Two Boulder residents are challenging the city’s use of 31 Flock Safety surveillance cameras, saying the technology violates Coloradans’ rights by cataloging their movements without warrants.
A lawsuit filed in Boulder District Court on Wednesday night argues the system gives Boulder police broad access to records tracking the movements of people driving and biking through the city — a level of surveillance the plaintiffs say violates privacy and other protections guaranteed under the Colorado Constitution.
The complaint, which seeks class-action status, comes amid broader national debates over privacy, data sharing and police surveillance technology. The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare Boulder’s Flock cameras unconstitutional and block the city from continuing its surveillance without a warrant.
“Boulder cannot pretend this is about catching criminals when 99% of the people its cameras surveil every day have nothing to do with any crime,” attorney Andy McNulty said in a written statement. “This is the kind of dragnet surveillance that turns every neighborhood into a checkpoint and every commute into a serious violation of privacy rights. The Colorado Constitution does not permit it and we intend to put a stop to it.”
The lawsuit names Police Chief Stephen Redfearn and Dawn VanAckeren, supervisor for Boulder’s records and information services, who denied a request for records filed by one of the plaintiffs, Wiilliam Freeman.
Spokespeople for the city and police department did not immediately return a request for comment Thursday morning.
Boulder’s Flock data was searchable by thousands of law enforcement agencies for more than three years through Flock’s national network, which allowed agencies across the country to search for a specific license plate within the department’s database, according to the lawsuit.
Records obtained by the Boulder Reporting Lab showed on Jan. 1, 2025, alone, Boulder’s system was included in 5,438 database queries. Between June 1, 2024, and May 5, 2025, the national system logged more than 4,000 searches citing “immigration” as the reason. However, those records identify only the agencies making the searches, not which local camera systems returned results, so it’s unclear whether any immigration-related searches involved data from Boulder’s cameras.
The Boulder Reporting Lab also found Boulder’s system was included in more than 100 searches conducted by the U.S. Border Patrol before Boulder cut off national sharing in June 2025.
“These cameras give the government unchecked superpowers and that’s not something we should tolerate,” Freeman said in a statement. On his commute to work, Freeman said five separate cameras capture his movements by car and bike, three cameras when he goes to a park and several more while he goes to and from the grocery store.
Gwen Steel, the other plaintiff, said cameras are capturing her movements four days a week during her commute to U.S. 36 through Boulder along the Diagonal Highway and Foothills Parkway. Flock cameras also capture her while she travels to attend gatherings at the Islamic Center in Boulder and protests throughout the city.
When a vehicle passes by a camera, it captures a high-resolution photo, the license plate number and the time, date and GPS coordinates of the vehicle. The lawsuit also claims that the system tracks the faces, characteristics and clothing of those who pass by a camera by bicycle.
The lawsuit is also asking a judge to order Boulder to release data collected through the cameras. One plaintiff said he has tried to obtain records captured by the automatic license plate reader system involving his own vehicle, but a city records supervisor refused to provide them, which the lawsuit alleges violates the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act.
“The public has a legitimate and compelling interest in knowing how law enforcement deploys mass surveillance technology against the communities they serve,” the complaint said. “Without transparency, there is no accountability.”
Flock operates in at least 75 Colorado communities, according to the lawsuit. Boulder has contracted with Flock since 2022 and pays $82,500 annually for the system, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit comes after a bill aimed at regulating how data collected by automatic license plate readers is used died in the legislature. Law enforcement agencies strongly opposed the measure, arguing it would hinder investigations.
Hence then, the article about 2 boulder residents sue over city s use of flock cameras citing widespread privacy violations was published today ( ) and is available on Colorado Sun ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( 2 Boulder residents sue over city’s use of Flock cameras, citing widespread privacy violations )
Also on site :