
Residents gathered at a recent City Council meeting, urging the council to “DeFlock” West Hollywood. (photo by Senna Omar)
The West Hollywood Public Safety Commission voted on Aug. 24 to ask the City Council to reconsider its contract with Flock Safety.
Although Flock cameras were not on the agenda, after hearing concerns from several residents during public comment, Commissioner Kelly Pilarski asked the City Council to “relook at the contract based on the national conversation and what is actually happening” with the data.
The motion passed 4-1; Chair Brandon Blau, Vice Chair Stephen Post, Commissioner Catherine Eng and Pilarski voted yes. Commissioner Kimberly Winick voted no. Commissioner Tod Hallman abstained.
Residents cited concerns with Flock cameras being used for Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity, regulating access to abortion and reproductive health care and violating individuals’ rights to privacy.
“I view Flock cameras as an existential threat to the community that raised me,” 19-year-old Siena Grouf said to the commission. “Queer clubs, safe spaces for refugees and reproductive health care services don’t survive in surveillance zones.”
In states such as Kansas, North Carolina and Georgia, the fears have rung true. Several officers have been accused of misusing license plate readers to stalk and track their ex-partners and other personal acquaintances. Although ICE does not have a direct contract with Flock, ICE officials have asked state and local law enforcement to search their databases.
The West Hollywood City Council voted in July to prohibit sharing Flock Safety camera footage with federal agencies such as ICE, unless mandated by courts. City Council legislation has not eased residents’ concerns, and many cited evidence that Flock violated local rules by giving ICE access to cameras in other cities.
“The risk is not that West Hollywood police will collaborate with ICE,” Grouf said, “it is that it only takes one friendly department anywhere in the country for our information to become available. Violations of privacy can even occur within our own district.”
West Hollywood resident Robin Boerner, originally from Russia, told the commission a story about his own encounters with ICE as a child. Boerner and his mother were trying to board a Disney cruise to the Bahamas when they were detained for several hours.
“What if I was a person of color? What if the agents decided to take me away from my mother?” Boerner said. “Flock cameras are not helping support public safety under this current administration. They are used to surveil and help persecute those already facing persecution.”
As a lifelong resident, Grouf was concerned about the use of Flock cameras to track people seeking abortions and gender-affirming care out of state. In states such as Texas, where abortion is illegal, police have been caught using Flock Automatic License Plate Readers to track women receiving abortions, according to a 404 Media investigation. Police departments were accessing Flock data from states such as Illinois and Washington, where abortion is legal, to track women seeking reproductive health care out of state.
“With a camera aimed directly at Planned Parenthood, this story should horrify you,” Grouf said. “What I hope to make clear here is that the dangers to privacy cannot be legislated away. They are inherent in the system itself.”
After hearing the concerns, Pilarski asked LASD Lt. Ashley Turner what happens when Flock cameras are wrong.
“This is really scary, right?” Pilarski said. “You’re just driving along, and somebody gets it wrong, and you get pulled out of your car and guns drawn at you.”
Turner said that police in L.A. County do not arrest or stop people based on Flock alerts alone. Instead, they have a “three-step process” to verify the license plate in their own systems. The lieutenant recommended that if someone is wrongfully stopped because of Flock data, they should comply with investigations.
West Hollywood resident Nik Roybal has been very vocal in his opposition to Flock surveillance. Roybal urged residents and workers in West Hollywood to write notes, letters or poems addressed to the surveillance cameras “naming what these cameras have actually cost us and what they don’t see.”
“A camera can’t be cross-examined,” Roybal said. “So I say, dear surveillance, do you know I’m non-binary and a survivor?”
The exact number of cameras and where they are located has not been revealed, and due to public safety concerns, the West Hollywood Station [Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department] does not plan to make the information public. As concerns amongst residents grow, the City Council will now have to reevaluate the contract with the surveillance company.
“I mourn for Lady Liberty, welcoming the tired, the poor and the huddled masses, yearning to be free,” Boerner said. “Only for our government to be locking them in cages and putting bullets in the back of their heads.”










2 Comments
Ludicrous. They already dealt with these issues in the contract. “Queer clubs, safe spaces for refugees and reproductive health care services“ all have you on camera for security. Have these people not watched news? How do they think all these videos of accidents get on YouTube? How do you know what Ring is using that footage of you walking by your neighbors apartment door? If you really want a surveillance free existence you’d better figure out a way to move somewhere where they don’t have cheap cameras. Like 1974.
Perhaps it is time to ask an uncomfortable question: if members of the Public Safety Commission are more interested in validating activist ideology than objectively evaluating public safety, are they the right people to be serving on a Public Safety Commission?
This latest exercise was embarrassing. National anecdotes, overheated claims about “surveillance zones,” and now poetry to cameras are apparently substitutes for sober analysis of West Hollywood’s actual program, its safeguards, its restrictions and its public safety benefits.
Commissioners are not appointed to be an amen chorus for whoever packs the room. They are supposed to exercise independent judgment, sift and winnow competing evidence, ask difficult questions and make recommendations grounded in the interests of the entire community.
If Flock is being abused in West Hollywood, show us. If our safeguards are defective, identify the defects. If the restrictions can be circumvented, demonstrate how and fix them.
But ideological opposition masquerading as analysis is not governance.
West Hollywood has no shortage of activists. What it increasingly seems to lack are appointed officials willing to distinguish activism from evidence.
If commissioners cannot make that distinction, perhaps the City Council should reconsider more than the Flock contract. It should reconsider who it appoints to advise it on public safety.