Summary
Cities are canceling Flock contracts, but the company won’t take them down and sometimes is reinstalling them. While more cities are canceling their c…
What this means for you
For Chinese readers in the US, this story shows that when a local city votes to cancel a Flock contract, the cameras may not come down right away: in Plymouth, Minnesota, they remained up for over a month after the city council voted to terminate the contract in September, and the city had received no acknowledgment from the company. In Dayton, Minnesota, Flock acknowledged the request and said it would take up to 60 days to remove the equipment, but the city later said two cameras were reconnected within city limits without authorization and the camera was placed back into service without authorization. The article also reports that in Illinois, Flock refused to take down cameras and uncovered cameras at Elgin Community College after the administration sought to cancel its contract. The practical effect described is that residents may see plate-recording cameras remain in place, or return to service, even after local officials have sought to end the program.
Cities are canceling Flock contracts, but the company won’t take them down and sometimes is reinstalling them.
While more cities are canceling their contracts with Flock Safety, just as many are discovering how difficult that can be in some instances. Plymouth, Minnesota’s city council voted to terminate its contract with Flock in September, but failed to respond to the city’s request. For over a month, the cameras remained up, and the city had received no acknowledgment from the company. So, Police Chief Eric Fadden took matters into his own hands and physically disconnected the cameras.
“After hearing nothing for more than a week, I directed our staff to disconnect the power cords from the cameras in order to be sure that they are not functioning or recording plates,” Fadden told The Drive.
Roughly 20 miles up the road, Dayton, Minnesota, is having its own issues with Flock. In this instance, the company acknowledged the city’s request and said it would take up to 60 days to remove the equipment. Despite this, Flock reconnected two cameras within the city limits without authorization, and following a specific request from the local police not to complete the work order.
Dayton’s local government posted on Facebook:
On September 17, 2026, the Police Department was made aware of a maintenance work order produced by Flock. The City notified Flock on September 18, 2026, that the program was on hold, and no work orders were to be completed. Unfortunately, the City’s direction was not followed, and the camera was placed back into service without authorization.
This follows a similar ordeal in Illinois, where the company refused to take down cameras and uncovered cameras at Elgin Community College after the administration sought to cancel its contract.
Flock did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Most Popular
This is the title for the native ad
More in Tech
This is the title for the native ad
Top Stories
Source: The Verge
Join the discussion
If your city council voted to cancel a Flock contract, would you prefer officials to disconnect the cameras immediately or wait for the company to remove them on its own schedule?
