I am a longtime resident Oakland resident, active in several community groups working to improve the safety and well-being of our neighborhoods.
I urge the Council to approve the OPD surveillance policy and acquisition of security cameras and related technology, retain the Flock Safety (ALPR) program and enter into a contract with Flock. These cameras are an important and effective public safety tool.
OPD leadership reports robberies have dropped significantly since the Flock cameras were deployed. The technology can help deter repeat offenders and enable police to link vehicles to criminal activity more effectively. With limited staffing and resources, OPD depends on tools like ALPRs. Every lead matters, and the Flock system helps officers solve cases faster and more efficiently.
The policy balances privacy interests.The Flock system in Oakland does not use facial recognition and does not capture personal characteristics such as race or gender. Strict use policies govern access and sharing of data, ensuring accountability and preventing misuse. California law prohibits sharing ALPR data with federal agencies, protecting residents from misuse or surveillance unrelated to local public safety.
Removing this technology would eliminate one of the few tools currently available that demonstrably improves investigative effectiveness.
Oakland residents deserve every responsible measure that helps make our neighborhoods safer and more livable.

This is a gigantic waste of our taxpayer money and a blatant invasion of privacy on everyone and I refuse to have my tax dollars support this and strongly oppose. I will be moving counties if this comes to pass and take my income somewhere less inclined to just throw money at a problem then to actually understand the root cause. Increasing surveillance is not the answer, if it hasn't solved crime before why would more of what hasn't worked be a viable solution? Just remember not only police have access to this, private investigators also are able to access flock data as well so do with that information what you will.

WE STRONGLY SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVING THE FLOCK CONTRACT &E OPS's NEW USE POLICY
I am the Vice President of the Oakmore Homes Association. I represent the 200+ members of our community who have invested our own funds to install Flock LPRs to help the OPD keep us safe. The understaffed OPD must have state-of-the-art tools like Flock LPRs to be more effective.

We took action after an armed daylight robbery & a violent assault on one of our private patrol officers shortly thereafter. In both cases the car that was driven was known to have been stolen & involved in previous violent crimes. If we had Flock LPRs sending Hot List Alerts those terrible crimes may have averted these crimes.

DO NOT remove Oakland’s LPRs and deprive the OPD of the ‘force multiplier’ that they need. DO NOT prevent us from sharing our Hotlist Alerts and data with the OPD. We are concerned about potential misuse of surveillance technology, but we believe that the value of this technology outweighs theoretical harm that it may cause. We know that both Flock Safety and the OPD have made significant changes to ensure that illegal use and abuse will not happen.

Removing Flock LPRs will make our neighborhoods LESS SAFE and UNDO THE VALUE that LPRs have already contributed to improving public safety. If the system is broken, fix it. If laws are being violated, prosecute the offenders. DO NOT THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER.

VOTE YES to keep LPRs in Oakland.

I understand that people are concerned about crime, but this is not the solution. We will live to regret it if we pass this - yes, even those of us currently in positions of relative safety.
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-roundup

I am Jonathan, an Oakland resident. I urge the Council to reject FLOCK ALPR’s contract—it violates Oakland’s own laws and enables ICE surveillance.

Oakland’s 2018 ALPR Policy (OPD DGO 1-12) explicitly bans sharing data with ICE. Renewing FLOCK directly breaks this promise, letting DHS access our license plate database to target immigrants—including lawful residents and asylum seekers. DHS confirmed in 2017 it uses local ALPR data for immigration enforcement. This is not "safety"; it’s mass surveillance trapping all Oaklanders.

When Oakland’s 2017 Privacy Ordinance and Data Ethics Framework demand protecting civil liberties, renewing FLOCK undermines everything we’ve pledged.

We do not need more surveillance. We need community safety rooted in trust: mental health services, violence interruption—not a city-wide camera network feeding ICE. With recent news about collaboration between Amazon's Ring and Flock, this contract requires much increased scrutiny. Ring's CEO claimed that he could build a "pre-crime detection system" to mitigate all crime over 10 years ago - now with the Flock partnership and implementation of AI, he believes that future is just 12 to 24 months away.

Reject this contract. Uphold Oakland’s privacy policy. Stop enabling ICE targeting.

I support the resolution in its entirety. Oakland must use smart tech to help deter crime. Many Bay are cities are already using surveillance tech to great benefit. With Oakland's multi-layer oversight of OPD and the CA Attorney General's vigorous enforcement of CA law against disclosing LPR info without a court order to Federal law enforcement, the use of Flock info by ICE would be minimal in Oakland.

This is disgusting, people just got shot defending our neighbors from ICE and now you want to give Flock a private company that is know to collaborate with ICE, $2.25m to spy for ICE in those same neighborhoods!

Not only are they know collaborators, but they also lie about the efficiency of their product, this is shotspotter all over again!

If we must have a surveillance state installed for the phantasm of safety, it should be operated locally and accountable to the public, not your tech donors from Piedmont!

But as crime is down across the board (Yes Ken even when you do the basic math to adjust for under reporting), I really don't understand why we must install a surveillance network at all!

Absolute Vichy level collaboration!

And given the close ties between Christian Larsen (Empower Oakland Tech-MegaDonor) & Flock, CMs that received Empower Oakland money should recuse yourselves, this is Trump level blatant corruption if not!

cityofoakland2.app.box.com/s/sjiq7usfy27gy9dfe51hp8arz5l1ixad/file/2021629240436 - Current crime stats.
404media.co/cbp-had-access-to-more-than-80-000-flock-ai-cameras-nationwide
404media.co/ice-taps-into-nationwide-ai-enabled-camera-network-data-shows
404media.co/tag/flock

I strongly support keeping the Flock cameras. Oakland crime is off the charts and our police need all the equipment necessary to carry out their duties. The flock system is crucial to track down the criminals. Flock is NOT an invasion of privacy. It is justice for Oaklanders and their safety. Our city has been soft on crime. Oakland has crime because we let the criminals run loose. In addition to the Flock cameras, we need to get change our Oakland's ordinances and Federal Oversight which are protecting the criminals and tying the hands of our police. Mindy Pechenuk, candidate for Oakland Mayor 2026

I strongly oppose the contract with Flock to install security cameras in our city. Flock is already partnering with the Trump Administration to deliver this information to ICE and CBP, putting our neighbors and communities at risk of kidnapping and deportation by the federal government. In addition, both the ACLU and Senator Ron Wyden from Oregon note the horrifying abuses of privacy that routinely occur at the company, with the ACLU highlighting a case where a Texan police officer used the system to search for a person who had an abortion. (https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/flock-roundup)

We do not need a mass surveillance system to make us safer. We need a massive investment in people; jobs, schools, parks, roads, libraries. Two million dollars is not a lot of money within the context of our budget, but it would be better spent on things that do not spy on us and threaten our civil liberties.

Our privacy is invaded in many ways far more intrusive than license plate readers and surveillance cameras. On the other hand, they are invaluable tools in keeping us safe. Since other adjacent cities network these camera, it leaves an enormous whole if Oakland does not join. Commercial break-ins are rampant. We need these cameras. The pluses far outweigh the minuses.

As a 22-year Oakland resident, I strongly support keeping the Flock cameras in place. Research and local data show that this technology helps reduce crimes such as car break-ins, vehicle theft, and other property offenses — all of which had been on the rise in our city. Since the Flock cameras were installed, Oakland has seen sharp declines in these types of incidents.

While it’s true that correlation doesn’t prove causation, the timing and scale of these improvements suggest that the cameras have played an important role in deterring and solving property crimes.

At the same time, I understand and respect the community’s concerns about privacy. We can and should address those through clear safeguards — such as strict data-retention limits, transparent oversight, and prohibitions on data sharing with outside or federal agencies. Many other cities have successfully adopted similar guardrails while keeping their camera networks effective and accountable.

Oakland can find that same balance: protecting both public safety and personal privacy. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Council to continue supporting the Flock camera program, with robust privacy protections in place.

Flock's strength lies in its comprehensive coverage. There are currently hundreds if not thousands of active cameras throughout the East Bay. They're run by CHP, PDs, cities, private communities and businesses. Oakland was literally the last local city to buy into this technology. When City Council first voted to fund the purchase of Flock cameras, it made one of the best investments in public safety and has already received a massive ROI. We not only got our own Flock cameras but we automatically got plugged into the massive East Bay Flock database. As soon as criminals prey on Oakland, their vehicle is tagged and they can be apprehended anywhere. The same us true vice versa; the East Bay as a whole grows safer if we all buy into Flock.

If Flock disappears in Oakland, it is once again announcing that it is the perfect crime destination. You don't get Flock tagged, you don't get chased, you don't get caught. Anyone can drive here, wreak havoc, and disappear scot-free. We pay the price up front. We also pay the price on the back end when businesses and citizens flee Oakland. Can you blame them?

We are at our weakest point now with about 450 active OPD. At 3 shifts per 24hrs, that's 1 officer per 3,000 citizens at any given moment. We absolutely cannot afford to lose the only truly effective technological tool that we have. Please support the continued use of Flock to stabilize Oakland and shift its reality towards safety rather than crime and chaos.

I’m a resident of Uptown Oakland, and I strongly support approving the motion to give OPD access to Flock cameras.

It would be a disaster if the city were to take away OPD’s ability to use Flock footage. These cameras can identify suspects in all manner of crimes, and OPD needs access to solve those crimes and deter future incidents.

Removing OPD access would take away our ability to make our neighborhoods more safe.

My young daughter has been physically attacked on the streets of downtown oakland, twice, by perpetrators who faced no consequences. The idea of discarding the use of technology that could have identified these people and ensured they faced consequences is quite frankly infuriating.

With our critically low police staffing, we need to fully leverage all the crime fighting techniques we have, including Flock. Please ensure OPD has full access to Flock and neighborhood cameras to keep us safe.

Nick Danoff

Privacy is a real issue, and reasonable steps should be taken to protect it. But think about this: If you make your living as a criminal, and Berkeley, Emeryville, San Francisco, and all other surrounding communities use cameras to capture your license plate, and Oakland doesn't... where are you going to go to crime? Of course you'd come here. The cameras do raise some privacy concerns, but given the clear benefits to so many of us in deterring and capturing criminals, the privacy issues are not disqualifying. Please take reasonable steps to avoid privacy abuses, and then deploy this technology.