By Marven Goodman, July 18, 2025
The city of Guthrie has found itself at the center of a troubling controversy that strikes at the very foundation of local governance. The issue? A seemingly innocuous contract with Flock Safety, a private company providing camera surveillance, has spiraled into a question of accountability, transparency, and the dangerous blurring of lines between policy-making and implementation. As a state-recognized journalist, I’ve dug deep into this matter through an open records request, uncovering a tale of inaction, undocumented claims, and potential overreach by municipal employees. The story raises a critical question for every Oklahoman: What happens when those tasked with carrying out the will of the people start making policy themselves?
It all began with a 24-month agreement signed on February 2, 2023, between the City of Guthrie and Flock Safety, a Georgia-based firm specializing in automated license plate recognition and surveillance technology. This deal, approved by the Guthrie City Council, promised to enhance public safety by deploying 12 cameras across the city, with an initial cost of $31,772 for the first year and a total contract value spanning two years. The contract stipulated that Flock owned the equipment, which would be removed upon expiration, set for “sometime” in May 2025, given the system’s undisclosed operational start date.
Fast forward to February 18, 2025, when Guthrie Police Chief Don Sweger notified Flock of the city’s intent to discontinue the contract upon its expiration. The reasoning was sound: funding for the program wasn’t allocated for the upcoming year, with resources instead earmarked for a new training facility, and state legislative restrictions prevented camera placement on major highways, limiting the system’s effectiveness. On the surface, this seemed like a straightforward decision to let the contract lapse.
But here’s where the story takes a troubling turn. Despite the contract’s expiration “sometime” around April/May of 2025, Flock’s transparency portal, updated as of July 16, 2025, lists 10 active cameras still operating in Guthrie. This revelation came to light through my persistent open records requests, filed under the Oklahoma Open Records Act (51 O.S. § 24A.1 et seq.), which mandates public access to government records unless specifically exempted.
My initial request on June 26, 2025, sought details on any agreement extending Flock’s services beyond the original term. City Clerk/Treasurer Kim Biggs responded promptly on June 27, asserting no such agreement existed and no additional payments were authorized. Fair enough, until I pressed further, asking for the contract’s end date, removal timeline, and an explanation for the active cameras. Biggs’ July 2 response provided the original contract and a copy of Sweger’s termination notice but introduced a new claim: Flock had been “reminded on at least three occasions” to remove their equipment, despite no authorization for continued operation.
This is where the red flags start waving. Under Oklahoma law, specifically Title 11 (11 O.S. § 10-106 et seq.), Guthrie operates under a council-manager form of government. Elected officials on the City Council hold the reins of policy-making, approving contracts, setting budgets, and defining the city’s direction. Meanwhile, appointed employees like the City Manager, City Clerk, and Police Chief are tasked with implementation, executing those policies without straying into legislative territory. The continued presence of Flock’s cameras, post-expiration and without a new Council-approved contract, suggests someone overstepped. And the lack of documentation for those three reminders? As the old adage goes, “If it’s not a record, it didn’t happen.”
As my inquiries grew more pointed, questioning why cameras remained active, why citizens and visitors were still being tracked, and what steps were being taken to enforce the contract’s end, I hit a wall. My July 3 follow-up went unanswered until July 14, when Biggs deferred to City Manager Eddie Faulkner, labeling my questions “administrative” rather than records-related. Faulkner’s July 16 reply claimed the city had “more than fulfilled” my request and redirected me to Sweger, effectively shutting down the dialogue.
This evasiveness is telling. The Oklahoma Open Records Act exists to ensure transparency, yet the city’s responses dwindled as I probed deeper into potential policy violations. The fact that 10 cameras are still operational, capturing data on Guthrie’s residents without apparent Council approval, raises serious concerns about accountability. If municipal employees are allowing a vendor to operate without a contract, they’re not just implementing policy; they’re making it. And that’s a power reserved for the people’s elected representatives.
Let’s be clear: the council-manager system is designed to protect democratic governance. The Council sets the rules, approving contracts like the one with Flock, while the City Manager, Clerk, and Police Chief ensure those rules are followed. The original Flock contract was a Council decision, but its post-expiration enforcement (or lack thereof) falls to employees. Sweger’s termination notice was a step in the right direction, but the failure to document reminders to Flock and the apparent tolerance of ongoing operations suggest a lapse in duty.
Consider the implications. If employees can allow a private company to continue surveillance without oversight, they’re effectively rewriting policy on the fly. This isn’t a minor oversight, it’s a breach of the public trust. Guthrie’s citizens deserve to know who authorized this, and why no action has been taken to remove equipment that, by contract, belongs to Flock and should have been gone by June 2025. The city’s claim of three reminders lacks credibility without records, leaving us to wonder if this was negligence or a deliberate sidestep of Council authority.
The City of Guthrie’s apparent uncertainty about the exact expiration date of its contract with Flock Safety, waffling between February 2, 2025, and May 2025, exposes a troubling lack of diligence that borders on negligence. The original agreement, signed on February 2, 2023, was intended to span 24 months, with the term commencing upon hardware installation, which City Clerk Kim Biggs later clarified occurred in May 2023, suggesting a clear end date of May 2025. Yet, the city’s initial response cited February 2025, only adjusting to May 2025 after further prodding, revealing a haphazard approach to contract management that undermines public trust. This lackadaisical attitude is unacceptable for a municipal government tasked with stewardship of taxpayer funds and adherence to legal obligations; failing to track a contract’s precise end date invites confusion, potential overpayment, and legal vulnerabilities, especially when coupled with the ongoing unauthorized use of Flock’s services. The City Council must demand an immediate audit of all contracts to ensure such oversights are corrected, restoring order and accountability to Guthrie’s administrative processes.
The ongoing operation of Flock Safety’s cameras in Guthrie beyond the contract’s April/May 2025 expiration date carries significant legal and financial liabilities for the city, particularly if driven by employee overreach. Under Oklahoma law, any unauthorized use of a vendor’s services without a valid contract could expose the city to claims of breach of contract or unjust enrichment, especially since Flock retains ownership of the equipment and may argue they are entitled to compensation for continued use. The original agreement’s termination clause allows for a $500 per camera removal fee, but the absence of a new contract raises questions about liability for additional costs, such as data storage, maintenance, or potential damages, if Flock seeks reimbursement for the unauthorized deployment. Moreover, the lack of Council approval could violate procurement statutes (e.g., 11 O.S. § 17-101 et seq.), potentially subjecting the city to legal challenges or fines from state oversight bodies, undermining the very fiscal responsibility taxpayers expect from their government.
Financially, the implications are equally dire. If Flock pursues payment for services rendered post-expiration, estimated at $2,500 per camera annually based on the original contract, Guthrie could face an unexpected bill exceeding $25,000 for 10 cameras over a single year, a burden not budgeted and already strained by the shift to a new training facility. Beyond direct costs, the city risks reputational damage and potential lawsuits from citizens concerned about unauthorized surveillance, which could escalate into costly settlements or legal fees. The undocumented reminders to Flock further complicate matters, as the absence of a paper trail might weaken the city’s defense in court, leaving employees and, by extension, the city itself vulnerable to personal or municipal liability. This scenario underscores the urgent need for the City Council to intervene, establish clear accountability, and rectify this breach to protect Guthrie’s taxpayers from the fallout of unchecked administrative decisions.
This situation isn’t just about Flock Safety; it’s about the integrity of local government. When employees overstep into policy-making, they undermine the voice of the electorate. The Guthrie City Council must investigate whether its directives were ignored and demand a full accounting of communications with Flock. It’s time to ask: Who’s really running the show in Guthrie?
Oklahomans value limited government and personal freedom, principles that demand elected officials, not unelected bureaucrats, set the course. The Flock fiasco is a wake-up call. If municipal employees can allow unauthorized surveillance to persist, what else might they be deciding behind closed doors? I urge the Guthrie City Council to act swiftly, demand Flock’s immediate removal of equipment, establish clear oversight, and to take the steps neccessary to ensure this will never happens again. The people of Guthrie deserve no less.
For now, the cameras keep rolling, and the questions keep mounting. Stay tuned as The Sooner Sentinel continues to fight for transparency and the rule of law in our great state.
*************************
The following is a list of the above referenced email correspondence from first to last:
From: Marven Goodman <marven.goodman@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2025 6:43 PM
To: Kim Biggs <kbiggs@cityofguthrie.com>;
Eddie Faulkner <efaulkner@cityofguthrie.com>
Subject: Open Records Request
Dear City of Guthrie Records Manager and City Manager,
Attached is an open records request. This request assumes an agreement exists between Flock and the City of Guthrie, extending services beyond the initial 24-month period, with or without additional payment from the current City Budget.
Sincerely,
Marven Goodman
The Sooner Sentinel
405 679-0350
On Jun 27, 2025, at 12:40 PM, Kim Biggs <kbiggs@cityofguthrie.com> wrote:
Mr. Goodman,
Thank you for your Open Records Request regarding the City of Guthrie’s agreement with Flock Safety.
At this time, there is no agreement in place between the City of Guthrie and Flock extending services beyond the initial 24-month term. No additional payments have been made or authorized from the current City budget for continuation of services.
Please let me know if you need any further clarification or additional records.
Sincerely,
Kim Biggs
City of Guthrie City Clerk
Treasurer Office: 405.282.0495
Fax: 405.282.6898
PO Box 908, Guthrie, OK 73044
cityofguthrie.com
From: Marven Goodman <marven.goodman@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2025 1:33 PM
To: Kim Biggs <kbiggs@cityofguthrie.com>;
Eddie Faulkner <efaulkner@cityofguthrie.com>
Subject: Re: Open Records Request
Dear Mrs Biggs and Mr Faulkner,
Thank you for your response to my open records request regarding the City of Guthrie’s agreement with Flock Safety. I seek clarification on several points.
First, please confirm the official end date of the initial 24-month contract with Flock Safety, as I understood it expired at the end of May 2025. Second, please provide the date by which Flock Safety is required to remove its cameras, software, and services, which I understand are the property of Flock Safety. According to Flock Safety’s transparency portal, 10 cameras appear to be active in Guthrie as of today, despite your statement that no agreement extends services beyond the initial term. Could you clarify whether the city has authorized continued operation of these cameras, and if so, under what terms?
Additionally, to ensure a complete understanding, please provide a copy of the original contract with Flock Safety, including its start date, terms, and any provisions for post-contract obligations. If there are any records of correspondence or agreements (formal or informal) regarding continued camera use after the contract’s expiration, I request those as well.
Thank you for your assistance. Please let me know if you need further details to process this request.
Sincerely,
Marven Goodman
The Sooner Sentinel
405 679-0350
On Jul 2, 2025, at 3:19 PM, Kim Biggs <kbiggs@cityofguthrie.com> wrote:
Mr. Goodman,
I’ve attached a copy of the original 24-month agreement between the City of Guthrie and Flock Safety, which was signed on February 2, 2023. This document outlines the full scope of the contract term. At this time, there are no formal or informal agreements, renewals, or amendments related to continued camera use beyond the original agreement. A search of city records did not return any correspondence establishing post-contract obligations or negotiated extensions with Flock Safety.
Based on the February 2, 2023 execution date, the contract expired on or around February 2, 2025. However, since the system was not fully operational until May 2023, the effective service period may have continued through May 2025. The City notified Flock on February 18, 2025, that we did not wish to extend or renew the contract – see attached email.
The City has not authorized continued operation of the cameras, and Flock Safety has been reminded on at least three occasions to remove their equipment.
Please let me know if you have question or need additional information.
Kim
On Jul 3, 2025, at 8:48 AM, Marven Goodman <marven.goodman@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mrs. Biggs, Mr. Faulkner, and the City of Guthrie,
Thank you for your informative update regarding the City of Guthrie’s agreement with Flock Safety and for providing the original contract and related correspondence. Your efforts to address my open records request are greatly appreciated. However, several points still require clarification to ensure transparency for the citizens and visitors of Guthrie:
Continued Camera Operation Post-Contract Expiration: Your response indicates that the contract with Flock Safety expired on or around February 2, 2025, or potentially May 2025, based on the system’s operational start date. Despite this, multiple outside agencies have observed 10 Flock Safety cameras remaining active in Guthrie, as noted in their transparency portal, without the knowledge or approval of the Guthrie City Council. Can you confirm whether the City has investigated this unauthorized activity and what steps are being taken to ensure compliance with the expired contract?
Removal of Flock Safety Equipment: As the contract has expired and all equipment and software are the property of Flock Safety, please clarify why the cameras remain active on city property (right-of-ways). Additionally, please provide a specific timeline for when Flock Safety has committed to removing their equipment, given that the City has reminded them on at least three occasions to do so.
Unauthorized Tracking of Citizens and Visitors: The continued operation of these cameras, tracking Guthrie’s citizens and visitors long after the contract’s expiration, raises significant concerns. Can you explain why the City has not taken further action to ensure Flock Safety ceases operations immediately, and what measures are in place to prevent such overreach by contractors in the future? I appreciate your attention to these matters and your commitment to transparency. Please provide a response addressing these points at your earliest convenience. If further documentation or correspondence exists regarding these issues, I kindly request those records as well.
Thank you again for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Marven Goodman
The Sooner Sentinel
405-679-0350
From: Marven Goodman <marven.goodman@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 14, 2025 5:19 AM
To: Kim Biggs <kbiggs@cityofguthrie.com>;
Eddie Faulkner <efaulkner@cityofguthrie.com>
Subject: Subject: Follow-Up on Open Records Request Regarding Flock Safety Contract - No Response Received Since July 2, 2025
Dear Mrs. Biggs, Mr. Faulkner, and the City of Guthrie,
I hope this email finds you well. On July 3, 2025, I sent you a detailed inquiry following up on my open records request concerning the City of Guthrie's agreement with Flock Safety. In that correspondence, I expressed appreciation for the provided contract and related documents while seeking clarification on several critical points related to the post-expiration operation of Flock Safety cameras in Guthrie.
As of today, July 14, 2025, I have not yet received any response from the City of Guthrie Records Custodian, the City Manager, or any other representative. Given the importance of these matters to ensuring transparency and accountability for the citizens and visitors of Guthrie, I am following up to kindly request your prompt attention. To recap, my previous email highlighted the following unresolved issues:
Continued Camera Operation Post-Contract Expiration: The contract with Flock Safety expired on or around February 2, 2025, or potentially May 2025. However, observations from multiple outside agencies indicate that 10 Flock Safety cameras remain active in Guthrie, as reflected in their transparency portal, without the apparent knowledge or approval of the Guthrie City Council. I seek confirmation on whether the City has investigated this unauthorized activity and what steps are being taken to ensure compliance with the expired contract.
Removal of Flock Safety Equipment: Since the contract has expired and all equipment and software belong to Flock Safety, please clarify why the cameras continue to operate on city property (right-of-ways). Additionally, provide a specific timeline for when Flock Safety has committed to removing their equipment, especially considering the City has reminded them on at least three occasions to do so.
Unauthorized Tracking of Citizens and Visitors: The ongoing operation of these cameras, which track Guthrie’s citizens and visitors well beyond the contract’s expiration, poses serious concerns. I request an explanation for why the City has not pursued further action to compel Flock Safety to cease operations immediately, as well as details on measures to prevent similar contractor overreach in the future. I remain grateful for your initial cooperation and commitment to transparency.
Please provide a comprehensive response addressing these points at your earliest convenience, ideally within the next seven business days. If any additional documentation, correspondence, or records exist pertaining to these issues, such as internal memos, communications with Flock Safety, or council discussions, I kindly request those as well under the Oklahoma Open Records Act. Thank you once again for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your timely reply and am available at the contact information below should you need any further details.
Sincerely,
Marven Goodman
The Sooner Sentinel
405-679-0350
On Jul 14, 2025, at 9:25 AM, Kim Biggs <kbiggs@cityofguthrie.com> wrote:
Mr. Goodman,
Thank you for your follow-up email. Since your questions are more on the administrative side and not so much related to records, I’ll defer to the City Manager on this. If you need anything from my office records-wise, just let me know.
Sincerely,
Kim Biggs
City of Guthrie City Clerk
Treasurer Office: 405.282.0495
Fax: 405.282.6898
PO Box 908, Guthrie, OK 73044
cityofguthrie.com
From: Marven Goodman <marven.goodman@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:33 AM
To: Eddie Faulkner <efaulkner@cityofguthrie.com>
Cc: Kim Biggs <kbiggs@cityofguthrie.com>
Subject: Re: Subject: Follow-Up on Open Records Request Regarding Flock Safety Contract - No Response Received Since July 2, 2025
Good morning Mr Faulkner,
I hope this email finds you well.
On July 3, 2025, I sent you a detailed inquiry following up on my open records request concerning the City of Guthrie's agreement with Flock Safety. In that correspondence, I expressed appreciation for the provided contract and related documents while seeking clarification on several critical points related to the post-expiration operation of Flock Safety cameras in Guthrie.
As of today, July 15, 2025, while I have received a response from the City of Guthrie Records Custodian, you as the City Manager have not replied to my questions. Once again, given the importance of these matters, and to ensuring transparency and accountability for the citizens and visitors of Guthrie, I am following up to kindly request your prompt attention. To recap, my previous email highlighted the following unresolved issues:
Continued Camera Operation Post-Contract Expiration: The contract with Flock Safety expired on or around February 2, 2025, or potentially May 2025. However, observations from multiple outside agencies indicate that 10 Flock Safety cameras remain active in Guthrie, as reflected in their transparency portal, without the apparent knowledge or approval of the Guthrie City Council. I seek confirmation on whether the City has investigated this unauthorized activity and what steps are being taken to ensure compliance with the expired contract.
Removal of Flock Safety Equipment: Since the contract has expired and all equipment and software belong to Flock Safety, please clarify why the cameras continue to operate on city property (right-of-ways). Additionally, provide a specific timeline for when Flock Safety has committed to removing their equipment, especially considering the City has reminded them on at least three occasions to do so.
Unauthorized Tracking of Citizens and Visitors: The ongoing operation of these cameras, which track Guthrie’s citizens and visitors well beyond the contract’s expiration, poses serious concerns. I request an explanation for why the City has not pursued further action to compel Flock Safety to cease operations immediately, as well as details on measures to prevent similar contractor overreach in the future.
Please provide a comprehensive response addressing these points at your earliest convenience, ideally within the next seven business days. If any additional documentation, correspondence, or records exist pertaining to these issues, such as internal memos, other communications with Flock Safety, or council discussions, I kindly request those as well under the Oklahoma Open Records Act.
Thank you once again for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your timely reply and am available at the contact information below should you need any further details.
Sincerely,
Marven Goodman
The Sooner Sentinel
405-679-0350
On Jul 16, 2025, at 1:37 PM Eddie Faulkner wrote:
Mr. Goodman,
Thanks for your email. I believe we have more than fulfilled your Open Records request. Just as I have stated to you before, for questions regarding Flock please feel free to reach out to Chief Don Sweger.
Eddie J. Faulkner
City Manager
City of Guthrie
101 N. Second Street,
P.O. Box 908 Guthrie, OK 73044
O: 405.282.0496
Real journalism is tenacious. In a world of quick headlines and no follow up, so appreciate you sticking on this and holding government accountable. Publishing the emails allowed all to see the familiar games played by the administrative state to avoid accountability. Wondering what happens when Guthrie citizens speed by those non-contracted cameras at this point. If no tickets are hitting the mail, it's purely a data-collecting surveillance web at this point. Who's behind that company?