Wilmington, Delaware, stopped using four Flock Safety license plate reader cameras that had been donated to the city. Yet Wilmington police did not abandon license plate readers altogether. Readers supplied by other companies remained part of its public safety work.
That distinction emerged as the city reconsidered who could control information from cameras watching passing vehicles. In a report published August 19, 2026, Delaware Public Media said the four Flock devices had been decommissioned. City leaders were concerned about their limited control over the information and the wider debate surrounding the company.
This was a decision about four particular cameras, not a newly enacted citywide law forbidding all license plate reader technology. It also was not the termination of a normal paid Flock contract. The cameras had been donated, and officials said the city had no direct contract with the supplier.
Why would a donation create questions?
Someone can give a police department a useful device without resolving every issue about the records it collects. A camera may take pictures on a public road, but the software and the rules controlling storage, searches and outside access can matter as much as the hardware itself.
In reporting published July 30, WHYY News interviewed Daniel Walker, a senior aide to Wilmington Mayor John Carney. Walker said the four Flock cameras had been donated by a nonprofit and that the city was decommissioning them, partly because of controversy involving the supplier and the absence of a city contract. He also said Wilmington does not participate in immigration enforcement.
A donated camera might avoid an upfront purchase, but the department still must ask who owns the images, whether the agency can restrict sharing, what happens to stored records when a system is discontinued and who can investigate a mistaken or unauthorized search. Those are questions for any vendor, not just Flock.
The public reporting did not establish a detailed final inventory of Flock hardware removed from every pole, the exact date each physical device came down or the fate of every previously recorded image. A system can be turned off even while equipment remains mounted. Decommissioning therefore should not be mistaken for proof of physical removal.
Why not stop using all license plate readers?
Wilmington officials continued to see a law enforcement use for the technology. Councilwoman Yolanda McCoy told Delaware Public Media that police had used license plate information to investigate stolen vehicles and related cases. Walker told WHYY that readers had helped the city identify vehicles connected to dangerous incidents and searches involving missing children.
Those accounts identify the benefits city officials believe the technology provides. They do not independently prove that particular recoveries would have been impossible without it. License plate observations can narrow a search, but investigators still need to check what the camera saw and connect a vehicle to the relevant incident.
By August, Delaware Public Media reported that Wilmington still had at least one plate reader from another supplier in use. WHYY had previously described a handful of non Flock readers. Because those accounts were made at different times, the exact active count should not be treated as independently verified here.
The police equipment also should not be confused with a speed or red light camera that automatically issues a ticket. A license plate reader generally records vehicle observations and helps officers search for a specific plate or vehicle description. It does not itself determine that the driver committed an offense.
What about other Delaware police agencies?
Wilmington’s decision did not compel the rest of the state to stop using Flock. WHYY reported that readers had also been used by Delaware State Police, New Castle County, Newark, Dover and Rehoboth Beach, among others. Different local agencies make their own procurement and policy choices within applicable law.
For example, WHYY reported that New Castle County’s police chief discussed 14 Flock cameras in February 2026 and emphasized restrictions on access. The Rehoboth Beach police chief described four cameras used for investigating vehicles leaving a resort community after incidents such as crashes. Those figures and policies were the agencies’ accounts at the time, not an inventory of current November operations.
The ACLU of Delaware announced on August 13 that it had written to more than 20 municipalities urging them to reconsider Flock systems. That is an advocacy effort, not evidence that all the addressed communities agreed or that their cameras were later shut off. It shows how one city’s decision became part of a broader local discussion.
The useful question now is less about whether a camera was free and more about whether a city can establish enforceable rules for the information it receives. That includes auditing officer use, limiting access, keeping ordinary records only as long as necessary and explaining to the public who controls the system.
Wilmington’s experience offers a useful comparison with our Jackson, Mississippi report, where officials discussed ending a Flock agreement while considering alternatives. In both cities, dissatisfaction with one supplier did not necessarily amount to opposition to every kind of license plate reader.
Before deciding whether Wilmington’s approach has fully resolved its concerns, readers would need updated details on the remaining suppliers, written retention and sharing terms, and the final handling of the discontinued Flock data. The August decision was clear. Its long term results require more information.
Sources
Delaware Public Media, August 19, 2026, decommissioned Wilmington readers; WHYY News, July 30, 2026, Delaware camera programs and Wilmington officials; ACLU of Delaware, August 13, 2026, letter to municipalities.
Historical developments reported in July and August 2026; reviewed November 13, 2026. The article does not claim a citywide camera ban or confirmed physical removal of every device. ALPRNews provides general information, not legal advice.
ALPRNews uses AI tools to assist with research, writing and editing. Read our editorial standards.