Butler County, Ohio — A Countywide Notice
We do not consent to being searched.
License plate cameras across Butler County are logging every car, on every road, into a searchable record — not to catch someone in the act, but to reconstruct where they've been. That's not one search. That's a profile.
“...to place obstacles in the way of a too permeating police surveillance.”
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT — Chatrie v. United States, 609 U.S. ___ (2026), quoting Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296This is a fraction of documented camera locations in and around Butler County. Every marker here represents a real, publicly reported license plate reader and its direction of view — pulled from DeFlock's crowdsourced map, positioned to reflect each city's real relative location. At normal zoom, there are so many that the roads underneath disappear. See the live, interactive map at deflock.me →
Show up
Where and when to say it in person.
A comment thread doesn't change a vote. A room full of residents does. Dates below come from each city's own published schedule — verify against the city's calendar before a meeting, since dates can shift.
The two things people say
Fair questions. Here are direct answers.
“My phone already tracks me.”
One photo isn't the issue. The issue is a government network stitching together every plate, every road, every day, into one searchable timeline of your movements — held indefinitely, queryable without your knowledge. That's the exact pattern the Supreme Court said crosses into a search: reconstructing the whole of someone's physical movements, not glimpsing one moment of it.
“I have nothing to hide.”
This was never about hiding something in one moment. It's about whether the government should be able to build a permanent, searchable profile of where you go, before anyone shows cause to look. Nothing-to-hide answers a question nobody asked — and it doesn't protect you once someone with access decides to look anyway.
Fact-checked
Sheriff Jones went live to defend Flock. Here's the record.
Butler County Sheriff Richard Jones addressed Flock cameras directly in a Facebook Live after backlash in the comments. We checked the specific, checkable claims against public records.
He said
Flock cameras don't take pictures of your face — "absolutely not," it only reads the license plate.
The record
Flock's own patent (US 11,416,545) describes querying footage for a person with "matching face recognition data points" as a designed system feature. A company's sworn patent filing contradicts its own sales pitch.
He said
If the system is abused, people have been fired or arrested — the guardrails work.
The record
True, and worse than it sounds: 17+ Georgia officers alone were arrested in 2026 for misusing Flock to track exes, family, and personal contacts — plus cases in Arizona, Louisiana, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin. Firings prove misuse keeps happening, not that it's prevented.
He said
Flock doesn't sell your data — "that's not true, they do not sell the data."
Actually true
Flock's policy confirms it doesn't sell customer data to third parties. This isn't the strongest defense of the program, though — the real concern is how long data is retained and who it's shared with, not whether it's sold.
You're not the first
Cities around Butler County have already acted.
- Oxford, OH
Council voted 6–1 to terminate, Aug 18, 2026.
- Fort Mitchell, KY
Ended its program the same night, Aug 18.
- Independence, KY
Mayor ordered cameras physically removed, Aug 24, after residents asked.
- Fort Thomas, KY
Discontinued Flock, Aug 28, citing privacy concerns.
Check it yourself
The evidence locker.
Every claim on this page traces to a public document, patent, or court opinion. Links go straight to the source.
- U.S. Patent 11,416,545Flock Group Inc.'s own patent describing face-recognition querying as a designed feature. View patent →
- Chatrie v. United States, 609 U.S. ___ (2026)6–3, holding a Fourth Amendment search occurs when police obtain digital location data — including short windows of it. Read opinion →
- Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018)Held that tracking someone's movements over time is a search requiring a warrant. Read opinion →
- Dayton v. State, 151 Ohio St.3d 168, 2017-Ohio-6909Ohio Supreme Court: home-rule authority lets a municipality set its own camera policy without a state override. Read opinion →
- DeFlock mapIndependent, crowdsourced map of license plate readers around the region. Open the map →
The fronts
Where this stands, city by city.
Monroe, OH
Active — deflockmonroe.com
Lebanon, OH
Active (Warren County) — deflocklebanon.com
Oxford, OH
Won — contract terminated Aug 2026
Hamilton, Fairfield, Middletown, Trenton, West Chester, Mason
Pending — no local site yet
Want to lead one of the pending fronts?
If you live in Hamilton, Fairfield, Middletown, Trenton, West Chester, Mason, or anywhere else in Butler County and want to get a site and a campaign going for your city, reach out.
Correct us
Sources.
- Meeting schedules and locations — each city's official website; full county list at bceo.org/municipalities
- Oxford 6–1 vote and contract termination — regional reporting, August 2026
- Fort Mitchell, Independence, and Fort Thomas, KY actions — regional reporting, August 2026
- U.S. Patent 11,416,545 — Flock Group Inc., granted August 16, 2022
- Chatrie v. United States, 609 U.S. ___ (2026) — opinion of the Court, Justice Kagan
- Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018)
- Dayton v. State, 2017-Ohio-6909 — Supreme Court of Ohio
- Georgia officer misuse arrests, 2026 — reporting from Reason, FOX 5 Atlanta, WALB
- Flock's data-sale policy — flocksafety.com/legal/privacy-policy