Artificial Intelligence

Flock Safety Faces Backlash as Cities Struggle to Cancel Contracts

While an increasing number of municipalities choose to terminate their agreements with Flock Safety, local governments are finding that getting the company to actually remove its automated license plate reader cameras is proving to be a significant challenge.

Radwan AbdulhadiEditor and technology writer

Published: November 2, 2026 · Updated: November 2, 2026 · 3 min read

Flock Safety Faces Backlash as Cities Struggle to Cancel Contracts — Image: The Verge

Contract Terminations Meet Operational Resistance

As more cities move to cancel their contracts with Flock Safety, municipal leaders are discovering how difficult that process can be in practice. As detailed by <a href="https://www.theverge.com/tech/1024232/flock-ignoring-cancel-contracts">The Verge</a>, while the decisions to terminate agreements are mounting, the physical removal of the surveillance hardware frequently lags behind or hits unexpected roadblocks.

Plymouth Police Take Action After Silence

In Plymouth, Minnesota, the city council voted in September to terminate its contract with Flock. However, the company failed to respond to the city's request, leaving cameras up for over a month with no acknowledgment. Facing a lack of communication, Police Chief Eric Fadden <a href="https://www.thedrive.com/news/my-city-canceled-flocks-contract-flock-ignored-it-so-the-police-chief-unplugged-the-cameras">took matters into his own hands</a> to ensure the hardware was disabled.

Chief Fadden explained to <a href="https://www.thedrive.com/news/my-city-canceled-flocks-contract-flock-ignored-it-so-the-police-chief-unplugged-the-cameras">The Drive</a> that after hearing nothing for more than a week, he directed staff to disconnect the power cords from the cameras to confirm they were neither functioning nor recording plates.

Unauthorized Reinstallations in Dayton

Roughly 20 miles away, <a href="https://www.thedrive.com/news/flock-reinstalled-its-cameras-after-another-city-canceled-its-contract">Dayton, Minnesota</a> encountered a different yet related hurdle with the surveillance provider.

While Flock acknowledged the local government's request and initially stated it would take up to 60 days to remove the equipment, the company subsequently reconnected two cameras within city limits without authorization. This action directly contradicted a specific request from the local police department instructing them not to complete the work order.

Detailing the incident on social media, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/CityofDaytonMNOfficial/posts/city-staff-were-recently-made-aware-that-a-flock-camera-was-reinstalled-within-t/1425347723035006/">posted on Facebook</a> that the police department was alerted to a maintenance work order on September 17, 2026. Although the city notified Flock the following day that the program was on hold, the directive was ignored and a camera was placed back into active service.

Broader Industry Context and Company Response

These disputes follow a <a href="https://www.theverge.com/tech/1009411/elgin-community-college-flock-safety-cameras">similar ordeal</a> in Illinois, where the company similarly refused to take down cameras and left equipment uncovered at Elgin Community College after administration sought to cancel its contract.

Addressing the mounting criticism regarding contract terminations, Flock spokesperson Andrew Smith provided a statement to <a href="https://www.theverge.com/tech/1024232/flock-ignoring-cancel-contracts">The Verge</a>.

"We are proud of the impact our technology has had in Plymouth," Smith told the publication. "We respect the city’s decision and are working with the customer to have the cameras removed."