In the previous year, Flock Safety, a police surveillance startup, engaged the mayor of Moreno Valley, California, a city with a population exceeding 200,000, to endorse its products. Currently, Mayor Ulises Cabrera alleges that Flock improperly terminated his employment primarily due to his refusal to leverage his mayoral position for the company’s benefit, as outlined in a lawsuit he filed against Flock in November 2024.
Supported by Andreessen Horowitz, Flock has reached an impressive $3.5 billion valuation, driven by its sales of licence plate recognition technology throughout the United States. The company has also made recent forays into drone technology. However, the lawsuit highlights significant concerns regarding the sway of private enterprises over elected officials.
Flock firmly disputes Cabrera’s claims, asserting that hiring a sitting mayor aligns with California’s conflict-of-interest laws. As of press time, Cabrera had not responded to a request for comment from StartupSuperb.
The lawsuit, reported by surveillance industry publication IPVM, indicates that Cabrera served as a Community Engagement Manager for Flock from February to June 2024. Cabrera has held the mayor’s position in Moreno Valley since 2022, although this role is part-time, as noted by local newspaper Press-Enterprise.
A job listing for this role states a salary range of $100,000 to $140,000, plus additional stock options. The role is designed to “assist law enforcement customers” through the public procurement process “in collaboration with the Sales team,” according to the job description. During his tenure at Flock, Cabrera delivered presentations promoting the company’s technology at two city council meetings well beyond his jurisdiction, specifically one in Whitewater, Kansas, and another in Mammoth Lakes, California, as evidenced by public meeting records.
However, approximately two weeks after Cabrera commenced work with Flock, he alleges that a Flock employee requested him to “utilise his position as Mayor of Moreno Valley to further the company’s interests.” Concerned about the ethical and legal ramifications, Cabrera claims he consulted with his legal advisor while copying the Flock employee in the correspondence, leading to allegedly retaliatory actions from the employee soon after. The lawsuit does not elaborate on the nature of the request made by Flock.
“It is troubling to see allegations that this company would pressure staff to misuse a government position unethically,” stated Albert Fox Cahn, founder and executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, in a statement to StartupSuperb. “This contributes to the mounting evidence that the American surveillance landscape is driven by a problematic revolving door between industry and government.”
Flock maintains that it confirmed through external legal counsel that employing a sitting mayor is permissible under California’s conflict of interest laws and asserts that Cabrera received training on these regulations. The law prohibits public officials from making decisions based on personal financial interests, including those arising from private sector employment. Nevertheless, it does not prevent them from taking jobs in the private sector.
During his re-election campaign, which he won in November 2024, Cabrera highlighted his prior vote to allocate funds for a citywide Flock system in Moreno Valley (before he was employed at Flock) on his campaign website, yet he omitted mentioning that he subsequently worked for Flock while serving as mayor. His LinkedIn profile also fails to reference Flock.
Additionally, Cabrera asserts he faced retaliation for voicing concerns regarding Flock’s significant underreporting of surveillance camera installations in Carmel-by-the-Sea while engaged in a project there. In February, a Forbes investigation uncovered that Flock’s camera installations contravened laws in at least five states, including incidences of installing cameras without obtaining the necessary permits from authorities. Flock responded to Forbes by asserting that the company “operates to the best of our abilities within the law’s confines.”
Cabrera also alleges that an employee at Flock subjected him to sexual harassment by inappropriately rubbing against him at a conference while revealing details about future parental leave. Flock categorically refutes all allegations presented by Cabrera.
This lawsuit adds to Flock’s recent legal challenges. In April, a civil rights organisation filed a lawsuit against Flock, claiming that the company’s extensive surveillance infringes upon the Fourth Amendment. In September, the Texas Department of Public Safety issued a cease and desist order to Flock, alleging that the company lacked the appropriate license to operate in private residences and businesses.