San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie announced Tuesday that the city will impose tighter controls on its use of Flock Safety license plate reader cameras, arguing that the technology has become an important crime-fighting tool but that police access must be accompanied by stronger privacy safeguards.
Speaking at Komaaj Pila Bazaar, a family-owned Northern Iranian restaurant in the Mission that has been burglarized three times in a year, Lurie was joined by Assemblyman Matt Haney, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins, Police Chief Derrick Lew, and Supervisors Stephen Sherrill and Bilal Mahmood.
“San Francisco controls San Francisco’s data,” Lurie said.
The announcement comes amid growing scrutiny of Flock cameras, including a recent San Jose case in which a police officer was fired for using the system to track a woman who had accused his cousin of domestic violence. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, an early supporter of Flock, has since called for criminal penalties for officers who misuse the technology.
Lurie’s new policy will reduce the period during which license plate data can be accessed through Flock’s platform from 12 months to 30 days. SFPD will retain the data for up to 12 months, but accessing information more than 30 days old will require approval and a connection to an active criminal investigation.
“Not only can we do both, but we must do both,” Lurie said, referring to protecting public safety and civil liberties.
A key tool for police
Flock cameras have become an important component of SFPD’s Real-Time Investigation Center (RTIC), which combines automated license plate readers with drones, public safety cameras, and other technology to help officers investigate crimes and locate suspects.
SFPD reported last year that the center had assisted in more than 500 arrests since its launch, including 207 involving Flock cameras. The technology allows investigators to identify vehicles associated with crimes and, in conjunction with drones, track their movements and direct officers to suspects.
In June, for example, RTIC officers used Flock to locate a vehicle connected to a robbery involving Pokémon trading cards. Drones subsequently tracked the vehicle and helped officers make arrests.
Lurie said public-safety technology had assisted in more than 1,500 arrests in San Francisco over the past two years.
“These cameras can help investigators find a stolen car or identify a vehicle connected to a break-in,” he said. “They can help locate suspects connected to robberies, shootings, sexual assaults and other violent crimes.”
He also cited the technology’s potential to help locate missing children during emergencies such as Amber Alerts.
New restrictions on data
Under the new policy, every active search of license plate data must be linked to a specific incident number. Officers must document their reasons for searching, and the system will record who conducted each search.
Federal agents are already prohibited from accessing San Francisco’s data. State and local agencies will continue to require case-by-case approval, while the new policy will prohibit searches conducted on behalf of other agencies. Vendors will also be barred from independently using or sharing the information.
“San Francisco controls San Francisco’s data,” Lurie said.
The department will continue to prohibit the use of license plate data for immigration enforcement, abortion-related investigations, and monitoring peaceful protests.
The Department of Police Accountability will conduct independent audits of SFPD’s use of the technology. An audit is already underway, and its findings will be made public when completed and presented to the Police Commission.
Chief Lew said SFPD had discovered that its data was being improperly shared with agencies outside California through the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center. The department cut off access and disclosed the problem.
“We know that violations of public trust could jeopardize our ability to have these tools in the future,” Lew said. “That is not a risk we can take.”
Haney seeks criminal penalties
Haney’s proposed state legislation would address what he described as a gap in California law: Although officers can be disciplined or fired for misusing sensitive databases, no specific criminal offense currently covers the unauthorized use or disclosure of license-plate data in circumstances such as the San Jose case.
“If you’re a public safety officer with access to sensitive information about where people go and when they go there, that access comes with an enormous responsibility and a very limited purpose,” Haney said.
“You don’t get to use that information to track someone for personal reasons, share it with a friend or family member, or use it for anything unrelated to your job.”
The legislation would criminalize unauthorized access and disclosure, require training for employees with access to the systems and mandate regular audits.
In the San Jose case, an officer used his personal cellphone to access Flock data and locate the vehicle of a woman who had accused his cousin of domestic violence. He allegedly shared the information with his cousin, who then used it to locate the woman. The officer was fired.
Mahan, who had previously championed Flock’s expansion in San Jose, said firing the officer was insufficient.
“I think there should be criminal charges when you misuse sensitive data like this,” Mahan said.
Haney said the penalties could vary according to the severity of the offense, with particularly egregious violations potentially treated as felonies. Jenkins said she and Haney were still determining the appropriate penalties.
“We will make sure that whatever it is, the consequences are appropriate,” Jenkins said.
Backlash over surveillance
The San Jose incident has intensified a broader backlash against Flock cameras. Civil liberties organizations have challenged the technology, arguing that extensive networks of license plate readers can allow authorities to reconstruct people’s movements and facilitate mass surveillance.
In San Francisco, concerns escalated after SFPD disclosed improper access to its data through the regional intelligence-sharing network. The department said it found no evidence that the searches involved immigration enforcement or reproductive-rights investigations.
District Attorney Jenkins acknowledged growing public unease about government surveillance and the potential misuse of technology.
“This isn’t necessarily to push back,” she said of the new restrictions. “It’s to reassure those who voted in the first place to allow this technology to remain comfortable with its use and to trust us that we’re using it the right way.”
She added that the technology had strengthened criminal prosecutions by providing evidence that helps establish who was involved in particular crimes.
“I cannot deny how much stronger our cases have become with that type of evidence,” she said.
But she warned that abuses could undermine public confidence and jeopardize the technology’s continued use.
Businesses, workers support safeguards
Komaaj’s owner, Mahsa Hakimi, said the restaurant’s three break-ins had taken a heavy financial and emotional toll.
“As a small family-owned restaurant in the Mission, we understand firsthand the emotional toll and the financial devastation of having your business broken into three times in a year,” Hakimi said. “You just don’t recover.”
An LGBTQ+ immigrant activist and lawyer, Hakimi also said she understood the risks of government privacy violations.
“All this can be true at the same time,” she said. “We have a lot of work to do. But this is a step in the right direction.”
Ying Shan Mei, secretary-treasurer of SEIU Local 87, which represents a predominantly immigrant janitorial workforce, said many union members work late shifts and rely on police for protection.
“When our member had been assaulted at the bus stop, trying to get home at 2 in the morning, they are not calling the elected officials to help us. They are calling the SFPD,” Mei said.
But she cautioned against deploying surveillance technology without safeguards.
“We don’t want technology without strong, balanced privacy protections that keep the technology accountable and keep our community’s trust,” she said.
Supervisor Mahmood, who represents the Tenderloin, said residents want police to have the tools to address crime and drug markets while also protecting them from government intrusion.
“Those are not contradictory demands,” he said.
The new rules leave San Francisco committed to using Flock cameras while attempting to address the privacy concerns surrounding them. For Lurie and SFPD, the challenge is maintaining public confidence in a technology they consider important to investigating crime.
“With these tools come great responsibility,” Lew said. “And we want the public to know that we will be accountable and transparent.”
