October Newsletter
The past few months have been busy for people fighting mass surveillance in San Francisco. From public demonstrations and policy changes to a growing debate over San Francisco’s use of Flock cameras, there has been a lot happening. Here are some of the biggest updates from the past few months and what to look forward to.
Upcoming Events:
Recent News:
Week of Action
During the week of August 16 to August 22, communities across the country participated in the National Week of Action Against Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) to raise awareness about the privacy and civil-liberty concerns surrounding Flock Safety and similar surveillance technology. Here in the Bay Area, we joined the national movement to educate residents and encourage local action. On August 19th, we helped organize the FLOCK OUT of SF Teach-In & Action. The teach-in explained how Flock and automated license plate readers are used to surveil communities, why advocates believe they can place vulnerable residents at risk, and what San Franciscans can do in response. Thank you to everyone who joined; we had a large turnout.
This event marked the start of our public SF campaign, which means things are heating up. Look forward to more frequent emails and volunteer opportunities.
DeFlock SF Takes Action at SF Democratic Party Meeting
On September 23, DeFlock SF joined the Sunrise Movement and other privacy advocates for a demonstration at the San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee (DCCC) meeting, where the future of Flock surveillance in San Francisco was discussed.
The committee considered competing resolutions over the city’s use of Flock automated license plate readers. Former Supervisor Gordon Mar introduced a resolution calling for stronger safeguards and for San Francisco to suspend its use of Flock cameras until SFPD could demonstrate that federal and out-of-state agencies could no longer improperly access the system. A competing resolution introduced by Supervisor Matt Dorsey and DCCC Chair Nancy Tung instead affirmed support for the city’s continued use of Flock cameras.
Before the vote, DeFlock SF and Sunrise Movement members delivered public comment, urging DCCC members to oppose the continued use of Flock cameras.
During the meeting, activists held a two-minute demonstration, raising signs and calling attention both to privacy concerns and Flock’s ties to the committee. Two voting DCCC members, Trevor Chandler and Lily Ho, work for Flock’s public-affairs team. Both participated in the vote rather than abstaining; the committee chair said the DCCC did not have conflict-of-interest rules covering the situation.
Additional reporting after the meeting raised further questions about the relationship between Flock supporters and DCCC leadership. The San Francisco Standard reported that Tung received a $10,000 contribution to her DCCC officeholder account from crypto billionaire Chris Larsen, a major financial supporter of San Francisco police surveillance technology. Records also showed that Tung used that account to purchase a $347 flight to Atlanta after Flock invited her to speak at its Flock Forward conference. Tung said neither Larsen’s contributions nor Flock’s outreach influenced her position on the issue.
Ultimately, the DCCC rejected Mar’s resolution and approved the Dorsey resolution supporting continued use of the technology. The Dorsey measure passed 11–3, with four abstentions. The vote does not determine whether San Francisco will renew its Flock contract.
Although the anti-Flock resolution did not pass, the demonstration raised awareness, made our opposition visible, and showed DCCC members that San Franciscans are paying attention to how surveillance technology is used in our city. As the debate over Flock continues, DeFlock SF will keep pushing for greater transparency, accountability, and privacy protections.
Mayoral Policy Updates to ALPRs: DeFlock SF’s Response
Mayor Daniel Lurie announced new restrictions on San Francisco’s use of Flock Safety cameras on September 29th. Under the new policies, Flock must remove San Francisco ALPR data from its system after 30 days, SFPD officers seeking older data must receive command approval and document its connection to an ongoing investigation, and most data must ultimately be deleted after 12 months.
Officers will also be required to associate searches with a specific investigation, and SFPD will supposedly provide further oversight by reviewing Flock search logs monthly and requesting annual audits from the Department of Police Accountability.
While the mayor’s policy changes are a step in the right direction, they don’t change the fundamental issues that DeFlock SF is most concerned about. Flock still collects millions of locations of San Franciscans. This data is sent to police departments across California, meaning that the information is only as safe as the weakest link (i.e., an officer acting carelessly or unscrupulously) in the state. The amount of data the police collect makes it impossible to control, which is exactly why this data has been leaked twice already. If the police department can’t protect our private data, they shouldn’t collect it. Even though ALPR searches will now require a case or dispatch number, there is not anything preventing police officers from connecting searches to unrelated cases. Normally police need a search warrant if they want to access location data or similar; Flock bypasses this requirement by allowing police to conduct warrantless searches. As seen in the SF DCCC, surveillance contractors have embedded themselves in the city’s politics, making removing Flock incredibly difficult. The city should terminate its use of all Automated License Plate Reader systems and not pursue a contract with a different vendor.
SFPD Allows 300 Illegal Searches of Database
In June, a police commission report revealed that 299 illegal searches had been made of the San Francisco ALPR database. This included a long list of local and federal agencies from out of state that participated in the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center program. An investigation is underway; however, there are no further updates at this time. This marks the second time SFPD has done this, following the 1.6 million illegal searches exposed last year. Under California law, it is illegal for police departments to knowingly allow non-in-state agencies access to their ALPR data. DeFlock SF will continue to monitor the investigation.
High Rate of Incorrect Plate Reads
Recent findings from Roseville, California, have raised serious concerns about the accuracy of Flock Safety’s license plate-reading cameras. According to Business Insider, city data showed that between 2023 and 2024, approximately 71% of the Flock alerts sent to police contained misread license plates. These errors included incorrect plate numbers and unclear images, despite Flock promoting its technology as highly accurate under ideal conditions. Although Roseville police require officers to verify an alert before taking action, such a high error rate demonstrates the risks of relying heavily on automated surveillance.
Join the Public Signal Group
For more frequent updates and to talk to others looking to DeFlock SF, join our new unvetted Signal groups: