Cities and their businesses spend countless hours calculating how to make do with less in every area of the budget. Springfield can ill-afford to add the legal and economic costs of defending the use of Flock Safety license-plate reader cameras to their budget woes.

Eugene has paused the use of Flock cameras, heightening the number of eyes on Springfield, as the City Council deliberates on the cameras. Springfield has worked hard to build the downtown area and improve the image of the city beyond that of “Eugene’s ugly stepsister” and “Springtucky.” One only needs to stroll the Springfield Block Party, visit the Wildish Theater or drop by downtown storefronts and eateries to get a sense of the new vibe, increased traffic and economic surge the city is experiencing. 

Springfield’s mayor and the City Council have spent earnest hours deliberating on a system that, in theory, would assist in pursuing criminals. Alas, the ideal of Flock as a simple automated license-plate recognition system belies the reality of a flawed surveillance system, which is being challenged nationwide by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Institute for Justice and the ACLU. One need only have been present at the Oct. 20 City Council meeting — where the Flock Safety official insinuated himself during the public comment portion of the meeting to make a sales pitch — to understand how this company operates. 

Springfield faces a tough choice. We can all relate to millions involved in protracted, expensive legal proceedings after being wed to the ideal of marriage or a business partnership, only to find they have the wrong partner. 

Springfield cannot afford the wrong partner, future lawsuits or a possible boycott. 

Terri Pratt
Springfield