The Manchester Board of Directors voted 5-4 on November 10 to terminate a contract with Flock Safety and remove automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras before the end of the year.
Manchester has 18 cameras, the majority of which are stationary Falcon cameras. Under the terms of the resolution introduced by Director Jerald Lentini, the cameras will be covered and shut off before they are removed.
The Manchester Policed Department (MPD) has had a contract with Flock in place since 2022, which has been renewed several times and expanded the number of cameras the town operates.
A contract between MPD and Flock obtained by Inside Investigator in December 2024 lists 12 Falcon cameras and four Wing Livestream licenses. Flock’s Wing product integrate into existing Internet Protocol cameras, and allow ALPR analysis to be performed on camera footage. Unlike the Falcon cameras, which are fixed and do not record people, Wing enables people to be surveilled.
The initial contract MPD signed with Flock in 2022 had a price tag of approxmately $34,000. A more recent contract, signed in September 2026, runs for three years, at a cost of approximately $15,000 per year.
The Board of Directors had previously twice discussed the town’s use of ALPRs and in August voted to impose a moratorium on the installation of new ALPR cameras absent a clear policy directive and full vote of the Board.
During the November 10 meeting where the resolution was adopted, Lentini said that he believed the process for competitive bidding laid out in the town’s charter was violated when the initial contract with Flock was signed.
The charter includes a cap on how much a department or employee can spend without going through the competitive bidding process, with the amount determined by a formula based on the town’s grand list.
In 2022, when the initial contract was signed, Lentini said that amount was approximately $14,670 dollars and was slightly lower when the most recent contract was signed, putting the cost of both Flock contracts above the threshold.
While the charter allows the Board of Directors to issue a bid waiver, Lentini alleged this process was not followed in 2022, stating that while the town thought a waiver would be appropriate for the initial contract because the police claimed only Flock made a product they wanted to purchase and there were no equivalents, they were never approached.
Chief of Police William Darby, who appeared at the meeting and answered questions from directors, pushed back on that characterization, saying he believed they did follow the rules and were looking at two other vendors at the time but that Flock had attributes to its product, such as standalone mounting and solar batteries, that other companies did not then provide. He added they provided a sole source letter for Flock.
Lentini countered, stating no one had approached the Board of Directors for a bid waiver and the bid waiver process still needs to be followed.
The board was divided on the measure and multiple directors made statements about struggling to find the balance between the usefulness of Flock’s ALPRs as a “tool” in fighting crime and residents’ concerns about privacy and the protection of their civil liberties.
Prior to the board’s discussion of the proposed resolution, a public comment period was dominated by residents speaking for and against the resolution, but mostly expressing concern with Flock.
While introducing the resolution, Lentini said he had spent a lot of time thinking about repeated claims that ALPR cameras are useful to law enforcement but ultimately concluded that the cases where they were used to successfully solve a crime weren’t because the cameras were recording criminals, but because they were monitoring everyone.
Lentini also referenced cases where ALPRs have returned false positives, in several case leading to wrongful arrests and detentions, and cases where Flock has shared data with agencies prohibited by state or municipal policy, including in Boston and Illinois. He also referenced Flock hiding an agreement it had with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to access data. While that agreement has since ended, Lentini noted the technology and ability to restart it still exists.
Deputy Mayor Sarah Jones said that she does not have respect for the technology but recognizes police find it useful. She said that while she wanted to have “fulsome debate” about the usefulness of Flock compared to its infringement on civil liberties, she could not “find a way to say this tool is worth the sacrifice of our liberties.”
Jones also expressed frustration with the way Flock cameras were introduced in Manchester, saying the community did not have an opportunity to debate and decide whether they wanted cameras to be deployed.
Directors who spoke in favor of the continued use of the cameras, including Directors Ed Boland and Leslie Frey, cited their usefulness in solving crimes, including a recent stabbing that occurred in Manchester, and asked others in the room to consider cases where their children or grandchildren were the victims.
Boland apologized to the police officers present and asked them to apologize to the department for “tying your hands” with the vote to terminate the contract with Flock.
Frey said she felt “safer with [Flock cameras] than without them.”
Several directors also suggested a “middle ground” proposal, allowing the cameras to stay on for another 30 or 60 days while the police department looked at other options for vendors.
Manchester also has a contract with Axon, which provides dashcam and body-worn cameras to police departments, for ALPR cameras. Unlike the town’s stationary Flock cameras, the 37 Axon ALPR cameras are mounted in patrol cars.
Mayor Jay Moran said he had struggled with a decision on the resolution, citing a drop in car and catalytic converter theft since the introduction of Flock cameras.
“If I vote no, it’s not because I think Flock deserves to be thrown out of Manchester, it’s because [Flock] is a bad vendor.” Moran said, citing a string of stories exposing abuses of Flock’s systems or failures by the company to secure its data.
Lantini’s resolution allows the town to expend any funds necessary to remove the cameras, but no other additional funds.
Town Manager Steven Stephanou estimated it would cost approximated $500 per camera for removal and that the town might also be on the hook under the terms of its memorandum of understanding for breaking the contract with Flock.
Lentini also raised questions about access to data related to ALPR use via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), referencing a pending complaint Inside Investigator has against the Manchester Police Department at the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC).
Lentini said he understood Inside Investigator had requested auditable data and it had not been provided. The assistant town attorney present at the meeting was unable to answer questions about the case because he was not involved.
In December 2024, Inside Investigator requested 30 days of ALPR data from Manchester Police Department. That requested was denied, citing a FOIA exemption for police department records that could reveal investigatory techniques not known to the public.
After Inside Investigator appealed that denial to the FOIC, the FOIC found MPD’s use of the investigation was likely improper but could not rule definitively and could not order them to turn over records because they had allowed them to be deleted automatically under a 30-day retention policy that was then in place. The passing of PA 26-14 has since lowered the amount of time police can collect ALPR data to 21 days after it has been collected, unless it is being used in a criminal investigation.
When Inside Investigator filed a new FOIA request in December 2025 for the same information, MPD again denied the request, this time claiming they had no way to fulfill the request because the data is in systems owned by Flock.
Flock’s MOU, which contains boilerplate language standard to many of its contract, specifically notes that while Flock retains ownership of its hardware, data is owned by individual police departments. MPD raised similar arguments in Inside Investigator’s initial FOIC complaint, which the commission did not find persuasive.
A second FOIC complaint, appealing the 2025 denial as a violation of the FOIC’s underlying order is still pending before the commission. However, testimony from that proceeding indicates MPD took no steps to preserve the requested data. With MPD’s Flock cameras due to be shut off, and a new FOIA exemption for ALPR data in PA 26-14 that went into place on October 1, it is unlikely Inside Investigator will ever see the data requested.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
