Watsonville votes to expand use of controversial Flock license plate readers despite immigration fears

The Watsonville City Council voted Tuesday to expand its network of controversial automated license plate readers throughout the city over the intense objections of community members who say they worry the surveillance system would undermine the city’s status as a sanctuary for undocumented immigrants.

The city council’s decision, a 5-2 vote, means Watsonville will renew its contract with Atlanta-based surveillance technology company Flock Safety to keep its existing 20 license plate-reader cameras throughout the city for another two years and install 17 more, nearly doubling the number of license plate readers within city limits. The renewed contract with Flock Safety will cost the city nearly $251,000. 

Mayor Maria Orozco and Councilmember Vanessa Quiroz-Carter were the only opposing votes. 

Concerns over these cameras have continued to grow within the county, with residents at the meeting citing recent reports of law enforcement agencies in California — not in Santa Cruz County — sharing data collected by the cameras with federal agencies like U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Outside the state, the surveillance technology company has faced criticism for sharing information directly with U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

Nearly 50 community members packed the council chambers Tuesday night to voice opposition to the cameras. The vote to expand their use was immediately met with verbal disapproval from those in attendance, who yelled out “Shame on you!” and “You’re failing the people!” as councilmembers exited the chambers for a five-minute break. 

The additional 17 cameras will be placed at city entrance and exit points and other “critical locations” that currently do not have coverage, according to David Rodriguez, Watsonville’s interim police chief. He did not elaborate on the “critical locations.”

In 2023, the city council approved a two-year contract with Flock Safety to install 20 license plate-reader cameras throughout the city. The cameras automatically log license plates and other identifying data of every single car that passes their field of view. The data collected by the cameras are stored for a month and can be accessed by other law enforcement agencies in the state if granted access by local police. 

Rodriguez told the city council at its Tuesday meeting that his department does not share any information gathered by the cameras for immigration purposes. Rodriguez added that Flock has rolled out a new feature exclusive for California customers, which will block users from conducting impermissible searches, including searches regarding immigration. 

Under the 2017 California Values Act, local law enforcement agencies are prohibited from using their resources to assist federal immigration authorities. Rodriguez also cited department policy that prohibits officers from sharing information with immigration agencies.

The department’s Flock database also shows a disclaimer, reading: “By accepting, you are agreeing that you will not use any Flock Safety technology to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes.” 

Only the Watsonville Police Department can decide whom it shares its Flock data with, according to Rodriguez. Each inquiry to access the data must cite a reason for the search and also provide a case number or details. 

Under its contract with the City of Watsonville, Flock Safety is not allowed to share information, since it’s solely owned by the police department. If the technology surveillance company violates the contract, the city has the right to cancel the contract within a 30 day-notice period, and it also has the right to sue the company, according to city attorney Samantha Zutler. 

Rodriguez defended the department’s need for Flock cameras as a tool to help solve serious crimes and identify stolen vehicles. He said the department used the city’s 20 cameras 98 times in the previous six months. One of those instances included helping track a stabbing suspect from Monterey County who later stabbed a police dog during the arrest. 

Rodriguez’s arguments were met with criticism from community members — all of the nearly 50 people in attendance were opposed to the contract renewal. Many residents pleaded with city councilmembers not to renew the contract, adding that it would create a threat to the community — many of whom are undocumented. 

Grassroots organizer Yesenia Molina reminded councilmembers that even though there are state laws and local ordinances in place to prevent the sharing of data to immigration officials, these protections can be thrown out any time, citing a recent Supreme Court ruling allowing ICE agents to racially profile people during immigration operations. 

“We ask you, our city councilmembers, to make every decision with our highly vulnerable immigrant community in mind,” Molina said. “Please do not put our community at risk by trusting the promises of the very company that will profit from this agreement.” 

Citing the current political climate, Orozco said she could not support renewing the contract with Flock, even though she recognized that the cameras have been helpful with solving serious crimes. 

“Two years ago, we did not have the [federal] administration that we have now, so that initial approval was in the hopes of trying to fix some of the traffic issues,” said Quiroz-Carter. 

Councilmember Kristal Salcido, who is also a prosecutor with the Santa Cruz County District Attorney’s Office, voted to renew the contract, saying she has faith in the police department to use this tool correctly and effectively. If Flock breaches the contract in any way, the council will still have the opportunity to end it and turn the cameras off, she said. 

Emmanuel Nevarez, chair of the county’s Latino Affairs Commission, told Lookout that he was not surprised at the city council’s decision to renew the contract. “They just sold out their entire community for $250,000,” he said. 

He told the city council that approving the contract would go against its sanctuary city policy. Earlier this year, elected officials reaffirmed Watsonville’s status as a sanctuary city prior to President Donald Trump’s return to the White House. 

Lourdes Barraza — a member of Get the Flock Out (GTFO), a local citizens group pushing to remove these cameras from local streets — said she was disappointed with Tuesday’s vote, and felt that elected officials ignored the community’s concerns. 

To her, the vote indicates that the elected officials don’t care about the community they’re serving, she said. “The community came and told you their concerns, and you didn’t give a crap about it,” Barraza said. 

Echoing Nevarez, she added that the decision to renew the contract feels hypocritical considering Watsonville’s sanctuary status. Barraza told Lookout that she doesn’t believe city officials anymore regarding their support for the immigrant community after this vote. 

Despite the contract renewal, Barraza said the GTFO will continue to speak out against the Flock cameras, and that city councilmembers should know that the group is not done fighting this technology. “This doesn’t mean that we’re going to go away. They’re going to keep seeing us,” she said.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.