green paint where drivers cross a bike lane. On residential Laurel Street, speeds fell from 25–30 mph to under 20 once humps went in. Serious injuries citywide dropped 50% in one year.
None of it requires a state law or much money — their newest project is paint, signs, and flex posts. Wellesley could do the Oakland/Woodlawn approach this fall. A camera changes what happens after a child is hit. A sightline changes whether the driver saw the child at all.
WPD needs to answer few questions:
1. Did it opt into sharing the data with other PDs in the country?
2. Logs of searches – We need to know who/what did WPD search (not interested in learning which officer searched)
3. Logs of other PDs who searched data in Wellesley
It would take me three comment sections to include all the PD’s/”communities” that received the “shared”data. Maybe the Swellesley Report could provide the information you have requested along with the contract terms in an updated adendum? If not, request the information from the Wellesley Executive Director.
There’s another side of this to be heard from.
Wellesley has recently experienced a near fatal bike/car accident, a very close call which instantly changed the lives of the family involved forever. Drivers/bikers speed through our town.
We want cameras we have paid for and hope they are in full use soon for our safety.
If you walked, you would soon see pedestrians have a dice-y time of it now with cars/bikes that don’t stop for red lights, drivers on cellphones/texting, etc.
Cameras are a hopeful deterrent to speeding e-scooters/e-bikes which appear from nowhere, careening down streets and sidewalks without a license or a word of warning.
If you walked you would welcome the invisible safety shield iof cameras we have already paid for.
Safety, is our goal as we go from point A to point B. Cameras are a buffer of protection and deterrent to drivers/bikers to think twice, get off their cellphones and ‘pump the brakes’. or get a ticket
What are you afraid of?
Why is it only the one side–the LOUD side considered in these discussions?
–LADY WELLESLEY
No Fear. One day there will be no buying or selling if the “mark” is not taken. The system for such is coming together. Maybe there is a recorded/retained image of a bumper sticker on a Resident’s car that triggers a freezing of his/her bank account in the future? Maybe in the near future, a Resident does not vote accordingly and the powers that be will have to add a demerit to his or her credit score; “no soup for you”? Maybe in the near future, you will want to go visit your family in another state but you posted something on the Swellesley Report ten years ago and now your car identifies as a threat thanks to a missing paint chip?
this was meant as a reply but got posted as a seperate comment:
Michael Daitzman says
August 21, 2026 at 10:24 am
Cameras can’t ticket what you’re describing. Automated enforcement reads a license plate and mails a ticket to the registered owner — e-scooters and unregistered Sur Rons have no plates, so the camera watches them go by and does nothing. Even where it works, the ticket arrives days later. Nothing about the moment on Oakland Street changes.
Four miles away, someone solved this. Somerville hasn’t had a traffic death since 2022, and the Globe reported that they got there without significantly stepping up enforcement. They didn’t out-ticket the problem, they out-designed it: 139 speed humps since 2019, raised crosswalks (which the FHWA credits with cutting pedestrian-strike risk 45%), curb extensions, painted “clear corner” boxes so parked cars stop hiding a child stepping off the curb, green paint where drivers cross a bike lane. On residential Laurel Street, speeds fell from 25–30 mph to under 20 once humps went in. Serious injuries citywide dropped 50% in one year.
None of it requires a state law or much money — their newest project is paint, signs, and flex posts. Wellesley could do the Oakland/Woodlawn approach this fall. A camera changes what happens after a child is hit. A sightline changes whether the driver saw the child at all.
Somerville is a surprisingly pedestrian-friendly city. Unlike Wellesley, there are plenty of sidewalks. And yes, the raised crosswalks and speed humps keep cars traveling at a reasonable pace.
I am more concerned about the plate readers in the parking lot at Weston and Central. What happens with that data?
“Wellesley had only a single Flock automated LPR at a high traffic spot.”
NO EXCUSE FOR SECRETIVE, WARRANTLESS SURVEILLANCE! One camera can do a lot of surveillance/data gathering in a “high traffic spot”. The logic is/was that there was only one camera deployed and since it was a trial the public was not informed because that’s our usual modus operandi?
Was/is Flock Safety Condor Units run and was/is Flock Freeform used and who went through/had access to Wellesley’s data since the start date of the Flock trial (May, 2025)?
Is it possible to get a copy of the signed Wellesley Flock trial contract?
In addition to ending the trial, TAKE DOWN THE CAMERA as contracts can be terminated while technology surveillance remains enabled. TAKE DOWN THE CAMERA.
What will be Flock’s replacement? Axon?
How about; ” A Government of the people, by the people, for the people” (Lincoln)
Yea, how about an audit!