HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2604-6298CITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Monday, May 04, 2026
Council Chambers & Hybrid
5:30 PM
Agenda Item
C.Update on Flock Automated License Plate Recognition Technology Public Comments
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: INFORMATION REPORTS
Lead Department: Police
Meeting Date: May 4, 2026
Report #:2604-6298
TITLE
Update on Flock Automated License Plate Recognition Technology
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Recognizing public interest in this topic, the Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) will begin
proactively posting on a monthly cadence partially redacted Flock search logs on the City’s
Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) webpage1. These logs include information
concerning ALPR queries performed by PAPD users, as well as queries performed by other
agencies, that has not previously been released pursuant to a legal exemption. The first logs,
covering July of 2023 (when the first Flock camera was installed in Palo Alto) thru March of
2026, were posted on April 21, 2026. Additionally, the City continues to use best practices to
secure Palo Alto ALPR data, including a 30-day limit on data retention, requiring MOUs with
other agencies for data sharing, and internal policy controls.
In 2023, unbeknownst to many users including PAPD, Flock added a new “Nationwide Lookup”
search feature. Using this feature, an out-of-state local law enforcement or federal agency
could perform a broad search of data from Flock’s entire nationwide network of over 6000
cameras, including the 20 cameras then-deployed in Palo Alto. The feature did not enable
targeted searches of any specific agency’s data. These searches could only be performed
system-wide when a full 7-digit license plate number was known and only based on the
articulation of a legitimate law enforcement purpose.
PAPD was first made aware of this issue in December 2025 and subsequently learned that Flock
had already disabled the feature for PAPD by late October 2024 and for all California law
enforcement agencies by March 2025.
1 City of Palo Alto’s Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) webpage;
https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Police/Public-Information-Portal/Automated-License-Plate-Recognition-
ALPR
While its data was included in the “Nationwide Lookup” searchable dataset during this period,
PAPD has worked with Flock to confirm that no PAPD data (i.e., license plates captured by Palo
Alto cameras) was actually received by any out-of-state agency or federal agency as a result of
any “Nationwide Lookup” search. In other words, PAPD had no records that matched the
“Nationwide Lookup” searches performed by out of state or federal agencies.
3 Additionally, PAPD found that no searches
had been performed by ICE, Customs and Border Patrol, or the Department of Homeland
Security; keyword searches did not identify any searches that appeared to be associated with
immigration enforcement or reproductive rights enforcement.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
APPROVED BY:
3 Search logs capture the search reason provided by the user at the time of the search.
From:Winter Dellenbach
To:Council, City
Subject:Flock cameras information report
Date:Saturday, May 2, 2026 2:33:53 PM
To: Palo Alto City Council Members
From: Winter Dellenbach
RE: Flock Cameras: Stop the denial
A number of supposed control measures have and are to be instituted as mentioned in the 2-page
Information Report on Flock camera usage in Palo Alto. Most were in place at the inception of the PAPD’s
contract with Flock in 2023. Some additional oversight has now been added (see Report) in an attempt to
smooth over Flocks wrong doing.
What is the problem?
"In 2023, unbeknownst to many users including PAPD, Flock added a new “Nationwide Lookup” search
feature. Using this feature, an out-of-state local law enforcement or federal agency could perform a broad
search of data from Flock’s entire nationwide network of over 6000 cameras, including the 20 cameras
then-deployed in Palo Alto. The feature did not enable targeted searches of any specific agency’s data.
These searches could only be performed system-wide when a full 7-digit license plate number was known
and only based on the articulation of a legitimate law enforcement purpose.” (Information Report)
PAPD was finally made aware of this Nationwide Lookup feature by Flock in Dec. 2025, including its
discontinuance in late October, 2024. All California law enforcement agencies were finally notified by
March 2025. It took that long!
None of Flocks recent notifications should instill any confidence by any reasonable person in Flocks
surveillance. It was dishonest and reckless to launch its Nationwide Lookup, violating its agreement with
Palo Alto. That no specific Palo Alto license plate was broadly targeted by law enforcement and ICE
nationwide is sheer luck, excusing nothing. Yet PAPD seems to be trying to tell us, Folks, it’s fine, there’s
nothing to see here, move along, move along.
No, Palo Alto and PAPD shouldn’t move along. We should stop doing business with Flock now, not
waiting on a non-conflicted auditor to report. Given Flocks nationwide breach of trust, we should do what
Denver, Santa Clara Co, several cities in the Country and Santa Cruz have done - stop doing any business
with Flock. To do less is being is to deny reality - Flock cannot be trusted.
Palo Alto should take action rather than being hood-winked.
Winter Dellenbach
From:CaraSilver@proton.me
To:Council, City
Cc:Austin Marshall; David Waksberg; Mike Slind
Subject:May 5 Agenda Item: New Coalition SOS Palo Alto Requests Immediate Termination of Flock Contract
Date:Friday, May 1, 2026 9:57:24 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Veenker and Council Members:
On behalf of SOS Palo Alto (Safety Over Surveillance), a coalition of ten local community
organizations, we write to express our alarm over the recent revelations that data from Palo Alto’s
Flock surveillance system was shared with multiple external organizations, over an extended
period of time.
These revelations did not surprise us: they conform to our experience with Flock in other cities,
locally and across the country. However, the scope of the access is quite alarming.
While the Palo Alto Police Department has repeatedly claimed that its Flock camera system has
never been accessed by outside agencies, the Department’s recent release of network audit logs
shows a multi-year pattern of outside agencies improperly accessing the Department’s system in
violation of California law (SB 34) and the City’s own Surveillance Use Policy.
Despite guardrails that you and your colleagues had established, audit logs show that outside
organizations were able to easily access Palo Alto’s Flock database without required prior
authorization. Indeed, outside agencies were able to access the City’s Flock system hundreds of
times by directly accessing its Flock database without complying with the City’s written policies.
While Flock has claimed that past violations have been corrected, we believe Palo Alto data
remain vulnerable to back door or side door access.
Flock has shown time and again that its system is easily hackable and that it is willing to allow
outside agencies into other cities’ databases without proper authorization. Throughout the country,
Flock data has been accessed for ICE investigations and for actions against women seeking
abortions. Palo Alto residents were assured that, because the City had done its homework, Palo
Alto would be different. Recent revelations call those assurances into question.
Furthermore, we have seen evidence that Flock cameras have been used elsewhere for
monitoring dissent. We do not anticipate Palo Alto agencies would pursue such an approach.
However, the combination of data leakage incidents and the cavalier attitude toward civil liberties
exhibited by the current federal administration is cause for grave concern.
Based on our understanding of the City’s Surveillance Use Policy, it appears that either Palo Alto
data from the Flock system was shared with unauthorized parties without the City Council’s or the
Police Department's knowledge, or the Police Department ignored the policy safeguards that the
City Council had specifically put in place for the Flock system.
In light of the above, our coalition calls on our City to take two policy actions:
1.
To cancel its contract with Flock.
2.
To cover Flock cameras until the Flock contract is canceled.
In addition, we understand that the City seeks to engage an independent auditor to report on the
Flock system prior to a decision on the contract’s renewal or non-renewal. Because we have
observed that audits of Flock in other cities have been incomplete and over-reliant on assertions
by Flock, we request a transparent process in which the public has access to information about
the design and parameters of the audit and in which local experts are able to advise the City on
best practices for such an audit.
Thank you for your leadership. We look forward to the opportunity to discuss these concerns with
you fully.
On behalf of Palo Alto SOS (Safety Over Surveillance),
Austin Marshall
Cara Silver
David Waksberg
SOS Palo Alto (Safety Over Surveillance) Coalition members:
Blue Turn Indivisible
Envision Transform Build East Palo Alto (ETB)
Indivisible Mid-Peninsula
Indivisible Palo Alto Plus
Los Altos for Representation and Equity (LARE)
Multi-Faith Voices for Peace and Justice
Services, Immigrant Rights & Education Network (SIREN)
Silicon Valley Democratic Socialists of America
Together We Will - Palo Alto/Mountain View
Youth United for Community Action (YUCA)
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.