Flock ALPR Surveillance

36-year resident argued the issue is corporate data monetization and surveillance without warrants, asking who is accountable if the city is told to track protesters; urged suspending cameras until safeguards exist.

Called for vendor-agnostic, NIST-based independent security and privacy assessments and a community task force, noting Flock is one of many surveillance vendors.

Cited 2024 audit logs listing 'pride' as a search reason and argued the city bears the burden of proving the dragnet is necessary; urged removing the cameras.

Said Flock takes about 1.3 million photos of residents monthly and that the city doesn't control its own data; urged canceling the contract and removing the cameras.

Proposed a charter amendment that would require public notice and consent for surveillance without banning any technology, framing it as a long-term protection framework.

Asked council to pause the cameras and build a vendor-agnostic legislative framework for all law-enforcement technology, citing data-retention and accuracy concerns.

Posed questions on the 30-day retention period, vendor security ties, and liability, concluding the only clear answer is to take the cameras down.

Asked council to pause the cameras and form a joint commission to build a transparent plan, pushing back on last week's 'lazy' characterization of opponents.