What The Flock?

So, Flock cameras. We have all heard about them, but if you haven't they are essentially cameras that have popped up around the country that are LPR's (license plate readers) that track traffic and can help assist police in finding criminals and missing persons. However, they are still very much "big brother" watching us and tracking our movements. Now, what makes these a bit different than LPR's that are in police cars is that cities are using a private company's service to facilitate this tracking. Russellville is no stranger to these cameras. The city currently has about 16 of these cameras. Though they have aided in a handful of investigations and helped RPD solve crimes, the vocal citizens do not appreciate the cameras being active in the community.

Being on City Council I try to keep an eye on the community pages where people air their grievances and discuss local matters. Flock cameras came up quite a few times. I even asked on my personal Council page if people thought we should renew the Flock contract when it comes up for renewal. It was overwhelmingly (like 100%) "no". I took that seriously and submitted for the council to discuss the cameras at our meetings. There were also a few citizens who had done their own research and had their own requests as to removing Flock and not replacing with a similar surveillance system. They showed how passionate they were about this topic and I, for one, appreciated their involvement in the issue.

During the City Council meeting on October 15th, I requested that the council prohibit the renewal of Russellville’s contract with Flock Safety because protecting our community includes protecting residents’ privacy, security, and trust in their government. I felt that trust had been degraded once news of the Flock cameras started circulating.

Now, to be clear, we, as a council, did vote to approve the installation of them roughly 2 years ago when Flock was not such a household name. Over the years they were embroiled in scandals, misuse that led to police officers being fired, and citizens wrongfully detained. Certainly not what we had knowledge of when voting, but that doesn't change the fact we did approve them in the first place. Now it was our responsibility to take action again.

My main concern was the relationship between citizens and their city. Recording ordinary travel can leave people feeling that going to work, visiting friends, attending worship, or participating in public life makes them subjects of government monitoring. We risk weakening the trust that encourages residents to report crimes, cooperate with police, and engage with local government. 

I did not believe renewing this contract was the responsible choice. I would rather pursue public safety investments that protect our community while preserving the trust of the people we serve.  During the October council meeting there was a member of the community there to speak, as well as the council engaging in some discussion with the Chief of Police. During the discussion we found out the Chief was not planning on budgeting for a renewal of the cameras, so no renewal would have happened. But as a council we still voted to prohibit the renewal of them to make sure all bases were covered. There may be further action taken to deactivate them sooner than when the contract is over, but that will be handled at a future meeting if it is proposed.

If you have any questions about this or any other topic, please feel free to reach out to me! That's what your council is here for.