Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance And Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodland residents urge council to end Flock Safety camera contract after audit alleges out-of-state and federal access
Summary
Several residents told the City of Woodland they obtained audit logs showing out-of-state and federal searches of the city’s Flock Safety vehicle database and urged the council to terminate the contract and delete stored data. City staff said they will perform their own audit.
Dozens of minutes of public comment at Monday’s City of Woodland council meeting centered on Flock Safety vehicle cameras and alleged data sharing.
Seanish Lamborough told the council that an audit log obtained after a public records request showed federal agencies — including the FBI and ATF, he said — and thousands of out‑of‑state entities had searched Woodland Police Department vehicle data over several years. “Federal agencies did have direct access to Woodland’s block data and did make about 15,000 searches,” Lamborough said, and he urged the council to “end the Flock contract right now, shut off the cameras, stop data sharing and delete the data that we do have.”
Other residents repeated and expanded the claims. A speaker introduced as Shelby said recent data shows more than a quarter of searches on Woodland’s Flock data came from out of state and argued the system amounts to “comprehensive surveillance,” citing Supreme Court precedents including Carpenter v. United States and United States v. Jones when urging the city to “deflok.” Another resident, Jessica, cited an Oxnard Police Department audit that she said revealed nationwide query access despite California-only settings and asked Woodland to cancel contracts and conduct its own audit.
City Manager (staff) acknowledged the concerns and told the council that staff were “performing our own audit” and would continue to look into the assertions. The manager did not provide a timetable or detailed findings at the meeting.
Why it matters: Residents' claims, if substantiated, could raise legal and policy questions about data access and privacy controls for local law enforcement surveillance technology. The council received multiple written submissions and on‑the‑record comments pressing for contract termination or data deletion and directed staff to investigate.
What the record shows: The specific numbers and agency accesses cited were presented as findings by public commenters and attributed to their review of audit logs obtained via public records requests. Council members thanked speakers and said staff are examining the assertions; there was no council action to change the Flock contract at this meeting.
Next steps: City staff said they will complete an internal review and report back; the council did not schedule or adopt any immediate ordinance or contract action during the meeting.
