Palo Alto delays Flock camera audit after auditor recusal

City scrambles to find alternative firm to review license plate reader data policies and security

Published on Mar. 11, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The consulting firm Baker Tilly, which serves as Palo Alto's City Auditor, has recused itself from a proposed audit of Flock Safety license plate cameras due to a conflict of interest. This leaves city staff scrambling to find an alternative firm able to conduct the review before the City Council goes on summer recess.

Why it matters

The audit was proposed to assess Flock's systems for 'appropriate policies, procedures and controls to ensure City information and data is secure and confidential' amid concerns about who can access the license plate reader data collected by the 30 cameras in Palo Alto. This comes after reports of sensitive data sharing with unauthorized parties in neighboring cities.

The details

The independent audit would have evaluated Flock's policies and data security, but Baker Tilly recused itself since it also provides services to Flock. City staff are now tasked with finding another firm to perform the review, with the goal of returning to the full City Council for a broader discussion of Flock's contract before June.

  • The initial three-year contract with Flock was approved in 2023, and extended through December 2029 the following year.
  • The audit was proposed and discussed at the Policy and Services Committee meeting on Tuesday, March 10, 2026.

The players

Baker Tilly

The consulting firm that serves as Palo Alto's City Auditor, but has recused itself from the Flock camera audit due to a conflict of interest.

Flock Safety

The company that operates 30 automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) in Palo Alto as a crime prevention and investigation tool for local law enforcement.

Kate Murdock

Palo Alto's City Auditor, who said Baker Tilly will commit previously identified funds for the proposed Flock assessment from the city auditor's contracted budget.

Ed Shikada

Palo Alto's City Manager, who acknowledged the auditor recusal 'throws us a curve' and said staff will pursue finding an alternative firm to conduct the review.

Julie Lythcott-Haims

Chair of the Policy and Services Committee, who suggested the broader question of Palo Alto's contract with Flock be taken up at a future City Council meeting.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“As the city and the vendor coordinate to set the scope for the assessment, we can assist as needed by recommending specific firms that would be able to conduct this work.”

— Kate Murdock, Palo Alto City Auditor (paloaltoonline.com)

“It's a decision that the full council needs to make, but … I don't see the point of spending money on an audit to then make that decision without the information from the audit.”

— Greer Stone, Palo Alto Vice Mayor (paloaltoonline.com)

“There's not really much point in having an audit if you already understand that ICE is going to be getting the data from Flock, and we are voluntarily giving that over to them. It's not the right thing to do.”

— David Page, Midtown Palo Alto resident (paloaltoonline.com)

What’s next

City staff will pursue finding an alternative auditing firm to perform the review of Flock in Palo Alto, with the goal of returning to the full City Council for a broader discussion of Flock's contract, including the results of the audit, before June.

The takeaway

This situation highlights the challenges cities face in balancing public safety needs with data privacy concerns when using emerging technologies like automated license plate readers. Palo Alto's efforts to put strict safeguards in place show the importance of thorough audits and public transparency around these systems.