DeFlock Renton

Dear Renton City Councilmembers and Renton Administration,

Ahead of the Committee of the Whole’s scheduled review of Renton’s Master Services Agreement with Flock Safety (hereafter referred to as the “Contract”) on Monday, August 10, 2026, many constituents reviewed the Contract (both individually and at a meeting) and shared it with the ACLU and an ALPR expert, who all submitted comments outlined in this email. We are alerting the Council to specific parts of the Contract that raise serious concerns. 

We ask that you consider and meaningfully address the following concerns and suggestions in the City’s review of the Contract, which are organized sequentially as they appear in the Contract for your convenience.

RECITALS

• The first paragraph states that Flock’s technology can capture “audio, video, image, and recording data,” despite Renton’s claims that Flock Falcon cameras only capture images. If Renton’s Falcon cameras only capture images, the Contract should reflect only that capability and not audio, video, or recording capabilities.
• The third paragraph gives Flock a 30-day retention period for any footage stored in Flock’s cloud system, which is longer than SB 6002 allows. Flock’s contractual retention period should be consistent with SB 6002. 
• The third paragraph allows Renton to extract, download, and archive footage from Flock’s systems on its own systems with no contractual limit on how long downloaded information may be retained. This section should meaningfully limit the retention of data downloaded by Renton, ideally to a time frame consistent with SB 6002.
• The fourth paragraph outlines the Permitted Use terms, which are “solely for the awareness, prevention, and prosecution of crime, bona fide investigations and evidence gathering for law enforcement purposes.” These terms, especially the “awareness” of crime, could be broadly applicable. The Permitted Use terms, particularly the “awareness” of crime, should be more specifically defined in the Contract.

DEFINITIONS

• 1.1 “Anonymized Data”: Vehicle movement data is especially difficult to anonymize reliably because repeated location and time observations can reveal homes, workplaces, religious attendance, healthcare appointments, etc. The contract provides no independent standard, audit, or verification that the data cannot be reidentified. Also, the contract states that “commercially available standards” are used to anonymize data, but these standards are not indicated nor specified. At a minimum, the Contract should clearly identify the “commercially available standards” used to anonymize data.
• 1.2 “Authorized End User(s)”: The “individual employees, agents, or contractors” are not specified nor identified in the contract. The Contract should identify the specific positions and roles that qualify as an Authorized End User.
• 1.8 “Flock Network End User(s)”: This is defined as anyone Renton authorizes access to or receives data from. There is no clarity on which agencies may access Renton’s Flock data nor whether sharing is enabled by default. There is also no clarity on which agencies outside Washington may access Renton’s data, whether Renton must approve individual searches, or how access to data is terminated or audited. The Contract should identify the specific positions, roles, agencies, and other parties that qualify as a Flock Network End User, as well as a process for terminating access to data and auditing data access.
• 1.13 “Retention Period”: Again, Flock’s 30-day Retention Period exceeds SB 6002’s 21-day retention period, and there are no contractual limits on how long downloaded information may be retained by Renton. Flock’s contractual Retention Period should be consistent with SB 6002. Also, this section should meaningfully limit the retention of downloaded data, ideally to a time frame consistent with SB 6002.

SERVICES AND SUPPORT

• 2.3 Support Services: This section gives Flock access to Renton’s data for really any reason, as long as it is to “improve performance and functionality.” This section should include specifications on exactly what information is monitored, how it is accessed and monitored, and for what purposes it can be monitored.
• 2.4 Upgrades to Platform: This section allows Flock to “make any upgrades to system or platform that it deems necessary or useful” to enhance their services. Any upgrade that Flock deems necessary or useful is permitted in the Contract. Upgrades could include enabling audio and video capabilities in the Falcon cameras under the guise of improving services without informing Renton. This section should require that Flock discloses which features are upgraded and for what purpose or function.
• 2.5 Service Interruption: Flock exempts their company from any liability, including “any loss of data or profits,” under any circumstances. This shifts the burden of liability onto Renton (in other words, taxpayers) for any loss of data or profits. The Contract should include stronger liability protections for Renton, not just liability protections for Flock.
• 2.7 Hazardous Conditions: Flock does not “contemplate hazardous materials or other hazardous conditions.” If there is a fire, car accident, or any other incident involving negligent installation or placement of a Flock camera, Flock exempts their company from liability. This section should include stronger guidelines around the handling of hazardous materials or conditions as it relates to camera installation and maintenance.

CUSTOMER OBLIGATIONS

• 3.1 Customer Obligations: Flock obligates Renton, at its own expense, to “provide Flock with reasonable access and use” of Renton’s facilities and personnel to perform services. These services, facilities, and personnel are not specified, nor are the frequency of visits, time of visits, or what the “services” entail. At a minimum, the Contract should limit costs accrued at Renton’s expense and specify the permitted reasons for Flock’s access to and use of Renton’s facilities and personnel.

DATA USE AND LICENSING

• 4.1 Customer Data: Flock grants their company a “limited, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable, worldwide license to use” Renton’s data. In Flock’s current Terms and Conditions, the word “perpetual” was added to this section. The Contract gives Flock perpetual and irrevocable access to Renton’s non-anonymized data to improve services, which includes training artificial intelligence. The Contract should limit Flock’s data access and use and meaningfully define what data may be used. The Contract should also specify a retention time frame that is not perpetual and is consistent with SB 6002.
• 4.2 Customer Generated Data: Flock grants their company “a non-exclusive, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free license to use” data generated by Renton to provide unspecified services. The Contract should specify the applicable services, limit Flock’s data access and use, and meaningfully define what data may be used. The Contract should also specify a retention time frame that is not perpetual and is consistent with SB 6002.
• 4.3 Anonymized Data: Flock grants their company a “non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free right to use and distribute” anonymized data for services and “training of machine learning algorithms.” As stated earlier, vehicle movement data is especially difficult to anonymize reliably because repeated location and time observations can reveal homes, workplaces, religious attendance, healthcare appointments, etc. The contract provides no independent standard, audit, or verification that the data cannot be reidentified. Again, the Contract should limit Flock’s data access and use and meaningfully define what data may be used. The Contract should also specify a retention time frame that is not perpetual and is consistent with SB 6002.
• In Flock’s current Terms and Conditions, the sentence that states, “Flock does not own and shall not sell Customer Data” was removed from Section 4. The Contract should contain terms that affirm Renton’s ownership and control over its own data and prohibits the sale of data.

CONFIDENTIALITY; DISCLOSURES

• 5.1 Confidentiality: This section broadly defines proprietary information (a.k.a. “non-public information”). However, non-public information is not specified other than “geolocation information and environmental data collected by sensors.” Non-public information should be further specified, especially because geolocation data is constitutionally protected information and requires a judicial warrant to access. 
• 5.3 Disclosure of Footage: Under this section, Renton’s footage may be used, preserved, and shared with law enforcement, government officials, and/or third parties if Flock has a “good faith belief” to do so during the 30-day Retention Period. As stated above, geolocation data is constitutionally protected information and requires a judicial warrant to access. The Contract should specify the limits of information shared via government order or other non-judicial warrant. “Third parties” and “good faith belief” should be more explicitly defined to limit unnecessary data-sharing.
• The Contract contains no meaningful security requirements. At a minimum, the Contract should include encryption standards, multifactor authentication (MFA), city audit rights, notice to affected individuals if a data breach occurs, and recourse for the affected individuals.

PAYMENT OF FEES

• 6.2 Notice of Changes to Fees: There is no requirement for Flock or the City to disclose a change in fees to the public. Taxpayers, who ultimately foot the bill for Flock, are not aware of the actual expenses associated with using Flock’s services on an ongoing basis. Between potentially unlimited price hikes, the liability burdens on Renton, and the annual cost of equipment, Flock is an expensive investment. Again, the Contract should limit costs accrued at Renton’s expense.

TERMINATION

• 7.2 Termination: Renton can give 30-days’ notice of termination of this contract if either Renton or Flock has breached any material terms, is financially insolvent, or ceases to exist. If Renton does terminate the contract, Flock will remove their hardware during “a commercially reasonable time period.” The Contract should allow for termination without cause and further specify the “commercially reasonable time period” by number of days.

REMEDY FOR DEFECT; WARRANTY AND DISCLAIMER 

• 8.5 Insurance: Flock maintains general liability policies and insurance. The Contract does not contain any mention of Renton’s liability policies or insurance. The Contract should include stronger protections against liability for Renton, not just for Flock.
• 8.6 Force Majeure: The force majeure clause includes changes of laws or regulations, acts of hackers, and acts or omissions of third-party technology providers. This leaves Flock scot-free for their own negligence, carelessness, or failure to do due diligence or research. Again, theContract should include stronger protections against liability for Renton, not just for Flock.

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY; INDEMNITY

• 9.1 Limitation of Liability: Renton carries a disproportionate amount of the burden in the Contract, despite having more strained resources. Flock exempts their company, affiliates, representatives, and contractors from any liability for anything whatsoever, including loss of revenue, inaccurate data, cost of services, damages, ineffectual services, or for any cost that exceeds “two times the fees paid and/or payable” to Flock in the 12 months prior to the applicable incident. The Contract contains minimal liability protections for Renton, yet strong liability protections for Flock. Again, the Contract should limit costs accrued at Renton’s expense, as Flock does for their company in this section, and include stronger protections against liability for Renton, not just for Flock.

INSTALLATION OF SERVICES AND OBLIGATIONS

• 10.2 Deployment Plan: Flock gives their company the final discretion to determine locations where cameras are placed, rather than Renton, who is actually leasing and using the cameras under the Permitted Use terms. This is especially concerning because Flock has deployed cameras without local authorization in Massachusetts, Texas, Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Washington State. The Contract should grant Renton more autonomy in the deployment of cameras and more specifically define the Permitted Use terms.

MISCELLANEOUS

• 11.14 Public Ethics: This clause allows Flock to terminate the Contract if Flock believes Renton has acted contrary to Flock’s “ethics or professional responsibilities.” That language is vague and could arguably be invoked if Renton publicly criticizes Flock, discloses system failures, or even adopts policies Flock disagrees with. At a minimum, this clause should be removed or rewritten so it cannot interfere with public accountability, whistleblowing, public records compliance, or criticism of Flock.

We look forward to you meaningfully addressing the civil liberties and liability concerns outlined above. Ideally, after reviewing the Contract and our comments/suggestions, we hope that you will instead terminate the Contract with Flock Safety.