TL;DR: Berkeley's City Council punted. After hundreds of residents spoke against the $2 million Flock Safety surveillance expansion (with public comment stretching past 1 a.m. Wednesday morning), the council delayed its vote until June 2. Bigger news: Mayor Adena Ishii reversed course. She's now formally opposing any Flock contract renewal. Her proposal, co-authored with Councilwoman Cecilia Lunaparra and backed by Councilman Igor Tregub, would cut Flock out entirely. This makes Berkeley the latest Bay Area city to push back on the surveillance company, following Mountain View, Santa Cruz, Los Altos Hills, and Santa Clara County.
What Happened Tuesday Night
The March 24 meeting was supposed to be the vote. Instead, it became a marathon testimony session.
Hundreds of Berkeley residents showed up (in person and on Zoom) to rebuke the council for even considering the Flock expansion. The meeting ran until 1:30 a.m. Wednesday. At that point, the council gave up.[1]
The decision: punt it to June 2, 2026.
Privacy expert Brian Hofer, who's been tracking Flock contracts across California, summed up the opposition:
"Just the amount of scandals blowing up, the false statements, the security breaches, it is stunning to me."[2]
Resident Aidan Hill was more direct: "Delay this. And if you must continue, delay it until another night."[2]
They got their delay.
The Mayor Changed Her Mind
Here's the bigger story: Mayor Adena Ishii flipped.
Before Tuesday, the council was split. Now Ishii has submitted a formal proposal that "opposes the renewal, approval, or authorization of any contract with Flock Safety."[3]
That's not a compromise. That's a kill shot.
Councilwoman Cecilia Lunaparra co-authored the proposal. Councilman Igor Tregub signed on as a supporter. That's three council members backing a complete Flock exit.[3]
The council faced three competing proposals on surveillance expansion. The mayor's anti-Flock option is the most restrictive. If it passes June 2, Berkeley's 52 existing Flock cameras could be the last ones the city ever deploys.
What Residents Were Worried About
The same fears that killed Flock contracts across the Bay Area showed up in Berkeley:
- Immigration enforcement: Can ICE use Berkeley's camera data to track immigrants? Residents don't trust the safeguards, especially under the Trump administration.
- Reproductive rights: Could plate reader data be used to identify women seeking abortion care? Other states have subpoenaed this exact data.
- Protest surveillance: License plate readers track movement. That means they track who went to which demonstration.
- Data breaches: Flock has had security incidents. Ventura County and other jurisdictions reported unauthorized access. Why would Berkeley be different?[3]
Police Chief Jen Lewis tried to reassure residents:
"All of this is about advancing our technology and resources and serving our community in a way that makes us a safe and thriving community."[2]
She also noted the contract includes financial penalties for data breaches and that the city retains ownership of collected data.[1]
The crowd wasn't buying it.
The Accountability Board Flagged Problems Too
It wasn't just residents. Berkeley's Police Accountability Board had already recommended deferring the vote.[4]
Vice Chair Leah Wilson raised vendor lock-in concerns. Once you're all-in on Flock (drones, cameras, software, ALPR), you can't easily exit:
"We have not seen any documentation of the vendor selection process at all."[1]
That's a procurement red flag. Berkeley police picked Flock as their preferred vendor without documenting alternatives. Now they're asking for $2 million.
The Bay Area Is Done With Flock
Berkeley isn't an outlier. It's joining a regional trend:
- January 2026: Santa Cruz terminates Flock contract over federal access concerns
- January 2026: Los Altos Hills terminates Flock contract
- February 24, 2026: Mountain View council votes unanimously to end Flock partnership after discovering feds accessed data without permission
- February 25, 2026: Santa Clara County bans Flock entirely by 3-2 vote
- March 10, 2026: San Jose blocks federal sharing and slashes data retention to 30 days
- March 2026: Denver announces it won't renew its Flock contract
The pattern: cities audit their Flock systems, discover problems with federal access or data retention, and pull the plug.
Oakland and Richmond went the other way: Oakland expanded, Richmond extended 4-3. But the momentum in the Bay Area is clearly against Flock.[1]
What Happens Now
Berkeley has 52 Flock cameras. That contract expires July 2026. The city has until then to decide.
The June 2 meeting will determine:
- Whether to renew the existing ALPR cameras ($660K with extension)
- Whether to add 16 PTZ surveillance cameras ($600K)
- Whether to deploy Flock drones
- Whether to buy Flock Nova AI investigative software ($75K)
- Or whether to follow the mayor's proposal and cut Flock out entirely
Three council members already support ending the relationship. The June vote will show if they have a majority.
What You Can Do
Mark Your Calendar
June 2, 2026. Berkeley City Council. 1231 Addison St. The meeting is hybrid, with Zoom access available. This is the deciding vote.
Contact Your Council Member
Three members already oppose Flock. Find out where your representative stands. They're hearing from police unions. Make sure they hear from you.
Ask the Hard Questions
Has Berkeley audited federal access to its camera data? Mountain View didn't know until they checked. Has Berkeley checked?
Watch the Region
Other Bay Area cities may make decisions before June. Each rejection makes the next one easier.
References
- Local News Matters - Berkeley City Council delays vote whether to expand Flock Safety surveillance system (March 25, 2026)
- East Bay Times - Berkeley hits the brakes on Flock surveillance camera expansion (March 25, 2026)
- The Berkeley Scanner - Berkeley mayor says no to Flock. Will council follow suit? (March 24, 2026)
- The Daily Californian - City Council postpones contract engagement with Flock Safety amid protests (March 2026)
Published: March 26, 2026