This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Please vote to permanently kill this Flock contract and reject the normalization of invasive surveillance in our city.
,
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
ALPR vendors. While we strongly oppose any mass surveillance system in our community, we support the community's guardrails, such as requiring a valid judicial warrant on all data searches, on any potential ALPR vendor. If an ALPR vendor cannot guarantee our safeguards, then we must cease operating all ALPR networks unless and until an alternate ALPR vendor can be found that meets all of the guardrails. San Jose should join our neighboring cities and aim to be a community defined by trust and freedom, not constant monitoring.
Please vote to permanently kill this Flock contract and reject the normalization of invasive surveillance in our city.
Caitlyn Sullivan
San Jose, California 95125
[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more]
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important Hello,
I do not see my below email in the letters from the public section of the minutes? Could you please make sure it is added in? I sent the email prior to the meeting and see that the minutes have been updated to include Letters received post meeting?
Best,
Kathleen
On Mon, Mar 9, 2026, 11:53 PM Kathleeniskeen < > wrote:
To the San Jose City Council,
I am writing to urge you to terminate the city’s contract with Flock Safety and discontinue the use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) technology. I am extremely concerned about the SJPD's warrantless, limitless access to the intrusive data collected by the nearly 500 flock cameras installed in San Jose.
Recent reports of the use of local ALPRs by federal agencies to track immigrants and protestors make me even more nervous.
I understand that from the SJPD's perspective, violating the privacy of the innocent 99% is worth it to track down the 1% that is guilty of a crime. This is a short sighted view the perceived good of the mass surveillance of San Jose residents does not outweigh the astonishing tyranny that can come from the misuse of this data by bad actors. Police officers and federal agents have been caught using ALPR technology to track
protesters (
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/how-
cops-are-using-flock-safetys-alpr-network-surveil-
protesters-and-activists?ref=404media.co), women accessing reproductive care (https://www.404media.co/a-texas-cop- searched-license-plate-cameras-nationwide-for-a-woman-
who-got-an-abortion/) or to stalk ex wives
(https://www.kwch.com/2022/11/04/kechi-police-
lieutenants-arrest-puts-flock-technology-under-scrutiny/). To make matters worse , there's no independent research proving that ALPRs can actually reduce crime.
I also want to note that the California Constitution guarantees the people’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures as well as the people’s inalienable right to privacy. San Jose’s warrantless ALPR database searches clearly violate this and are therefore illegally expending taxpayer funds.
52 communities (including Santa Clara county, Mountain View, Los Altos Hills and Santa Cruz) have deactivated their flock cameras so far, I believe that San Jose can be the 53rd if we can show a commitment to protecting our community members'
right to privacy.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Best,
Katy G.
San Jose resident