Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Ridgecrest council to review Flock camera contract, cite privacy and conflict concerns
Summary
More than a dozen residents urged the Ridgecrest City Council to reopen and clarify the city’s contract with Flock license‑plate reader cameras, citing LAPD’s recent contract lapse, alleged false positives, data‑sharing concerns and a possible conflict involving former Mayor Eric Bruin.
Dozens of Ridgecrest residents used the public‑comment period at the July 15 City Council meeting to press elected officials to review the city’s 24‑camera Flock license‑plate reader (ALPR) deployment and contract language.
Several speakers, including Mike LeCitra, Jamie Jones and Edward Chaika, said recent developments elsewhere — notably the Los Angeles Police Department’s decision not to renew its Flock contract — underscore privacy and civil‑liberties risks. "The LAPD is looking for a contract that allows the city to exclusively own all their data and specifically prevent Flock from sharing it," LeCitra said, arguing that Ridgecrest’s contract still allows broad vendor access and data uses. Jamie Jones said the company’s audit logs and search‑run records have been altered and cited a 32.3% false‑positive figure she attributed to the LAPD inspector general.
Edward Chaika described his concerns as governance questions, not anti‑police sentiment: "Who has access to the data? How long is it retained? Has the city received an independent security assessment?" he asked. Speakers said the vendor’s hot‑list feature can produce incorrect matches and that inaccuracies can lead to unnecessary stops and legal exposure.
Several public commenters also raised a possible conflict of interest involving former Mayor Eric Bruin, saying he had promoted Flock while connected to the city and now stands to benefit as a private investor. One commenter asked whether Bruin still influences council decisions.
Council members responded by acknowledging the concerns and describing steps already underway. The presiding official said vendor audits have been conducted and that current default settings do not permit sharing data out of state without a significant legal process. City staff and the chief of police, the chair said, are negotiating contract language with Flock to address liability caps and data‑sharing settings. "Audits are happening," the chair said, adding that staff and negotiators are working to ensure vendor settings and contractual terms protect the city.
What happens next: Councilmembers repeatedly encouraged residents to submit documents and records to staff and several said they would consider placing a specific Flock‑contract agenda item for fuller public discussion. The council did not vote on any change to the contract at this meeting, but directed staff and the police department to review audit records and to report back on vendor settings and possible contract revisions.
