The San Francisco Democratic Party voted on Wednesday to continue its support for Flock surveillance cameras, which are in widespread use across the city but have come under scrutiny nationwide in recent months.
Flock cameras scan license plates; some argue that they help law-enforcement investigations, while others say the information can be misused.
Two major resolutions were in front of the party’s 31 members — 13 of whom were absent — on Wednesday. One, written by former District 4 supervisor Gordon Mar, called for the city to impose increased guardrails for Flock’s automated license-plate readers, and to consider suspension of its contract with the city.
The other, written by committee chair Nancy Tung and District 6 supervisor and former police spokesperson Matt Dorsey, asked the group to affirm its trust in the city’s existing use of Flock cameras.
Elsewhere in the Bay Area, city governments have turned off their Flock cameras and taken steps to cancel their contracts in the wake of reports that these cameras have been repeatedly accessed by outside federal and state agencies without local authorization.
At Wednesday’s San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee meeting, a majority voted to reject Mar’s resolution and pass Dorsey’s. Dorsey’s measure received 11 votes in favor, 4 votes abstaining, and only 3 against.
Both sides acknowledged that the city’s Flock camera data was illegally accessed more than 1.6 million times in 2024 and 2025, with lots of those searches reaching out-of-state agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
And, more recently, the San Francisco Police Department admitted around 300 out-of-state illegal searches had happened in the last year.
Supporters of Mar’s resolution saw threats to the city’s data security. Supporters of Dorsey’s said that they felt the benefits of Flock cameras outweighed the risks.
“I’ve got some real concerns about privacy,” said committee member Patrick Boileau. “I’ve got some real concerns about surveillance. But I’ve also got some concerns about crime.”
Mar raised another concern: Two of the committee’s current members — Lily Ho and Trevor Chandler — work for Flock. Last month, the San Francisco Standard reported that a prior version of Mar’s resolution was removed from the party’s agenda by a subcommittee chaired by Ho.
Neither Ho nor Chandler offered to abstain from voting on Wednesday. Even without their votes, it would have passed.
The committee does not have rules related to conflicts of interest for issues like this one, Tung told Mar. They then proceeded to count both Ho and Chandler’s votes.
In this matter, the San Francisco Democratic Party has little formal power. Its resolutions, at best, influence other party members.
In February 2027, however, the Board of Supervisors may decide whether to renew the city’s Flock contract. Supervisors Connie Chan and Bilal Mahmood, who are on the committee but were absent Wednesday, could weigh in at that time.
Frankie Solinsky Duryea is a staff reporter covering criminal justice for Mission Local. He was born and raised in Burlingame, and he first worked with Mission Local as an intern in 2025, where he covered immigration and ICE.
Frankie Solinsky Duryea's work has appeared elsewhere in the SF Chronicle and in SFGATE. He speaks Spanish fluently, and Arabic and French conversationally. You can contact him securely on signal @frankiesd.28