I thought this was a well thought out conclusion to reach. Especially appreciated folks highlighting the issues this might cause in privacy invasion for people coming to California for care not available in their states.

More virtue signaling by a lost council. What is more likely to happen? A: that a burglary ring will strike Menlo Park, or worse a home invasion will occur, and the license plate readers will be used to catch the criminals?

Or B. what the Council is worried about: that the National government will become so facist it will let another state use California state license plate readers, despite the fact abortion is protected by our state constitution, to track residents from another state who come here to seek an abortion.

The latter concern is completely absurd and conspiracy theory stuff.

Our neighborhood just west of downtown experiences nightly trolling by masked and hooded robbers and would-be robbers. Our two cars have been broken into recently. <My neighbors across the street had someone try to enter through their front door twice in the same night. The police told me that people troll our neighborhood nightly looking for unlocked cars and houses. It is only a matter of time before they force their way into someone's house. Our City Council is sadly lacking in the will to protect the citizens of Menlo Park. They should all be voted out at the first opportunity as they clearly serve no useful purpose and often work to oppose their citizens' best interests.

Absurd vote out the council. Let’s be equitable with gunshot detection. No wonder officers are leaving Meno Park.

I’m disappointed in the decision. I’m guessing council don’t go to Palo Alto, Redwood City, Atherton, or the Sheriff’s jurisdiction, because they all have these cameras. I’m sure the crooks will read this and realize that Menlo Park is the only city in the area that doesn’t have cameras. Now I guess I have to lock my doors since crocks are being welcomed here

More stupidity from our council. It is well established law that no one has a right to privacy in public. Where are ALPR's used? In public. Therefor, no privacy concerns. More virtue signaling from our out of touch council.

I agree with not moving forward with License Plate readers for several reasons. "Big Brother" is one of them, we really don't need more observation and surveillance. Most people have Ring cameras and other cameras mounted on their residence. More than that we are already in a budget deficit so we go deeper when there isn't a proven benefit. If I recall Atherton installed several License plate readers and how well is that working out for them? I read articles of more home burglaries but not articles about catching the burglars.

And to Oops I would ask do you know where the data from the cameras is being stored? Some states are proposing trying to criminalize traveling out of state for an abortion. If the company is storing data in that state is it safe? Sad that this needs to be a consideration but it is the times we live in...

I don't think this was an easy decision and council members did a ton of due diligence (e.g. talking with other communities using Flock cameras and looking at their data). There was significant concern that the cameras would not be cost-effective. We are running a budget deficit and while there is a lot of respect for the police chief and desire to support him and his team, the sales pitch from Flock was heavy on anecdotes and thin on data. Some other communities are reporting mixed results. Seems like they are good for recovering stolen vehicles but they may not be as effective for deterring (or solving) residential burglaries. They also cost a non-trivial amount of staff time (and I've heard that the cameras in Los Altos Hills aren't always functioning.)

Web Link Web Link

Can anyone name one place where license plate reader data from California has been used to prosecute someone in another state, who was seeking an abortion. Are you really suggesting the Chief is going to set up a license plate reader in an abortion provider parking lot? If one is really worried about this extremely low probability scenario, tell the Chief he can’t put a license plate reader within 500 feet of an abortion provider. But to have a statistically irrelevant possibility factor into a public safety decision is irresponsible. Regarding the budget deficit, has the Menlo Park budget gotten so bad that the City of Menlo Park can’t consider public safety steps other cities are taking on the Peninsula?

Ms. Doerr is surely joking in suggesting that gunshot detectors placed where there are historically more gunshots "highlights inequity". That statement is akin to suggesting that increased police presence in crime areas is bad. Perhaps Ms. Doerr should ask residents affected by gun violence and crime before offering such pretentious opinions.

Abraham Lincoln: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt"

1. There is no expectation of privacy when you are in the public. It is perfectly legal to photograph the license plates of every car you see.

2. Menlo Park is sending a message to burglaries that they won't be tracked in their city. Neighboring cities who have experienced a lot of burglaries offer our thanks.

I had long hoped that increased use of surveillance devices would put an end to home crime (ring, etc). But the opposite seems to be true. The annual cost of this "service" is just another masterful case of how these companies prey on unexperienced city/town leaders. With all the talk of how the criminals use stolen cars, I find it of little value to track license plate info.

And look Woodside had 5 burglaries yesterday. I’m sure their cameras will help identify the suspects.

Interesting criticism of the tech. Flock license plate readers recently caught four auto thieves in just one week this year in another city.

Web Link

Oops, did you happen to read this article or another Bay Area city that solved 24% of their crimes, not including stolen vehicles with flock? Seems like these cameras would help solved many crimes

Web Link

The Menlo Park City Council is insane.

"Interesting criticism of the tech. Flock license plate readers recently caught four auto thieves in just one week this year in another city."

I thought the intended purpose was to catch stop home break-ins, not catch stolen cars? And at a cost of nearly $550,000 the first year to catch 4 stolen cars that likely were not worth more than $100,000 combines it sounds like a bad fiscal decision. The council made the right call on this. If you want cameras I recommend getting a Ring doorbell and adding high definition cameras around your house. I know the police would be happy for any footage you can supply to their investigations...

Statistically it’s amazing we have the City Council that knows more about what works solving crimes than their own Police Chief and all of the other law enforcement agencies and City Councils that surround us.

When is the next election? This city council is ridiculous. And Maria Doerr, who they appointed, we did not elect, is the worst. She cares more about highlighting inequity than keeping our city safe by reducing crime and protecting people. Her concern about highlighting inequity in this case does absolutely nothing towards SOLVING inequity. So there is absolutely no gain for anyone.

Brian, ring cameras show grainy picture. I’m sure there are more than 4 success stories with flock. I suggest you can install all the ring cameras you want. Let the rest of us have Flock.

The only rights being trampled on are by the Blue fascists in Sacramento, DC...and Menlo Park. When will the madness end?

Glock is needed as well as Flock...

Let’s get back to “ Law and Order”, provide our police agencies with all the tools they need. Have our public safety professionals make the recommendations and our elected representatives support them to make our community safe. Price.. what is the total cost of loss of human life, theft, assault, or any lawlessness. Priceless right council, with your huge tax surplus too.