In the months since Apex resident George Hogan began his crusade against Flock—a network of cameras that can track cars by license plate number—more have joined him in protesting the technology, citing privacy concerns.
But as public pressure mounts, the Apex Town Council seems divided on whether to continue its contract with Flock, switch to another vendor, or stop using automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) entirely.
If the town council does switch to another vendor, Axon is a likely candidate. The Apex Police Department (APD) already contracts with Axon for its body cameras, vehicle cameras, and tasers, according to Police Chief Ryan Johansen. The town council was set to approve another contract with Axon for new drone software in early September, but the vote was delayed after pushback from residents.
Like Flock, Axon and other ALPR alternatives, such as Motorola’s Vigilant, allow police officers to search a nationwide database of cameras.
“In some ways, Axon is actually worse than Flock,” Dave Maass, director of investigations with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties nonprofit, said in an interview with the INDY. “Flock never had mobile license plate cameras, and Axon does. They install them on patrol cars, and that means patrol cars become like roving data vacuums.”
Additionally, Axon’s agreement with Ring allows police to request video footage from doorbell cameras. (An infamous Super Bowl commercial demonstrating the technology raised alarm nationwide and prompted Flock to cancel a planned partnership with Ring.)
The APD first started using Flock cameras in October 2025, with plans to re-evaluate after a year-long pilot program, which ends in January 2027.
Apex’s Public Safety Committee, made up of Mayor Jacques Gilbert and council member Ed Gray, is set to make a recommendation to the town council after meeting Thursday afternoon at Apex Town Hall.
Meanwhile, as states like Florida cancel Flock contracts, the North Carolina General Assembly made its year-long pilot program permanent. The program funds installation of additional ALPR cameras on state-maintained roads—not just major highways, but about 75% of all roadways in North Carolina.
Where Council Members Stand
Gilbert and Gray have spoken in favor of Flock, arguing that it helps police investigate crime and make arrests. At a town council presentation in June, Police Chief Johansen gave several examples from the six months the system has been fully in use.
One was the arrest of a person in violation of a domestic violence protection order. Flock alerted officers that a vehicle associated with the suspect was in the area of the victim’s residence. Johansen also cited examples of Flock alerting officers to stolen vehicles entering Apex, some of which were connected to a series of thefts and burglaries.
“I wish I had this tool, this technology back then,” Gilbert, a retired Apex police captain, said at the June meeting. “I see the purpose, the benefit, not only as a retired police officer, but as a resident of this town.”
Gray, a former federal prosecutor and public defender, also said he sees Flock’s value, specifically for providing evidence in police investigations. He said he wants to find a way to balance the privacy concerns with the utility that ALPRs offer police.
“I’ll be the first person to tell you, it [Flock] is a program that has flaws, but it’s also a program that has the ability to make things work better,” Gray said.
Two other council members, Arno Zegerman and Sue Mu, took a softer approach, but seemed satisfied by Johansen’s report on the technology and safeguards in place, including a 30-day limit for data retention and regular system audits.
“I believe that the people of Apex deserve safety. I think they also deserve a proper measure of privacy. And so I do appreciate a lot of the thought that clearly has gone into the policies that govern the use of this system,” Zegerman said.
Other council members aren’t convinced. In an interview with the INDY, Mayor Pro Tem Terry Mahaffey said he is “entirely opposed” to Flock and any similar technology being used in Apex, including Axon.
The sticking point is that data collected by ALPR cameras goes into a nationwide database, which is vulnerable to security breaches, Mahaffey said. Using cameras to enforce laws on public thoroughfares isn’t new—look at red light or toll road cameras—but “it’s not the camera, it’s the database,” Mahaffey said.
“It’s completely unregulated. They [Flock] have had numerous security incidents,” Mahaffey said. “I don’t have any confidence in them as a company. … The more I think about it, I don’t really think there’s a way to do this safely, and consistent with our values as a country.”
Council member Shane Reese was also skeptical of Flock at the June meeting, saying that while he supports the Apex PD, he doesn’t trust the company.
“The primary question we have to answer is … do we trust the privacy policies and security standards of certain third party law enforcement vendors? It is a powerful technology, and I trust your department and your officers,” Reese said, addressing Johansen. “I don’t trust that particular vendor.”
How is Apex PD using Flock?
Apex residents have raised specific concerns over public records showing how APD and other agencies across the country are searching Apex’s Flock cameras. Residents shared these records with the INDY; the INDY verified them with the town.
For instance, while Johansen told the town council in January that the police department does not share data with federal agencies, public records show that two federal agencies did have access to Apex’s data as of March.
Johansen acknowledged this in his June presentation. The town’s staffer in charge of reviewing requests to access Apex’s system mistakenly approved requests from the United States Postal Inspection Service and a military police force, he said, as the civilian “just didn’t immediately recognize those as federal entities.”
But, he added, “the audit systems that are in place worked.”
As part of a monthly notification system, Johansen said he noticed two federal agencies had access to Apex’s data and revoked it. He added that he has now worked with Flock to block federal agencies from even requesting access to Apex’s data.
The APD has never conducted a Flock search for immigration enforcement, abortion enforcement, or any purpose other than official police investigations, Johansen said in response to concerns residents have raised.
He said every Flock search made by APD has included a case number and description of the reason for the search, and police have made no searches in violation of law or local policy.
A record of APD searches conducted from June to mid-August shows that each included a specific reason. The top five reasons listed were larceny/theft, motor vehicle theft, wanted person, drugs/narcotics, or burglary/breaking and entering.
The records also show that most searches were attached to specific case numbers, although about 13% simply listed “APEX CASE” instead of a case number. Some other searches were related to cases in other towns, like Cary or Holly Springs, for which case numbers were unknown.
Johansen responded to an interview request expressing willingness to meet in person, but the INDY was unable to schedule an interview before the publication deadline for this story.
Data Sharing
Still, residents remain concerned about the security of a nationwide database and the fact that this data is in the hands of a third-party company. Apex can’t prevent police officers outside the town from conducting searches of the system on behalf of federal agencies like ICE, or for other unethical or illegitimate reasons, instances of which have been reported in multiple media outlets.
Apex allows about 1,000 organizations across the country, mostly local and state law enforcement agencies, to access its data, and in turn can search Flock cameras in those jurisdictions.
That information sharing is part of what makes Flock so valuable to law enforcement, Johansen argued. But at the same time, Apex PD cannot hold outside agencies accountable for any violation of its policies.
“I do have very limited control over that [misuse outside of the department], beyond auditing … and reporting it if I see it,” Johansen said.
Residents opposing Flock have said that adding additional safeguards or switching to another vendor will not resolve their privacy concerns. The solution, they argue, is to stop using ALPRs entirely.
There are differences between Axon and Flock, but “at the end of the day, it’s the same fundamental technology that raises the same fundamental questions around the relationship between the government and the governed,” Jay Stanely, a senior policy analyst with the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told the INDY.
“And how much power communities want to grant the law enforcement agencies that serve them to carry out mass surveillance, or any kind of surveillance at all,” he added.
In addition to ALPR systems, companies are marketing AI-powered tech platforms for law enforcement, which raises additional concerns. In 2024, Axon unveiled Fusus, an AI-powered system that connects body cameras, drones, gunshot detectors, and ALPRs into one platform and allows data sharing with other agencies.
“What we’re looking at in 2026 is the entire concept of policing being replaced bit by bit by a company software, to the point that basically your police is Axon,” said EFF’s Maass.
“Law enforcement’s number one asset in solving crimes is a strong relationship with its community. And instead you have these companies coming in selling all these products that are very much undermining that trust.”
Comment on this story at [email protected].
