With legal threat looming, Richmond Flock camera saga may not be over yet

Immigrant advocate Marisol Cantú sighed when Richmond City Council agreed to reinstate the city’s Flock license plate reader system.The outcome was what she had expected — and only the beginning. Within moments of the March vote, the conversation among activists had shifted from opposition to strategy: educating the public, organizing and preparing for a potential court case.

“Don’t worry,” Cantú recalled attorney Brian Hofer telling her afterward. “We’re going to hit them with a lawsuit.”

Cantú, a community organizer with Reimagine Richmond, said her group is planning a campaign to inform residents about the risks of license plate reader technology, including the danger it presents for immigrants.

“I don’t trust Flock,” said Mayor Eduardo Martinez, who voted against reinstating the system.  “And I have good reason not to.” 

Those who attended the council meeting were as divided as the council, which passed the measure by a 4-3 vote. Some people  broke out in cheers, others in groans. Sitting on opposite sides, all were there to encourage a vote that “keeps Richmond safe.”

In voting to reinstate the cameras, Councilmember Jamelia Brown said, “Public safety is immigrant safety. Protecting one community while leaving another vulnerable is not public safety — it’s negligence.”

The decision comes after Richmond police shut down the automated license plate reader system in November, when Police Chief Timothy Simmons discovered a feature that allowed outside agencies to access the city’s data, raising concerns about whether the system conflicted with California law and Richmond’s sanctuary policies.

Although Richmond police say that feature has since been disabled, advocates like Cantú don’t buy it.

“They’ve turned that back-door channel off, but we don’t believe it,” she said. “If council members want evidence-based decisions, then that’s the work we’re going to do.”

Lawsuit threatened

In a letter submitted to City Council ahead of the vote, he wrote that through a public records request, he found Richmond police may have shared license plate data with more than 2,700 out-of-state agencies, potentially violating a California law barring law enforcement agencies from sharing such data with out-of-state or federal law enforcement.

“Richmond has a choice: continue down the path of expanding mass surveillance through a vendor with mounting controversy and legal exposure, or take the responsible path and terminate the relationship,” Hofer wrote.

“We are presently litigating such claims against neighboring jurisdictions, and we intend to litigate the same with Richmond,” he continued.

In an interview, Hofer said cities often misunderstand how much control they actually have over their own data and that Flock’s lawyers are “running circles” around city attorneys.

“Elected officials think owning your own data solves the problem,” he said. “But when you give a company an irrevocable, worldwide license to use that data, that protection is essentially meaningless.”

For immigrant communities, he said, it’s not just one system — it’s everything working together.

“It’s almost impossible to hide today,” he said. “A local government can’t stop ICE, but it shouldn’t be making it easier.”

Cameras as crime fighters

Paris Lewbel, public relations manager at Flock Safety, said in an email that Flock does not share information with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In response to Hofer’s potential lawsuit, Lewbel said the company is confident in its practices and would vigorously defend claims brought against it. “Flock takes privacy, legal compliance and data security extremely seriously,” Lewbel wrote. “We are committed to helping communities and law enforcement agencies use technology responsibly and in compliance with applicable law. Across California, Flock has been an invaluable tool in helping solve and deter crime, supporting investigations and promoting public safety for residents and communities.” 

Police say the system is a necessary tool. Simmons told the council that vehicle thefts rose 33% after the cameras were turned off. Between April 2023 and November 2025, he said, the system contributed to 274 arrests, helped recover 259 stolen vehicles and supported hundreds of investigations.

When Richmond paused the system while other Bay Area cities kept using it, Simmons said the city became a “black hole” for crime.

Oakland Police Lt. Gabriel Urquiza-Leibin backed that up, crediting the city’s nearly 300 Flock cameras with a sharp reduction in crime.

“We’ve seen drops that I haven’t seen in my career, and I grew up in Oakland,” he said. “Our resources are dwindling. It’s important to have a resource multiplier, something that makes our job faster and more efficient.”

Oakland is not without its own controversial history with Flock. Secure Justice sued Oakland in 2021, alleging the city violated California law by sharing data with out-of-state agencies. That case settled in 2024. Then late last year, Secure Justice sued the city again, saying it had violated the terms of the agreement. 

In December, Oakland City Council approved a two-year contract with Flock that included adding 40 cameras. A month earlier, a council subcommittee had deadlocked on the contract during a meeting in which 100 people, most of them opposed to Flock cameras, signed up to address the council. The Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission, for which Hofer previously served as privacy commissioner, had advocated against the expansion.

‘This hits very close’

The technology has become common in the Bay Area, though Richmond, Oakland and other cities had paused new contracts to examine privacy issues. El Cerrito, which operates about 40 cameras at entry and exit points, decided in February to continue using the cameras and credited the system with helping solve cases, including a fatal hit-and-run and an armed home invasion.

More than 120 cameras installed across the city will be reactivated once a contract amendment is finalized. The timeline has not been made public. 

Richmond plans to add even more cameras. In February, the city issued a request for proposals for a broader surveillance system that could include more than 100 license plate readers and dozens of other cameras.

In a city where roughly a third of residents are foreign-born, Cantú said surveillance tools carry consequences that go beyond policing. Recent viral videos of deportations have only made those fears feel more immediate.

“This hits very close,” she said.

That’s why advocates are preparing for a legal battle. Their fight, Cantú said, is already underway.

---

Corporate home ownership has risen sharply in Richmond. Will City Council move to curb it?