TL;DR
Get bike and ride gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Flock Safety replaced an unplugged automatic license plate reader in Plymouth, Minnesota, after the City Council voted to end its contract with the company. Flock said a maintenance order was mistakenly left active and that the replacement camera is not collecting data; The Drive reported that it was plugged into a solar panel and battery pack when checked. The city said it was sending staff to investigate.
Flock Safety replaced an unplugged automatic license plate reader in Plymouth, Minnesota, after the city voted to end its contract with the company, prompting the police chief to send staff to investigate. Flock said the installation resulted from a maintenance order that was inadvertently left active and asserted that the new camera is not collecting data; The Drive reported that the device was plugged into its solar panel and battery pack when the outlet reported back.
The Drive reported that a contractor was replacing the camera on a pole along Rockford Road on Wednesday, November 4. The contractor said he had been hired by Flock and was working under an order to replace the existing device because it was “broken.” He declined to give his name or company and did not show The Drive the work order. The outlet observed that the replacement appeared physically larger than the unplugged camera.
Plymouth’s City Council voted on September 22 to discontinue use of Flock’s license plate readers and end its contract. After the council vote, the cameras remained in place. Police Chief Eric Fadden told The Drive he directed staff to disconnect their power cords after more than a week without a response, so they would not be functioning or recording plates. The replacement installation took place after that disconnection.
Flock told The Drive the cameras were unplugged before the cancellation could be formally processed, which automatically generated maintenance orders. The company said it removed the remaining work orders but inadvertently missed one, leading to the replacement. It said all removal orders had been expedited and that the cameras would be removed in the coming weeks. The Drive said its check found the new unit plugged into an attached solar panel and battery pack, a physical observation that does not independently establish whether data was being collected.
A Contract Exit Meets Camera Work Orders
The episode puts a practical question behind Plymouth’s decision into focus: who controls equipment installed under a canceled contract, and how quickly can a city make sure it is inactive and removed? The council voted to end the arrangement, and the police chief ordered the cameras unplugged, yet a maintenance order led to another device being installed at the same location.
For residents and local officials, the immediate concern is not only whether the replacement camera was transmitting information. It is also whether the city and vendor have a shared, reliable process for cancellation, disabling equipment, and removing it. Flock’s explanation points to a missed work order; the reported installation shows how an administrative error can conflict with a city’s stated decision. The available reporting does not establish that the camera recorded vehicle plates after installation.
Popular right now
Sony WH-1000XM4C (M4 2nd Gen) Wireless Noise-Cancelling Headphones, Black
Philips Café Aromis Automatic Espresso Machine with LatteGo Pro Milk System
Apple AirPods Pro 3 Wireless Earbuds with Active Noise Cancellation
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Plymouth’s September Contract Vote
The Plymouth City Council voted on September 22 to stop using Flock’s automatic license plate reader cameras and end the company contract. The devices are designed to read vehicle plates; the report does not provide the contract’s full terms, the number of cameras covered, or the scheduled cancellation date.
According to The Drive, Plymouth was not the only Minnesota city where camera removal became contentious: the outlet cited a prior instance in Dayton, where Flock reinstalled cameras after the city took them down. That comparison is relevant background, but the report does not establish that the circumstances or contract procedures were identical in both cities.
“The cameras were unplugged before the cancellation could be formally processed, which automatically triggered maintenance orders.”
— Flock Safety spokesperson, as quoted by The Drive
Camera Power and Data Status
The report does not independently verify whether the replacement camera collected, transmitted, or stored plate data. Flock said it was not collecting data; The Drive observed that it was plugged into its solar panel and battery pack. That observation indicates a power connection, but does not by itself confirm the camera’s operating or data-transmission status.
It also remains unclear when the city’s contract cancellation was formally processed, whether other Plymouth cameras remain in place or connected, and what steps staff took after Fadden said they were going to investigate. The report does not include a statement from the city on the results of that inquiry or a copy of the relevant work order.
Removal and City Review Ahead
Flock told The Drive that it had expedited all camera removal orders and expected the devices to be removed in the coming weeks. The company did not provide a specific removal date in the material supplied. Plymouth staff were headed to the site to look into the replacement, according to Fadden; the outcome of that review was not reported.
The next confirmed developments to watch are whether Plymouth verifies the camera’s operating status, when the replacement and any remaining cameras are removed, and whether the company or city provides further details about the missed work order and cancellation process.
Key Questions
Why did Flock replace the Plymouth camera?
A contractor told The Drive the camera was being replaced because it was “broken.” Flock said a maintenance order was generated automatically after the cameras were unplugged and that one order was inadvertently missed when others were removed.
Had Plymouth voted to end its Flock contract?
Yes. The Plymouth City Council voted on September 22 to discontinue use of the company’s automatic license plate readers and end its contract.
Was the replacement camera collecting data?
Flock said the replacement was not collecting data. The Drive reported that the camera was plugged into its solar panel and battery pack, but that observation alone does not confirm whether it recorded or transmitted information.
What happens to the cameras now?
Flock said all removal orders had been expedited and that the cameras would be removed in the coming weeks. Plymouth staff were also going to investigate the replacement installation; no results or exact removal date were provided in the report.
Source: thedrive.com
