‘We’re Getting Testy Here’: West Hollywood Council Divided Over Flock Camera Rollout

West Hollywood’s surveillance camera expansion is moving forward, but not without a fight.

Six Flock Safety fixed cameras are now active citywide and feeding into a new real-time watch center at the Sheriff’s station. Installation of the remaining 48 had stopped after council discussions raised concerns about the vendor. Tuesday night, a council majority pushed to get the rollout back on track  over the objections of two colleagues who weren’t ready to let it go.

Councilmember Chelsea Byers had thanked Public Safety Director Danny Rivas earlier in the meeting for hitting the brakes. “I just want to also acknowledge and appreciate you pausing while we have discussion at the council around some of the technology vendors,” Byers said.

Mayor John Heilman opened the discussion by asking his colleagues directly — should Rivas move forward with the camera program, or wait until the council had its broader discussion about the license plate readers?

Byers had a question first. Are these Flock cameras?

Rivas confirmed they are — not license plate readers, but Flock equipment.

“So, no,” Byers said. “Not until we have the information we’ve requested.”

Councilmember John Erickson agreed. “I think we should look at it holistically.”

Vice Mayor Danny Hang wasn’t with them. “I’m okay with moving forward with the project. It’s already in place. It’s a different system. It is not taking photos of license plates.”

Then the room got a bit tense.

Byers pushed back. The issue isn’t the technology — it’s the vendor. “We thought that the vendor was only supplying the city with the automated license plate readers, but the expansion with the real time watch cameras, which are 24-hour watch cameras, is under this vendor.”

Heilman then turned to his other colleagues. The mayor already knew where he stood.

“I didn’t hear a majority of the council say hold off on the fixed cameras, other than the license plate readers,” Heilman said. “I’m in favor of moving forward with installing them.”

Councilmember Lauren Meister agreed. She asked Rivas what it would take to get the rollout back on track and said she didn’t want to “throw the baby out with the bathwater.” Residents want the technology, she argued. Why are we stalling?

Related Coverage:
• West Hollywood Reviews Flock Deal After Feds Accessed Camera Data

The Vendor Problem

Hang raised a practical point. Nobody is manning the real-time watch center around the clock. No city personnel monitoring feeds, no one pushing data out to outside agencies. Captain Fanny Lapkin of the West Hollywood Sheriff’s Station confirmed it,  only she and Lieutenant Ashley Turner have administrator access to the Flock system, and access is limited to station personnel.

Meister zeroed in on the exit question. If the council eventually decides to replace the vendor, how hard is it to get out? Rivas said the contract requires notice, a removal fee per camera, and 45 to 60 days for equipment to come down. The idea behind pausing the rollout, he said, was to avoid paying to remove cameras they’d just installed. But if the council wants to proceed, he’s ready.

Meister asked Lapkin directly, does Flock have access to data from the fixed cameras, not the license plate readers?

They don’t.

“Well, then I would say we move ahead with that,” Meister said.

Erickson raised the subpoena question. If the federal government came with a court order, what happens?

“If a federal judge signs a subpoena, we have to” comply, Lapkin said.

“So if the federal government, which has never done anything like this in the past, does this,” Erickson said, “you would have to turn over all relevant data to the federal government, no matter what it would be pertaining to.”

Lapkin confirmed it.

Erickson turned to Rivas. How much does it cost to walk away from the whole thing?

Somewhere between $150,000 and $200,000 for all 54 cameras, Rivas said.

“There is your music festival,” Erickson told his colleagues. “If my colleagues want to move forward with that risk and wasting $150,000 of taxpayer money, then that’s on them, but not on me.”

Heilman Fires Back

The mayor wasn’t buying it.

“I don’t think it’s a waste of taxpayer money to install security cameras that will give the sheriff’s additional tools to track down people who engage in criminal conduct in our city,” Heilman said. “We’ve had people being attacked on the street, people being held up on the street with guns. I think these are tools that we agreed to, as a council, to have installed in our city. And I think that’s our responsibility — to keep our residents safe.”

He went even further. Every camera in every business can be subpoenaed. Cell phones can be subpoenaed. The cameras in the council chambers can be subpoenaed. Stripping out surveillance equipment doesn’t protect anyone, he said. It does the opposite.

“The idea that somehow we’re protecting people by getting rid of security devices is foolish. Every camera in every business, they can all be subpoenaed. Are we gonna tell everyone in the city, get rid of all your cameras, get rid of any kind of thing that collects data? That doesn’t keep us safe. It makes us more vulnerable as a community.”

Erickson said he wanted to remind his colleagues that cameras haven’t solved a single major crime in the city in recent months. The video of the recent attack near the Abbey on Robertson came from a bystander’s phone. Not a city camera.

“I will remind my colleagues that the cameras related to the incidents that have happened in the last four months have not brought any suspect to be arrested,” Erickson said.

Heilman shot back. “Because we don’t have any installed except six.”

Erickson seemed to read the room. “I mean, look, there’s three votes for it. There are two against it, so enjoy installing.”

Heilman turned to Rivas. “I think there is, at least, a majority that believes there’s no reason to not go ahead with what we already approved, which was the installation of the cameras. And we, of course, will have the opportunity to revisit this when we have a discussion about the license plate cameras.”

Hang, in an emotional moment, said he wanted to remind the council that two and a half weeks ago in Monterey Park, eight Asian people were detained. Cameras had nothing to do with it. Whether Flock equipment sits on West Hollywood streets or not isn’t what determines who gets targeted.

“Of the people that are sitting up here, whether there are cameras or not, people are gonna detain me whether they see Flock cameras on the streets or not.”

Heilman then called it. “I think it’s time for us to take our break. We’re getting testy here.”

Rivas said he could have roughly half the 54 cameras installed by March 16th. The full program — fixed cameras, license plate readers, the Flock contract comes back to council that night for a comprehensive review.

Two weeks ago the council voted 5-0 to review the Flock contract. Tuesday night made clear that unanimity was always more fragile than it looked. March 16th is when it gets tested for real.