Debate over Flock safety cameras continues in Richmond

Our Take

Velena Jones's report for NBC Bay Area captures something we see over and over: a council meeting that runs long, a room full of residents who showed up to argue both sides, and officials who leave without a vote. That's not gridlock, that's democracy actually working the way it's supposed to on surveillance tech. Flock Safety would rather these contracts get renewed quietly on a consent agenda. Richmond forcing hours of public debate is exactly the friction this technology needs before it gets bolted onto every intersection in town.

What usually gets lost in these hearings is the fact that Flock cameras don't just watch for stolen cars — they log every plate that passes, build a searchable travel history on anyone, and share that data across a network of agencies with little independent oversight. Richmond's council members owe residents real answers on retention periods, who else can query the system, and what happens when — not if — the data is misused or breached. "Public safety" is not a rebuttal to those questions, it's the reason they need answering.

If you're in Richmond or anywhere else watching your city weigh a Flock contract, don't wait for the meeting notice to hit the agenda packet. Check our camera map to see what's already been installed near you, and use our take-action resources to show up prepared the next time this comes back for a vote.