It is a crazy scenario: corporate employees you’ve never met watching live feeds of your child’s gymnastics class, not for security, but to impress potential customers. That’s exactly what happened in Dunwoody, Georgia, where Flock Safety workers accessed cameras in children’s spaces at the Marcus Jewish Community Center as part of sales demonstrations.
Despite learning about these intrusions, Dunwoody’s city council renewed their surveillance contract with Flock anyway.
The Access Logs Tell the Story
Public records reveal specific dates when Flock employees viewed sensitive locations for commercial purposes.
The details, uncovered through public records requests by resident Jason Hunyar, are unsettling. On July 23, 2025, Flock’s Randy Gluck viewed cameras labeled “Gym Mendel – 1” and “Main Pool Right.” On September 30, 2025, Vice President Bob Carter accessed the “Gymnastics” camera.
These weren’t security emergencies or system maintenance. They were sales pitches—Flock showing off their surveillance capabilities to prospective police department clients by streaming live footage of children.
Corporate Damage Control Mode
Flock’s apology and transparency promises ring hollow after the privacy breach discovery.
When the story broke, Flock CEO Garrett Langley personally apologized to the Jewish community center, acknowledging “poor judgement.” The company promised “radical transparency” and agreed to stop using Dunwoody footage for demonstrations.
But here’s the thing about radical transparency: truly transparent companies don’t need public records lawsuits to reveal they’re using your kids as sales props. Flock’s defense—that access was “authorized” by the city—misses the point entirely. Legal permission doesn’t make watching children appropriate commercial content.
Council Chooses Vendor Over Residents
Nearly three hours of public protest couldn’t sway officials committed to surveillance expansion.
Dunwoody residents packed April 2026 council meetings for almost three hours, voicing concerns about:
- Stalking
- ICE data sharing
- Protest surveillance
They demanded the city end its relationship with Flock entirely.
Instead, the council approved a renewed contract with what they called “guardrails”:
- The city owns the data
- Controls federal sharing
- Prohibits Flock from selling information
Mayor Lynn Deutsch expressed frustration with Flock’s actions but supported renewal anyway.
Your local government just told you that municipal surveillance partnerships matter more than your children’s privacy. The message is clear: once these systems embed themselves in city operations, getting rid of them becomes nearly impossible—even when vendors cross obvious ethical lines.
