East Palo Alto City Council removes Flock camera contract item from agenda

Councilmember Carlos Romero called the decision a “very antidemocratic, autocratic, almost imperious move that I think this council should reconsider.”

The City Council was scheduled to reconsider its use of Flock cameras. The city has 25 active Flock cameras and has been using them since December 2024.

The surveillance technology, used for public safety, has raised privacy concerns around the country since there have been reports of federal authorities having access to the cameras’ data.

But at the start of the meeting, Lincoln made a motion to remove the item from the agenda, saying it was duplicative of another item during which the council received a regular, quarterly report on the use of Flock cameras.

Dinan agreed with Lincoln, calling it “a waste of time.”

“I don’t want to be discussing this every two months for the rest of my term in office just because people, some people in the community, aren’t happy with it,” Dinan said.

The city approved a three-year contract for the cameras in December 2025, but Tuesday’s agenda item was added to discuss if the city should prematurely end the contract at the end of this year.

“We recently went through this entire discussion,” Dinan said. “I believe it was in December, a few months ago. Nothing has changed, from my perspective.”

Romero disagreed.

“I believe that certain information that has revealed itself since we approved this item requires us to at least look at this one more time and decide if indeed we want to have this level of oversight, one might say, ‘local spying,’ done on our community,” Romero said.

Regionally, cities including Mountain View, Santa Cruz and Los Altos Hills have recently terminated their contracts with Flock Safety after learning that federal agencies could search the camera data.

In February, the city of Mountain View severed ties with Flock after an audit revealed that federal law enforcement agencies had accessed its camera data despite assurances from the company that security measures would prevent this from happening.

Rising immigration enforcement from federal agencies like the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Department of Homeland Security have sparked growing resistance to Flock cameras over concerns that federal authorities can access camera data to conduct surveillance of civilians.

Abrica echoed these concerns, condemning the council’s decision at the start of the meeting. He and Romero voted against the motion to remove the item from the agenda.

“This is a very serious issue, and the council members who voted for it are insulting the immigrant community, particularly the Latino community, who have grave concerns about this,” Abrica said after the vote. “Who are you to tell the public that we don’t want to hear about it?”

Despite the item getting tossed from Tuesday’s meeting, community members stayed at the meeting to speak during general public comment.

“I’m deeply disheartened to hear that you guys pushed the item for a future date,” resident Donna Moreno said. “These council members seem to think that because they have the majority, they don’t have to listen to the concerns of their constituents. But that won’t stop us from showing up and having our voices heard.”

Later in the meeting, the council heard the quarterly report on the use of Flock cameras from Police Chief Jeff Liu and Officer Jason Peardon. The pair tried to reassure the council that despite concerns over data security, no federal agency has ever accessed the city’s Flock camera data.

“I’ve been constantly weighing what’s the community benefit versus the concerns over the Flock data, and I am concerned as well,” Liu said at the meeting. “That’s why we take the extra steps. That’s why we have our system locked down more than any other agency in the Bay Area.”

Peardon said he conducts monthly audits of the camera systems and also reviews the systems weekly to make sure that no unauthorized agencies are accessing the data.

“He’s in there constantly checking to make sure other agencies are not using this data inappropriately, making sure we have no breaches, making sure our personnel are using it properly,” Liu said. “I think he lives and breathes Flock just to make sure that we are secure.”

Dinan wanted to continue using the cameras, saying that they are making East Palo Alto safer. He also said that federal access to Flock camera data from local jurisdictions should not be a big concern since federal agencies under President Donald Trump’s administration have other ways of conducting immigration enforcement.

“There is so much danger from this administration, but Flock is not one of them,” Dinan said. “I think it’s incredibly useful for police officers to catch people doing crimes. It’s not a system that immigration would need to use given the vast powers and technologies they have in their back pocket.”

Councilmember Ruben Abrica was not satisfied, saying he was worried that the cameras could be hacked despite oversight from police.

“It is hacked by side doors and back doors, not the front door, and definitely our police department and our staff are guarding the front door very well,” Abrica said. “It’s the side door and the back door of the Flock system throughout the country that explains why city after city after city is building up this resistance.”

Abrica, who helps set agendas with Lincoln, said he will try again to put the item to revisit the Flock camera contract back on the agenda for the April 21 meeting.