HAYS COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE
After the Commissioners Court voted to cancel the Flock Safety contract last week, Hays County Sheriff Anthony Hipolito met with the San Marcos Daily Record to discuss his reaction to the decision and public concerns about Flock data privacy.
The 3-2 vote reflected a divide on the Court regarding the use of images collected by the Flock ALPR (Automatic License Plate Reader) cameras. Unease about how this data would be shared outweighed support of the Flock cameras as an effective crimefighting tool.
“License Plate Readers are a force multiplier and a tool that we covet as law enforcement,” Hipolito said. “I can tell you that that was a big morale killer for our deputies ... because people don’t know how vital of a tool that is.”
One of the primary issues brought up during hearings and presentations throughout Texas regarding the use of Flock Safety cameras has been the potential use of the information they collect by ICE agents for tracking and arrests.
Eric Martinez, Executive Director of advocacy group Mano Amiga Action, said the cancellation of the Hays County contract exemplifies public skepticism regarding ALPR cameras.
“This is a victory for every resident who spoke out against being watched, tracked and treated like a suspect in their own community,” Martinez said.
Hipolito denied that the ALPR cameras in Hays County could be used to track citizens. “The Flock technology is not mass surveillance. Flock cameras simply take a picture of a vehicle and a license plate and a snapshot in time. It doesn’t actively track a vehicle.”
Hipolito also stressed that Hays County does not have a contract with ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and has not been asked directly to share data collected with Hays County ALPR cameras with ICE.
However he did say that, theoretically, ICE could access Hays County Flock data through another agency who had a data-sharing software agreement with Flock.
“Flock does not share directly with ICE, although they can reach out to various law enforcement agencies to use their software or ask or request to use the software,” Hipolito said.
“They (ICE) don’t have a Flock contract, so they don’t have access to any of the software or any of the databases. But they could call U.S. Border Patrol, which is a separate entity, and say, ‘Hey, I need you to check a vehicle license plate for this reason.’ And so they have indirect access, but they do not have direct access to any Flock camera. They have to rely on a third-party law enforcement agency.”
Under this arrangement with Flock Safety, HCSO would not know what specific Flock data an agency that had been previously granted access to the data is looking for, Hipolito said. This is whether or not it is U.S. Boarder Patrol or any other outside agency that Hays County has approved for access.
“We can’t tell if they’re searching, if they’ve received information from our cameras, we can’t tell that. All we know is that they can request access to our database, and once we give them access, if they have access ... we don’t know when people are accessing.”
He also stated that this situation is typical for law enforcement as there are many databases used for investigations that are shared among other law enforcement agencies.
The data sharing between local law enforcement agencies is one of the benefits of the Flock Safety system because it allows police to track suspects between jurisdictions, said Hipolito.
“We share with 200plus agencies throughout this country. That’s the beautiful thing about Flock, the networking capabilities, because criminals don’t just stay in one jurisdiction. They travel to commit crimes and then go back home. So that’s the huge benefit of being able to share data with other agencies.”
He singled out four recent cases in which Flock cameras played a key role in identifying suspects, including the arrest of Omar Galvan-Ochoa, 29, formerly of Kyle, who was found guilty of murder in August. Surveillance cameras at the Buda Valero station where the murder took place were not detailed enough to read the suspect’s license plate, but detectives were able to identify the license plate number by using Flock camera data, according to a HCSO spokesperson.
Hipolito said Flock cameras were also crucial to the August arrest of Harris County resident Patrick Zepeda for Trafficking of Persons/Engage in Sexual Conduct. Zepeda allegedly offered vapes and alcohol to underage girls in exchange for sexual favors in the Dripping Springs area.
“I just would like to have the tools necessary to help fight crime on a daily basis, and we have to leverage technology in 2025 for us to be successful as a law enforcement agency,” said Hipolito. “It’s a tool that obviously provides leads to our investigators and our deputies that are on the street in a very timely manner, which in turn, allows us to put criminals in jail more efficiently than we would without the technology. And now it’s gone” The cancellation of the Flock Safety contract means the four additional cameras requested by the Hays County Sheriff ’s office will not be ordered and the six cameras currently in operation will be deactivated within 30 days.
As of last month, the county had Flock cameras at the following locations: FM 150 in the area of Hays City Store (Driftwood), HWY 21 near the intersection with FM 2001 (Niederwald), (2) US 290 near the intersection with Nutty Brown Road (unincorporated Austin), US 290 near the intersection with Ranch Road 12 (Dripping Springs), and Overpass Road near the intersection with Firecracker Drive (unincorporated Buda).
Security cameras are now an unavoidable part of everyday life, according to Hipolito.
“There are cameras on many businesses throughout the county. There are cameras on hundreds of residences throughout the county, there are cameras in the downtown area of San Marcos, we’re just living in a day and age where there’s just cameras everywhere. You can’t walk into a convenience store without being on camera. You can’t walk into a mall without being on camera.”
He also said that the use of ALPR cameras was not a violation of Constitutional rights.
“This is a technology that takes a picture of a vehicle on a public roadway. It’s not considered a search that would be covered by the Fourth Amendment. I take an oath to uphold the laws of this land and uphold the rule of law, and uphold the Constitution, and I wouldn’t be in favor of anything that would violate anybody’s rights. I take that very, very seriously, and it’s just not something that we as law enforcement nationwide would endorse if it violated rights.”
Under the agreement with Flock Safety, HCSO has access to images taken by their ALPR cameras for 30 days.
“Once that 30 day mark rolls off, then we no longer have access. I think Flock probably still has access to that data, or it’s stored somewhere, but that database is CJIS (Criminal Justice Information Services) compliant, which meets the regulations of all of the databases that we use as law enforcement. … so quite frankly, there’s really no risk of that data being breached or that software being breached to where Joe Blow public, or anybody from the public can just access it.”
Flock Safety does not currently have a contract with any U.S. Department of Homeland Security agencies, according to CEO Garrett Langley. However, he said in an August 25 statement that the company had “engaged in limited pilots with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), to assist those agencies in combating human trafficking and fentanyl distribution.”
As of mid-August, Flock has paused all pilot programs with the federal government in order to change the way federal agencies can interact with the software, Langley said. The updated system will allow local law enforcement agencies more insight in how their information is being shared.
Prior to the August pause, the Flock database did not have distinct permissions and protocols to ensure local compliance for federal agency users, according to Langley. But revisions to the Flock software will address this issue.
“All federal customers will be designated within Flock as a distinct “Federal” user category in the system. This distinction will give local agencies better information to determine their sharing settings. Moving forward, federal users will not be added to Statewide or Nationwide lookup. Any sharing request, audit or display of these agencies will clearly delineate that an organization is federal.”
The reach of their network continues to expand, with Flock Safety announcing earlier this month a partnership with home security camera company Ring. The agreement between the companies allows Ring customers using the “Community Request” feature to share videos in response to law enforcement agency requests submitted through Flock software.
“The expansion of Community Requests will empower more communities to do what they’ve always wanted to do – help,” according to a statement from Ring.
“Public safety agencies can't see who received a notification or who chose not to respond. You can even turn off Community Request notifications altogether if you prefer.”
Public concern about the privacy of data collected by Flock Safety and other ALPR cameras has led Central Texas cities to cancel contracts, decline to install these cameras or to opt for oversight measures regarding access to the data. In June, the Austin City Manager ended the city’s contract for 40 Flock cameras following input from the Austin City Council and citizens voicing their concerns. Earlier this month, the Lockhart City Council rejected a proposal to install seven ALPR cameras within the city limits. And in June, in response to community feedback and discussions with the San Marcos City Council, the San Marcos Police Department ceased all automatic sharing of ALPR data with outside law enforcement agencies.
Data will now only be shared upon request and confirmation of a specific criminal investigation or prosecution, according to an SMPD spokesperson. Agencies must also complete a formal request process, including a non-disclosure agreement, before data will be released.
“Building and maintaining public trust is fundamental to our mission,” San Marcos Police Chief Stan Standridge said in a previous press release issued by the city on the topic. “As we leverage Flock ALPR technology to enhance community safety, we will ensure that clear expectations and usage protocols for Flock ALPR data are regularly communicated and understood throughout the department, reinforcing our commitment to privacy and responsible data stewardship.”
Hipolito said he would consider a similar arrangement if a data-sharing agreement cannot be worked out, but such an agreement would diminish the capabilities of Flock Safety or other ALPR systems.
“Would I accept that? I would, because my people use Flock every single day. … Obviously it wouldn’t be as effective if we don’t share, then that will cause other agencies not to share with us. But some is better than none.”
Even though they voted to end the Flock Safety contract, Commissioners Debbie Gonzales Ingalsbe and Michelle Cohen said their votes were against the company Flock Safety, not the ALPR technology. Both commissioners suggested that Hays County should reach out to other companies that manufacture ALPR cameras.
“I want to also be open to looking at other options,” said Commissioner Cohen. “I know that there’s other companies out there that may do the same thing.”
Hipolito said he would welcome meetings about alternatives to Flock Systems cameras.
“We’re going to have conversations with commissioners over the next three or four weeks to figure out what direction we can go into that they would feel comfortable with.
“Although we’ve lost Flock, I’m going to continue to fight for technology. I’m going to continue to fight for license plate readers,” Hipolito said. “My job as a Sheriff is to try to keep this county as safe as possible.”
This article has been revised from the original published in the Oct. 22 print edition of the Daily Record to include official statements from the Flock Safety and Ring company websites.
