BRIDGEWATER, Va. – Five Flock Security cameras record the license and vehicle information of the cars coming and going in the town of Bridgewater. 

An article published nationally on Sep. 17 by the Virginia Center for Investigative Journalism focused on the Flock Security system in Bridgewater, raising concerns about privacy rights and technological overreach.

Flock Security cameras had already gained a negative connotation with reports of ICE requesting police departments to access the Flock database on their behalf for immigration reasons. 

Cameras capture license plates for police 

Although there are only five cameras in the town of Bridgewater, around 60,000 vehicles are recorded coming and going each month, according to the Virginia Center for Investigative Journalism. The cameras record the license plates and identifying information of vehicles entering and leaving town and save them to a database for law enforcement accessibility. 

According to the Town of Bridgewater Flock FAQ page, the Bridgewater Police Department uses the data to assist investigations. Through the Flock cameras, BPD receives an alert whenever a vehicle associated with an outstanding warrant enters town.

Current Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR) policy in Virginia states that all collected information must be deleted within twenty-one days. It also prohibits law enforcement agencies outside of Virginia from blanket access to Flock data within Virginia’s jurisdictions. 

Before this law, the collected information was accessible nationwide. Between 2024 and 2025, the VCIJ reported that Houston, Texas, requested information from Bridgewater’s Flock cameras over 500,000 times for undisclosed reasons.

The data now collected by the cameras is entered into a database accessible only by the Bridgewater Police Department. Utilizing AI, the system can match search requests to plates that have entered or left town. 

The public’s response is split 

After the VCIJ article was published, the Bridgewater Police Department hosted a public conversation on Sep. 29, 2025 about the cameras. Town Chief of Police Philip Read was there to discuss BPD’s use of Flock Security.

Flock Security has come up in multiple town halls, including the most recent one on Feb.10 2026, where the Bridgewater minutes record citizen Bryn King raising concern about the cameras. According to the Daily News Record, King’s main statement was that the cameras do not prevent crime, but rather only erode public trust.

Concern about Flock cameras is not limited to Bridgewater. WHSV reported in February that more than 800 Harrisonburg residents have signed a petition asking for the removal of Flock cameras in the city.

Practitioner in Residence in Computer Science at Bridgewater College Lorinda Cullip said she is not convinced of dangers related to data collection.

“We post what we’ve eaten, we post everything that our family does, we put our own self out there on social media,” Cullip said. “If anybody has a cell phone, everywhere that they’re going is being tracked.”

People generally aren’t fond of surveillance, despite carrying smartphones on their person every day, junior computer science major at Bridgewater College, George Holsinger said. 

“That data is going to a cloud, and we’re just trusting that whoever is maintaining that is using it for the right reasons,” Cullip said.

Bridgewater College sophomore and local Bridgewater resident Jess Manson feels negatively about the cameras and does not want to be monitored while going about daily life.

“It gives me a sense of being watched,” Manson said.

Public transparency is another concern for those coming and going through Bridgewater.

“It was put up and not talked about for two years until a single article came out,” Holsinger said. 

Bridgewater implements new reforms and policies 

In response to the VCIJ article, Bridgewater Mayor Ted Flory, BPD, and the Town of Bridgewater management created a new FAQ page about Flock in Bridgewater.

The Bridgewater Police Department highlights the positives of the cameras, stating on the FAQ page that in 2026, ALPRS were used to locate a hit-and-run vehicle, investigate a theft, and make a felony arrest. In 2025, BPD states that ALPRs were used to recover a missing child and apprehend the suspect.

The FAQ also makes clear what ALPRs are not used for in Bridgewater, including immigration, harassment, traffic violations, intimidation and personal use by officers. Flock Security cameras also do not record identifying information such as gender or race of individuals in the vehicle, according to the FAQ.

The FAQ does state that there is always a concern over data when using technology, but that BPD has a policy on how the data can be accessed. 

Even with the current ALPR statutes, the General Assembly published a report in Jan. 2026, finding that not all Virginia law enforcement agencies were using ALPRs in adherence to the law. Allowing outside agencies to access the information is cited as the most common violation, followed by data retention beyond the twenty-one day limit. 

The General Assembly report also states that Staunton, Va. plans to suspend their usage of ALPRs.