Skip to content
ORWELL INDEX
Retired Updated

Santa Cruz Police | License plate readers

The City Council voted 6-1 on January 13, 2026 to terminate the city's Flock Safety license plate reader contract and to discontinue use effective immediately. Two months earlier the city paused its participation in statewide sharing of the data, according to Lookout Santa Cruz.

At a glance

Council action
Terminate the contract and discontinue use, carried 6-1 on 2026-01-13 [1] [2]
Minutes approved
2026-01-27 [2]
Retention in policy
A maximum of 30 days, with the vendor purging at the end of that period (Policy 415.5) [3]
Sharing limits in policy
No sharing for federal immigration enforcement, none with Immigration and Customs Enforcement absent a valid court order, and none for enforcing prohibitions on reproductive or gender-affirming care (Policy 415.2 and 415.5) [3]
Audit required by policy
An annual audit of at least 10 detection browsing inquiries (Policy 415.7) [3]
Local surveillance ordinance
Municipal Code Chapter 9.85 covers face recognition and predictive policing only [4]
Cameras, as reported
Eight in the city, reported by Santa Cruz Local in September 2025 [7]
The contract
not in the records we fetched; Lookout Santa Cruz reported that it had been scheduled to expire on March 27, 2026 [6]
Effective end date
we have not read the termination notice; Lookout Santa Cruz reported that the vote allows termination on 30 days' notice, making February 12, 2026 the earliest possible end [6]
Sharing and search logs
not in the records we fetched

How it happened

  1. Context

    Policy 415 in the published manual

    The department's policy manual, Lexipol stamp March 7, 2025, caps retention at "a maximum of 30 days," bars sharing for federal immigration enforcement, and requires an annual audit of "at least 10 detection browsing inquiries." [3]

  2. Decision

    City pauses statewide sharing of plate data, per Lookout Santa Cruz

    Lookout Santa Cruz reported that the city "is pausing its participation in a statewide system that shares data from license plate cameras in order to review the program, saying the company it contracts with, Flock Safety, violated California state law earlier this year." [5]

  3. Decision

    Council votes 6-1 to terminate the contract

    Item 28 directs the city to "Terminate the City's contract with, and discontinue use of, Flock Safety ALPR services effective immediately," and to return to council with an approach for reinstituting readers "only if and when a viable option is identified." [1] [2]

What the record establishes

The council’s agenda for January 13, 2026 carried item 28, “Terminate Flock Safety Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Contract; Cease ALPR Use; Direct Conditional Return Only if a Fully-Vetted, Values-Aligned ALPR Alternative is Identified (CN) LOCATION: Citywide.”[1] The minutes, approved on January 27, 2026, record that “Councilmember O’Hara moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kalantari-Johnson,” and that “The original motion carried with the following vote. AYES: Councilmembers Trigueiro, Newsome, Golder, O’Hara; Vice Mayor Kalantari-Johnson; Mayor Keeley. NOES: Councilmember Brunner. ABSENT: None.” The motion directs the city to “Terminate the City’s contract with, and discontinue use of, Flock Safety ALPR services effective immediately and direct the City Manager/City Attorney to provide the necessary notice,” and to return with “a recommended approach for reinstituting ALPRs, only if and when a viable option is identified,” including a “Recommended vendor/system that provide stronger local controls” and “Recommended contract and policy safeguards to ensure system transparency, protect civil liberties, and reduce cybersecurity risks, including strict controls on data access/sharing and independent auditability.”[2]

What the policy says

Policy 415 of the department’s published manual, carrying a Lexipol stamp of March 7, 2025, sets the rules that applied while the readers ran. Section 415.2 says the department “does not permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City of Santa Cruz or its contractors/subcontractors for purpose of federal immigration enforcement, pursuant to the California Values Act,” naming Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection. Section 415.5, on restrictions on use of the data, adds that data “shall not be shared with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unless under the authority of a valid court order” and that “Nor will ALPR data be shared with any law enforcement agency for the purposes of enforcing prohibitions on reproductive or gender-affirming care.” Section 415.5 caps storage at “a maximum of 30 days” and says the “ALPR vendor will purge their data at the end of the 30 days of storage.” Section 415.8 says data “may be shared only with other law enforcement or prosecutorial agencies for official law enforcement purposes or as otherwise permitted by law.” Section 415.7 requires an annual audit of “at least 10 detection browsing inquiries.”[3]

The city’s own surveillance ordinance does not reach this equipment. Municipal Code Chapter 9.85 exists “to prohibit the city’s acquisition and/or use of face recognition technology and predictive policing technology, prior to obtaining city council approval, by resolution,” and gives “any city resident or other person injured by a violation of this chapter” a route to injunctive relief or a writ of mandate after a 90-day cure notice. It covers those two technologies and no others.[4]

What the reporting adds

Lookout Santa Cruz reported on November 18, 2025 that the city “is pausing its participation in a statewide system that shares data from license plate cameras in order to review the program, saying the company it contracts with, Flock Safety, violated California state law earlier this year,” and that Police Chief Bernie Escalante told council that Flock “disclosed earlier this year that it had violated a California law by allowing out-of-state law enforcement agencies to use a national search tool to access license plate data collected by agencies in California.”[5] Santa Cruz Local reported on September 8, 2025 that “Santa Cruz city has eight and Capitola 10” cameras, and quoted a department spokesperson saying that “Between January and March of 2025, data gathered by California law enforcement agencies was improperly made available to law enforcement agencies outside of California,” and that “The SCPD continues to monitor the situation with Flock to make sure that these types of occurrences do not happen again.”[7] On the day of the vote, Lookout reported that it “allows the city to terminate the agreement with 30 days’ notice, which means the end of the contract could be Feb. 12 at the earliest,” against a contract “previously scheduled to expire on March 27.”[6]

What it does not establish

The contract itself was not in the records we fetched, so its price, its term and its sharing settings are unread here. The notice the council directed the City Manager and City Attorney to give, and the date the contract actually ended, are open on the same footing. So are the sharing and search logs for the period the readers ran, and the annual audits Policy 415.7 requires. The camera count comes from reporting, not from a city record we read.

Questions

Does the Santa Cruz Police Department still use license plate readers?
Not under the council's action. On January 13, 2026 the council carried a motion, 6-1, to "Terminate the City's contract with, and discontinue use of, Flock Safety ALPR services effective immediately and direct the City Manager/City Attorney to provide the necessary notice." We have not read the notice itself. [2]
How long was the data kept?
Policy 415.5 says data "should be stored for a maximum of 30 days in accordance with the established records retention schedule," and that the "ALPR vendor will purge their data at the end of the 30 days of storage." [3]
Could the data go to immigration authorities?
Policy 415.2 says the department "does not permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City of Santa Cruz or its contractors/subcontractors for purpose of federal immigration enforcement," and section 415.5 adds that data "shall not be shared with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unless under the authority of a valid court order." [3]
Does the city's surveillance ordinance cover license plate readers?
No. Chapter 9.85 of the Municipal Code addresses face recognition technology and predictive policing technology, and requires council approval by resolution before the city acquires or uses either. Readers are governed by the department's own policy and by the contract. [4]
What did the police chief tell the council about the vendor?
This is carried by reporting rather than by a record we read. Lookout Santa Cruz reported in November 2025 that Police Chief Bernie Escalante told council that Flock "disclosed earlier this year that it had violated a California law by allowing out-of-state law enforcement agencies to use a national search tool to access license plate data collected by agencies in California." [5]

On the map

The community has mapped 94 devices of this type in the county on OpenStreetMap. These are community reports: the vendor and operator of each point are unverified, and none is confirmed to belong to this system. See them on the map →

Street names from reverse geocoding — © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).

What we do not know

What you can do

Show up

Systems like this one are approved by boards, councils and committees that meet in public. We have not yet confirmed where each of them meets in Santa Cruz County.

What we have documented in Santa Cruz County →

Protect yourself

Practical steps to shrink your personal data trail. Our guides publish at launch; until then, EFF's Surveillance Self-Defense is the best starting point.

Surveillance Self-Defense →

Sources

  1. 1.
    Santa Cruz City Council, agenda of January 13, 2026, item 28 · Meeting record · · accessed · archived copy
  2. 2.
    Santa Cruz City Council, minutes of January 13, 2026 (approved January 27, 2026) · Meeting record · · accessed · archived copy
  3. 3.
    Santa Cruz Police Department Policy Manual (Lexipol, 2025-03-07), Policy 415, Automated License Plate Readers · Primary document · · accessed · archived copy
  4. 4.
    Santa Cruz Municipal Code Chapter 9.85, Surveillance Technology Ordinance (Ord. 2020-17) · Law · accessed · archived copy
  5. 5.
    Lookout Santa Cruz, "City of Santa Cruz pauses statewide license plate data-sharing" · News · · accessed · archived copy
  6. 6.
    Lookout Santa Cruz, "City council votes to end Santa Cruz's contract with Flock Safety" · News · · accessed · archived copy
  7. 7.
    Santa Cruz Local, "As a new state bill pushes back against license plate cameras, Watsonville looks to add more" (read through the Wayback capture of 2025-10-13) · News · · accessed · archived copy

Get the digest

A regular digest of what changed in the world of surveillance: the counties we published, the devices that appeared on the map, and the public meetings where these decisions get made. We send it when there is enough to report.

Subscribe to the newsletter

One click to unsubscribe. What we do with your address is on the newsletter page.