I am a resident of district 4, and I strongly oppose the proposal to use Flock cameras.

I am a resident of district 1 and I oppose the proposal to expand the use of Flock cameras. These cameras record far more than potential criminal activity. They record everything that happens in the places where they are located. That footage gets stored in places where citizens of Oakland will never truly be able to say who will or will not ultimately see it or what it will be used for. Flock has demonstrated that it does not care what Oakland city officials say about what constitutes appropriate usage or safe storage of the footage and the data associated with it. This is not how we make Oakland a safer place to live. This is a threat made by those who have wealth and privilege to those who do not.

As an Oakland resident of District 5, I oppose the proposal to expand Flock's license plate reader cameras. The devices are intended for public safety and to reduce violent crimes, but there is not reliable evidence or studies that support this claim. They only respond to and investigate crimes; they don't prevent them. A more appropriate response to reduce violent crimes is investing in Oakland's most vulnerable community members, ensuring their basic needs are met like housing and healthcare. Around the clock surveillance is not the answer. Invest the city's money and resources into solutions that WORK.

Dear Oakland, mass surveillance does not equal public safety!

Please do not expand OPD’s use of Flock license plate reader cameras. I am demanding a NO vote on Flock expansion.

Oakland already has 290 Flock cameras across the city. In 2025 alone, those cameras scanned more than 638 million license plates, creating a massive database of where people drive, park, work, worship, organize, and seek care.

By expanding the reasons officers can search this surveillance system, you are further leaking into our everyday lives and infringing on our civil liberties. We won't accept this!

Please vote to OPPOSE any continued/expanded use of the Flock surveillance program. This level of surveillance does not make us feel safe, let alone safer than the traditional modes for crime prevention & response.

Furthermore, in the report:
“Staff did not complete a comprehensive Racial Equity Impact Analysis on the recommended policy
action; each annual report contains its own respective race and equity impact and breakdown, if
applicable.”

If anything, given race-police relations, such studies/reports need to be made on a monthly basis. I strongly OPPOSE the Flock program and certainly an expansion of it.

I'm an Oakland resident, and I'm urging you to vote NO on expanding OPD's use of FLOCK cameras. I'm deeply concerned with the harm that this expansion will cause to our community. OPD using cameras to track people's every move, increasing contact with the most vulnerable community members and criminalizing people in moments of crisis will lead to a terrorized community NOT a safe one. Safety comes from supportive infrastructure and helping people meet their basic needs! This is a proven fact, not an opinion.

Cities like Los Angeles and Cleveland have ended their contracts with FLOCK, and Oakland must make all efforts to move away from this harmful surveillance tech.

I'm an Oakland resident strongly opposed to Flock cameras in our city. As many others have said, Flock has repeatedly lied about sharing data and has had several leaks of people's personal information. Flock access is also being abused, as police officers have used it to stalk romantic partners and conduct searches based on ethnicity, to name just a couple of examples. Los Angeles has ended their contract with Flock because of privacy and security concerns, and we must do the same.

I'm an east bay resident and Security GRC Engineer (CISSP, CCSK) with 10+ years assessing vendor risk under FedRAMP, NIST 800-53, and SOC 2. I urge the Board to vote no on Flock Safety or related technology. These systems being abused isn't hypothetical: a Feb. 2026 class action alleges ICE, CBP, FBI, and ATF queried SFPD's Flock data 1.6M+ times in violation of SB 34, and Mountain View terminated its contract after finding 250+ unapproved agencies ran ~600,000 unauthorized searches. These systems harm citizens, such as when a Texas sheriff searched the network after a woman's self-managed abortion, EFF found 50+ agencies surveilling protesters, and 18+ stalking cases are tied to the platform. The efficacy case is also weak. A Dec. 2025 peer-reviewed study found effects "equivocal or limited," and a 16-year Piedmont study found under 0.3% of hits useful, at $576,378.80 in cost. Flock's "70%" claim is self-reported, not independent. At ~$3,000/camera/year and repeated civil rights violations, I ask the Board to vote no on Flock and related technologies.

I am a district 1 resident and I strongly oppose the use of Flock or any surveillance technologies. Our tax dollars should be used on care-first solutions to address the root cause of crime: poverty. We should be making sure our residents are taken care of, not spied on. This surveillance tech has already been shown to be abused by stalkers, abusers, and people targeting political dissidents and marginalized communities. This doesn't solve our problems, but introduces new ones.

As a District 1 Oakland resident, I am STRONGLY OPPOSED to the use of Flock license plate readers and other mass surveillance technology in my city, and urge the City Council to vote to end the contracts associated with their use. Why the Flock are we handing over millions of dollars of Oakland taxpayer money, AND Oakland residents’ personal data to private tech companies that clearly value corporate profit over individual privacy and civil liberties? The tech companies behind these surveillance technologies have closely aligned themselves with the Trump administration, helping them implement their corrupt agenda and chip away at our civil liberties in exchange for corporate tax breaks and legal loopholes. These tech companies are NOT who we should be entrusting with massive amounts of personal data that can be used to track where Oakland residents drive, work, worship, seek care, congregate, and live. We have seen already that federal agencies such as ICE have used “back doors” to access license plate data collected by Flock cameras across the country. Furthermore, these tech companies have demonstrated that they have no qualms about handing over citizens’ private data when subpoenaed by the Trump administration, regardless of constitutional considerations. Protect your constituents - END THE USE OF FLOCK LICENSE PLATE READERS AND OTHER MASS SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY IN THE CITY OF OAKLAND!

I am a district 1 resident, and I strongly oppose this use of surveillance technology and Flock in particular. I think that the arguments in favor of the cameras are confusing surveillance with safety, despite a lack of any reliable data showing that Flock reduces crime. What we do have is a ton of well substantiated evidence that Flock is an irresponsible company with at-best sloppy and at-worst unethical data practices and is actively harming communities through misidentification and creation of a vast surveillance network that is accessed by ICE, the secret service and the military. This company should not be receiving Oakland tax dollars. We should be following the lead of communities that have wised up to Flock and canceled their contracts.

As a student, I oppose the expansion of Flock security cameras in Oakland. Flock has allowed footage from its cameras to be accessed by ICE agents in cities across the US, furthering the unconstitutional violence currently being enacted on our community members. Oakland is a sanctuary city housing at least 100,000 immigrants who contribute to our thriving community. If we continue supporting Flock, we risk ICE crackdowns, data leaks, and people being tracked without a warrant, a violation of everyone’s privacy.
Other California cities have cut ties with Flock Security, including Mountain View, Santa Cruz, and Los Angeles. We can follow in their path by putting the protection of our own people over private companies. Let’s maintain our values as a diverse and welcoming city for all.

I'm an Oakland resident in District 1. I'm ardently opposed to the adoption of Flock and similar surveillance tech.

Before I get to the rationale, I want to quantify my opposition. Rejection of surveillance tech is now my animating priority in local organizing. I am working to build a coalition of like-minded citizens to do all of: persuade our councilmembers to change their support, counter the police propaganda around the use of these systems, expose the inept and unsafe privacy policies of the companies running these systems, educate citizens on the importance of non-police programs in creating safety, and electorally challenge councilmembers that put the police ahead of their own constituents.

Flock does not create safety. Police do not create safety. Safety is created through the programs and infrastructure that make ours a thriving community: childcare, food security, housing security, streets, crisis intervention, etc. Yet, the councilmembers keep telling us that the city is broke, and "nobody is happy" - and yet here we are, giving the police new tech atop their overtime budget crisis, for which they can't even bother to fill out timesheets, in violation of their own policies. And if traffic injuries are the main concern, ALPRs aren't the answer, traffic calming infrastructure is the answer.

I urge you to oppose this, and reclaim the resources that OPD is draining from the budget; resources that should be used to make ours a vibrant, connected, and safe city.

As a lifelong resident of district 4 in Oakland, I deeply oppose the expanded use of Flock. The expansion of these surveillance technologies does not make us safer. In fact, Oakland police have already shared Flock data with the federal agencies, including ICE, in violation of California law. Oakland claims to be a sanctuary city-- please put that into action by protecting our neighbors and opposing the expansion of Flock.

Vote no on flock expansion! This type of surveillance doesn’t keep us safe, it puts our communities in more harm via stalking, racial profiling, and infringing on our privacy. These tools are more dangerous than they are helpful, and budget should instead be spent on the critical social services and infrastructure that actually reduce crime in Oakland. Thank you.

No Flock or other surveillance tech in Oakland!

Please vote no on surveillance technology. We do not need more Flock cameras and car trackers, drones to surveil us, or Israeli spyware to break into our personal devices.

Even if you think there is "public safety benefit" to these technologies, why compromise your values and spend our public money with terrible companies? These surveillance companies enrich Trump cronies, call protestors terrorists, and destroy lives around the world - they don't deserve our money.

Please Vote No on Flock Expansion. There were so many people opposed to the original contract in December it should never have passed, but there is no reason at all for it to be expanded.

As an Oakland resident, I urge you to vote NO on Flock.
Surveillance technology like this is not the solution to public safety in our city. Time and time again, we've seen this technology deployed without ethical oversight or accountability, and used in ways that cause real harm to communities—particularly communities that are already over-policed and under-resourced.
If we're serious about safety, we need to invest in what actually works: community-based violence prevention, mental health and crisis response services, youth programs, housing stability, and public infrastructure. These are the investments that build safer neighborhoods—not expanding surveillance systems with a track record of misuse and little transparency.
Please vote NO on Flock.

As a District 2 homeowner and long-time Oakland resident, I am writing to express my firm opposition to the use of Flock cameras and the expansion of surveillance technology in our city. Automated license plate readers do not make our neighborhoods safer; instead, they create an invasive web of warrantless tracking that threatens the privacy of every Oaklander. We should not be handing over our public safety budget to for-profit tech companies with no accountability. I urge the City Council to stop investing in these oppressive technologies and instead redirect those funds toward community care and resources that actually address the root causes of crime. Our tax dollars belong in our community, not in a surveillance dragnet.