Residents say Flock camera terms, data use undermine trust in River Falls

Several River Falls residents used the council—public-comment period on Aug. 25 to urge officials to reconsider the city's use of Flock automated license-plate readers, citing recent contractual changes and a lack of community trust.

"Flock has been repeatedly caught intentionally misleading city councils considering their service," Dana Linscott said, urging the council to scrutinize the company's terms and consider disabling the system. Linscott said recent changes to Flock's licensing language removed explicit prohibitions on sharing customer data and granted Flock "a perpetual right" to use customer data to support and improve services, allowing continued use of driver-surveillance data even after a city ends its contract.

Julie Noyer, who said she had pursued city responses to community questions for months, called the four-year contract "about $113,000 over a 4-year period" and asked how many crimes had been solved using the cameras and whether alternatives such as Axon were considered. "How do we really know" data are being deleted as promised, she asked.

Other residents raised similar concerns. Hovah Herfindahl told the council she believed mass-surveillance systems erode trust in policing and the city. Alicia Akkin pointed to Oxford, Ohio, which she said quietly ended a Flock contract after concerns about misidentification, warning of potential legal costs.

The speakers did not report a city response to the specific claims that Flock's licensing changes permit data sale; council members and staff said they would continue to respond through staff and legal channels. The council did not take immediate action on the system during the meeting; public commenters urged a review of the contract and consideration of disabling or removing the cameras pending legal counsel and community approval.

What happens next: The city has not announced a council vote or formal review schedule on the contract during this meeting. Residents asked the council to provide clearer answers to whether Flock's deletion and data-control claims are independently auditable and to weigh alternatives that give the city greater user control."