I am deeply concerned as a resident of Fremont, CA, that our city is investing in technology that jeopardizes our privacy without providing any tangible benefits. It is well documented that Flock Safety, a company providing Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs), has been involved in numerous privacy and contract violations across the country. Despite these alarming facts, the Fremont city council is considering continuing their contract with Flock Safety by allocating funds in the upcoming fiscal year budget 2026/27.

It is distressing to see our hard-earned tax dollars being used for illegal surveillance practices which infringe on the privacy of citizens. The Fremont Police Department itself has not provided any substantial evidence or data that proves ALPRs have prevented or solved crimes in our city. This misuse of resources is unacceptable, and it's imperative that as residents, we demand accountability and transparency from our local government.

Recent developments across the Bay Area have made it clear that this technology poses a significant risk to the privacy and civil liberties of our residents:

No Proven Results: When I requested public records from the Fremont Police Department regarding how many crimes these cameras have actually helped solve, the response was that there are "no responsive records." We are spending $30,000 annually on a surveillance tool that lacks documented evidence of its effectiveness in Fremont.

Unauthorized Data Sharing: We now have verified reports from Mountain View, El Cerrito, and Santa Clara County confirming that Flock’s system allowed unauthorized access by federal and out-of-state agencies. These were not isolated incidents but recurring technical failures that bypassed city-approved privacy policies.

National Precedent: Cities like Mountain View recently voted unanimously to terminate their contracts, concluding that public safety must be grounded in community trust—trust that Flock has repeatedly broken.

Per Section 11.16 of the agreement, the City has the right to terminate for non-appropriation with 30 days’ notice and no penalty. I urge you to choose not to appropriate funds for this contract in the FY 2026/27 budget. Instead, please advocate for reallocating these resources toward the SparkPoint program or other local initiatives that provide measurable benefits to all Fremont residents.

Flock Safety has faced widespread criticism for their negligence regarding surveillance standards and data protection. By choosing to not renew the contract with them, Fremont has an opportunity to lead by example in prioritizing citizen privacy and ethical governance.

Let's come together and urge the Fremont city council to remove funding for Flock Safety in the upcoming budget. Let’s make our voices heard to protect our privacy and advocate for responsible surveillance practices that do not exploit our community.

Please sign this petition to demand the termination of Fremont’s contract with Flock Safety.

Here is more information on Flock Safety privacy and contract violations:

1. Santa Clara County to stop using Flock surveillance cameras
2. Mountain View, CA: Voted unanimously on February 24, 2026, to terminate after an audit found federal agencies (including the ATF and Air Force bases) accessed local data without city permission or knowledge.
3. Santa Cruz, CA: Voted to end its contract on January 13, 2026, due to data breaches involving ICE.
4. Los Altos Hills, CA: Terminated its agreement on January 15, 2026.
5. Evanston, IL: Shut down all 19 cameras and terminated its contract in August 2025 after a state audit found the company was illegally sharing data with federal agencies like U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
6. Cambridge, MA: Terminated its contract after Flock installed cameras without the city's awareness, which officials called a "material breach of trust".
7. Other Notable Cancellations: Contracts have also been ended in Eugene, OR, Flagstaff, AZ, Denver, CO (initially by Council, though the mayor later intervened), and Syracuse, NY.

Documented Privacy Violations & Concerns
Investigations by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and local audits have revealed several alarming patterns:

Unauthorized Federal Access: Audits in Mountain View, El Cerrito, and San Francisco found that federal and out-of-state agencies searched local databases millions of times, often bypassing city-approved privacy settings.
Immigration Surveillance: Despite "sanctuary city" policies, Flock's system allowed ICE and CBP to access local records for immigration crackdowns.
Weaponizing Surveillance Against Health Care: In October 2025, it was revealed that Texas deputies queried Flock data to investigate a woman for a self-managed abortion, logging the tracking information as evidence.
Biased Policing: Audit logs from 2024 to 2025 showed over 80 law enforcement agencies used the system to conduct discriminatory searches for Romani people using racial slurs and harmful stereotypes, often without a suspected crime.
Targeting Protesters: Investigations revealed that multiple agencies used the national Flock network to track and monitor protesters and animal-rights activists exercising their First Amendment rights.

Current Legal & Legislative Challenges
The controversy has sparked significant legal and federal action:

Class-Action Lawsuit: A lawsuit filed in February 2026 against Flock alleges the company allowed federal agencies to access San Francisco’s database over 1.6 million times without authorization.
Congressional Investigation: U.S. Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robert Garcia launched a formal investigation into Flock’s role in enabling invasive surveillance that threatens women, immigrants, and vulnerable populations.
State Blockages: Several states, including Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, and Washington, have enacted laws or policies to block federal access to license plate records.