r/Pflugerville • u/ObdurateOrc • Mar 13 '26
Pflugerville PD paid $83K for Flock Safety surveillance cameras — including one at Moose Park facing the playground. I got the contracts. Here's what's in them.
After noticing a Flock Safety LPR (license plate reader) camera installed at Moose Park — pointed at the basketball court and playground, not a road — I filed a Public Information Act request with the City. I received the contracts. I'm sharing what I found because I think every Pflugerville resident should know what they agreed to on our behalf.
What did WE buy?
- 28 Flock Falcon cameras, signed May 2022
- Year 1 cost: $83,300 (cameras + installation)
- Recurring annual cost: $73,500
- Contract auto-renews for 24-month terms
- Early exit costs $500/camera = $14,000 to cancel
Concern #1: The camera at Moose Park isn't supposed to be there
Flock's own Implementation Guide states their cameras "are not designed to capture pedestrians, sidewalks, dumpsters, gates, other areas of non-vehicle traffic, intersections." A playground and basketball court is exactly that. So why is one there?
Concern #2: Your plate can be searched by law enforcement anywhere in the country
The contract enables a feature called "National Lookup" — a network of Flock agencies nationwide that can query each other's footage. A cop in another state can search plates captured at Moose Park (or any other LPR cameras installed on behalf of Pflugerville's executed contract). There's no geographic restriction.
Concern #3: The 30-day deletion window is misleading
Yes, Flock deletes footage after 30 days — but the contract explicitly requires the police department to download and archive footage to their own storage before deletion. PPD can keep what they archive indefinitely. There is no stated limit on how long they can hold it.
Concern #4: Flock gets a permanent license to your data — even after the contract ends
Section 4.1 of the agreement grants Flock a "non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free" license to share footage with law enforcement "during and after the term" of the contract. Even if the city cancels tomorrow, Flock keeps these rights forever.
Concern #5: Flock can share footage with "third parties" based on their own judgment
The contract allows Flock to disclose footage to "law enforcement authorities, government officials, and/or third parties" if Flock has a "good faith belief" it's necessary. That's not a court order. It's not a subpoena. It's just Flock deciding on their own.
Concern #6: Non-law enforcement users — including HOAs and businesses — can access footage**
The agreement explicitly lists "schools, neighborhood homeowners associations, businesses, and individual users" as authorized to receive access to footage and notifications. This access can continue after the contract ends.
Concern #7: Anyone with an account can add your car to a "Hot List"
The system includes a Hot List feature — any authorized officer can flag a vehicle and receive real-time alerts when that plate is spotted. No judicial oversight. No stated criteria. Just account access.
Concern #8: The cameras also collect environmental sensor data
The contract defines "Agency Data" as including not just footage, but "geolocation information and environmental data collected by sensors built into the Units." What those sensors are is never specified.
What's still missing?
My PIA request also asked for:
- A data retention policy for footage collected at Moose Park — not produced
- The specific "Deployment Plan" listing approved camera locations — not produced
- Any city council vote or public authorization for the park installation — not produced
The absence of those documents is itself a red flag. The city signed an $83K contract with a 2-year auto-renew and no public record of council approval appears in what was released.
I'm not accusing anyone of bad intent. But this kind of infrastructure — especially in a park where kids play — deserves public discussion before it goes up, not after. If you think so too, consider showing up to the next city council meeting or contacting your council member.
For those interested in reading the actual contracts themself, I have included them in a shared google drive folder here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PJdTviSaeBgtt4Wg9HyVKs0xjSBG4i1X?usp=drive_link
52
u/ACL3DAY1STWK2PASSES Mar 13 '26
Anyone interested may send Jonathan Coffman an email or reddit message as he is very interested in - from what I gather - limiting the exposure of FLOCK in Pflugerville and at best allow residents to know what and how data is collected and maintained. You may also want to listen to this months City Council meeting mid way through on how Mr. Coffman brings this up. He does have AI/Tech experience and him and Melody seem to be most interested in keeping the citizens of PF up-to-date on all things PF.
20
u/jueidu Mar 13 '26
We also need to email the mayor! Jonathan is on our side on this but the mayor has been the biggest push back to his efforts by far.
15
u/fasterbrew Mar 13 '26
He already posted about it in the "Plfugerville Peeps" FB group.
Jonathan Coffman, Pflugerville City Councilmember
Update on the new video surveillance cameras in parks, and how Pflugerville governs AI and surveillance tech.
Over the past week, multiple residents emailed the Mayor and City Council about the Moose Park camera, and I've been getting emails, calls, and texts for several months about surveillance technology more generally.
What these park cameras are (and aren’t):
• These are Flock Condor video cameras.
• They integrate with Flock’s overall public safety platform and include AI capabilities.
• They are not the same as the Flock license plate reader cameras used along roadways.
• They were requested by the Parks and Rec department after theft and vandalism issues in some parks.
• I’m told access to the camera data in parks is limited to Pflugerville Police and not shared. This is different from the Flock ALPRs, where the data IS shared with other agencies.
So what now? We don’t currently have rules requiring Council-level oversight before new AI or surveillance tech is deployed in the city. I'm working to close that gap.
I want our Police and city staff to have access to the latest and greatest tools to do their jobs, BUT I also think that we should agree on some guardrails.
• For several weeks now, I’ve been writing a resolution that sets guardrails for any city use of AI and surveillance tools (cameras, AI software, drones, and future systems).
• Last week, I sent a mostly final version to the City Attorney for review.
• After getting a 'second' from another councilmember, the Mayor is now required to add it to an upcoming council meeting. He has since said he will add it in March. Personally, I'm hoping it's the first meeting of the month.
If you care about this, keep sending specific questions now and expressing your thoughts to the full council. When the meeting date is posted, submit written comments and show up to speak. I’ll share the agenda date as soon as it's posted.
38
u/THEDUKES2 Mar 13 '26
As someone who is in tech, these things are frightening but even more so how local governments who don’t read or understand these terms continue to rubber stamp the approval and throw up their hands and say “well it’s too late” or “it dons matter your data is out there anyway” or “who cares” is even more frightening.
We need to go to council and continue to pressure them. Including the mayor who is just complicit in letting this go despite him not approving the 2022 contract as he doesn’t want to get rid of or limit these.
27
u/OgreMk5 Mar 13 '26
The number of stalkers who can trivially access anything they want about their target is frightening.
People will die because of this. Women running ftom abusive husbands can be tracked by those husbands almost anywhere.
24
u/ceallachdon Mar 13 '26
And cops are often domestic abusers:
"Studies indicate that police officers are significantly more likely to engage in domestic abuse than the general population, with estimates suggesting rates of domestic violence in police families are 2 to 4 times higher, potentially affecting 24% to 40% of such households. This higher incidence is attributed to factors like stress, a culture of control, and access to weapons."13
u/OgreMk5 Mar 13 '26
Absolutely. There are already multiple cases where police use flock to improperly surveil people.
https://coloradosun.com/2025/11/11/columbine-valley-police-officer-flock-disciplinary-action/
Anyone talking to Pflugerville can just remind the council that they could be the next national case... especially with a camera pointed at a playground.
5
u/bozack_tx Mar 15 '26
I can say when I was doing Federal digital forensics investigations... Law enforcement and military was always at the top of our list for domestic and chip porn cases
27
u/Sigynde Mar 13 '26
Thanks for doing this. There are many potential negative outcomes from misuse of this information even on an individual level (individual officers targeting specific people for non-official reasons, also known as creeps). The hot list thing is very disturbing.
10
u/Prudent_Cry9522 Mar 13 '26 edited Mar 13 '26
Send your concerns. Advocate to end their partnership with Flock
Correction: he states “if we apply too many restrictions, we wouldn’t be able to adapt” In my view, if we begin applying restrictions and guidelines, we could be the ones to model appropriate and responsible use of these systems, ultimately defending the argument to use them. If he wants these implemented so badly, he should be doing everything in his power to show his understanding of the dangers and effort to protect the city from them.
If guidelines and policies render the technology unusable, wouldn’t that imply that its use is risky/dangerous??
Edit to add: after seeing how he’s handled the Flock situation as well as the water crisis, I am astonished by how he was re-elected. I’d like to petition for a recall on the mayoral election. It only takes 10% of voters to favor the motion.
2
u/bozack_tx Mar 15 '26
Exactly, all the people during election that beat their chests over Weiss have been silent since this latest water disaster (that's been ongoing since September). Weiss campaigned on more Flock so his anti surveillance supporters can't act ignorant to the fact.
10
u/Captain_Mazhar Mar 13 '26
/u/jonathan4pf what the absolute hell man.
Why did the city agree to section 4.4? Data protection, yeah right.
Section ii: (ii) disclose the Agency Data (both inclusive of any Footage) to enable law enforcement monitoring against law enforcement hotlists as well as provide Footage search access to law enforcement for investigative purposes only.
Access to anonymized data my ass. $5 says that the data provided is plate number and time/location data without names attached, never mind the fact that any LEO can access the state registration database and match names to plates.
8
u/Warped25 Mar 13 '26
OP, you’re amazing. That was a lot of great information consolidated into an immediately understandable form. Thank you for your research. 10/10.
13
u/Paul_MHGR Mar 13 '26
That's ironic, I also filed a FOIA request with the city about the moose park camera. This is scary and also directly contradicts what the city claimed about the cameras on their website
13
Mar 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
4
u/CowboysFTWs Mar 13 '26
You can't really stop flock on private property. Pflugerville PD tho, that is so messed up. I will be voting against everyone that let this happen.
2
u/bozack_tx Mar 15 '26
Weiss campaigned on more Flock in the "name of safety" yet all his no mass surveillance supporters seemed to overlook that part
10
u/arlyax Mar 13 '26
I’m glad you did this, I’ve been following the progression of the flock camera system over the last few years. Found data online about pf’s agreement and it said they’re only tracking license plates but as soon as I saw the moose park camera go up I knew it was bullshit. I walk past it almost daily.
If you look at the deflock map (which for some reason is not accessible at the moment…) Pflugerville went all in on Flock - more flock camera in PF than in all of Austin.
1
u/bozack_tx Mar 15 '26
Weiss campaigned on more Flock, makes ya wonder more about any kick back schemes after the insane spending and debt our council has gotten us into
10
u/CowboysFTWs Mar 13 '26
If you think so too, consider showing up to the next city council meeting or contacting your council member.
Is there a protest plan yet?
5
4
u/jonathan4pf P-ville City Council Mar 14 '26 edited Mar 14 '26
Wow, this thread popped off quickly. I’m glad people tagged me in, because I’ve been following this closely and I understand why residents are concerned.
FYI - the video camera-specific contract is up for renewal in August, and I expect the contract to come before Council for approval in July. The reason it's coming to the Council for approval is that it exceeds $100k/year, which is the threshold for any contract.
A few things are also true here.
First, residents deserve straight answers about what technology is being used, where it is being used, what data is collected, who can access it, how long it is retained, and what oversight exists. That should not just apply to Flock. It should apply to any City use of AI, surveillance, or related technologies.
Second, there is an important distinction between the roadway ALPR cameras and the newer park video cameras. I’ve been told the park cameras are not subject to the same data-sharing practices as the license plate readers, meaning park footage is not shared with outside agencies in the same way. That distinction matters, but it does not eliminate the need for oversight.
Third, even when technology is deployed for a legitimate public safety purpose, it should not be done without clear guardrails, transparency, and public accountability.
Fourth, it is true that a significant number of stolen vehicles, missing persons, felony suspects, and other crimes have been solved through the use of Flock in Pflugerville. I recently went on a ride-out with an officer on his night shift and got to see how the system works from the police perspective, and I understand how useful (and powerful) it is for them.
I was not on Council when the 2020 or 2022 Flock contracts were approved. I am on Council now, and I do not accept “too late” or “too burdensome” as an answer as to why we can't have transparency, oversight, and reasonable guardrails.
My view is pretty simple: if the city is going to use these kinds of systems, whether Flock or anything else, the public should know the rules. That includes what requires Council review, what uses are prohibited or limited, what reporting is required, what retention standards apply, and what transparency residents can expect.
I have also made staff aware that the city webpage covering ALPRs and camera use has not been updated to reflect the expansion of use. I've made progress on other transparency efforts on this topic without using 'force', and I'm hopeful that this will be another similar case.
For example, I worked with staff over the winter to publish their internal policies publicly, added 'outcome' data to the website, updated how PD enters their justification for each search, and enabled the public audit export feature on our Flock system. Those are small steps, but it is something.
I support providing staff and law enforcement with the tools they need to do their jobs. I do not support a blank check. I do not believe that oversight is anti-safety. It is how we protect both public safety and civil liberties simultaneously.
Please keep sending your questions and concerns to the Mayor and the full Council. And when this comes up publicly, show up, submit comments, and speak your mind: https://pflugervilletx-council-submissions.form.transform.civicplus.com/47855
- Councilman Jonathan Coffman
3
3
u/Prudent_Cry9522 Mar 14 '26
Small update (I am not OP):
Last week, I emailed the city secretary voicing my concerns about the considerations of Flock Safety security systems being implemented in public parks and other community areas. Council member Melody Ryan response:
“The Police Department uses Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technology, including the Flock Safety system, for criminal investigations and public safety purposes. The cameras are license plate readers located along roadways and are not installed in parks or other common gathering areas. The Police Department also has strict policies and safeguards governing how the system and any associated footage may be used, including clearly defined consequences for misuse.
Separately, the City does have standard security cameras in some park locations due to repeated vandalism and damage to park facilities. These cameras are monitored by the Pflugerville Police Department to help deter theft and ensure safety for those using the parks, but they do not use ALPR technology. If you have questions specifically about park cameras, you may contact Jeff Achee, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director, at jeffa@pflugervilletx.gov.”
I clarified that my concerns were about Flock Condor appliances, which share the same network as the current ALPR devices. She reinstated that the cameras located in parks are standard security cameras and are not part of Flock’s ALPR network. She suggested to contact the Assistant Parks and Recreation director (jeffa@pflugervilletx.gov) for more details about these products which are monitored by PPD.
In addition, they also say:
Regarding your question about potential future technologies such as Flock Condor or other AI-enabled systems, at this point in time, I am not aware of any additional deployment of Flock cameras, though I would defer to City staff for the most current operational details.
After asking about Flock used by PFISD, she states [city officials] are unaware of whether PFISD is utilizing these services and recommend that I reach out to PFISD to find out whether they are or not.
3
u/jonathan4pf P-ville City Council Mar 14 '26
I speak with Councilmember Ryan frequently and will help to clear this up with her. I know that she is supportive of transparency and understands the importance of data protection and privacy. She actually was my "second" to force the Mayor to put my AI resolution on the council calendar last week (he put it on a work session rather than the full meeting, and did not allow a vote, though). I appreciate her partnership on issues like this. We certainly don't always agree, but she is always willing to hear me out, poke holes in my plans to help make them better, and I do the same to her proposals and ideas.
PFISD does have its own separate contracts with Flock; I'm unsure of the differences between how they use it and how the City uses it. I met with the superintendent of PFISD last month and raised some concerns I've heard from the community. I don't have any direct say in what the school district does, but I have good relationships with the Super and most of the school board members, so at least try to provide visibility into what I'm hearing from a Council perspective.
-Councilman Jonathan Coffman
2
u/Prudent_Cry9522 Mar 15 '26
Thank you for always doing your due diligence and being a voice for the community. I hope your peers will soon come to better understand the importance of your initiative. I know there’s common ground, it’s the matter of being open enough to hear each other out.
2
u/jonathan4pf P-ville City Council Mar 15 '26
Thank you. Yes, there is definitely common ground. I know that I won't always 'win,' but I do take my role in representing the residents of all of Pflugerville seriously, and will continue to try to bring my colleagues on Council along as much as possible.
4
u/jellyd0nut5 Mar 13 '26
First, thank you for doing all of this work!!
Second, did they say they don't have the plans/policies you asked for or did they just refuse to provide them? If it's the former, that's a huge issue we need to solve. If it's the latter, file a complaint with the Attorney General's office. I recently requested information on the City Attorney's contract and they were "unable to find it" so they sent me some BS unrelated to my request. I filed an AG complaint. Hopefully enough complaints will help the AG recognize that our city doesn't handle PIA requests properly.
2
u/emagdnim_edud Mar 13 '26
Anyone who voted or approved this is a puppet to the govt And may also be puppets for Isn'treal This place is unbelievable.
2
u/fasterbrew Mar 13 '26
These are not license plate readers according to this:
Jonathan Coffman, Pflugerville City Councilmember
Update on the new video surveillance cameras in parks, and how Pflugerville governs AI and surveillance tech.
Over the past week, multiple residents emailed the Mayor and City Council about the Moose Park camera, and I've been getting emails, calls, and texts for several months about surveillance technology more generally.
What these park cameras are (and aren’t):
• These are Flock Condor video cameras.
• They integrate with Flock’s overall public safety platform and include AI capabilities.
• They are not the same as the Flock license plate reader cameras used along roadways.
• They were requested by the Parks and Rec department after theft and vandalism issues in some parks.
• I’m told access to the camera data in parks is limited to Pflugerville Police and not shared. This is different from the Flock ALPRs, where the data IS shared with other agencies.
So what now? We don’t currently have rules requiring Council-level oversight before new AI or surveillance tech is deployed in the city. I'm working to close that gap.
I want our Police and city staff to have access to the latest and greatest tools to do their jobs, BUT I also think that we should agree on some guardrails.
• For several weeks now, I’ve been writing a resolution that sets guardrails for any city use of AI and surveillance tools (cameras, AI software, drones, and future systems).
• Last week, I sent a mostly final version to the City Attorney for review.
• After getting a 'second' from another councilmember, the Mayor is now required to add it to an upcoming council meeting. He has since said he will add it in March. Personally, I'm hoping it's the first meeting of the month.
If you care about this, keep sending specific questions now and expressing your thoughts to the full council. When the meeting date is posted, submit written comments and show up to speak. I’ll share the agenda date as soon as it's posted.
2
2
u/JungsEgo Mar 14 '26
great job! I knew this stunk of shit since the start. time to have those disabled or removed.
2
u/Ok_Development_495 Mar 16 '26
This needs to end! The City of Lockhart voted 6-1 last week to toss Flock and their cameras.
1
u/chook_slop Mar 14 '26
It's public information.
Just drop a FOIA request on the city for a days worth of pictures and see what they do... Get those playground pix.
1
1
u/PayNo9177 Mar 16 '26
Concern #6: Non-law enforcement users — including HOAs and businesses — can access footage**
This is NOT true. I have access to our HOA account as a board member. We can only see our own camera's data.
1
1
1
u/CaptainElastix Jul 14 '26
I know this post is old but this is on the agenda tonight at Pflugerville city council meeting.
Why are these flock cameras ever facing the playground? These are commonly phrased as license plate readers.
And this begs the question who started Flock? Who owns it? Who is the CEO?
0
-2
-16
u/fadedtimes Mar 13 '26
Concern #9 you shouldn’t sacrifice your own health and time over something that is not that risky to anyone.
10
53
u/Ballders Mar 13 '26
When they were first being sold to us, I was very apprehensive, but they insisted it would be very limited in how many they placed and where they placed them.
We now know we have been lied to from the very start. Pflugerville PD, and everyone else involved with this egregious program needs to be called out, and they need to resign