Flock keeps ignoring requests to cancel its contracts

Flock Safety cameras may continue to record and transmit data even after your city requests their removal, posing a persistent privacy risk.

Flock Safety is reportedly making it difficult for municipalities to cancel their contracts, with multiple cities experiencing delays and unauthorized actions. Plymouth, Minnesota, had Flock cameras remain active for over a month after their city council voted to terminate the contract, leading Police Chief Eric Fadden to physically disconnect the devices. Similarly, Dayton, Minnesota, faced issues when Flock reconnected cameras within city limits despite explicit requests not to, and after acknowledging a 60-day removal window. These incidents echo a previous case in Illinois where Flock allegedly refused to remove cameras after a contract cancellation request from Elgin Community College. The company has not provided immediate comment on these ongoing issues.

The recurring issues with Flock Safety's contract terminations suggest a deliberate strategy to maintain service and data collection, potentially leveraging contractual ambiguities or lengthy processes. This pattern raises concerns about user control over their data and the operational autonomy of local governments when engaging with such technology providers. Cities may need to implement stricter oversight and contractual clauses to ensure swift compliance with termination requests.

These events highlight a growing tension between the capabilities of surveillance technology providers and the desire for local control and privacy. As more cities re-evaluate their partnerships with companies like Flock Safety, the methods these companies employ to retain business could shape future contract negotiations and regulatory discussions. The ability of Flock to override directives and continue operations post-cancellation request indicates a potential power imbalance that could affect municipal decision-making regarding public safety technology.