Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired
Agenda Item
9 26-0294 Subject: OPD Community Safety Cameras Policy And FLOCK Agreement
From: Oakland Police Department
Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution (1) Approving The Oakland Police Department Surveillance Use Policy "DGO I-32.1 - Community Safety Camera System" And The Acquisition Of Security Cameras And Related Technology; (2) Awarding A Two Year Agreement To Flock Safety For Acquisition Of Automated License Plate Reader And Pan Tilt Zoom Cameras, Operating System Technology, And Related Services At A Cost Not To Exceed Two-Million Two-Hundred Fifty-Two Thousand Five-Hundred Dollars ($2,252,500); And (3) Waiving The Competitive Multiple-Step Solicitation Process Required For The Acquisition Of Information Technology Systems And Waiving The Local And Small Local Business Enterprise Program Requirements
Oakland has already spoken up loud and clear, time and time again: This is a contract that your own privacy experts rejected in October; this is a contract that members of this Council rejected in November; this is a contract that thousands of constituents have spoken up against—the only thing that's changed since then is a new lawsuit over OPD’s illegal data sharing with ICE using existing FLOCK technology.
Turning Oakland into a surveillance-city will destroy our values and status as a Sanctuary City. Allowing OPD and FLOCK to collect and store our data into a massive, warrantless searchable database will make that info accessible to over 5,000 agencies nationwide—including ICE and the Trump administration; we won't be able to protect ourselves from the govt taking access and using that info against any of us for, honestly, anything (including speaking up against the govt).
This is NOT how we keep us safe, especially when there are so many other alternatives. Please don't feed our country's terrifying escalation of authoritarianism—please listen to your privacy experts, your constituents, and our community organizations and vote NO. Thank you.
As a resident of District 1, I strongly oppose renewing the Flock contract. I do not believe that Flock to keep our data safe. Surveillance in our communities creates more risk and discrimination. It will not keep our community safe. I am one of many Oakland residents that oppose Flock and have already made their voices heard at the Public Safety Commission meeting. Our community needs funding for education, to serve our unhoused community and on community-led public safety solutions. The 2.2 million dollars should be invested in enhancing our communities not in surveilling them. Please oppose this agreement and listen to your constituents.
I am an Oakland resident in District 2 and I am so disheartened to see Flock Cameras on the agenda again. It is true that Oakland residents want improved public safety, but a contract with Flock Safety will not achieve that and puts us all at risk. It is worth noting that once we pay to install these cameras, ending our contract will not guarantee safety. Flock owns and operates all of these cameras, and it is in their interest to compile as much data as possible to support their broader AI surveillance system. Even if Flock Safety could be trust to follow California law, there is no way to ensure our data isn't used to train their AI models.
I’m an Oakland resident and I’m strongly opposed to the use of Flock cameras in our city. The lack of transparency and potential for abuse is deeply concerning. We do not need this surveillance in our city.
I'm another Oakland resident strongly opposing flock cameras. Countless stories have shown that these surveillance systems will be abused, no matter how carefully we draft the policies, contracts, or even laws governing their use. Sensitive data will be accessed without warrants, and abused without accountability, as we have seen happen all over the country. Once these cameras are in place, the risks to privacy will only continue to increase as the surveillance technology evolves to extract more data from Oakland residents. It will be near-impossible to roll this back, once the system has been installed. The time to stand against this rise of privatized networked surveillance is now.
As a resident of District 1, I'm strongly opposed to this measure, and any other involving usage of Automatic License Plate Readers or other mass surveillance technology by Oakland Police Department.
I strongly oppose renewing the Flock contract. I do not trust Flock to keep our data safe and expanding surveillance in our communities will lead to more risk and discrimination. It will not keep our community safe. Many Oakland residents oppose Flock and have already made their voices heard at the Public Safety Commission meeting. The 2.2 million dollars for this contract would be better used on education, supporting our unhoused community, and on community-led solutions to public safety. Please oppose this agreement wholeheartedly and listen to your constituents.
I urge you to reject OPD's Community Safety Camera System use policy and FLOCK Safety Contract until these safeguards are in place to ensure full compliance with Oakland sanctuary ordinance. I am deeply concerned with how the lack of transparency in the city's procurement process and the reported high-risk history of Flock Safety will enable federal immigration agencies and other private actors to violate my privacy while providing little improvement to public safety beyond quality of life issues.
OPD’s claims that "customers own the data collected by Flock devices, and have the opportunity to provide a legal challenge, seek to intervene, or otherwise respond to these legal orders" ignores recent case law and policy guidance showing that data ownership does not prevent federal subpoena compliance. Considering the fact that Oakland's ability to "legally challenge" a federal order provides minimal practical protection, Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Trump administration have made clear their willingness to use force to get this information.
As Oakland has ongoing litigation to defend sanctuary jurisdictions, I’m afraid for the safety and wellbeing of my neighbors being targeted by federal immigration agents and anti-abortion states. Flock's technology and company practices threaten Oakland's sanctuary protections, which we saw last July when OPD's own policies allowed other agencies to conduct illegal search requests on behalf of ICE.
I am a homeowner and small business owner in District 2, and I am outraged that the City Council appears to be shirking transparency and bypassing the democratic process in order approve OPD’s Community Safety Camera System use policy and FLOCK Safety Contract at a special meeting just before the holidays.
This is a contract that the privacy experts on the Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission rejected in October. This is a contract that members of this Council rejected at the Public Safety Committee in November. Why are you ignoring serious and documented risks in OPD’s handling of Flock Safety’s real-time surveillance access when it threatens the safety and privacy protections of millions of Oaklanders and Bay Area residents like me and my neighbors?
OPD and some Councilmembers argue that $2.25M for private surveillance technology is needed to compensate for OPD staffing levels that crashed from 711 to 636 officers since, “with an operational staffing level of 509 sworn" in October 2025. But, apart from the suspicious timing in raising this argument, OPD presents a false choice: technology OR staffing has never been interchangeable.
I urge to you vote NO on the Flock contract!
Sharmi Basu, Executive Director, Vital Arts
at December 15, 2025 at 12:35pm PST
Vehemently opposed to this violent implementation that will be mostly unused by OPD for anything that might be helpful. Public safety rests in community care and investment.
As a D5 resident, I strongly oppose any contract with Flock Safety. Flock indiscriminately collects enormous volumes of video footage. In Illinois, they've been caught breaking state privacy law by sharing that footage with out-of-state law enforcement officers [1], including U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents and a Texas sheriff [2] tracking a woman who'd had an abortion. Their sloppy license plate readings have led to false accusations [3], and their careless security practices increase the risk of hackers stealing footage [4]. When it comes to public safety in Oakland, I trust local violence prevention programs—not unaccountable tech companies or increasingly brutal and lawless federal agencies.
I live in District 3 and strongly OPPOSE this item. Surveillance doesn't make us safer. If you have $2,252,500 to spend give it to the children, give it to our schools, to housing, to small businesses, to food security, to anything that actually creates a safer and healthier place for us to live. This surveillance program is completely ineffective at keeping us safe and only makes things worse and creates an environment of fear. Stop it. Listen to the people and reject this item and anything like it now and forever.
This is a shameless attempt to ram through the measure that has already been voted down by the public safety committee. Why does this keep resurfacing? There is clearly widespread public opposition, which is very reasonable as we’ve seen no credible assurances that the data collected as part of this contract would be used responsibly. Please, do NOT expand Flock surveillance in Oakland. Surveillance is not safety. As Dave Eggers wrote in The Every, “It’s a reprehensible idea that seems, on the surface, virtuous.”
I am born and raised in Oakland, and continue to live in Oakland. Our town does have issues with crime and safety, but this is because we do not have enough social safety nets. Our country and the Bay Area already put SO MUCH money towards surveillance and policing, and it's not getting us anywhere. We DO NOT need more surveillance. We need to put money towards our people -- this includes care and food for children and elders, support for working class families, actually affordable housing, mental health crisis response, etc.
On top of this, implementing Flock will put our undocumented and immigrant communities in danger. ICE, Secret Service, and US Navy confirmed access to Flock’s network in October 2025. Undocumented and immigrant communities make up the backbone of Oakland. We should be protecting our neighbors and families, not putting a bigger target on their back. Protect our people -- stop Flock.
My name is Gemma Waaland, I am a resident of District 1 and I strongly opposed any continued or expanded contract with FLOCK. I am deeply concerned with how the lack of transparency in the city's procurement process and the reported high-risk history of Flock Safety will enable federal immigration agencies and other private actors to violate my privacy while providing little improvement to public safety beyond quality of life issues. This is a contract that your own privacy experts on the Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission rejected in October. This is a contract that members of this Council rejected at the Public Safety Committee in November. The only thing that has changed since November is a new lawsuit over OPD’s illegal data sharing with ICE using existing Flock technology. Rather than taking such costly legal risks, Councilmembers could direct this funding towards community violence intervention, expanded mental health crisis response, or youth diversion programs that produce measurable crime prevention without legal exposure. I urge you all to vote no, particularly my City Councilmember Zac Unger.
I am a District 3 resident who opposes the Flock agreement. Flock’s surveillance system directly invades on the privacy of those who live in Oakland. I and many community members continue to feel threatened by the heightened presence of surveillance technology, and I grow more concerned by the day with the safety of especially the Black and Brown communities I live with. Let’s build an Oakland where its residents actually feel safe to exist on its streets!
I am a D2 resident and I am tired of seeing this agenda item. The majority of Oakland red know that increased surveillance doesn't make us safer. Law enforcement has been militarizing for decades including by expanding its surveillance power. The result is not a city free from crime but one that is stratified between haves and have nots, the watchers and the watched.
LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS. Don't do business with this shady company. Show us that you understand that increasing safety is about meeting people's needs and not about increasing contact with the police.
My name is Jenny Tighe. I am a D1 resident and federal worker who spoke up at the Public Safety committee. I am concerned that despite the outpouring of opposition from the community this is still being moved forward. On 11/18, I listened for hours as many Oaklanders with different backgrounds and occupations spoke out against this horrific contract, which resulted in Public Safety committee voting against it. Only to have the will of the people overridden by private interests. At a time when democracy is under attack at the national level, I am ashamed and aghast to see democracy being evaded here in Oakland. As a federal worker, I have had frontline experience of witnessing how the Trump administration has been using increased surveillance and oversight to control the population.
This contract with Flock furthers Trump’s agenda of widespread surveillance for the sake of control, while also failing to protect our most vulnerable populations. We do NOT manage Oakland the way the Trump administration operates.
Vote NO on the expensive contract with this ineffective surveillance company that will provide us no greater safety. Oakland deserves better than this contract and you all know it.
As an Oakland resident, i am STRONGLY OPPOSING flock cameras. they will not make our communities safer. reject reject reject
Oakland has already spoken up loud and clear, time and time again: This is a contract that your own privacy experts rejected in October; this is a contract that members of this Council rejected in November; this is a contract that thousands of constituents have spoken up against—the only thing that's changed since then is a new lawsuit over OPD’s illegal data sharing with ICE using existing FLOCK technology.
Turning Oakland into a surveillance-city will destroy our values and status as a Sanctuary City. Allowing OPD and FLOCK to collect and store our data into a massive, warrantless searchable database will make that info accessible to over 5,000 agencies nationwide—including ICE and the Trump administration; we won't be able to protect ourselves from the govt taking access and using that info against any of us for, honestly, anything (including speaking up against the govt).
This is NOT how we keep us safe, especially when there are so many other alternatives. Please don't feed our country's terrifying escalation of authoritarianism—please listen to your privacy experts, your constituents, and our community organizations and vote NO. Thank you.
As a resident of District 1, I strongly oppose renewing the Flock contract. I do not believe that Flock to keep our data safe. Surveillance in our communities creates more risk and discrimination. It will not keep our community safe. I am one of many Oakland residents that oppose Flock and have already made their voices heard at the Public Safety Commission meeting. Our community needs funding for education, to serve our unhoused community and on community-led public safety solutions. The 2.2 million dollars should be invested in enhancing our communities not in surveilling them. Please oppose this agreement and listen to your constituents.
I am an Oakland resident in District 2 and I am so disheartened to see Flock Cameras on the agenda again. It is true that Oakland residents want improved public safety, but a contract with Flock Safety will not achieve that and puts us all at risk. It is worth noting that once we pay to install these cameras, ending our contract will not guarantee safety. Flock owns and operates all of these cameras, and it is in their interest to compile as much data as possible to support their broader AI surveillance system. Even if Flock Safety could be trust to follow California law, there is no way to ensure our data isn't used to train their AI models.
I’m an Oakland resident and I’m strongly opposed to the use of Flock cameras in our city. The lack of transparency and potential for abuse is deeply concerning. We do not need this surveillance in our city.
I'm another Oakland resident strongly opposing flock cameras. Countless stories have shown that these surveillance systems will be abused, no matter how carefully we draft the policies, contracts, or even laws governing their use. Sensitive data will be accessed without warrants, and abused without accountability, as we have seen happen all over the country. Once these cameras are in place, the risks to privacy will only continue to increase as the surveillance technology evolves to extract more data from Oakland residents. It will be near-impossible to roll this back, once the system has been installed. The time to stand against this rise of privatized networked surveillance is now.
As a resident of District 1, I'm strongly opposed to this measure, and any other involving usage of Automatic License Plate Readers or other mass surveillance technology by Oakland Police Department.
I strongly oppose renewing the Flock contract. I do not trust Flock to keep our data safe and expanding surveillance in our communities will lead to more risk and discrimination. It will not keep our community safe. Many Oakland residents oppose Flock and have already made their voices heard at the Public Safety Commission meeting. The 2.2 million dollars for this contract would be better used on education, supporting our unhoused community, and on community-led solutions to public safety. Please oppose this agreement wholeheartedly and listen to your constituents.
I urge you to reject OPD's Community Safety Camera System use policy and FLOCK Safety Contract until these safeguards are in place to ensure full compliance with Oakland sanctuary ordinance. I am deeply concerned with how the lack of transparency in the city's procurement process and the reported high-risk history of Flock Safety will enable federal immigration agencies and other private actors to violate my privacy while providing little improvement to public safety beyond quality of life issues.
OPD’s claims that "customers own the data collected by Flock devices, and have the opportunity to provide a legal challenge, seek to intervene, or otherwise respond to these legal orders" ignores recent case law and policy guidance showing that data ownership does not prevent federal subpoena compliance. Considering the fact that Oakland's ability to "legally challenge" a federal order provides minimal practical protection, Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Trump administration have made clear their willingness to use force to get this information.
As Oakland has ongoing litigation to defend sanctuary jurisdictions, I’m afraid for the safety and wellbeing of my neighbors being targeted by federal immigration agents and anti-abortion states. Flock's technology and company practices threaten Oakland's sanctuary protections, which we saw last July when OPD's own policies allowed other agencies to conduct illegal search requests on behalf of ICE.
I am a homeowner and small business owner in District 2, and I am outraged that the City Council appears to be shirking transparency and bypassing the democratic process in order approve OPD’s Community Safety Camera System use policy and FLOCK Safety Contract at a special meeting just before the holidays.
This is a contract that the privacy experts on the Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission rejected in October. This is a contract that members of this Council rejected at the Public Safety Committee in November. Why are you ignoring serious and documented risks in OPD’s handling of Flock Safety’s real-time surveillance access when it threatens the safety and privacy protections of millions of Oaklanders and Bay Area residents like me and my neighbors?
OPD and some Councilmembers argue that $2.25M for private surveillance technology is needed to compensate for OPD staffing levels that crashed from 711 to 636 officers since, “with an operational staffing level of 509 sworn" in October 2025. But, apart from the suspicious timing in raising this argument, OPD presents a false choice: technology OR staffing has never been interchangeable.
I urge to you vote NO on the Flock contract!
Vehemently opposed to this violent implementation that will be mostly unused by OPD for anything that might be helpful. Public safety rests in community care and investment.
As a D5 resident, I strongly oppose any contract with Flock Safety. Flock indiscriminately collects enormous volumes of video footage. In Illinois, they've been caught breaking state privacy law by sharing that footage with out-of-state law enforcement officers [1], including U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents and a Texas sheriff [2] tracking a woman who'd had an abortion. Their sloppy license plate readings have led to false accusations [3], and their careless security practices increase the risk of hackers stealing footage [4]. When it comes to public safety in Oakland, I trust local violence prevention programs—not unaccountable tech companies or increasingly brutal and lawless federal agencies.
[1] https://www.nprillinois.org/illinois/2025-08-27/hundreds-of-police-departments-use-camera-company-accused-of-breaking-state-law
[2] https://capitolnewsillinois.com/news/illinois-license-plate-cameras-used-illegally-by-out-of-state-police-giannoulias-says/
[3] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/11/flock-haters-cross-political-divides-to-remove-error-prone-cameras/
[4] https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-krishnamoorthi-urge-ftc-to-investigate-surveillance-tech-company-on-negligently-handling-americans-personal-data
I live in District 3 and strongly OPPOSE this item. Surveillance doesn't make us safer. If you have $2,252,500 to spend give it to the children, give it to our schools, to housing, to small businesses, to food security, to anything that actually creates a safer and healthier place for us to live. This surveillance program is completely ineffective at keeping us safe and only makes things worse and creates an environment of fear. Stop it. Listen to the people and reject this item and anything like it now and forever.
This is a shameless attempt to ram through the measure that has already been voted down by the public safety committee. Why does this keep resurfacing? There is clearly widespread public opposition, which is very reasonable as we’ve seen no credible assurances that the data collected as part of this contract would be used responsibly. Please, do NOT expand Flock surveillance in Oakland. Surveillance is not safety. As Dave Eggers wrote in The Every, “It’s a reprehensible idea that seems, on the surface, virtuous.”
I am born and raised in Oakland, and continue to live in Oakland. Our town does have issues with crime and safety, but this is because we do not have enough social safety nets. Our country and the Bay Area already put SO MUCH money towards surveillance and policing, and it's not getting us anywhere. We DO NOT need more surveillance. We need to put money towards our people -- this includes care and food for children and elders, support for working class families, actually affordable housing, mental health crisis response, etc.
On top of this, implementing Flock will put our undocumented and immigrant communities in danger. ICE, Secret Service, and US Navy confirmed access to Flock’s network in October 2025. Undocumented and immigrant communities make up the backbone of Oakland. We should be protecting our neighbors and families, not putting a bigger target on their back. Protect our people -- stop Flock.
My name is Gemma Waaland, I am a resident of District 1 and I strongly opposed any continued or expanded contract with FLOCK. I am deeply concerned with how the lack of transparency in the city's procurement process and the reported high-risk history of Flock Safety will enable federal immigration agencies and other private actors to violate my privacy while providing little improvement to public safety beyond quality of life issues. This is a contract that your own privacy experts on the Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission rejected in October. This is a contract that members of this Council rejected at the Public Safety Committee in November. The only thing that has changed since November is a new lawsuit over OPD’s illegal data sharing with ICE using existing Flock technology. Rather than taking such costly legal risks, Councilmembers could direct this funding towards community violence intervention, expanded mental health crisis response, or youth diversion programs that produce measurable crime prevention without legal exposure. I urge you all to vote no, particularly my City Councilmember Zac Unger.
I am a District 3 resident who opposes the Flock agreement. Flock’s surveillance system directly invades on the privacy of those who live in Oakland. I and many community members continue to feel threatened by the heightened presence of surveillance technology, and I grow more concerned by the day with the safety of especially the Black and Brown communities I live with. Let’s build an Oakland where its residents actually feel safe to exist on its streets!
Surveillance does not help me feel safer. Can we direct funds to helping Oakland residents?
I am a D2 resident and I am tired of seeing this agenda item. The majority of Oakland red know that increased surveillance doesn't make us safer. Law enforcement has been militarizing for decades including by expanding its surveillance power. The result is not a city free from crime but one that is stratified between haves and have nots, the watchers and the watched.
LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS. Don't do business with this shady company. Show us that you understand that increasing safety is about meeting people's needs and not about increasing contact with the police.
My name is Jenny Tighe. I am a D1 resident and federal worker who spoke up at the Public Safety committee. I am concerned that despite the outpouring of opposition from the community this is still being moved forward. On 11/18, I listened for hours as many Oaklanders with different backgrounds and occupations spoke out against this horrific contract, which resulted in Public Safety committee voting against it. Only to have the will of the people overridden by private interests. At a time when democracy is under attack at the national level, I am ashamed and aghast to see democracy being evaded here in Oakland. As a federal worker, I have had frontline experience of witnessing how the Trump administration has been using increased surveillance and oversight to control the population.
This contract with Flock furthers Trump’s agenda of widespread surveillance for the sake of control, while also failing to protect our most vulnerable populations. We do NOT manage Oakland the way the Trump administration operates.
Vote NO on the expensive contract with this ineffective surveillance company that will provide us no greater safety. Oakland deserves better than this contract and you all know it.