The Tide Turns on Tech: How Cities Are Reclaiming Control of Surveillance
For years, the rollout of surveillance technology in our cities felt…inevitable. Police departments, citing efficiency and cost savings, quietly adopted license plate readers, facial recognition software, and predictive policing algorithms. But 2025 marked a turning point. Across the country, a growing number of cities began treating these purchases not as administrative necessities, but as political decisions – and the results were striking.
From ‘Inevitable’ to ‘Negotiable’: The Power of Procurement
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and other digital rights groups have long argued that the way cities procure surveillance technology is a critical vulnerability. Vendors have skillfully exploited “legacy procurement practices,” leveraging loopholes like “no-cost offers” and “pilot programs” to normalize surveillance before any real public debate takes place. This creates a situation of “information asymmetry,” where cities become reliant on vendors for data governance decisions, effectively outsourcing policy-making.
But in 2025, that dynamic began to shift. Cities like Austin, Oak Park, Evanston, and Denver saw significant pushback against Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR) systems, with several jurisdictions outright rejecting or cancelling contracts. This wasn’t simply about privacy concerns; it was about reclaiming control. Officials started demanding evidence of efficacy – and, crucially, refusing to renew contracts when that evidence wasn’t provided. Hays County, Texas, and San Marcos, Texas, exemplified this fiscal responsibility, rejecting the “force multiplier” myth and prioritizing responsible spending.
The Rise of Community-Driven Oversight
The success in 2025 wasn’t solely down to savvy politicians. It was fueled by robust community organizing. Residents demanded transparency, questioned data-sharing practices (particularly concerning immigration enforcement, as highlighted by EFF’s work on Flock Safety), and pressured elected officials to prioritize civil liberties. The Austin example, where a pilot program was allowed to expire due to constituent concerns, is a powerful illustration of this grassroots influence.
This organizing is increasingly focused on the concept of “Community Control Over Police Surveillance” (CCOPS), advocating for local ordinances that require public review and approval before any new surveillance technology can be deployed. These ordinances often include provisions for impact assessments, data minimization, and strict limitations on data sharing.
Looking Ahead: Trends to Watch in 2026 and Beyond
The momentum gained in 2025 suggests several key trends will shape the future of surveillance in our cities:
- Increased Scrutiny of Vendor Contracts: Expect more cities to conduct thorough audits of existing surveillance contracts, focusing on data security, privacy safeguards, and actual effectiveness.
- Expansion of CCOPS Ordinances: The CCOPS model is likely to spread to more cities, empowering communities to have a direct say in how they are policed.
- Focus on Data Governance: Cities will increasingly grapple with questions of data ownership, retention, and access. The fight against “vendor lock-in” – where cities become dependent on proprietary systems – will intensify.
- Legal Challenges to Surveillance Technologies: We can anticipate more lawsuits challenging the legality of facial recognition, predictive policing, and other invasive technologies, particularly in light of growing concerns about bias and discrimination.
- The AI Procurement Challenge: As Artificial Intelligence (AI) becomes more integrated into surveillance systems, the procurement process will become even more complex. Cities will need to develop expertise in evaluating the risks and benefits of AI-powered tools. Taraaz Research’s work on AI procurement will be crucial in this area.
The Denver case, where Mayor Johnston overrode a unanimous council rejection of a Flock contract, serves as a stark reminder that the fight isn’t over. It highlights the importance of strong local ordinances and vigilant community oversight.
FAQ: Surveillance and Your City
- What is “legacy procurement”? It refers to outdated administrative processes that prioritize speed and cost over democratic review when purchasing technology.
- What is a “pilot loophole”? Vendors offer free trials or “no-cost” programs to get their technology into cities, making it harder to remove later.
- What can I do to influence surveillance policies in my city? Attend city council meetings, contact your elected officials, join local advocacy groups, and demand transparency.
- Is facial recognition technology accurate? Studies have shown that facial recognition systems are often inaccurate, particularly when identifying people of color and women.
The events of 2025 demonstrated that surveillance isn’t a foregone conclusion. It’s a choice. And increasingly, communities are choosing to say “no” – reclaiming their power and demanding a future where technology serves the public good, not the other way around.
Want to learn more? Explore the EFF’s resources on Community Control Over Police Surveillance and surveillance technology. Share this article with your neighbors and start a conversation about the future of policing in your community.