According to DeFlock, there are roughly 15 Flock cameras in the immediate vicinity of USF, and over 1,000 in SF and its general surroundings. These cameras are being used by local law enforcement to stop crime using automated license plate reading technology. However, there may be more than meets the eye when it comes to these new additions to our city.
Public opinion of the SFPD’s use of Flock camera surveillance has dropped amongst certain groups so much so that protests have begun to break out. According to the San Francisco Standard, during a meeting at City Hall discussing the issue, protesters from DeFlock SF held up signs reading “SF DEM PARTY = BIG TECH PUPPETS.” Overall, concerns for the security of Flock data, as well as negative opinions of the use of surveillance technology is causing San Franciscans to ask the age-old question of whether or not reduced crime rates are really worth the sacrifice.
However, public dissatisfaction doesn’t end there. An article from ABC 7 News reported, “Members of the Sunrise Movement, a youth climate group, gathered outside the home of cryptocurrency billionaire Chris Larsen, criticizing his support for surveillance technology and arguing that public safety resources should be directed elsewhere.” They even went so far as to display “a mock surveillance camera bearing the message, ‘Does this make you feel safer, Chris?’”
On the upside, journalist Greg Rosalsky from NPR found that, “Car thefts in SF are down almost 59%, and car break-ins are down more than 82%, according to our analysis of SFPD crime data comparing January through August of 2026 with the same months in 2022.” Furthermore, the same article cites the city of San Francisco as having said, “Greater use of surveillance technology — including a controversial, AI-powered license plate camera system made by Flock Safety — has been crucial to this drop in car crime.”
Freshman psychology major Carmine Harris shared his opinions about the local cameras, “I think they should totally remove all of the Flock cameras they have.” Furthermore, he went on to talk about his thoughts on state surveillance as a whole, saying, “It’s just almost never productive.”
One of the primary concerns is where Flock data is actually going. NBC reported that out-of-state agencies had been accessing data from Marin County’s 31 active Flock cameras for approximately nine weeks. Furthermore, an article from the San Francisco Standard reported that San Francisco’s Flock license-plate database was illegally accessed 1.6 million times by out-of-state agencies. It was even found that “an SFPD officer used the cameras to search for his wife’s stolen car, in violation of department rules.”
Other USF students are sharing these concerns, with freshman architecture major Jacquline Sampson saying, “I personally do not think they’re very productive. I think they break a lot of privacy rules honestly, and I think being constantly watched isn’t something that anybody wants to go through.”
Due to these allegations, controversy has arisen regarding the usage of these cameras. The San Francisco Standard reported that 150 cities and local governments across the country have already cancelled their contracts with Flock and deactivated cameras in their communities. Additionally, “[t]he turbulence surrounding the company has been so rough that its leaders are considering a sale.”
However, the city of San Francisco is doubling down, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said in an article from the San Francisco Standard, “It’s ever present in people’s minds that it wasn’t that long ago that they had lost confidence in us, and the city was in a much different place … San Francisco is doing well; we are coming back.” She says the cityis approach reflects the 2024 ballot measure that allowed the SFPD broader access to drones and security cameras for law enforcement purposes. For now, it appears Flock cameras may be here to stay.
