Plymouth Police Chief Eric Fadden took direct action to disable Flock Safety cameras after the company reportedly ignored formal demands to cease operations. Following a unanimous vote by the Plymouth City Council to end its contract with the company in September 2026, the city initiated a multi-step termination process. This included suspending all user accounts, notifying the company of the decision, and sending a formal letter of cancellation via both email and US Mail. When Flock Safety failed to provide a corporate or legal response for more than a week, Fadden directed staff to physically disconnect the power cords from the cameras to ensure they were no longer recording license plates.

A Flock Safety automated license plate reader camera with a physical cover over the lens.
A Flock Safety camera, which the Plymouth Police Chief ordered to be physically disconnected following a contract dispute.www.tomshardware.com

The image illustrates the specific hardware used by Flock Safety that the city of Plymouth took manual action to disable.

The incident highlights a significant breakdown in cooperation between the municipality and the technology provider. While the city sought to terminate the agreement, the company's lack of response forced the city to take manual measures to secure its infrastructure. This situation mirrors a similar conflict in Dayton, Minnesota, located just 10 miles away. In that instance, Dayton police instructed Flock not to proceed with a work order to replace existing devices, but the company moved forward with the replacement anyway despite the explicit instruction to stop.

These actions occur against a backdrop of increasing public scrutiny regarding Flock's automated license plate reader (ALPR) technology. While marketed as ALPRs, Flock's system utilizes AI to identify vehicles based on paint color, stickers, and make/model, leading to concerns about the depth of its tracking capabilities. Critics have pointed to specific incidents, such as a mistaken "ambush" of a car reviewer by Plymouth police due to an administrative error, as evidence of the system's risks. While removing the cameras requires city labor and reduces surveillance coverage, critics argue that leaving the cameras active—even without a contract—costs the company nothing while continuing to monitor the public.