Nevada City staff to study exit options and oversight after heated Flock camera briefing

Chief Dan Foss gave an informational briefing on Aug. 12 about Nevada City's Condor (Flock) pan-tilt-zoom cameras, describing them as live-streaming devices with up to 25x optical zoom, 30-day default storage and no audio, ALPR or facial-recognition capability in the department's installed configuration.

Foss said cameras were purchased with a Prop 64 grant (procured ~2023, deployed March 2024) and the current vendor contract runs through October 2027. He stressed data-control provisions in the city's contract: "Customer data is retained solely by the customer" and the city's contract amendment says Flock "shall not sell or otherwise disclose or distribute customer data... except as specifically authorized in writing by [the customer]." He also said access to live views by neighboring agencies is logged and that the department can disable external access.

The presentation prompted an extended public-comment period in which residents raised concerns about surveillance, potential misuse, third-party queries of Flock's national operating system, hacking exposure and documented ACLU findings about the company's practices elsewhere. Risa Kroll told the council the installation infringed on privacy and said, "You all are here ... to serve the people. We here are the people." Other speakers sought an immediate removal of the cameras; still other residents—vendors and neighbors concerned about theft and the city's small police staffing—urged keeping the system.

Council members asked practical questions about alternatives, costs and data sharing. Foss said the city would remain contractually obligated for the remaining term if it chose to terminate early and that switching vendors would require new cameras because the existing units are proprietary. He estimated the vendor annual service fee at $18,000 and reaffirmed that many advanced features (ALPR, facial recognition and automated tracking) are not present on the installed hardware.

After deliberation the council directed staff to prepare an exit-and-alternatives analysis (financial, contractual and operational implications of leaving Flock or moving to alternative vendors or local-storage models) and to draft a surveillance-technology policy that would set explicit local limits (for example, no ALPRs or biometrics without council authorization, restrictions on immigration or reproductive-policy enforcement, and audit and sharing rules). City staff will return with options for council review. Foss said department metrics on camera use and case outcomes will be compiled to help that analysis.