Q: Where do Snohomish County cities stand on Flock license-plate reader cameras in May 2026?
A: Three cities took three different paths within three months. Lynnwood terminated its Flock Safety contract on February 22, 2026. Everett reactivated its 68-camera network on April 7 after Gov. Bob Ferguson signed SB 6002 into law in March. On May 13, 2026, the Snohomish City Council told staff to keep the cameras the city already purchased sitting in storage while members wait for the Washington Attorney General’s statewide model policy, which is not due until July 1, 2027.
Snohomish County is now running three different experiments on the same surveillance technology at the same time.
Lynnwood ripped its Flock Safety cameras out of service in February. Everett brought 68 of them back online in April. And on May 13, 2026, the Snohomish City Council told staff to keep the cameras the city of Snohomish already paid for in storage a while longer.
For Everett residents who want to know whether the license-plate readers along your commute are an outlier or the regional norm, the short answer in mid-May is: it depends on which city limit you cross. The longer answer matters more, because the next time this question gets settled across the county, the Washington Attorney General’s office will be holding the pen.
What Snohomish City Did on May 13
Snohomish — the city of roughly 10,000 people on the other side of the Snohomish River, not to be confused with the larger county that surrounds Everett — bought a small set of Flock automated license-plate reader cameras last year. The cameras have been sitting in storage. They never went up.
On May 13, at least four members of the Snohomish City Council told staff to keep them there.
According to the Snohomish County Tribune’s account of the meeting, Councilman Tom Merrill said he doesn’t see that the city has the level of crime that warrants Flock cameras at all. Councilman David Flynn said he is still investigating, but in his current read the “liability does not outweigh the possible assistance from time to time.” Councilwoman Dr. Anup Deol agreed and said the city should revisit the issue periodically.
Council President Felix Neals proposed a specific holding pattern: wait for the Washington State Attorney General’s office to publish its statewide model policy on automated license-plate reader systems. That model policy has a statutory deadline of July 1, 2027.
In other words, Snohomish is not killing the program. It is parking it for up to fourteen months while a higher-level policy gets written by someone else. The cameras stay in the box.
What Everett Did on April 7
Everett’s path looks like the opposite arrow from the same starting point.
The Everett Police Department had taken its 68-camera Flock network offline in late February 2026, after a Public Records Act ruling and broader concerns over how Flock data was being accessed by outside agencies. The pause lasted roughly six weeks. On April 7, 2026, EPD brought the network back online after Gov. Bob Ferguson signed Senate Bill 6002 — the Driver Privacy Act — into law on March 30.
The Everett restart is the subject of our prior coverage on tygartmedia.com (the April 23 story walked through the timeline, EPD Commander Natalie Given’s statement, and Simone Tarver’s objection on behalf of the ACLU of Washington). The tighter point for tonight: Everett’s decision to restart is a bet that the new statewide framework solves enough of the original concern to bring the cameras back to work.
Whether that bet was right depends largely on the same Attorney General’s model policy that the Snohomish council is now waiting on.
What Lynnwood Did on February 22
Lynnwood reached the other end of the same spectrum first. On February 22, 2026, the Lynnwood City Council voted unanimously to terminate its contract with Flock Safety.
The Lynnwood Times and HeraldNet coverage of that vote attributed the decision to two specific failures. First, the city found that Flock’s “nationwide lookup” feature — which allows any participating agency in the United States to search a local network — was active in Lynnwood for nine days before Lynnwood Police Chief Cole Langdon turned it off. Subsequent local reporting found that out-of-state agencies conducted more than 100,000 searches of the Lynnwood network in that window, including at least sixteen searches tied to immigration enforcement.
Second, Councilwoman Isabel Mata, in remarks during the termination vote, said: “The contract with Flock has failed on its most basic requirement, trust. Council was not promptly informed of a data access breach. Promises that the system would not be used for immigration enforcement were broken.”
Lynnwood’s cameras had already been offline since October 2025 when EPD took them out of service. The February vote made that decision permanent.
The Statewide Frame: What SB 6002 Actually Does
The three different city paths all sit on top of one statewide law.
SB 6002, signed by Gov. Ferguson on March 30, 2026, did several things in one bill. It established a 21-day retention limit for ALPR data — significantly shorter than the open-ended retention many agencies were operating under. It banned the sharing of ALPR data with federal immigration authorities. It restricted camera placement near schools and health-care facilities. And it set a two-step compliance timeline for the agencies that decide to keep operating ALPR systems.
That two-step timeline is the part that matters for understanding what Snohomish, Everett, and Lynnwood are each waiting on.
The Two Dates That Matter — July 1, 2027, and December 1, 2027
Under SB 6002, the Washington Attorney General’s office has a statutory deadline of July 1, 2027, to develop and publish statewide model policies on the use of ALPR systems. That is the document Snohomish City Council President Felix Neals named on May 13 as the trigger for revisiting Snohomish’s posture.
After that, by December 1, 2027, every agency in Washington that operates an ALPR system must do one of two things: adopt a policy “consistent with the model policies” and submit a copy to the Attorney General, or formally notify the Attorney General of any departure from the model — with stated reasons and an explanation of how the local policy still satisfies SB 6002.
That second clause is the quiet leverage point. Cities that diverge from the model have to put the divergence in writing to the state’s top legal officer. Cities that adopt the model verbatim do not. For council members who do not want to be the elected body that has to defend a custom Flock policy in a state-level filing, the rational play is to wait for the model and follow it.
That is what Snohomish is doing.
Why This Pattern Matters for Everett Residents
Three things change for Everett residents because of where this regional pattern stands tonight.
First, the cameras you drive past in Everett are operating under a statewide framework now, not a city-only one. SB 6002’s 21-day retention limit, federal-sharing ban, and placement restrictions apply to Everett’s 68-camera network whether EPD’s individual policy mentions them or not. The April 7 restart happened inside that new perimeter.
Second, the comparison cities are not theoretical. Lynnwood — eleven miles down I-5 — has permanently exited the program. Snohomish — across the river — has paused for up to fourteen months. Mountlake Terrace and Monroe currently operate ALPR systems. Stanwood and Sedro-Woolley have appealed a public-records ruling tied to Flock data. The county is not running one experiment. It is running several.
Third, the next pivot point for Everett is not a city council vote. It is a state-level model policy that does not exist yet. When the Attorney General’s office publishes the SB 6002 model policy on or before July 1, 2027, Everett’s policy will either match it (no further filing required) or depart from it (filing required, with reasons). That is the date to put on a calendar if you want to know when this question gets revisited at the local level.
What To Do Next
If you want to weigh in on Everett’s policy: Public comment on city council items is open at council@everettwa.gov. Regular meetings stream live and are archived at everettwa.gov/citycouncil. Comments on individual ordinances can be filed in writing in advance of any meeting on the agenda center calendar.
If you want to read SB 6002 directly: The bill text and final law are posted at app.leg.wa.gov under bill number 6002 from the 2025-26 session. The Driver Privacy Act sections covering 21-day retention, federal-sharing, and the model-policy deadlines are in the same chapter.
If you want to watch the Snohomish discussion: The Snohomish City Council’s meeting calendar is posted at snohomishwa.gov. The next regular meeting agendas show whether Flock returns to the council’s discussion list before the AG model is published.
If you want a direct line to the Attorney General’s office on this issue: The Washington Attorney General’s office accepts public comment on model policy work as it is developed. Filings and updates appear at atg.wa.gov.
If you want to follow the Lynnwood decision over time: The Lynnwood City Council’s archive at lynnwoodwa.gov holds the February 22 termination vote record, including Councilwoman Mata’s remarks.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: How many Flock cameras does Everett currently operate?
A: Sixty-eight, according to the city’s most recent public statement at the April 7, 2026 reactivation. EPD has not announced any change in that count since.
Q: Did SB 6002 require Everett to restart its cameras?
A: No. SB 6002 set a statewide framework — retention limits, federal-sharing ban, model-policy timeline — but did not mandate that any specific city operate an ALPR program. The April 7 restart was an EPD operational decision under the new statewide rules.
Q: When is the Washington Attorney General’s model policy due?
A: By statute, no later than July 1, 2027. Local agencies that operate ALPR systems must then bring their policies into compliance — or formally explain their divergence — by December 1, 2027.
Q: Are Everett’s Flock cameras allowed to share data with federal immigration enforcement?
A: No. SB 6002 specifically bans the sharing of ALPR data with federal agencies for immigration enforcement purposes. That prohibition applies statewide.
Q: How long does Everett retain Flock data now?
A: SB 6002 caps retention at 21 days for any agency operating an ALPR system in Washington. EPD has stated it operates within the statutory window.
Q: Why did Lynnwood pull out if Snohomish only paused?
A: Lynnwood’s termination was driven by a specific operational incident — Flock’s nationwide-lookup feature being active for nine days, during which more than 100,000 out-of-state searches occurred including at least sixteen tied to immigration enforcement. Snohomish never installed its cameras, so it does not have a specific operational incident to react to. Its council is waiting on the statewide model instead.
Q: Can Everett residents request what data has been collected on their license plate?
A: ALPR data sits inside the Washington Public Records Act framework. The 2026 ruling that triggered Everett’s February pause confirmed that. Records requests go to Everett’s Public Records Office at everettwa.gov/publicrecords.
Related Exploring Everett Coverage
This story was expanded into a knowledge cluster on May 14, 2026:
Leave a Reply