Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
At a glance
- Public comments
- 7
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed Jun 16, 2026.
Public comments (7)
North Bay Organizing Project member worried ICE can circumvent non-compliance ordinances through Flock data and objected to AI-outsourced surveillance.
City Council — June 16, 2026 · 3:14:48 →District 1 resident said Flock's AI-driven 24/7 surveillance invites abuse of power and misidentification, and described feeling constantly watched in her neighborhood.
City Council — June 16, 2026 · 5:33:53 →North Bay Organizing Project member cited data sharing with Oakland and San Francisco (both facing Flock class actions), ICE access despite SB 34, and asked where costs land when grants end.
City Council — June 16, 2026 · 5:36:41 →Cited the Mountain View data access discovery and Ventura County audit showing 364,000 out-of-agency data shares, and urged the council to reconsider the Flock contract this fall.
City Council — June 16, 2026 · 5:41:12 →District 5 resident and NBOP task force member questioned how Flock will be funded after the grant ends and flagged Flock's new terms allowing data sale.
City Council — June 16, 2026 · 3:26:21 →Lifelong resident and NBOP organizer said door-knocking found most neighbors don't know about the 120+ Flock cameras, and cited the perpetual data license and liability shifts in new contract terms.
City Council — June 16, 2026 · 5:47:12 →NBOP leader said the human cost of AI mass surveillance outweighs benefits, citing roughly $400,000 in annual costs, liability shifts, and class actions in Bay Area cities.
City Council — June 16, 2026 · 3:30:27 →