the town council meeting of May 26, 2026
to order.
>> Jennifer, will you take role? Council
>> member Alberish
>> here.
>> Council member Brown
>> here.
>> Council member Gold
>> here.
>> Council member Wall
>> here.
>> Mayor Donowski
>> here.
>> Council member Brown, will you lead us
in the pledge of
>> allegiance?
United States of America.
» Okay. Thank you, Dick. Appreciate it.
Moving on to public comment. Uh we'll
open that up. Persons wishing to address
the council on any item not on the
agenda are invited to do so now. Please
note, however, that the council is not
able to undertake extended discussions
uh or to have much of a conversation
whatsoever on those items, but we can
refer them to staff for placement on a
future agenda. This communication period
is limited to five persons, three
minutes each. Are there any any members
of the public who would like to make a
comment tonight on any item not on the
agenda?
We're going to jump right into the Zoom
room and it looks like uh Tom, you're up
first.
You are unmuted.
» Good evening, town council.
>> Good evening.
>> I respectfully request that the town
council place on a future agenda a
discussion regarding the possible
substained ethics violations referenced
in former town manager Jason Led
Better's letter. Given the seriousness
of the concerns raised, I believe the
community deserves an open and
transparent public discussion regarding
the findings, the town's response, and
what steps may be necessary to ensure
accountability and restored public
trust. This request is not intended to
prejudice or judge any individual, but
rather to encourage transparency,
ethical governance, and public
confidence in the integrity of our
town's operation by the council. Thank
you for your consideration of this
request and for your continued service
to the community. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you, Tom. uh the council is
determining what if any corrective
action is warranted and um with respect
to that one sustained finding and we
certainly endeavor to address that issue
as soon as schedules permit. So thank
you for that. Uh we have Falia and Steve
up next.
>> Hello. This is this is Steve. Um
following up on what Tom says, I think
there's more than that that one council
member involved. Uh the so-called
independent investigations into
allegations raised by Jason against
council members did not address all the
issues raised in Jason's letter. The
district attorney investigator told me
her office did not have evidence to
criminally prosecate either either Jason
or the council. But this doesn't mean
that serious concerns don't remain in
the public perception of the council's
behavior. As several has requested
before these investigations began, we
need a truly independent investigation
when public with public input into what
issues are investigated. Please add
consideration of such an investigation
to your agenda. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Steve. Um, just maybe to
reiterate, the complaint was addressed
through an independent and an impartial
process. uh the claims were tendered to
the insurance carrier who then
designated independent counsel and of
course even the investigator and that's
what the law asked for and that's what
uh was handled in exactly the way it was
called for but we appreciate your
comment. Any other comments from the
room before we take another one from the
Zoom? Okay. Uh we're going to you
Walker.
» Hi. Uh likewise uh given the previous
town manager's whistleblower report,
primarily the DA determining the
behavior was not criminal extortion
while being fired for it and the
sustained allegations disclosing of
confidential information in a closed
session. I'd also like to make that
request that the council adds an agenda
item for the next town council meeting
to give a public opportunity to engage
the the council to speak um to town
council ethics,
a recommitment and a public overview of
what constit constitutes a Brown Act
violation and behavior of corruption. I
only make this request to add the agenda
item for the next town council meeting
to restore public trust, not to bring
more allegations. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you. We've already covered
that, but appreciate it. Uh any other
comments?
Well,
okay. Seeing [clears throat] none, we
will close public comment and move on to
the next agenda item, which is a
presentation from Sustainable Sonteo
County. Welcome.
>> Thank you so much. Let me share my
screen
and slides.
Good evening, Mayor Dumbosski and
council members. I'm Sarah Huard,
executive director of sustainable
Sanonteo County. Though SSMC's board
chair, Terry Nagel, is unable to be
present tonight, she sends her regards.
She was a Berling game mayor for 12
years and and council member for 12
years and like me really appreciate the
efforts that you've made to serve your
community through council service. Um
thank you for the opportunity also to
introduce SSMC's programs and consider
how we might partner in the future and
collaborate to help Woodside address
your town's needs and challenges.
Um, SSMC is a nonprofit organization
independent of the County of Sanonteo's
government structure. Uh, for more than
30 years, we've worked toward a vision
of a more sustainable future for
everyone in Sonteo County. And we're not
just focused on the environment. We look
at sustainability through the three E
lens, which includes the environment,
the economy, and social equity, which
all need to be in balance. We inform,
inspire, and empower local governments
and community members through datadriven
research, community engagement, and
policy impact.
Now, I'd like to give a very brief
summary of our programs and the free
tools that you can use to support your
town's goals. Um, we provide data on
more than 100 metrics on our
sustainability dashboard, enabling
communities to identify both
sustainability challenges and progress
that they're making. Um tonight I'll
point out a few of the dashboard metrics
that are um relevant to Woodside's
unique characteristics in the county. Um
other programs include our ideas bank
which offers case studies on proven
solutions that address sustainability
challenges
and our annual indicators report which
combines both metrics and solutions on a
single focus subject and provides
recommendations for local action.
In October of 2025, we launched our
report on the climate impact of food and
our upcoming 2026 report will be on
preserving and improving the urban tree
canopy. Uh we also recognize
achievements and inspire further action
through our annual green building and
sustainability awards which we host
every spring. And finally, all of these
programs are supported by meetings,
webinars, roundt discussions,
newsletters, and a host of other
communications that foster community
collaboration and impact.
So, I've mentioned our dashboard, which
is a centralized place for metrics that
help councils and community members
assess local needs, plan solutions,
write grants, and track progress. It
includes data across several categories
such as climate action, housing,
transportation, natural environment and
demographics to name a few. Uh we
regularly update the data to ensure that
the information stays relevant. And as
you can see here in the graphic, each
city appears on the map and you can
click on the city to select it and see
that how the trend line on the right um
is highlighted automatically. You can
also click on multiple cities and
compare their historical trends side by
side and share and download the selected
data as an image and a CSV file. Um, our
reputable data sources are listed in
that yellow box and include things like
the US Census Bureau, California Energy
Commission, PG&E and others.
Um, I had provided a PDF of that lists
all of the metrics available on the
dashboard organized by topic. The
metrics in bold are actually available
at the census track level. And I know
you have a very packed agenda, so I'm
going to run through just a handful of
metrics that might be of interest to
Woodside and invite you to take a closer
look later. Um, one is emissions from
food consumption per capita, which has
decreased substantially in the last 15
or 20 years, but is also a little over
the county average. Um, urban tree
canopy, no surprise to you, you are
among the very highest in the county.
Uh, related to that, we also find that
the risk of wildfire is much higher
here. And there may be some things that
we can do to help reduce that risk.
Similarly, expected annual loss from
wildfire is one of the data points that
we have in the dashboard.
Um, also interestingly, we have some
data related to English speaking. Uh,
those that speak English less than well,
it's a very low number in Woodside.
Your um, PAL Envirro screen score is
also low, which is a positive thing. It
means that you're at a lower risk for
communities having environmental
challenges.
Uh we also indicate progress toward
low-income housing goals and you are
making progress for them but haven't yet
met the arena goals.
We include progress toward very
lowincome housing goals as well.
And soon we'll be incorporating a new
dashboard feature which is a
downloadable report for one city's
metrics. Uh you might be able to see
across the bottom of the screen there
that we have tabs for demographics,
housing, economic security, climate
change mitigation and adaptation, tree
canopy, and community vulnerability.
So, the report was designed with the
input of community groups to help assess
progress and support communications and
funding requests. And we hope that
you'll be able to find it useful in your
own work.
I want to invite you to review these
tools and resources. Uh, subscribe to
our monthly sustainable cities
newsletter, which is targeted toward
council members and city staff.
participate in and promote upcoming
events and email me with any questions
or uh successes that you would like to
share. I thank you again for your time
tonight and I look forward to our future
collaboration. If you have time this
evening, I'd be happy to respond to any
questions that you have now.
>> Wonderful. Thank you. Any questions from
council
or the public?
Well, we'll just thank you for your
presentation and all your efforts to
bring the data and the dashboard and uh
to communities like ours in terms of how
we can do a better job on the
environment and housing. I thought that
was a great dashboard on housing, by the
way. I don't I always wonder how we're
doing versus everybody else in the
county. So, we'll definitely check that
out. So, thank you.
>> I hope we work together in the future.
>> Thank you so much. Thanks for coming
down,
>> Sarah.
>> Okay, moving on to the consent. So, all
items on the consent calendar are
considered to be routine and will be
approved by one roll call motion unless
a request is made to remove an item. Is
there any item that any member of the
council would like to remove for further
discussion?
Is there any item the public would like
to have removed?
Okay, moving right along. Can we get a
motion to approve all six items on the
consent? So moved.
>> Second. Okay. Council member Aberish,
>> yes.
>> Council member Brown,
>> yes.
>> Council member Gold,
>> yes.
>> Council member Wall,
>> Mayor Donkowski,
>> yes. Thank you.
>> Okay, moving on to old business. So,
tonight we open up with item A, which is
a continuation of the public hearing on
the appeal for the proposed project at
10 Still Creek Road. We do want to thank
everybody for giving us the opportunity
to um process all the public comment and
review all the submitted documents. It
makes a big difference. So, uh, as
stated, we have closed public comment
and we're going to be opening up, uh,
with council deliberations. So, in terms
of council deliberations, the way we're
going to go about this is, uh, uh, we
have to start with setbacks here. Uh,
and we're going to just go and find out
if there are any findings that council
members cannot make. And then depending
on how that plays out, we could focus on
deliberations if necessary
uh around any contested issues before
moving on to the next entitlement. And
ultimately we'll wish to get a motion to
approve, deny, or to approve with
conditions. So that's the process. So I
think we'll just kick things off. This
is on the setbacks. Um is there anyone
that disagrees with the findings? And
maybe Dick will just start with you and
we'll move left to right tonight. Uh,
are you able to make the findings on the
setbacks as articulated in the staff
report or are there items that you would
like to discuss?
>> No, I agree with the staff report.
>> Okay,
Council Member Wall.
>> Yeah, thank you. So, you know, after
reviewing all of the items that have
been submitted and the testimony,
um I I also um can make the findings as
articulated in the staff report.
>> Okay.
Um Vice Mayor Gold.
>> Yes. Um
so, first I just wanted to say that
there was just so much information
provided to us. It was, you know, I'm
glad we actually took the extra time to
um to to go through it and u that was
actually pretty helpful cuz there was
[clears throat] an awful lot of
information there. The setback for me
was the kind of the key issue for me. I
actually can make the findings based
upon the staff report. I thought that it
was pretty thorough. Um the other ones I
think were a little closer call, but I
think that the um on that first issue I
can make the findings.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh, Council Member
Abberish.
>> Hello. Yes. Hi. Uh,
>> this, uh, this one's been really hard
for me. Um, I've known
David and Christine. We live on the same
road. Um, I've also met a lot of you in
the neighborhood. Uh, and I've spoken
with a number of you. Um, so for me,
this has been, yeah, it's been really a
very challenging decision. Um, and
you know, for for Kristen and David, I
we live on the same road currently, and
they're great neighbors. Um, they come
out uh for road work days. Uh, they
always help. They put up their house to
help to to host the uh lunch after the
road work days. Um, when some a neighbor
sends out an email about a tree that's
fallen on their driveway and they can't
get out, uh, David and Christine showed
up. Kristen showed up uh, with
chainsaws,
met them there. Um, they're always
there. And so
that's been my experience with them.
I've had lunch with them. I've eaten at
their house. Um, they were very
supportive. uh um when I was campaigning
all all the time and I I genuinely appreciate them as people. Um
so when this came down and I started
hearing that um it was basically
uh
the them on the one side and
[clears throat] basically every the
entire neighborhood on the other. I
thought what what is happening? How how
can this happen? you know, this is very
different than my experience with them.
Um, and so, you know, and I know for
Kristen, it's uh a very personal issue.
Um, I know her family's owned the
property for a long time, and this is,
you know, it's been a dream of hers for
a very long time to develop this
property and to have her family live
there with her. Uh, and so
I can appreciate that. And I think it's
her right to be able to to build a home
and to be happy in it on her property.
Um
uh with all that taken um when I went
out to the property for the first time
and I saw the um
the flags and the poles and the lines um
it made a little bit more sense to me on
why there was so much conflict. Uh it is
it's it's a large property and it's a
large development and it's very close to
the road and um and it's on both sides
of the road and so I could start to see
uh you know the the difference of
opinion and I could see you know and I
understand where she's coming from and I
also understand where the neighborhood's
coming from. Um, and I can tell you that
my neighborhood on Grand View, we've had
the same conflict that occurred with the
Peterson property that some of you may
have heard of. It's a uh
um it was a small lot with on a steep
slope and there was a lot of push back
and from the neighborhood and he handled
it all wrong. I would say he sued the
entire neighborhood, pretty much all the
properties. And so it started with
litigation and the neighborhood sued him
back and I wasn't part of that
litigation, but most of my neighbors
were and the neighborhood won. So he was
not allowed to build property is still
undeveloped.
Um, and there's a lot of anger and
frustration from my neighborhood with
the town council for approving it and
just with the whole situation. Um, and
so here I tried as best as I could to
take a step back to look at it from a
neutral perspective. Um,
and um, and before I get into that, I I
would strongly encourage because it
sounds like the council it doesn't
really matter which way I vote. Um,
there's already three
uh, yeses it sounds like. So, but I I I
would encourage everyone to please
mediate. Try if you can to to find a
solution because uh I'm a litigator.
I've done it. I've done it for quite a
while. It's always hard. It's always
stressful on the parties and ultimately
the only real winners are the lawyers.
They make a bunch of money from the
litigation. Uh, but it's exhausting
and, you know, and I I would hate to see
you, you know, either get this house
built and then move in and still have
all this conflict with neighbors. Um,
and or, you know, you you spend a lot of
money, go through litigation and end up
like Mr. Peterson and have it all and
have to start back at ground zero. Um
and so I would encourage both sides to
really seriously consider mediation, see
if there's some kind of compromise you
can work and um and if I can be of any
assistance to anybody in that, I would I
would very gladly do it. Um and so then
so looking at I tried to just be very
objective in looking at the the
requirements the standards. Uh and so
for me specifically for the setback
exception
um I felt that the first requirement I
could not personally find it um that
there was no alternative and
specifically because of the detached ADU
on the other side of the road which I
didn't think it's not really part of the
home dwelling that what I understand you
know the the main unit and then the
family um your parents you [snorts] know
unit and that would just be kind of an
extra Uh, and I I think it might go a
long way to, you know, compromise with
that piece with the with the neighbors.
I I don't know. Um, so maybe something
worth exploring. But for me, I couldn't find for number one. And then
requirement number five under that same
uh section.
For me, I read that as being
specifically a place to protect the
interests of neighborhoods and
neighbors. And it feels like that the
showing that we have here and that we
had two weeks ago um tells me that there is a lot of uh push back and
frustration from the neighbors. So I
think that's specifically what it was
created for. Um
and again I would just I would encourage
everybody to seriously think about
mediation scheduling a mediator. I'd be
happy to help you find one. And if
there's any if there's openness, I I'd
be happy to help you work uh together,
you know, any any way I can. So,
that's that's where I'm at. Okay.
>> Thank you. Um and I too can uh make the
findings that are uh articulated in the
staff report. And um you know, for me
it's uh you know, why do you have
exceptions and variances? It's in
addition to privacy and conformity, it's
uh provides some flexibility when you
have a difficult to uh build situation
and the strict rules don't apply. And um
I do think that you know 1B is is well
said um in terms of the natural
topography and contours of the land but
also the constraints and the distance to
other properties and the original home
site uh in the plot map and the
limitations on 50% slopes and the
significant grading costs and so forth
and even the the setback itself is just
I look at it as an incremental
encroachment a little bit you know uh
maybe 15 or 20% of the property line not
the entire line. So uh I can fine for uh
the setbacks. So that's where I am on
that. So from a straw pool point of
view, we have a pretty good sense on
setbacks. Um
why don't we move on for a second and uh
we have maximum residence size and um
formal design. Formal design. Can folks
make for the formal design? Um if you
can't make setbacks, you can't make
formal design obviously, but um
where are we on formal design? Anyone?
You want to start left or right again?
Okay.
>> Start same place I was on the first is
that I I agree with the um staff report.
I didn't see any any issue with the
formal design.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> I can als
I assume
no to put where's my Yeah, it's kind of
by default. Got it. And I can as well.
And then maximum resonance size. Uh,
we'll just do the same thing. Council
member Brown.
>> Same. I agree with staff.
>> Same.
>> Gold.
>> This one was a closer one for me. I can,
but it's um was definitely the closest
call for me.
» Did you want to discuss that at all or
No.
>> Okay.
if I would actually be fine with the the
size if uh if it wasn't for the specific
location.
>> Okay. And
likewise uh so I think what we're
hearing is we are in a place to make a
motion um and we have to make a motion I
think pretty tightly uh tied to the
resolution. Um is there somebody that
would like to make that motion?
She does.
» Um before we make the motion, can we
deliberation? Sorry. Yeah. I think
sorry.
>> Yeah. I just wanted to reflect on this
process here a little bit because
>> um you know echoing a lot of what Hassan
said like this I can just tell there's
so much emotion here. Um we rarely have
council meetings where so many residents
show up. they participate in the process
and so thank you for doing that. Um it
really means a lot. It really helped us
come to our conclusion. Um there was a
lot of information provided that was all
very useful. Um this was a really tough
call and um I would double down on
Hassan's comments um around trying to
find a resolution that's m that's not
just necessarily latigious. Um it would
you know I think success here you know
would look like um a neighborhood that's
that finds its way to to resolve this
and for people to come together and um
so I I hope I hope something like that
can happen. Um but just wanted to say
you know I I could just tell there there
is a lot of emotion and a lot of um you
know a lot of stakes involved here and
we I just wanted to recognize that. So
thank you
Well said.
>> And I don't mean anybody else want to
say anything
>> other further deliberations, comments.
>> Okay.
Um with that, I will do my best to
make a motion. So, um, I move to approve
a resolution of the Woodside Town
Council on appeal approving ASRB
202250017
formal design review of project XMAX
20225-0010,
a maximum residence size exception and
XC2025-001,
a setback exception to construct a new
main residence with an attached garage
junior accessory dwelling unit and one
attached accessory dwelling unit, one
detached ADU and associated site
improvements on a vacant lot located at
10 Still Creek Road.
>> Second.
>> Council member Alberish,
>> no.
>> Council member Brown,
>> yes.
>> Council member Gold,
>> yes.
>> Council member Wall,
>> yes.
>> Mayor Donowski,
>> yes.
» Thank you all.
Um,
okay.
Moving on. Um, new business item B,
license plate readers. Melissa.
>> Thank you, Mayor Donowski. Before the
council this evening is the quarterly
report from the Sanonteo County
Sheriff's Office regarding the use of
automated license plate readers, ALPRS
for January 2026 to March 2026. Per the
ALPR usage and privacy policy on a
quarterly basis. The town manager is to
make a report to the town council which
includes a data audit from the sheriff.
randomly selects at least 10
detection browsing inquiries to
determine if each inquiry meets the
requirements of the town's ALPR policy.
I have reviewed the quarterly report
from the sheriff's office and determined
based on the information provided by the
sheriff's office in the quarterly report
that the use of the ALPRs in Woodside is
compliant with the town's ALPR policy.
Attachment three to the staff report
contains the town manager audit.
Sergeant Nick Borano is in attendance
this evening via Zoom to answer any
questions the council may have about the
quarterly report. At the February 10th,
2026 Town Council meeting when the last
quarterly and annual reports were
reviewed, the town council directed
staff to explore potential vendors to
conduct annual audits of the use of the
flock safety ALPR system installed in
Woodside. Staff is seeking a direction
from council on whether to prepare for
council review and approval a request
for proposals RFP for ALPR auditing
services of the flock safety ALPR
system. The RFP scope of work could
include an audit of the reason for
search log external sharing audits and
data deletion verification. If the
council wishes to issue an RFP, a draft
would be brought back to the council
before issuance. That concludes my
report and I would be happy to answer
any questions. Thank you. Thank you.
Questions for Melissa or uh Sergeant
Nick?
>> Uh yes. Uh have there been any any
reports of misuse of the data by anybody
in Woodside?
>> There have not. To my understanding, I'm
trying to make Sergeant Brano a
panelist, but it's not led me. Jen,
could you
So what you're saying is that we have no
evidence of any any problems.
>> That's correct. From my review of the
sheriff's report, I do not see a misuse
and Sergeant Barono can confirm.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Hi.
>> Good evening everyone. Uh, no, there has
not been um any signs of any mis misuse
with the the software.
[clears throat]
>> Any other questions?
>> Um, so Melissa, you and I talked a
little bit before the meeting um about
um what an RFP could look like and um
we've been emailing back and forth about
some potential uh vendors and I know you
did some outreach. Sounds like um Palo
Alto could maybe could you just share
what you learned about Palo Alto?
>> Sure. PaloAlto uh explored the third
party audit and they reached out to
Baker Tilly. Uh PaloAlto uses Baker
Tilly for their independent they're
their independent auditors and when they
asked Baker Tilly if they would be able
to perform a third party audit of the
Flock system, a conflict was discovered
because Flock Safety is also a client of
Baker Tilly. And so I reached out to
PaloAlto to find out some more
information if they will be putting out
an RFP. I did not receive a call back.
Um I did some additional looking on
their website. I did not find an RFP has
been drafted. Uh they had a policy
subcommittee in meeting in March and I
had didn't see any update since then
since that conflict was was raised.
» Mhm.
>> Can I ask a question?
>> No. No. Just a second. As soon as we're
done, we're about to close. Any other
questions from council?
>> Well, now you can, sir. Welcome. Please
come on up. Public comment is now open
on license plate raers.
>> AJ Costa, 13 Sunrise Drive, but what's
the benefit of of the license plate
readers? Is there a specific reason they
put them up? I'm not against them, but
I'm just kind of curious. What kind of
data do they collect? And what are they
really for? Can anybody explain that to
me? Sure.
So, uh, in 20 in 2023, the town council
approved an agreement with Flock Safety
to install 20 cameras throughout various
locations in town. Uh it captures data
for the license plate uh make a model of
the car color and the sheriff's uh the
sheriff's department uh manages program
on behalf of the town the town's data
through the flock system and the
sheriff's office of Sanonteo County can
use the system to search for very
specific terms in the town's ALPR usage
policy. And me one second. I'll pull up
to this. I had it here earlier.
Um,
so they s they allowed to search for
very specific uses to assist in
identifying and investigating crimes
against persons and property to locate
missing children, adults, andor elderly
individuals, including in response to
Amber alerts and silver silver alerts.
To locate stolen, wanted, and/or other
vehicles that are the subject of an
investigation. To assist in gathering
evidence to identify, apprehend, and
prosecute criminal offenders. To respond
to emergency events. To locate and/or
apprehend individuals subject to arrest
warrants. To locate victims, witnesses,
and suspects associated with an
investigation.
Or to check either manually or automated
for license plate data appearing on
active hot lists.
Okay,
>> that's all I want to know. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Curious.
>> All right. Thank you.
>> Appreciate it. Thank you. Moving on to
the Zoom room. Um, Mr. Wells,
» it just disappeared, took his hand down,
it looks like.
>> Can you hear me?
>> Okay. Yeah, we got you. Um,
one one interesting use case of data and
could maybe be under the umbrella of
audit or use of
uh the flock safety system is the one
thing we're not utilizing that flex
safety does offer is traffic analytics.
So that gives you vehicle class types.
It gives you speed information between
two points, you know, between two
cameras. It gives you
analytics on when the traffic is
occurring. Obviously, we have a lot of
we have a distinct weakened problem and
rather than just kind of using, you
know, anecdotes, you can actually have a
datadriven
enforcement regime and have a lot of
insights that we currently are not
using. I'm not sure exactly how it's
priced, but it is another use of flock
safety that could be very beneficial to
the town.
That's all.
>> Thank you. Uh, Sergeant, uh, do you have
any thoughts on the expansionary pack
that was just mentioned?
>> Yeah, it is the date of you're
collecting it either way. Um,
so it is a, you know, I do know we do
have a weekend issue. Um,
Woodside's unique as far as the flow
that comes in. There's only a couple
ways into town. So, um, that's obviously
completely up to the town and how you
guys would want to utilize it. It
wouldn't be
beneficial outside of a I guess traffic
enforcement data collection point for
the sheriff's office. Um, you know, on
when to staff it, but again,
um, you guys, we're already staffing the
town according to the contract with the
sheriff's office right now. So, I don't
know how much more that would change. Um
we do have some success stories um with
Flock um this quarter actually as of
recently is uh three days ago um that I
did want to highlight. Um as you all
know in February and March of 2026
there's some copper thefts. Um that case
was solved and arrest was made um solely
due to flock. Um and then on earlier
this month on the 13th of May, um there
was a stolen vehicle reported in town
and just to kind of capture how well
Flock worked in the situation. The
vehicle was reported stolen at 1:50 p.m.
It was recovered um by 2:30 and we had
two people arrested by 3:30 in uh in the
city of Redwood City associated with
that stolen vehicle. Um, as of the 23rd,
there was a reporting of uh someone
shooting in the area um off of Trip
Road. Um, utilizing ALPR data and in the
flock data, um, several investigative
leads, including uh um possible suspects
have been um our investigators have been able to
use that data for that information.
» Good to hear. Thank you. Uh, moving on
to um Isa.
Sorry.
>> Hi, Mayor. Can you guys hear me? Hi.
Yeah, we can.
>> Thank you. Sorry for not being there in
person. Um, I apologize. My wife is
feeling ill, so I'm watching my boys.
Um, you guys know my position on this. I
will continue to show up every single
time or call in like today. Um, I think
I' I've come around to the opinion that
Flock itself is a singularly awful
company. They are absolutely
untrustworthy. the more information and
news that comes out about them, the more
that that conclusion is reinforced. I
think doing business with them is
dreadful. Um, I read a snippet of David
Middleman's letter. I haven't had a
chance to read the whole thing, but I
think I'm on the same page. And I wanted
to just address one other thing that
some of the town council members have
mentioned in some of the previous
meetings, and it's a reference to how,
you know, our phones already track us,
so it doesn't matter that flock tracks
us. Well, there's a fundamental
difference there, which is a phone is
the device you choose to go purchase and
then you choose how to interact with it
and you select the companies and vendors
that you install in terms of apps, you
know, uses, etc. You can turn your phone
off, uninstall all the apps, and they
can't follow you, right? That's your
choice. With the flot cameras, we don't
have that choice. And as much as I'm
certain there are success stories,
there's all sorts of things that the
government could choose to do that would
quote make us safer, but come at the
cost of liberty of everybody. So again,
as always, I implore you to terminate
the contract with Flock. They are
dreadful. I actually watched a hour and
a half podcast I guess that he did with
the founder of Stripe, Patrick Collison,
and the founder is a psycho. He has a
vision of a crime-free city that is just
some dystopian nightmare. Um, I will try
to send it to you guys if you have have
the time to watch it. That made me even
more, you guys know how anti I was
before Rahand. Watching that made me
even more anti-flock. I would be the fan
of a privacy focused company running
AOPRs in our town. Block is not it. And
the representatives don't tell the
truth. The company is awful. I strongly
urge Woodside to stop doing business
with them. And anyways, thank you all.
Have a wonderful night and enjoy the
rest of your meeting.
>> All right. Thank you.
Any other comments from the public?
Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to I
guess this is deliberation. Are you
looking for direction on a third party
auditor search basically?
>> Yes. And then separately the council
could choose to accept the um quarterly
report.
» Did we not already sort of give
direction on
>> Okay. So, this is just a a confirmation
of looking for a third party auditor
>> that we would do a request for proposal
that we would come back to council with
a request for proposal that would
outline the terms that the town is
looking for for a third party auditor
and they would submit submit responses
um to hopefully hit all of the data
points that the council is looking for.
>> Okay. Your feedback was Baker Tilly was
not
>> uh they have a well they have a conflict
because they represent flock safety. So
I would assume they would have the same
conflict if we reached out to them.
>> Okay. So I guess the question for
everybody is is there anyone that cannot
support
uh an RFP for a third party auditor and
uh cannot support approval or acceptance
of this quarterly report.
I did a ne a double negative there
perhaps. So you also feel free to
deliberate any way you wish.
>> Just [laughter]
deliberation. Sorry. this I would like
to offer some deliberation. Um, so
I think
you all heard me ask a lot of questions
at the last council meeting that um was
on this topic and I still have all the
same questions. Um, and I have still
arrived at the same conclusion is that
it's it's incumbent on us given all of
the issues that have been reported in
the press um to engage a third party
auditor. Let me take a step back. Like
we've been we have been dealing with the
ALPR topic for a long time and I've
always said I've always been in support
of ALPRs. Um I think they are a valuable
they they can be a very valuable law
enforcement tool. So, I'm absolutely not
opposed to ALPRs, but they have to be
deployed and used in a way that does not
compromise our policy and compromise uh
our uh our privacy laws. And I have
after thinking about this over and over
again and really trying to wrap my head
around it, I have come to the conclusion
that we are we our our town staff is
amazing. They are not data auditors.
they are not equipped to you know audit
the vast amounts of data that comes in
um from the flot cameras. I mean just
you know millions and millions and
millions of records of data um nor nor
is law enforcement. So the notion that
um you know have there been any reports
of misuse this is not the kind of thing
that lends itself to reports of misuse.
Um and
um so it's you know however okay I mean
then the other point is that I think
anybody that has done 10 minutes of
research on this topic I mean any
reasonable person would come to the
conclusion that there's a big question
marks about block and whether it's a trustworthy vendor. I mean, our
peer cities, um, peer law enforcement
agencies have canled their contracts
with Flock because of the privacy
issues. So, I mean, there is definitely
an issue with Flock. Um, and I mean, I
think it's it's great that, you know,
our town staff and and our law
enforcement partners haven't uncovered
any issue, but, you know, Woodside is
just as vulnerable to the issues that
have been discovered in other
jurisdictions. Um, and I really think
that it's only going to be through a
third party audit that that if something
had happened, it would be discovered or
going forward. Um, so
I mean I just I think we would be so
remiss to just ignore all of the press
reports and the and the concerns and the
actual documented issues that have
occurred in our peer cities. um to you
know not look for you know at a bare
minimum minimum put out an RFP to find
somebody that could like look under the
hood and see if you know Woodside is
vulnerable to the really serious data
breaches that you know many of the
cities around us have experienced. Um so
you know again I my position is very
clear. Um, I think it's really important
not, you know, at a bare minimum to put
out an RFP, but I I think if we're going
to continue use using this tool and
we're going to continue using this tool
with Flock and again, they're not the
only game in town. There are other
vendors. Um, so if we are going to
continue to, you know, have these
cameras up in town, deploy this, you
know, surveillance tool, provide that
data to law enforcement, and do so
knowing that there's been so many issues
and problems in the cities around us, I think our our role as elected
officials, like our responsibility to
make sure that the town, you know, data
is you gathered and used in an
appropriate way, like the absolute bare
minimum that we owe to citizens is to is
to put out an RFP and look for somebody
that can do a do a real audit of what's
happening here.
>> Thank you. Other comments.
[clears throat]
>> I guess I would say that I'm I'm
certainly open to looking into an audit,
but I want to to to um caution
everybody. I don't want to see a
$500,000 audit. Um, and in a time when
our budget is tight and we have no
evidence, none whatsoever that there's
any issue with Woodside. We have some
press reports and issues elsewhere and a
few uh police departments have or at
least um other entities have experienced
what they say are some problems. But I'm
not ready to say that we should be
spending a lot of money trying to audit
something that we've been having no
problem with whatsoever.
Okay. Thank you, Council Member Brown.
Other thoughts?
>> Um, I thought I I recall at a prior
meeting we had discussed potentially
exploring other vendors. Um,
>> I don't remember if it was an agreement
that that was something we were all in
agreement on.
um
>> don't recall that but I will let you
know that the contract is coming up for
renewal and that will be with our next
quarterly report in July
um for a discussion. So,
uh, the last time when we got the
cameras, we put out an RFP for, um,
proposals to install the the cameras.
>> And can maybe this is a question for,
uh, Sergeant Brano. Uh, do we have, if
we went with a system other than Flock,
would you still would it could it
provide the same
service?
>> Um, we would have to look at it. the the useful tool of lock um or or any APR
I guess service would be in the network
um that it has. Um so for example the stolen vehicle report um if FL if
Woodside had an independent APR system
um we would not have the flow that we
had with the stolen vehicle. we would
maybe have recovered the vehicle because
it was recovered in the town of
Woodside. But after it left Woodside,
we'd have to go then go to a different
system,
in this case, Flock, and search Flock.
So, you wouldn't have the flow of
information and data as far as the
solving the crimes as quickly. um the
data would still be there but you'd be
utilizing a completely different
database unless
um that other vendor and I don't even
know if this exists but that other
vendor has an agreement with lock for
data sharing or something like that but
I think that just opens up the door that
you guys are trying to avoid right now.
Um but I said the useful the the tool
makes itself is the is the network um
and how many agencies every agency in
the county utilizes it.
>> Um and the information sharing and the working with different agencies back
and forth is what makes it what it is um
and how useful it is in this situation.
for perfect example was the stolen
vehicle and the flow of it. The stolen
vehicle was reported stolen out of the
town of Woodside. Within 40 minutes, it
was recovered in the town of Woodside.
And because we had a flock hit on a
suspect vehicle, we had that vehicle
located utilizing flock. We found it in
Redwood City. Our detectives went out
there and we had two people in custody
within two hours of the vehicle being
reported. That would not be able to
happen if the [clears throat] system was
split in my opinion.
>> Thank you. That makes sense. And I Yeah,
it feels like block really is the only
game in town as of right now.
» That
I had one other request uh and that's on
sort of related is I like the idea about
using it for traffic uh information
purposes. We've looked into that in the
past, I believe, and found it wasn't
available. If it's become available now,
I'd really like to look into see what
the cost is and what we can get for it
because we get a lot of traffic data
reported by the sheriff department every
month, but we're never able to truly
analyze what to do with it. Um, and I
think that uh something like a flock
could give us a database that could be
pretty easily uh analyzed to come to to
conclusions of where are the biggest
problems and when and where and who and
how do we deal with it.
Like to know the cost of that if it's
available.
>> Okay. [clears throat]
>> Uh I I I thought we already gave
direction on this. So uh but I guess it
was just a straw pull uh last time
around. So, yeah, I'm I'm in favor of u
of a a third party auditor and um based
on all the advocacy here on the council
and by several citizens makes a lot of
sense. I don't know what it's going to
cost, but we'll find out. And um
>> yeah, and I'm sorry to cut you.
>> You were just staring at me. I didn't
know you had a
>> I'm sorry. I should have read you
differently. Yes, council member. So
after after the um
>> I've got a something for folks to think
about and I'd be interested in uh the
sergeant's take on this. I actually
tried to call you this afternoon,
Sergeant. I don't you probably didn't
get the message, but I want because I
don't like surprising people at meetings
like this, but the um uh so this is a
you know it's a hot issue for everybody
and I I I think all the comments are
well taken and and Assan's concerns that
he always voices so skillfully are well
taken I think. And um but but the truth
is is that what what we're the
guardrails that we set up here in
Woodside was that we were going to do an
audit. We wrote a policy and so far it's
working. I mean they're you know the I I
admit that taking a sample of 10 out of
thousands is a pretty modest thing but
that's what we asked them to do and
they're doing it and we have it we've
yet to turn up you know that that um
we're sharing data with agencies that we
shouldn't be. So, I mean, that's they're obeying the laws that we wrote
for them, and that's fine. Um, I also
think I didn't actually remember
what uh council member Aberish, the
sergeant were just talking about, and
that is that the beauty of the flock
system, I'm making air quotes here, is
that it's integrated throughout so many
communities, and you could do it. I
still remember at the very first
meetings that we had was that a lot of
people think that it's just contained
within Woodside. In other words, there's
a crime within Woodside. Did the flock
cameras capture the criminal? We capture
criminals here that committed crimes in
Oakland or in St. Louis or somewhere
else. And they they capture people in
other cities. Well, the sergeant just
mentioned one that happened last week in
other cities that were committed here in
Woodside. It's the integration of them.
Um that's really the again with air
quotes the beauty of the system that it
can track people in other areas. And we
have I remember uh talking with um uh
the chief in Hillsboro about how they
caught a criminal at the Hillsdale Mall
that had just comm you know in um uh I
think that's San Monteo if I'm not
mistaken.
That's right. Um that had committed a
crime in Hillsboro in in u Hillsboro and
um that's sort of the way the system
works. Um but I do think that the
auditing that we have in place now is
insufficient. I do agree with the third
party auditor by the way. I'm against
using this for any other reason than
what we have now. The narrow reason for
law enforcement I think is why we did
it. Not for speeding and not for you
know other other activities. I think
that um we should just sort of uh stick
to what we originally went through.
That's my my opinion. But the proposal
that I have, I actually wrote this right
after um Jason had given a previous uh
um audit report on this thing. And if
I'm not mistaken and and the sergeant
can correct me if I'm wrong, the data
that you get every quarter is exported
onto an Excel spreadsheet with I think
it's like seven columns. And the columns
are the, you know, the number, the
agency that requests it, the requesttor,
which is some redacted or disguise
somehow, the reason for it, etc. There
were like those are the columns because
that's what we asked them to audit. And
then you choose out of those several
thousand 10 at random, and you look at
them to make sure that they comply with
our policy. I think that's the way
it's done. So, you have this Excel
spreadsheet. So, I mean, I'm not a
wizard on Excel, although I have to
admit, I'm actually pretty good. But but
the but on an Excel spreadsheet, all you
have to do is sort by the agency.
So, instead of picking 10 at random, I
can propose a 100% audit that he can do
with the click of a mouse once, and that
is just sort the column on agency, and
they'll be alphabetized, and they should
almost all be Sano County Sheriff's
Office. There should be some for the San
Monteo Police Department and some for
the Redwood City Police Department. If
there's any other names on that, we're
not in compliance. And that's 100%. We
will reveal every single agency that's
on there. So, that's actually easier
than the current audit process, which is
10 out of 5,000 or whatever it is every
single quarter. We could do a 100% audit
simply by sorting on the agency
requesttor column and alphabetizing it
and taking a look at who's there and all
I need back because this is the key
element for us. It's we want to make
sure that let's be frank about it. ICE
is not accessing our information. That's
kind of what this is about and I'm
perfectly fine with that. So I um and I
concur with the with the u reservations
that we have about that. We're a little
bit less concerned that Redwood City
Police are doing it and was it a valid
reason and who was the requesttor and
what was the result of that? Uh we we
sort of I I I think that um there's a
certain trust that we have in our law
enforcement officials and we've yet to
uncover anything there and I seriously
doubt pulling 10 at random is ever going
to reveal them. But we could actually
analyze again 100% of the inquiries from
agencies and make sure that only the
authorized agencies are there literally
with the click of a mouse in a nancond
and the sergeant can look at it and all
he has to do is report back to us that
every single encounter and inquiry made
this quarter was from an authorized
agency and that should satisfy this
period. Now that doesn't mean that flock
is perfect and it doesn't mean that
they're doing things but they're not
doing it in Woodside. So, I do assume
that they or if I read the press reports
correctly, they are in violation in some
cities. I, you know, we've heard Oakland
and Mountain View and uh I forgot there
was some other ones that are there that
that's their business. And I know that
Flock's got perfect rationale for why
it's not their fault and it was under a,
you know, an investigation or it was
under some other, you know, a trial
period. Whatever it is, it's fine with
me. It they are not violating Woodid's
rules that we set up for them. and it is
being administered by Sergeant Baragno.
And so for that reason, I think we need
that. Now, there's a second part to
this. So, sorry to go on so long here,
but the but but the first one is we may
not need a third party audit. I'm all
for it. If we could get this complete
list of who's accessed the information,
that would satisfy it because no matter
what the auditor does, if they do a 95%
audit, there's going to be somebody in
this room who thinks that the 5% is
where all the criminal that's where all
the access are taking place. And even if
we find another vendor, as soon as they
go to Flock to track down that stolen
car, you're open again. There you are.
You've just exposed it to Flock once
more. So, this is a way that we can at
least assure that our data is is has not
been accessed by an outside agency.
The last thing I wanted to do is I think
we need to get a certification from
Flock that our data has in fact been
deleted after the what is it 60 days? I
think is is that is ours 45?
>> 60 days.
That is a certification that we
need. That's the belt and suspenders. So
if the Sanonteo County Sheriff's Office
certifies that no other agency with a
100% audit has accessed our data and
flock and tell us that all your data
that's older than 60 days with the
exception of the ones we know about
ongoing investigations, trials, etc.
that that are that are there and there's
handful handfuls of those that continue
past 60 days. If Flock can do that and
we can do 100% audit, I think that's the
belt and suspenders that at least I'm
hearing from folks who are so concerned
about it. We should be able to uh lock
this down at least for a quarter.
So anyway, that was my suggestion. I
wrote this to um our prior town manager
and did not hear back.
>> I think that's an impressive um an
impressive response. So, um, yeah, why
are we going to pay somebody if we could
just get the 5,000 data 500?
>> We do a 100% audit. Yeah,
>> as a list, but who who would audit that?
We would
>> the same person.
>> That's if you want a third party
auditor, that's going to be the issue.
You're going to have to
>> he's certifying though.
>> I know. I know. But I think just belers
if you wanted it. Could could that
report be generated just the agency
names of every not not the cases not all
the details but just a list of all
agencies that have accessed it in alpha
order. Uh and it could go to a staff member here it could
go to council. It could go um you know
there are ways to do that that we don't
that we could effectively become a third
party auditor by reviewing it. What are
your thoughts Jenn? Yeah, I mean I think
the point here is is to not oversimplify
it but trust but verify, right? And we
have reports that Flock is not
trustworthy, that they're unreliable.
Um, and you know, you know, I absolutely
have all the respect for our law
enforcement partners, but there's been
reports from other jurisdictions that
there's been misuse by law enforcement
partners. But I think to really ensure
that this data is being used
appropriately,
um, we really just need a neutral third
party to come in and say, "Yep, you
know, we've looked at it. There's no
issues." I think it could be structured
in a very cost-effective way. It's also
what other jurisdictions are doing as
well. I think this is the the um where
all this where all this is headed um
given all of the issues that towns have
experienced and law enforcement agencies
have experienced with uh flock. I mean
when I say law enforcement agencies have
experienced issues with flock. I mean I
think the the mountain view uh police
shut it down. I think there's other
examples of that. So, um I'm all for
making our um you know, our audit like
to the extent we want to continue doing
it more robust, but I I think in order
to really confirm that um everything is
above board, we really needed we we are
not data auditors, right? Like this is
very technical stuff. It's all about um
you know, stuff that I am not equipped
to audit at all. Um, and
it I think we just need somebody that's
skilled in this to come in and be like,
"Yep, we're all good."
>> What I'm But what I'm proposing is no
matter, like I said, if we do a 95%
audit, there's going to be a question
about the 5% that you miss. I'm
proposing a 100% audit. And yeah, I'm perfectly fine with somebody
verifying what the sergeant comes up
with. First of all, Sergeant, I I I'm
sorry that I didn't get back to you. Is
what I propose feasible?
>> So just uh number-wise, you're you're
probably looking around it is 100%
feasible. Um the way it is is the audit
report is going to that I run, you have
to run it in 30-day increments.
So for that 30 days, I'd say just
averaging a 30-day inquiry, you're
probably running anywhere between 7 to
10,000 search inquiries into the
network. So over that quarter you're
looking close to you're not at the 5,000
number range. You're more at the 30,000,
you know, 25 to 30,000 range. Um but
that column of the agencies that um
searched it um is easily able to sort it
in in that Excel spreadsheet. Um it's
also built into the privacy settings
that you guys have already established
as far as who's able to look at it. uh
search network and that's also there's
three in the column and it's the
sheriff's office road city and uh Santo
PD. So um that's I could easily run
those reports. I could easily sort out
that column for you guys and do that um
if you wanted to look at all
[clears throat] again it fluctuates each
month on how many inquiries into the
system are there. But I'd say you're
averaging probably 25 to 30,000
inquiries for a quarter.
>> A lot. I mean, another thing is like,
you know, this this audit wouldn't be
able to to verify um that our settings
haven't been altered by Flock, which has
happened to other jurisdictions, right?
I mean, Flock already told us that we
weren't on national lookup, but can we
really believe that given that they said
that to other jurisdictions and turned
out to be wrong?
» Well, one thing we've learned is that
because you can search for it's not just
sorting. you could simply search for ICE
and search for any of the issues very
quickly. Um, at least it's telling us
that maybe the scope of a third party
auditor isn't going to be that
expensive.
So,
um, and I, you know, I'd point out that
even if we changed vendors on this and
we used Acme
camera system or whatever, whatever it
is out there, their database could be
accessed by ICE, too. We just don't
know.
Well, I think it depends on
>> So, as soon as we get a report from De
Moines, Iowa that the Acme database was accessed by ICE without them
knowing, do we now look for the next
vendor? I mean, it's just I think we're
sort of chasing it here. We control the
access through the Sanonteo County
Sheriff's Office and that and that's
where I think we should focus our
efforts. I would like to get a statement
from Flock at least annually that our
data is being deleted. I think council
member Wall makes a good point and that
our our data has not been accessed by
outside agencies. Their our database
that they have not the because if it's
been deleted every 60 days the exposure
is 60 days.
>> I mean I think I don't know if you call
but I think a lot is not deleted. I
think a lot gets bundled into this
active investigation bucket. Um, so it
was surprising to me to learn that that
um
that a lot of this is not deleted within
60 days. And I think an audit should look into whether or not um
things are rightfully in that bucket of,
you know, being an active investigation.
There's a lot of nuance here. Um, and I wish I did a better job of trying to
tease out some of the nuance, but again,
because it's so nuanced and technical, I
think it's really important that we we
have a third party look at it. That's
that is that
>> I'm I'm in complete agreement.
» Okay. So, uh you think we should give a
take a vote on direction uh to accept
and also uh direction to third party
auditor RFP put one in place.
>> I think that was a motion. Yes.
>> Okay. Do we have that motion?
>> It' be one motion or do you need two
motions? One motion.
» I mean, I think the acceptance of the
audit and then voting on a third party
voting, you know what I mean? It is two
separate concepts. So, I
>> we got the time.
>> Um, but
it Okay.
>> Get a motion to accept. I'm
>> Can we?
>> Yes.
Do we have a second?
>> Oh, I'll make a second. I'm sorry.
This is
>> This was to This just to accept the Yes.
>> Uh, Council Member Aubish.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Brown.
>> Yes.
>> Council member [snorts] Gold.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Wall.
So,
um I'm going to vote yes to accept
because I do think that the audit um
complies with what we have asked for. I
think town staff has given us what we
have asked for. I think I've made it
really very clear. I think it's not
adequate. So, I just wanted to explain
my vote. Um so,
>> got it. And and so it was smart to break
these out. That's good. Uh, and I'm a
yes as well. Yeah. And the second part
is the motion on the third party auditor
RFP.
>> Uh, I move to um give the staff
direction to um draft an RFP um for a
third party auditor.
>> Second.
>> Council member Alberish.
>> Yes. Council member Brown.
>> Yes. Council member Gold.
>> Yes. Council
>> member Wall. Yes. Mayor
>> Donowski.
>> Yes. Thank you. And thank you, Sergeant.
Appreciate you being here tonight.
>> Thank you very much.
>> Take care.
» Moving on to reports, volunteer report,
anything?
>> Yes. Uh the co-ed softball league is
going to be starting uh in June and on
June 22nd. And uh registration for
current team members is going to be
going out. And then if anybody in town
is interested in starting up another
team, then they need to reach out to the
softball commissioner, Richard Mains, as
soon as possible.
Thank you. Any council communications?
Okay, seeing none, uh we will call it at
809. Thank you all.