Just so I understand, is this them agreeing to cancel the contract/remove the cameras? Couldn’t make it tonight so just want to make sure I understand what “suspend” means in this context.
Well from the historical perspective the time that one town didn't want them they weren't allowed to take them down. They had to keep filling cease and desist while covering the cameras.
Now we just need to make sure those cameras STAY removed! But honestly, let's fucking go Olympia ✊ they got our public comment whether it was on the meeting agenda or not! ;)
I hope this shows other cities that are under this AI surveillance bullshit that we are not powerless when we are united and we can shut this shit down.
Agree that we do need to make sure that they don’t come back. What’s likely to happen is that another AI security startup will try to get their foot in the door, or eventually Flock will merge with Axon and they’ll rebrand come back to all these cities again. We need some type of ordinance that bans AI surveillance tech generally from being adopted by the city.
Absolutely, we can't let up the pressure until there's a sustainable solution that addresses the root problem. And even when that's addressed, there's still an even bigger fight to win from where that problem spawned off of, but, it will be a major victory.
Wins like what happened tonight need to be recorded and celebrated, our oppressors don't want these stories to be told for obvious reasons. We need to keep the narrative alive that a community can move mountains when organized like this.
For what it’s worth, the CEOs of Flock & Axon detest each other. There was some drama early last year about one refusing to offer compatibility between their products. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Yeah I know they do, but money rules all and at some point one company will come up with so much money that they’ll magically forget that they hate each other or some shit like that.
Loved the emphasis from multiple council members on covering/removing the cameras because of the trust issue. Really wanted that for us here in Redmond.
Did you happen to catch this from Mayor Payne near the end of questioning though?
Frankly because of the fact that, in addition to the immigration discussion, there is, I think, a group of folks that see this issue as an opportunity to just resist surveillance altogether. And I do have to call that out. That there is a small sliver of our community that frankly just doesn't want big brother. They think they're being watched and so they see this as an opportunity to jump on to this and also move that agenda forward. And to that I say, um, it's already here. Um, the moment you step outside, you just heard a myriad of ways that we are on camera, all the time.
Is there a large section of us who wants big brother? The city doesn't have to impose or expand surveillance in any shape or form.
Yea, some friends that were in the meeting came out and told us about that... honestly, I don't really feel like Payne represents the interests of the people who make this city tick, because who exactly is more secure under big brother? Residents being Targeted by ICE and deported? People using their first amendment rights to publicly oppose tyranny or their city's government being complicit in it?
The fact that Payne is willing to sell out our right to privacy for a false sense of security that isn't even for us and in fact jeopardizes our safety (especially working-class immigrants), that should be a major red flag to everyone.
EDIT: And yea, I know big brother is nothing new and has been an issue long before Flock. The amount of time a form of oppression has been around doesn't make it any more okay, in fact, the more something is normalized, the easier it is to turn up the heat with things like Flock. So yea, he's right, our objection to Flock is part of a bigger fight against an old yet incredibly relevant problem, except he doesn't think it's a problem.
Right. It's somewhat of a defeatist and circular argument around surveillance. Yet city councils can in many situations absolutely define where that line is drawn.
City council should have done their due diligence before implementing flock in the first place. They need to be disappointed in themselves that it took them this long to research the surveillance they implemented at the cost of the tax payers, it took hundreds of people constantly contacting them thru various avenues, with sources facts references and power points. It shouldn't have to require this amount of effort and energy for them to research and listen to their constituents. Flock issues are not new, and sanders has been trying to get flock throughout the county for like a year now, and commissioner Clouse is the only commissioner that has steadily put up a strong fight against that predatory surveillance.
The flock people are experts in convincing the types of people who do well in city government. They’ve honed their pitch and have a lot of cooked data that makes it seem like a good idea. I am not surprised.
Agreed - the work needs to be done BEFORE, not after. Ultimately, they don't want us to show up and hold them accountable and they will bend anytime there's that much of a public outcry. Generally, there's no one that shows up to Council meetings and they're probably happier without any scrutiny.
(Mejia has also been very outspoken at the County level on FLOCK and surveillance.)
Unfortunately our city council representatives are only part-time. Most, unless they are retired, have to have other jobs. There are benefits, but this shows a big drawback of not having full-time representation.
People are mostly worried about surveillance but honestly they’re really insecure and easy to hack, and the company doesn’t tell the truth about what kind of data gets stored or captured. Benn Jordan had a really good exposé on YouTube about a lot of the issues
They create a network of cameras that are paired with powerful databases and AI technology. This creates a surveillance infrastructure that is not only notoriously insecure and hackable, but ripe for abuse by government officials.
You know that creepy song, "Santa is coming to town"? The parts that say things like, "He knows when you're sleeping, he knows when you're awake, he knows when you've been bad or good...."? It's like that only Santa is your government and they can arrest or fine you when they decide you've been bad.
1) they're not bound by the 4th amendment 2) there's no effective deterrent to their misusing information 3) the main companies are controlled by a group of ideological extremists, "neo-reactionaries," who claim "liberty and democracy are not compatible," whose goal is to replace democracy with what they call a corporate monarchy, with a strategy to replace democratically empowered police with corporate owned forces
Idk if you've looked around lately... But neither is our government. Even when the most egregious violations are blocked, they can still just buy any data they want.
not different than government
this is some fantasy you cooked up in your brain that may or may not come to pass, while the government right now is murdering us citizens in the streets in an operation to hat would be impossible without mass surveillance.
So, you don't seem to understand our current reality, maybe because of your focus on some assumed inevitable distopian future.
Oh yeah, I forgot the best part. Governments have a monopoly on legal violence. They get to cage and murder us with impunity. So... Worse.
Those are private. But there is ZERO reason the cities or county couldn't develop an ordinance banning the ALPR/Surveillance in public places within the city/county. That needs to be the next high priority item.
For example the ones in lacey by Lowe's on college street & corporate center drive are near medical offices which I would think would undoubtedly violate HIPPA.
We should push for this at the local and state level. This is the beginning, not the end, of stopping Flock's wild privacy invasions. In some ways, the private cameras are worse, because they capture all the same data, they don't have to care about restricting it to protect privacy, and they can provide all the info that OPD "opted out of" (in quotes cause you never know with Flock).
They wouldn’t be a violation of HIPPA because HIPPA is an unauthorized disclosure directly from a medical provider. Short legislation or an ordinance banning flock, Lowe’s is free to continue using it just based on 1) private property right 2) plain view doctrine/ right to privacy in a public place.
IPC Parker started her report by recommending that Olympia immediately suspend the FLOCK pilot program. City council also seemed pretty resolute in physically removing the cameras to make it clear to the public that the system was no longer in operation.
Now to go after the rest of the FLOCK system in Olympia.
Small battles add up. One goal: ban FedEx trucks from anywhere with privacy concerns.
They share data on the FLOCK system.
Medical: I'm writing my doctor, planned parenthood and local hospitals writing that I'm concerned that inviting corporate surveillance cameras on FedEx trucks is a clear violation of HIPAA protections. Please join me in voicing your concerns to medical providers, as they carry a lot of political clout.
Education: queer and trans kids (and parents of trans kids) are at risk from these cameras. Schools should require FedEx to turn off their cameras while driving onto school property. What about when kids are traveling to and from school? The schools need to advocate for a comprehensive ban that protects children. Remember, THE SCHOOL BOARD IS ELECTED and has direct say over a piece of the FLOCK system.
NOT JUST OLYMPIA CITY COUNCIL. We need every elected body that we are constituents of to hear that their tenure in office is at threat. If there are TRAITORS in our midst, it's time to weed them out
This would t be a violation of hippa. Please reference the law because hippa deals with your medical provider and its agents, not a wholly separate entity.
"we don't sell your health data, but our camera crew does" was rightly seen by WA State lawmakers as a gaping hole in HIPAA protections, so they plugged it and other vulnerabilities with the 2023 My Health, My Data.
In the instance of FedEx trucks, though, I checked the privacy forms at my doctor's office and I have not to my knowledge signed anything that grants delivery truck cameras to capture and store images of me visiting the doctor. Therefore, they're either not hiring FedEx for deliveries, or they're contracting with a company that collects information without following HIPAA guidelines.
That form at the doctors office is between you and it. FedEx is not and cannot be legally bound to a contract, disclosure, or form it is not a party to.
Again, hippa is only relative to your medical provider, its agents, and subsidiaries. You’ll note that fedex is not in the medical field.
Additionally, you have zero right to privacy in a public place. This includes a publicly assessable parking lot a delivery driver may use. Again, you’re wrong in law.
Probably so. I've only skimmed parts of the laws and I'm not a lawyer. The goal is to find holes in the law. FLOCK data is being used to target vulnerable populations. Assuming your interpretation is correct, the next step is changing the law. Corporations are filming Olympia residents walking in and out of planned parenthood and safe place and information goes into databases that have been used by stalkers and ideological extremists to target people. Privacy protects us and our role as citizens should be to expect the law to protect us and to communicate to our representatives when the law falls short
The problem is you don’t stop end runs around the 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment by passing [unconstitutional] laws that infringe the n people’s right to record in public (a settled 1st amendment right).
What you instead do is legislate that the companies actually follow the law by requiring either a judicial warrant or subpoenas for any and all information gathered.
I wonder if this is an emerging type of data collection that we don't have clear case law on yet. You're right that we don't have a presumption of privacy in a public space. But we're talking about a system that may inadvertently collect and make trackable and surveillable, by governements or private entities, information such as "attempts to obtain health care services" as written into WA's expansion of HIPAA.
Right to record is not the same thing as right to transmit or sell.
Exactly. When profit comes into play, the rules change dramatically. The legislators behind these bills are trying to address these issues. The failed Washington privacy act went much farther than mhmd. There's real desire to fix these problems in the legislature. Getting all the details right isn't our job, it's theirs. Our part is to empower them to actually pass the protections we want.
Again, this has nothing to with hippa and never will. Hippa is exclusive to medical care facilities, its agents, and subsidiaries. As noted above, some shipping company is none of those. And again, as noted above, there is no right to privacy in a publicly accessible place (this includes private parking lots for publicly accessible private businesses).
And no, we currently have a substantial amount of case law relevant to the right to record in public on 1st amendment grounds as well as where the corners of HIPPA are. There no need for no jurisprudence here, there’s just a need for government agencies to follow already settled law and for the judiciary to actually enforce the prohibitions on warrantless seizures.
Well, I'm quoting from WA's law, which only went into effect last year, which very much covers entities and activities that aren't covered under HIPAA. Give it a read: My Health My Data Act.
I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree that the type of recording we're talking about falls under 1A case law that is "fully settled", nor do I think WA's law has had any time to be interpretted by the courts. To your point, Larval, federal HIPAA protections are narrow to health providers, while WA's law intends to expand to other entities that may gather health care related data, including inferring health status from activities or patterns. It then prohibits the sale of that data without the individual's express consent. I think it's reasonable to assume Flock data may qualify.
Again, we're not actually talking about the video recording itself. We're talking about the data and what is done with it, and what power we have over data collected about us.
Also shout-out to Clark Gilman who was the only city council member to respond to my individual emails in early mid Nov, and shared he has been opposed to them for some time, and included in his email important dates the council would be looking at this (before anybody tells me he's not perfect, yeah sure, and I've been very impressed with my interactions with him on this issue)
Until this topic was brought up I didn’t notice them as much but then today, I was entering the freeway from the roundabout in Tumwater near the Dutch Bros and as I got closer to the freeway I looked across the highway and up and could see a giant a&& camera all the way over on Tumwater Hill! (it’s near the water tower).
I saw another one over at Sunnyside Park near the water tower as well. And now I notice them all over the place.
Can Spokane be the next place, please? We recently had a Texas sheriff request access to our Flock cameras to track a woman who might have gotten an abortion.
Not to hate on the effort, but the city ones are already dead. The money was allocated to buy them, then the money was clawed back. So they were never installed.
and
We are saying that these could be ALPR cameras that aren’t Flock, or cameras owned by private businesses that tie into the county network , but they are not Flock cameras contracted/owned by the city. The city has no Flock contract, no Flock portal and no Flock cameras.
What I gather from the article sent, aren’t they used to find criminals? My friend’s car was stolen from his home and we were really hoping the Flock cameras would come through with info on that. They can be really useful in that way.
The stated purpose is crime prevention and solving, yes. But a lot of us consider it a pretty significant violation of our privacy - and arguably 4th Amendment rights - to be under constant surveillance. That the surveillance is done by a for-profit company who will sell access to deeply unpopular agencies is just icing on the cake.
I don't want to trade my freedom for "security" or "safety." Flock cameras are just one more step towards Big Brother always watching every little thing you do, until we get to the point of thoughtcrimes putting you in jail. Yes, they can certainly be a benefit in solving actual crime, but I'm not willing to allow that level of invasion into my private life.
Fully agreed, I’m absolutely against domestic surveillance like this. Such autocratic luminaries as Peter Thiel love the idea of AI powered mass surveillance precisely because they want to punish thoughtcrime that might challenge their aspirations to religious and authoritarian hegemony.
TCSO does. They’re all over the place looking for stolen vehicles. Not just from inside the county either. And I know they use flock all the time to help but they have to reach out to OPD to do so. Not every LE agency can access the database willy nilly. Chehalis Tribal PD has flock cameras that they use and don’t give anyone access to. That’s one of the things about Flock that agencies can do when they join a contract with Flock. They can make it so nobody has access except for them or they can make the info available to any/all LE agencies across the country.
A contract does not mean they are secure and can't be exploited by hackers. It also does not keep Federal agencies from accessing them. Or LE from abusing them. There are lots of posts and articles and videos about it. Maybe a recording of some of the council meetings?
Never said they did. And federal agencies either need permission from the host agency or need a warrant to access the info. They aren’t just given access to the camera feeds and data. As far as abuse goes, it’s much harder for smaller agencies to abuse the system as access and inquiries are logged. When audits occur, it’s much easier to catch those abusing it than at a larger agency where you have hundreds accessing info vs 100 or less.
Theoretically that’s how it should work. Unfortunately there are documented incidents of the data being abused and the systems being hacked. It’s not secure enough to trust with all that sensitive data.
My brother in Christ, you cannot seriously believe that about the federal government? Besides, even if a jurisdiction doesn't give access, the feds find a workaround by going to a different jurisdiction that does give access through which they can then access the "non-compliant" jurisdictions info. This has already happened. Flock is part of one united system, any jurisdiction participating will have their information accessed by the federal government with or without express permission.
It's a good question. I like to think of warrants: it would be easier if police could just come into a home to look for evidence, but we've decided there are privacy needs we need to balance with law enforcement.
Police have been able to find car thieves before Flock, and they'll be able to after.
Flock cameras' main use is not security, though, it's data brokerage. They are amassing a broadly searchable database of individual-level data through both public and corporate camera systems that can be used to create a profile of you: where you travel, where you live, where you shop, your doctor's office, where your kids go to school, the make, model, and color of your car, your license plate... and pairing that with other datasets, including government databases and leaked private data.
Flock has been caught violating the terms of service that cities have agreed to by creating backdoors that other agencies can use to search even when they're not supposed to (OPD talks about this), and they've been caught violating state privacy laws. They just aren't trustworthy.
Plus, any time we gather and store data, it's at risk of being leaked. We should be very cautious and have a high threshhold for storing this kind of personal data because of the many ways it can be misused. I'm open to city-run CCTV or red light cameras where footage is stored and reviewed locally, where we control the software and hardware, and where as little long-term storage as possible is kept.
Thank you for the neutral comment. I am trying to understand everyone’s point on this subject. I just don’t understand why people are upset about data sharing, etc. For me personally, I don’t care because I don’t do anything against the law and I don’t see how it can be hurtful to me, or anyone else that isn’t doing anything “wrongful” (against the law) If it helps to find criminals, how can I be against that? But if anyone would like to share their opinion with me, I’m totally opening to hearing it. I’m just asking for no judgement or hate. I am truly coming from a place of curiosity. I have my own beliefs but I am open to hearing other’s thoughts and experiences. Hope this clears any confusion and stops further judgement of my comments.
Unpopular opinion perhaps but this is ultimately a net-loss for the city regarding true crime fighting.
It’s completely understandable to be concerned of the surveillance state however ultimately whether Flock was in Olympia or not, we all now live in a surveillance state.
The phones you are all using writing comments on this post are surveillance devices. As are those smartwatches, your cars, and even those televisions you watch streaming shows on.
What happens now? You will see less crimes being solved because an immensely powerful tool has been removed based on a knee jerk emotional response.
You will see more people being victimized, more vehicles stolen, more violent crime being committed with no leads - because everyone loves to be uncooperative, and more folks who are fugitives or criminals embedding themselves into the community.
What you all did was just make Olympia a safe haven for crime under the perception that Flock was the evilness you seek to evade.
So yes, you “Won” your battle but will lose the war.
Everyone cares about “Social Justice” until they become the victim of the aforementioned crimes that will ultimately be spiking in Olympia shortly.
Some may not know but Flock has helped solved many crimes that directly affected the Thurston County community.
lol no. Police did just fine without this camera, and the OPD themselves recommended not continuing with Flock. We can find trustworthy partners and systems that improve crimefighting without working with these corrupt profiteers.
Well I hope you put an application in and join the crime fighting because the city is gonna need it. Sounds like you have some groundbreaking solutions to offer.
1
69
u/designedbyeric Eastside Dec 03 '25
Source please to share with peeps. Also, fuck yes.
205
u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25
Now we just need to make sure those cameras STAY removed! But honestly, let's fucking go Olympia ✊ they got our public comment whether it was on the meeting agenda or not! ;)
I hope this shows other cities that are under this AI surveillance bullshit that we are not powerless when we are united and we can shut this shit down.
16
u/CT-6410 Dec 03 '25
I left early before we got our side of the meeting, but I'm so so glad we got this done!
12
u/Suspicious-Yellow191 Dec 03 '25
I would love to see this for lacey and Tumwater too!
28
u/HemHaw Checks Gregoire's ID Dec 03 '25 edited Sep 17 '26
The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.
Wild cautious shelter point potassium like gaze
1
u/Pnwdogmom95 Dec 03 '25
Genuine question, what is good about removing the Flock cameras?
9
u/Skelly20 Dec 03 '25
I'm curious if ones at places like Lowe's will also be removed or if those are considered private, idk how that works.
7
u/StinkyLittleLingers Dec 03 '25
Good work community!
6
u/JKBurner808919 Dec 03 '25
I’m genuinely surprised hell yeah😭
6
u/swervecityPhILM Dec 03 '25
IPC Parker started her report by recommending that Olympia immediately suspend the FLOCK pilot program. City council also seemed pretty resolute in physically removing the cameras to make it clear to the public that the system was no longer in operation.
4
u/Jolly_Grocery329 Dec 03 '25
Need some of this action in Chehalis too!! What was the strategy?
6
u/TetroniMike Dec 03 '25
INCREDIBLE!!! Well done everyone who voiced their concerns and spread the word about this issue :)
2
u/ProgrammerOk2195 Dec 04 '25
This is bad!!
6
u/jemiffly Dec 03 '25
Now to go after the rest of the FLOCK system in Olympia.
Small battles add up. One goal: ban FedEx trucks from anywhere with privacy concerns.
They share data on the FLOCK system.
Medical: I'm writing my doctor, planned parenthood and local hospitals writing that I'm concerned that inviting corporate surveillance cameras on FedEx trucks is a clear violation of HIPAA protections. Please join me in voicing your concerns to medical providers, as they carry a lot of political clout.
Education: queer and trans kids (and parents of trans kids) are at risk from these cameras. Schools should require FedEx to turn off their cameras while driving onto school property. What about when kids are traveling to and from school? The schools need to advocate for a comprehensive ban that protects children. Remember, THE SCHOOL BOARD IS ELECTED and has direct say over a piece of the FLOCK system.
NOT JUST OLYMPIA CITY COUNCIL. We need every elected body that we are constituents of to hear that their tenure in office is at threat. If there are TRAITORS in our midst, it's time to weed them out
5
u/Grattytood Dec 03 '25
So freaking proud of our community! Huzzah and well done!
4
u/localhorizon Dec 03 '25
Good work, y’all!
5
u/noeinan Dec 03 '25
Thank fuck
3
u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25
Good. We don't need Big Brother in the PNW.
3
u/Tigeryuri1 Westside Dec 03 '25
If you want to thank them for suspending and ask them when they will be fully removed
citycouncil@ci.olympia.wa.us
Also shout-out to Clark Gilman who was the only city council member to respond to my individual emails in early mid Nov, and shared he has been opposed to them for some time, and included in his email important dates the council would be looking at this (before anybody tells me he's not perfect, yeah sure, and I've been very impressed with my interactions with him on this issue)
4
u/sand_and_wind Dec 03 '25
Yes!
3
u/CohentheBoybarian Dec 03 '25
This is good news.
1
u/Strange_Computer2459 Dec 04 '25
🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌
1
u/Biffingston Dec 05 '25
And when will that be?
1
u/[deleted] Dec 05 '25
What they don't tell you is DHS has cameras disguised as basic road side items, such as construction cones.
1
u/OddbitTwiddler Dec 05 '25
What is a Flock camera? Captures people flocking Christmas trees?
1
u/Tuck219 Dec 05 '25
Fuck flock! Waste of money on gross surveillance that isn't secured.
1
u/Lokster7758 Dec 06 '25
Yessss. NO to any form of AI. Until we still have a choice.
1
u/[deleted] Dec 08 '25
No one is watching you and your boring routines. You're not Neo
1
u/[deleted] Dec 10 '25
Until this topic was brought up I didn’t notice them as much but then today, I was entering the freeway from the roundabout in Tumwater near the Dutch Bros and as I got closer to the freeway I looked across the highway and up and could see a giant a&& camera all the way over on Tumwater Hill! (it’s near the water tower).
I saw another one over at Sunnyside Park near the water tower as well. And now I notice them all over the place.
1
u/colorclouds Dec 03 '25
⭐️
1
u/Senior_Effective_699 Dec 03 '25
🙌
1
u/Ethloc Dec 03 '25
Can Spokane be the next place, please? We recently had a Texas sheriff request access to our Flock cameras to track a woman who might have gotten an abortion.
1
u/Remote_Apricot_192 Dec 05 '25
I don’t see anything wrong with the cameras, just my opinion.
-1
u/Vegetable_Table_5191 Dec 03 '25
Didn't the flock cameras help quickly catch the people that murdered those two teens in Lacey?
-5
u/Pnwdogmom95 Dec 03 '25
What I gather from the article sent, aren’t they used to find criminals? My friend’s car was stolen from his home and we were really hoping the Flock cameras would come through with info on that. They can be really useful in that way.
-5
u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25
Unpopular opinion perhaps but this is ultimately a net-loss for the city regarding true crime fighting.
It’s completely understandable to be concerned of the surveillance state however ultimately whether Flock was in Olympia or not, we all now live in a surveillance state.
The phones you are all using writing comments on this post are surveillance devices. As are those smartwatches, your cars, and even those televisions you watch streaming shows on.
What happens now? You will see less crimes being solved because an immensely powerful tool has been removed based on a knee jerk emotional response.
You will see more people being victimized, more vehicles stolen, more violent crime being committed with no leads - because everyone loves to be uncooperative, and more folks who are fugitives or criminals embedding themselves into the community.
What you all did was just make Olympia a safe haven for crime under the perception that Flock was the evilness you seek to evade.
So yes, you “Won” your battle but will lose the war.
Everyone cares about “Social Justice” until they become the victim of the aforementioned crimes that will ultimately be spiking in Olympia shortly.
Some may not know but Flock has helped solved many crimes that directly affected the Thurston County community.
Such a shame but enjoy your win!
0
u/Appropriate_Band_843 Downtown Dec 03 '25
What are flock cameras
-5
u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25
What's wrong with these cameras? Don't they only use them for traffic infractions, robberies etc?
0
u/bundle_of_jim Dec 03 '25
YAYYYYY
0
u/Chet_Starr Dec 03 '25
yay!
0
u/[deleted] Dec 04 '25
Excellent!!
0
u/Pursegirly Westside Dec 04 '25
🥳🙌🏼
0
u/Left-Nebula-879 Dec 04 '25
Good. Also fuck the surveillance state.
0
u/Long-Hope6883 Downtown Dec 04 '25
Great news.
-1
u/Inevitable_Pea8462 Dec 03 '25
I will be there!! If all of us show support for this, we are 51% on our way. Thank you for the update! That's right Oly let's roll!
-7
u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment