Updated at 5:31 p.m. on Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2025
Nine members of the Denver City Council are raising legal concerns about Mayor Mike Johnston’s recent extension of the city’s contract with the $7 billion surveillance company Flock Safety.
In an Oct. 25 letter to city Auditor Timothy O’Brien, the nine members accused the administration of circumventing the council’s authority to approve contracts, operating in an “undemocratic” manner and potentially violating the city’s contracting rules.
“We do not believe that the City and County of Denver should continue doing business with a company that has demonstrated such disregard for honesty and accountability,” the council members wrote.
It’s a sign that there’s growing resistance on council to the city’s use of Flock’s cameras, which can identify license plates and track millions of vehicles around the city. Nine votes would be enough to reject future contracts with the company.
Johnston recently extended a contract with the company without the approval of the city council, drawing criticism. He has promised to let the council have the final decision next year, saying the city is working with Flock to address privacy concerns.
On Tuesday, O’Brien responded to the council members, writing that he understood their concerns and would investigate.
“I will perform my due diligence, as I would for every contract, by considering whether this contract is intentionally split in violation of city contracting rules and assessing if it subverted City Council’s independent oversight,” O’Brien wrote.
Four council members did not sign the letter: Darrell Watson, Amanda Sawyer, Kevin Flynn and Diana Romero Campbell.
Flock’s purpose and past
Denver installed Flock cameras at 70 sites around the city in May 2024. The company provides similar technology for thousands of communities around the country.
The technology has been used to solve a string of crimes in Denver and nationally, by making it easier for police to find vehicles associated with crimes.
The technology has raised concerns about privacy and government overreach among groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
- Related: Police used Flock cameras to accuse a Denver woman of package theft. She had her own evidence
When the city’s contract with Flock was set to be renewed for $666,000 in May, council members expressed concerns about how the technology could be used, specifically in federal immigration policing — possibly in violation of city and state law.
Federal immigration agents have had access to Flock’s network. Earlier this year, the company was forced to acknowledge that it was working directly with federal authorities.
Denver’s data was exposed to national searches until April. There’s no evidence it was used in any immigration cases, but several council members were still unconvinced the information collected would be safe from federal law enforcement abuses in immigration policing and beyond.
Facing opposition, Johnston asked the council to vote the Flock contract down so the city could work on those issues.
Then, his administration extended the contract for just less than $500,000 — ducking under the threshold that would have required council approval. Recently, the administration announced that Flock had agreed to strict restrictions on data sharing with other cities and possible fines for Flock if city policies are violated.
Last week, hundreds of residents gathered to express their opposition to Flock.
“We have serious concerns about Flock Group Inc.’s ethics, transparency, and credibility,” the nine council members wrote the auditor. “The company’s CEO has made multiple false statements both publicly and directly to council members, which raises significant questions about Flock’s trustworthiness as a vendor.”
Johnston has argued Flock has been a critical tool in solving homicides, car thefts and kidnappings.
“It is the mayor’s job to keep the city safe,” wrote mayoral spokesperson Jon Ewing. “License plate readers do just that, and there is nothing about this no-cost extension that is beyond the scope of the mayor’s responsibilities or authority.”
The mayor’s office has had conversations with the City Attorney’s Office and said the extension does not violate the city charter.
At a committee meeting on Wednesday, Councilmember Amanda Sawyer said she supports license plate readers and their use in reducing crime. She proposed that the council draft new laws governing the use of data and surveillance technologies.
“Do I like the way the mayor's office went through extending this contract so that it stays under the $500,000 amount?” she said. “No, I'm not in love with the process. But it is also their right. They have not done anything illegal here.”
Editor's note: This article was updated to correctly name who declined to sign the letter to the auditor. Diana Romero Campbell did not sign it, while Chris Hinds did.
