Skip to content

Mill Valley has suspended its use of license plate readers and video cameras because of privacy and civil liberties concerns.

The decision came after residents raised objections at City Council meetings about the surveillance systems. They urged the city to follow other municipalities around the country that have suspended their contracts with Flock Safety, which has been found to share tracking and profiling data with federal agencies, including immigration enforcement.

“As the capabilities of the technology evolves, we too have to evolve in terms of our capabilities of protecting data and privacy,” Vice Mayor Caroline Joachim said. “It was really difficult and challenging to do that currently because we felt like we were always chasing it.”

“Even though we limited the use of it, and we had guardrails, and we were limited to only sharing the data with a small number of agencies, we were also aware there were breaches with other agencies,” she said. “We need to hit pause and figure out how we can actually use this technology in a responsible way, such that we can use it as an effective law enforcement tool but we can also assure the community that their data is not being used for another purpose and their privacy is protected.”

Mill Valley was the last municipality along the Highway 101 corridor in Marin to contract with Flock, whose camera and software network collects and analyzes information — typically license plate numbers and the make of vehicles — used by police and other public safety agencies.

In August, the Central Marin Police Authority announced would not renew its contract with Flock.

Mill Valley said its license plate readers and “live-feed cameras” have been off since Sept. 9.

The city entered into a two-year contract with Flock in February 2025 and sought to limit the surveillance system, officials said. It did not use facial recognition; reduced data retention to 72 hours for two live-feed video cameras and a week for six license plate readers; and had data-sharing agreements with state and local police agencies.

However, a handful of residents repeatedly spoke up at City Council meetings and urged the city to stop using the technology.

“I’m not opposed to ensuring our community is safe from criminal activity,” Margaret Fisher said on Sept. 8. “I am deeply opposed to the use of Flock cameras, in particular, given the thousands of times other secondary agencies have been given access to our data under the term ‘other’ in the contract.”

“If we cannot get a contract that is failsafe with Flock, take the cameras down, pause them. It’s not worth it,” she said. “We have so many immigrants in this town that are under threat, and our whole democracy is under threat.”

City officials met with Flock after that meeting seeking legally binding assurances around “the ownership, sale, sharing and use of data,” Joachim said. She said the company had revised its “terms of use” without the city’s consent.

Flock attested that the city owned its data and acknowledged Mill Valley’s request that it would not be used for “machine-learning purposes” — artificial intelligence — Joachim said.

“I appreciate the effort, but I didn’t feel like the attestation was adequate, particularly given that data and privacy was at issue,” she said. “It’s a legal attestation versus amending the actual terms of use.”

“Flock has updated its Terms and Conditions to strengthen customer protections,” Dan Haley, its chief legal officer, said in a company blog post on Aug. 21. However, the updates do not apply to all of its customer agreements.

“We are following up with the customer,” said Andrew Smith, a Flock spokesperson. “I don’t have anything to share yet as those conversations are ongoing. I will let you know if something changes.”

Mill Valley residents who called on the city to stop using the technology were pleased with its decision.

“I’m excited to see that the city is taking seriously the concerns of its citizens and hopeful that this means that they understand what they have to do next,” said Jeremy Revitch. “That’s not simply replace the Flock cameras with another vendor’s cameras but to instead review and understand how any of these technologies work.”

“When it comes to law enforcement, if you give them an operationally effective tool, they are going to use that and they’re not always going to consider its implications,” he said. “I think that’s exactly what happened here.”

“I’m glad that our City Council finally did this, even if it is months too late,” said Justice Rosen, who raised the issue last spring and said the technology has unacceptable error rates. “I was just thinking about all the times I’ve driven in this county and how many times my car has been mismatched to other plates.”

“What I hope we do is immediately put trash bags over these cameras because there have been instances in other counties across the U.S. where they turn off their cameras and Flock turns them back on by themselves and keep recording,” he said. “I think the next step is the City Council voting or declaring that this is a surveillance-free town.”

In August, the Marin County Board of Supervisors adopted a new data policy that will govern its sharing of digital information internally and externally. However, coordinating data use and sharing among all jurisdictions and agencies in Marin — municipal, county, state and federal — is difficult and daunting, Joachim said.

“Our top priority is public safety,” she said. “It is a matter of trying to appropriately balance.”

“Public safety is a fundamental responsibility of local government, and we are committed to providing our Police Department with tools that help keep our community safe,” said City Manager Todd Cusimano. “At the same time, we recognize that the use of certain technology raises important questions about privacy, transparency and accountability. We take those concerns seriously and remain committed to balancing effective public safety practices with the trust and confidence of the community we serve.”