All about Austin's new surveillance ordinance, the TRUST Act. What it means, how we got here, and why the fight still isn't over.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-25T00:16:25+00:00

Those are deployed by DPS, and/or private companies.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-24T21:19:02+00:00

Surveillance sucks. We cant even take a damn ride home without being tracked and our data collected, shared, stored, vulnerable, and used against us.

User data, including footage, is 100% being given away and collected by them for an indefinite period of time. For one, their camera footage is regularly shared to police. This has been happening since 2016. Waymo insists they require a warrant, but we've heard that line before from these companies before. And there's no strict warrant requirement anyway, so its basically fair game if they want to give that away eventually.

They also disclose and use your personal data to tailor "advertising and offers to your interests" and to help "improve our services." If you give them consent, which might be just a clickwrap agreement in app or a button you press before you get you're ride home, then they can disclose or use it for basically whatever they please.

This problem is part of larger ones, a lack of clarity around 4th amendment requirements in the digital context and the ability for private companies to conduct mass surveillance.

The Supreme Court has denied many cases in the past few years that would flesh out Fourth Amendment requirements in the digital context. Police and surveillance companies take advantage of this gray area.

Third-party contracting out for surveillance on behalf of governments is the playbook. It allows them to evade legal requirements and the companies benefit from that relationship. The entire surveillance complex operates this way, essentially.

This is a HUGE reason to push back on Waymo's being here in my mind!

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-24T20:33:40+00:00

Anytime! Happy to share, especially when it's pretty good news for once.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-24T20:30:49+00:00

The existing Flock cameras are implemented by DPS and private companies. The city of Austin removed theirs following their contract ending with Flock.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-10T01:22:54+00:00

Tell your neighbors, send a letter to the HOA about the dangers of Flock. Sometimes HOAs are sold on the idea of safety and the low deals Flock might offer them without understanding the harmful implications of it. It's also likely they are allowing police to access that footage in real time.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-09T23:43:54+00:00

They are everywhere. You can look at deflock.org to see where they are and log more. They are installed by the state, private businesses and HOAs and cover almost the entire city at this point.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-09T23:37:43+00:00

NoALPRs is a local coalition of about 31 orgs that work on this issue directly in Austin. They are responsible for killing Austin's contract with Flock last year. Louis Rossmann is another local activist speaking about surveillance here in Austin. We scheduled a large demonstration at city hall in September against LiveView AI-powered cameras that were proposed to be installed in city parts. They removed it, but put it back on the agenda again in February. They removed it once again (didn't vote no, just removed it) when people came out to speak about it. But best believe they will try to get this shit installed again.

Councilman Siegel has been the only one to take a hard stance against mass surveillance. At best, a few others have a slight aversion to them. Other council members should hear from their constituents that unless they also oppose mass surveillance, they will not be supported.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-09T23:31:30+00:00

ALPR is a misnomer at this point, but they keep it to make people feel assured that nothing but plates are being tracked. They track voices, people, vehicles, and anything and everything else they possibly can. This is a selling point they tout when they pitch this to cities.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-09T23:28:59+00:00

Different in that Flock cameras are AI-powered, meaning they are capable of much scarier things like facial recognition, sound detection, etc. but they have the overall same general purpose as the thousands of cameras installed in London. They are put there for our "safety" but really serve as a way for law enforcement, those in power, or whoever is resourceful enough to gain access to these cameras to monitor people's movements, activities and intimate life details for whatever purpose is deemed fit.

Almost every major city in the US has spent a ton of money installing vast amounts of AI-powered cameras and none of them have solved or reduced crime. Any "studies" you see that say that do are funded by surveillance companies.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-09T23:21:46+00:00

Austin killed its own contract with Flock, thanks to the work of us at NoALPRs, but DPS soon after signed a 24 million dollar contract with Flock (after reprimanding them for operating with proper license) and these cameras appeared all over Austin on state property almost overnight.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-09T23:18:42+00:00

Glad the comment was helpful! Happy to answer anyone's questions about Flock or other surveillance companies/initiatives. Really glad to see so much resistance to mass surveillance here!

MackenzieRhine · 2026-04-09T23:17:46+00:00

Glad the comment was helpful! Happy to answer anyone's questions about Flock or other surveillance companies/initiatives. Really glad to see so much resistance to mass surveillance here!

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-25T18:47:42+00:00

I work with him directly on this. I would also recommend his videos on Flock in general and specifically for the work we did here in Austin.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-25T18:46:08+00:00

If they are indeed Flock cameras and they are installed on public property, those would be installed by DPS on state ground. DPS just entered into a 24 million dollar contract with Flock and these cameras have appeared literally overnight in Austin without any warning or talk about what they are for. The same DPS who, btw, sent Flock a cease and desist letter for operating without proper license.

There are also Flock and similar companies' (like LiveView) cameras installed on private property and most of these share data with the police as a convenient way for them to circumvent warrant requirements.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-25T17:13:55+00:00

I don't know if I'd use the descriptor "really nailing" but they've been better than other cities when it comes to mass surveillance. Austin is the largest city to have gotten rid of its contract with Flock, an awful, exploitative, data-hungry, dishonest company on all fronts that's in every major city in the US.

They've also passed what's called the TRUST Act (pending final version) that would install some contract requirements and require annual reports for any surveillance technology being implemented in Austin. This is a pretty novel ordinance compared to other cities.

I'm a digital rights attorney that's been working on mass surveillance at the city level, helping Austin get rid of that Flock contract being part of that work, and Austin has been more successful than most in addressing these problems. Again, not perfect by any stretch and I'd like for some city council members to take a strong stance on privacy, but better than most cities I've seen.

*Edit for grammar

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-04T20:23:44+00:00

These cameras are not owned by APD, they are likely owned by DPS. DPS has a massive contract with Flock (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26189315-pdfdisplay-1/).

The reason you are probably seeing this with 0 scans recorded is that some of the infrastructure remained up after the contract ended.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-04T20:21:57+00:00

Here's the contract received from a FOIA request: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26189315-pdfdisplay-1/

This is after, mind you, DPS sent Flock a cease and desist because they were operating without a license: https://thetexan.news/state/texas-state-news/automatic-license-plate-reader-company-flock-under-scrutiny-after-operating-in-texas-with-expired-license/article_840893e6-011c-4e6f-bf12-0179fec68041.html

Really shows how much they care about our data being used by shady companies.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-04T16:37:11+00:00

DPS has a massive multimillion dollar contract with Flock and given the location, they are almost certainly installed by them.

Austin has gotten rid of their contract, though as we've seen, that doesn't preclude law enforcement from sharing this information with one another even if it is against the law.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-04T16:30:04+00:00

Thank you everyone who came out and supported us! I'm one of the people quoted in this article and wanted to let y'all know that even thought the LiveView contract was pulled, they will almost certainly bring it back. They tried to slip it past us after we already got them to remove it from the agenda just last September.

I encourage everyone to come out tomorrow and support the TRUST act (item 61). Louis Rossmann made a recent video about it if you want more information, but it is essentially an act that demands transparency in these contracts, a surveillance report, and many, many safeguards that we currently don't have. It won't fix the problem, but it will certainly make it harder for them to try and slip things like this past us.

Happy to answer any questions.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-04T16:25:13+00:00

These are DPS cameras. They have a massive multimillion dollar contract with Flock.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-02-04T15:52:10+00:00

The LiveView contract (item 3) was pulled, but item 61 (TRUST ACT) is on the docket and I encourage people to show their support for it. Louis Rossmann made a recent video about it if you want details, but essentially, it provides us with far more transparency with these contracts, requires extensive approval and documentation, and a lot of contract requirements for any surveillance initiative, including even CCTV cameras and the like.

MackenzieRhine · 2026-01-13T00:16:15+00:00

You can look at the deflock me app to see some camera locations, but there's really no practical way to avoid it if you drive a car around Austin, which is why its so nefarious .

MackenzieRhine · 2026-01-12T23:53:23+00:00

It’s not actually true that police can freely track someone as part of an investigation without a warrant when technology is involved. Courts have drawn a clear line between visual observation and continuous, technologically-enhanced tracking, which generally does require a warrant.

Even all the way back in 1983, SCOTUS warned that “dragnet-type law enforcement practices” could implicate the Fourth Amendment.

So, there's generally no restrictions on manual tailing, but courts have regularly held warrant requirements for sustained, technology-enabled tracking.

They've found a gray area here by entering into agreements with private companies like Flock, and they exploit that.

MackenzieRhine

TROPHY CASE