Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ricky Faust <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 5:53 PM
Sabha, Tamer
No Flock Cameras in Pasadena!!
[ t ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not c!ick links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Ricky Faust
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
<[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 5:54 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ fe ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Allegra Ringo <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 5:58 PM
Sabha, Tamer
No Flock cameras in Pasadena
[ il ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
Hello, as a Pasadena resident I urge Pasadena City Council to prioritize safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful toot" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Allegra Ringo
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Angela Petrella <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 6:32 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Angela Petrella
Pasadena, California 91104
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rita Kapadia <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 6:36 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ i ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Rita Kapadia
Pasadena, California 91101
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Deborah Aschheim <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 6:54 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, peopie of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Fiock now.
Deborah Aschheim
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lucas Pierce <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 6:57 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive heatthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Lucas Pierce
Pasadena, California 91103
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jasmine McNeill <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:00 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Jasmine McNeill
Pasadena, California 91101
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
George Zhou <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:01 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you frnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
George Zhou
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
David Abramovitch <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:02 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[ ! ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I am a Pasadena resident and I am deeply concerned about surveillance and misuse of data by law enforcement.
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would 1 otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Thank you,
David Abramovitch
David Abramovitch
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Husam Ghanim <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:09 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ ! ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos hlills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Husam Ghanim
Pasadena, California 91103
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Anna McCurdy <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:11 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over sun/eillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Anna McCurdy
South Pasadena, California 91030
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jeb Bearer <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:14 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you toow/the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Jeb Bearer
Los Angeles, California 90042
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lilly Huang <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:16 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M TSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Lilly Huang
Los Angeles, California 90042
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Oliver Hierons <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April14, 2026 7:19 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Oliver hlierons
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Angelita Martinez <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:28 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is ovenwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Angelita Martinez
Altadena, California 91001
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Anthony Ponce <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:33 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[.I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Anthony Ponce
Pasadena, California 91107
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Alex Steinkruger <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:37 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Alex Steinkruger
Pasadena, California 91104
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Caitlyn Neal-Steinkruger <[email protected]> Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:38 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content issafe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Caitlyn Neal-Steinkruger
Pasadena, California 91104
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abigail Salcido <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:45 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Keep Flock OUT of Pasadena!
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I beg of Pasadena City Council to put safety over mass surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
We are giving away our citizens' privacy for little gain and not only is it sinister and short- sighted, but it goes against every value that makes Pasadena the wonderful place I've called home for six years.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would 1 otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected anyALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now. Be on the right side of history.
Abigail Salcido
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Deb McCurdy <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 7:49 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you toowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Deb McCurdy
South Pasadena, California 91030
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Karina Hanshaw <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:07 PM
Sabha, Tamer
I don't want to feel watched in my own neighborhood. No Flock cameras. [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Karina Hanshaw
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ann Bailey <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:10 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ ! ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Ann Bailey
Pasadena, California 91104
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Katie Singer <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:19 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M TSabha,
We have to stop the surveillance society some leaders and policy makers have bought into.
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Katie Singer
Glendale, California 91206
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Andrew George <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:23 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Andrew George
Pasadena, California 91101
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mohamed Cheikh <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:37 PM
Sabha, Tamer
No Flock Cameras in Pasadena!
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you /mow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M TSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Mohamed Cheikh
Pasadena, California 91101
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Troxell Roclord <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 8:41 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I strongly encourage Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech. Flock does not make us safer.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Troxell Roclord
Pasadena, California 91101
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ani Badalyan <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 9:00 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Ani Badalyan
Pasadena, California 91101
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Selina Ho <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 9:15 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M TSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Selina Ho
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mariam K <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 9:23 PM
Sabha, Tamer
I'm against Flock cameras in Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I am very concerned about the Flock company itself and the huge risks we open with this system. I've come to city hall and heard the discussions. I hear a lot about audits as a mitigant to data risks but audits don't stop data leaks or misuse.
This is too big of a risk for us to take (and frankly seems very expensive for something not that useful??)
Thank you for hearing me out.
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
1 There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Mariam K
Pasadena, California 91101
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Nancy Leonov <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 10:14 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M TSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Nancy Leonov
Pasadena, California 91107
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Theresa Cheng <[email protected]>
Tuesday, April 14, 2026 11:56 PM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M TSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cutties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Theresa Cheng
Pasadena, California 91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Benjamin Franke <[email protected]>
Wednesday, April 15, 2026 2:06 AM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Benjamin Franke
Pasadena, California 91103
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Vanessa EIShamy <[email protected]>
Wednesday, April 15, 2026 6:02 AM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse of ALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Vanessa EIShamy
,91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Katie Harriman <[email protected]>
Wednesday, April 15, 2026 6:11 AM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you /mow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in divertiing resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Katie Harriman
,91106
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Loraine Labet <[email protected]>
Wednesday, April 15, 2026 6:24 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Pasadena doesn't need Flock cameras
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M Public Comment,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Loraine Labet
Altadena, California 91001
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
K R <[email protected]>
Wednesday, April 15, 2026 8:10 AM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
MTSabha,
I demand Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
KR
Rosemead, California 91770
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Beatrice Delgado <[email protected]>
Wednesday, April 15, 2026 9:17 AM
Sabha, Tamer
Flock out of Pasadena
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnow the content issafe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
M T Sabha,
I urge Pasadena City Council to put safety over surveillance and cut ties with Flock.
Flock ALPR cameras are being used for indiscriminate surveillance, tracking and targeting of countless individuals. While Flock, law enforcement and city government tout the benefits of automated license plate readers for public safety, in reality it endangers everyone - in particular immigrants and their families, people of color, people seeking sensitive healthcare, and the many exercising civil liberties like free speech.
Flock's indiscriminate surveillance is in conflict with constitutional protections and numerous civil liberties groups such as the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation arguing that the technology infringes on Americans' right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Despite repeated attempts from Flock to reform their system, it is apparent ALPR is problematic, insecure and can have devastating consequences for innocent individuals. Academics, researchers and experts overwhelmingly agree that there's a lack of evidence linking flock to crime reduction rates.
There is overwhelming evidence of abuse and misuse ofALPR systems across the country - and Pasadena's ALPR systems are no exception. Pasadena was notified that it was sharing ALPR information across the country, the city lacked ALPR data retention restrictions, and many residents have expressed privacy concerns over the years. Despite this, Pasadena Police says Flock is a "useful tool" - yes, it is useful in diverting resources that would otherwise go towards community oriented public safety solutions that don't infringe on our civil liberties.
1 Pasadena should join dozens of cities across the country who have ended their contracts with Flock, removed cameras and rejected any ALPR replacements such as Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, and others.
Pasadena, choose your constituents. Restore trust, restore accountability and uphold our constitutional rights. End all ties with Flock now.
Beatrice Delgado
Pasadena, California 91107
2