2026-05-22 Working Meeting Minutes

Actas de Reunión y Actualizaciones Semanales Working Meetings
1

2026-05-22 Working Meeting Minutes

Attendance

Treasurer: @Turcotte
Secretary: @ckposadas

Key Takeaways

Meeting focused on “Fight Off Flock” campaign, specifically about proofreading the PRA requests that @chima drafted (linked here). Here are the main questions the meeting attendees had:

  • Should we try to dwindle down the data WCU is requesting in the hopes of getting it faster? To that end, should we create separate PRA requests for the data WCU is especially interested in?

  • Should WCU inquire EMAC about how much data they’re collecting?

More details can be found in the google document linked above via comments.

2

PRA 01 (did anyone misuse the cameras?) covers most of what EMAC’s covers; and they have some of what we have in PRA 03 (contracts, funding, and procurement).

PRA 01 covers the class misuse people are looking for: an officer or employee searches plates for personal, retaliatory, or some other unauthorized reason.

PRA 02 covers where a city might say “we don’t share with ICE/federal/out-of-state agencies,” but Flock’s network settings, statewide/nationwide lookup are enabled and that still gives those outside agencies access. Cities like Mountain View, Oxnard, West Hollywood all had to look up actual settings, not just what the people were searching, to realize that the cameras had nationwide/statewide lookups enabled.

Most likely they will slow roll sending us information, but they have legal deadlines they are supposed to meet regardless of how many we send in a single day. So it’s best to just send them individually but on the same day so we can start the clock on all of them.

3

Just to give a broad overview of the reasons for requesting the others.

PRA 03: Contracts, Funding, and Procurement

This is the simple what did Stockton buy, how much is owed, what grants paid for it, what future payments are locked in, and how hard are these contracts to escape. I think a big thing for us will be that stuff is funded by grants, very baked into Stockton’s safety plan now, and will have to come out of the General Fund later.

Cities that removed or suspended Flock still had to deal with contracts: termination notices, equipment return/removal, data deletion, and remaining payments. Hopefully with this we can push back against any claims that things are too locked in to be removed.

PRA 04: Deployment, Equipment, and Location Records

This is asking what physical footprint Flock actually has in Stockton, trying to identify current, planned, removed, or deactivated cameras while also trying to capture the location of drones, docks, radar, trailer, etc. The only transparency portals have cameras, but I believe the miss some of the other items.

PRA 05: DFR, FreeForm, Flock911, and Integrated Video Streams

This is the everything else besides license plate readers request. Stockton has a bunch of other integrations and this is to ask how the data flows between all of those things and who owns it, what they capture, etc. There’s a massive increase in surveillance through these programs. And we still don’t know if these other programs give people access that ALPR audits would miss.

PRA 06: Communications

This one will take the longest to get back probably and they might object to some of it. But it’s important to see what city electeds and staff were saying about Flock and the related expansions; if they asked for legal advice; if public comments match private knowledge etc.

PRA 07: Policies, Training, Users, Permissions, Retention, And Compliance

This is to see if there was misuse or improper sharing, was it against policy, allowed by policy, missed by internal audits, or never trained on.

PRA 08: Port, County, External Agency

This one we can not send out yet since it’s not directly related to Stockton.