Municipalities Struggle to Terminate Surveillance Contracts with Flock Safety

As more municipalities move to end their professional relationships with surveillance technology provider Flock Safety, several local governments are reporting significant challenges in getting the company to deactivate or remove its hardware. These administrative hurdles have left some city officials feeling forced to take unilateral action to ensure their data privacy mandates are respected.

In Plymouth, Minnesota, the city council officially voted to end its agreement with the company this past September. Despite this formal decision, the municipality did not receive a response from Flock regarding the termination. After more than a month of silence and the continued presence of active cameras, local law enforcement decided to intervene. Police Chief Eric Fadden authorized his staff to manually unplug the equipment, ensuring that the devices could no longer collect or record license plate data.

A similar situation is unfolding in the nearby city of Dayton, Minnesota. Although Flock acknowledged Dayton’s desire to end the contract—initially indicating a two-month timeframe for removal—the company’s actions contradicted the city’s instructions. Following a specific directive from the Dayton Police Department to halt all maintenance and installation efforts, Flock proceeded to reconnect two cameras without authorization. Despite being informed on September 18, 2026, that the program was suspended, the company initiated a work order that placed the surveillance units back into service, ignoring the city’s explicit demand.

These issues are not limited to Minnesota. Reports indicate that the firm has demonstrated resistance to contract terminations in other regions as well. For instance, at Elgin Community College in Illinois, the administration attempted to dissolve its agreement with the company, only to be met with a refusal to remove the hardware. This pattern of behavior has created a difficult environment for institutions seeking to exit their agreements, leading some to resort to physical disconnection or direct confrontation with the firm’s maintenance workflows to regain control over their local surveillance infrastructure.

Sources: The Verge

Aggregated summary. Original: The Verge