DENVER – Data from license plate readers in Denver can't be shared with the federal government, according to a new five-month extension of the city's contract with camera maker Flock Group, Inc. announced Wednesday. It's a move aimed at ending months of controversy about the cameras in the city.
As part of the agreement, access to photo and location data from Denver's Flock cameras was turned off for any outside law enforcement agency, and any sharing of the data with the federal government will come with hefty penalties.
- Denver7 Chief Investigator Tony Kovaleski breaks down what these cameras do, why they are controversial and what happened Wednesday.
License plate readers have been a hot-button issue in the city for months and the subject of a series of Denver7 reports. Police departments have touted their effectiveness in catching criminals, while others have expressed concerns about over-surveillance and the potential misuse of the data gathered by the cameras – particularly amid a rise in immigration enforcement under the second Trump administration.
Flock cameras were installed in Denver in May of 2024. There are more than 100 of the cameras mounted at 70 intersections across the city. Denver police have credited the cameras for hundreds of arrests and recovered stolen vehicles, and dozens of recovered firearms.
The five-month extension appears to be the compromise city leadership has sought for months since the council unanimously rejected a Flock contract extension over privacy concerns in May. The city's announcement says the extension is coming at no added cost.
Denver
Denver City Council rejects expansion for license plate recognition cameras
The agreement states that data from Flock cameras will be made accessible only to outside law enforcement agencies that sign a memorandum of understanding that the agency won't share data with the feds. An agency that signs the agreement and violates it will be subject to prosecution by the Colorado Attorney General's Office.
Flock doesn’t own the data its cameras collect. Previously, Flock data in Denver could be accessed by the city’s police department as well as more than 80 law enforcement agencies and four FBI agents in Colorado.
Flock will owe a $100,000 fine for any instance in which it shares data with the federal government, according to the city.
If the city is satisfied at the end of the no-cost extension, Mayor Mike Johnston's office said it would present a long-term contract to the city council. In Denver, any contract over $500,000 requires council approval.
“In Denver, we believe you can be a city that is just as tough on fighting crime as it is protecting someone’s civil liberties,” Johnston said in a Wednesday morning statement. “That’s why we’re taking steps not seen anywhere else in the country to ensure this technology is wielded responsibly and that our data stays out of the federal government’s hands. I’ve made clear to Flock’s leadership that I expect total transparency and that anything less will result in an end to our relationship."
- Watch our full interview with Denver Mayor Mike Johnston below
In August, Denver assembled a task force to discuss the future of license plate recognition technology in the city. Around the same time, Flock announced it was pausing operations with federal agencies amid concerns about the use of the data. It had been participating in pilot programs with the Department of Homeland Security, according to the Associated Press.
Even with the new promises about keeping Flock data in Denver, council members we're hearing from in the wake of the announcement said the program isn't good enough – and that they felt undermined by the mayor.
Denver city councilwoman Sarah Parady, an outspoken critic of the Flock program, sent us a statement in the moments after this story published, saying she is still not satisfied with the new steps being taken – even going as far as saying the use of Flock cameras "remains incredibly dangerous for Denver."
"I was stunned to learn late yesterday that after convening a task force of local and national experts, Mayor Johnston has been negotiating secretly with the discredited CEO of Flock safety and signing another unilateral extension of this mass surveillance contract with no public process and no vote from city council or input from his own task force," her statement to Denver7 Investigates read in part.
Parady said the new data constraints – "a version [of Flock] where we do not participate in massive data networks with other jurisdictions" – was always available and that Wednesday's announcement is a "belated step" by the mayor's office.
Before the Wednesday morning announcement, Parady had already accepted an invitation to attend a community meeting regarding Flock Wednesday evening. Several registered neighborhood associations organized the town hall with a stated goal of telling the mayor to "turn the cameras off."
Councilwoman Flor Alvidrez told us she thought the decision was made "behind Council's back."
"I remain deeply concerned about how this surveillance data could be accessed or misused by other jurisdictions, especially those looking to prosecute women or pregnant people seeking reproductive healthcare in Denver," she said. "Council rejected this contract for a reason. Denver deserves safety without sacrificing civil liberties or bypassing community accountability."
On Wednesday afternoon, Flock responded to Denver7 Investigates with a statement, which reads in full:
"Flock Safety is committed to working with communities like Denver to provide critical public safety technology that helps law enforcement prevent and solve crime, while protecting residents’ privacy. We fully support Mayor Johnston’s commitment to transparency and accountability and will continue partnering with the City to ensure that Denver’s program reflects its values and priorities. Flock’s technology is trusted by more than 6,000 communities across the United States and has been credited with helping solve more than 12% of reported crime nationwide. Our mission is to give cities effective tools to help their communities be safer while upholding community values."
Editor's note: This story was updated to clarify the nature of Wednesday evening's town hall. A previous version stated that town hall was organized by councilwoman Sarah Parady, but it was in fact organized by a group of RNOs. Parady accepted an invite to attend and speak at the meeting
