Deflock York County’s petition reaches its goal of 2,500 signatures
YORK COUNTY, S.C.- Law enforcement agencies brought Flock to the York County community in 2021. What started as the sheriff’s department purchasing seven Flock Safety cameras has turned into 45 cameras around our county.
The Clover Police Department (CPD), specifically, has seven cameras and York County Sheriff’s Office (YCSO) has 19. Neighboring districts like Rock Hill and Fort Mill have upwards of 20 cameras.
In an interview with York County District Two Representative Andrew Litten, he says, as of right now “the cameras are an asset more than a hindrance”. He stated several times that he trusts CPD and YCSO, but understands the importance of keeping the information gathered out of the wrong hands.
The annual average daily traffic for Charlotte Highway is 36,700 vehicles according to the South Carolina Department of Transportation as reported by The Herald. Just on the stretch of Hwy. 274 outside of Crowders Creek Elementary, there are two Flock cameras pointing at either side of the road. With a minimum Flock reported mistake rate of 4%, an estimated nearly 1,500 mistakes a day are made just on that small stretch of road. When asked about this number, Litten responded that 4% was close enough to zero for his comfort.
He added that his “opinion is subject to change” if they become a bigger problem.
Since Oct. 2024, Will Freeman’s organization, DeFlock, has attracted a growing number of supporters. Their mission is to locate Flock cameras, educate citizens and unveil the negative impacts and secrets of Flock Safety.
DeFlock York County, a branch of the organization
from the area, started a petition on change.org on Aug. 12, 2026. The petition has 2,609 signatures at the time of publication. Every signature goes towards the organization’s mission to call for the removal of Flock cameras in the community.
When asked how many signatures would be needed to actually raise an issue, Litten said that for it to become a real issue in the council there must be 10% of the voting public in the county. He also added that not every signature on a change.org petition can actually be trusted because signatures must be followed by a voting card.
Deflock’s criticism of Flock cameras stems from concerns over misuse, errors and the invasion of privacy experienced by innocent civilians. For a recent example, Flock system error led to a police officer holding a Rock Hill man at gunpoint after the camera system falsely flagged him for driving a stolen vehicle.
Litten suggested that errors like this are “human errors and not related to Flock itself and the AI”. When this argument was countered by asking “how do you rule out human error and how do you make this better” he replied that CPD and YCSO has “better guardrails, guidelines, policies and procedures” going into action.
After reaching 2,000 signatures, the starters of the petition posted a message to the supporters. It read, “the message remains simple: We can support law enforcement and public safety while still demanding limits on mass surveillance. Residents deserve to know who can search this data, how it is being used, how long it is retained, what outside agencies can access it, how misuse is detected, and what happens with the enormous amount of information these systems collect about people who are not suspected of committing any crime”.
Trent Faris, YCSO Public Relations officer, has responded to questions regarding the issue with “We do hope that once we have our website transparency page up and the transparency portal provided by Flock Safety, both will help dispel any concerns the public may have”.
Recently, CPD has published a transparency portal that partially answers these concerns. To read more on this go to https://transparency.flocksafety.com/clover-sc-pd . Much of the information in the portal relies on the trust that officers and entire departments will not misuse the technology. Though this publication answers questions, as evidenced by the petition, the people of York County have a hard time trusting that any department will lawfully follow the prohibited uses. Additionally, the transparency page and portal that CPD and YCSO uses are provided by Flock Safety.
To try to combat misuse, Flock forces logs to be kept on reasons for accessing the data. Problems arise when officers access data with vague justifications such as “follow-up” or “investigation”.
There are people across many departments who are able to access and potentially this data. Some who have been affected by misuse report that they feel they cannot come forward because the offenders carry a badge and a gun and they worry about facing retribution for making a report.
Across the country, concerns continue to rise. The county of Mooresville, N.C. has recently signed a contract with Flock to use their drones for surveillance in addition to the Automatic License Plate Readers.
The Charlotte Observer reported in July that “A CMPD officer was arrested after being accused of using the Flock database to search the license plate of a person buying drugs from his friend in Boone to see if they were an undercover police officer”.
Just a few states over, Florida’s Department of Transportation (FDOT) has banned the usage of Flock cameras on state-owned roads. FDOT has given law enforcement agencies 30 days to remove the Flock cameras and other ALPRs.




























