Santa Clara County Limits Flock Safety Surveillance Cameras

Supervisors amend policies to restrict license plate reader technology in three South Bay cities

Published on Feb. 25, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Santa Clara County Supervisors have amended their policies to restrict the use of Flock Safety license plate cameras in three South Bay cities - Cupertino, Saratoga, and Mountain View. The move comes amid growing concerns over privacy and the expansion of surveillance technology, with some county leaders arguing that license plate readers represent an "excessive invasion of privacy" that outweighs any public safety benefits.

Why it matters

This decision highlights the ongoing debate over the balance between public safety and civil liberties when it comes to the use of surveillance technologies like automated license plate readers (ALPRs). While proponents argue that these tools can aid in solving crimes and locating missing persons, critics contend that they contribute to the erosion of democracy and individual privacy protections.

The details

The county's new policy will restrict the use of Flock Safety's ALPR technology in Cupertino, Saratoga, and Mountain View. However, the sheriff's office may still be able to resume oversight and operation of license plate readers if the cities find new vendors. Some county leaders, like Supervisor Susan Ellenberg, voted against the change because they believe license plate readers in general represent an "excessive invasion of privacy" that outweighs public safety benefits. The ACLU of Northern California also argued that the move does not go far enough, as rival ALPR vendors may not necessarily provide better privacy protections.

  • On February 25, 2026, the Santa Clara County Supervisors amended their policies to restrict Flock Safety license plate cameras in three South Bay cities.

The players

Tina Kapoor

Cupertino City Manager, who confirmed the city's Flock contract is still active and said the city will be evaluating the agreement based on the county's decision.

Susan Ellenberg

Santa Clara County Supervisor, who voted against the change in policy because she believes license plate readers in general represent an "excessive invasion of privacy" that outweighs public safety benefits.

Nick Hidalgo

A senior staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, who said the county's move was encouraging but does not go far enough, as there is no guarantee that rival ALPR vendors will provide better privacy protections.

Paris Lewbel

A spokesperson for Flock Safety, who said the company is "proud of the impact our technology has had in helping solve crimes and locate missing people in Santa Clara County and across the state of California."

Ellen Kamei

A Mountain View City Councilmember, who said the city's decision to end its contract and terminate automatic license plate readers reflects "integrity and public service" and the city's commitment to being a "community for all."

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Flock is particularly problematic. But I differ from my colleagues in that I don't believe they are an outlying bad actor and alternatives are not necessarily any safer.”

— Susan Ellenberg, Santa Clara County Supervisor (kqed.org)

“I am really existentially troubled by the expansion of the surveillance state and its contribution to the erosion of democracy, civil liberties and other protections that actually create safe communities.”

— Susan Ellenberg, Santa Clara County Supervisor (kqed.org)

“Alleviating poverty and ensuring stable housing, sufficient nutrition, access to health care and education, clean and well lit streets, of course, create more safety than surveillance cameras, even when used under the strictest use policies.”

— Susan Ellenberg, Santa Clara County Supervisor (kqed.org)

“There is no guarantee that rival ALPR vendors will do better. These companies market their systems as easy to share with other law enforcement agencies — sharing is by design, and vendors are incentivized to facilitate it.”

— Nick Hidalgo, Senior Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California (kqed.org)

“Acknowledging a situation, acting quickly and communicating openly reflects integrity and public service. We've talked about how our city is known as a community for all, and being a community for all means telling the truth, even when it's difficult.”

— Ellen Kamei, Mountain View City Councilmember (kqed.org)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Walker Reed Quinn out on bail.

The takeaway

This decision in Santa Clara County highlights the ongoing debate over the use of surveillance technologies like automated license plate readers, with concerns over privacy and civil liberties weighing against potential public safety benefits. As more cities and counties grapple with these issues, the balance between security and individual rights will continue to be a key consideration for policymakers.