Voices grow louder in debate over license-plate reader technology

A sustained effort by Eugene police highlighting the use of license-plate readers in fighting crime comes as more voices — including the ACLU of Oregon — oppose using the technology in Eugene and Springfield.

Thirty-six people spoke out against the cameras at a Monday, Sept. 8, meeting of the Eugene City Council, with another two dozen unable to speak after the council enforced its 90-minute time limit on public comment.

Turnout on the issue roughly doubled compared to July meetings of the council and the Eugene Police Commission. None spoke in favor of the technology at Monday’s meeting.

Mounted cameras on Eugene streets record the license plates of passing vehicles, allowing police to more easily find and track vehicles sought in criminal investigations or when searching for missing persons. Data-sharing also allows police agencies to make use of cameras installed elsewhere.

In Eugene, there will be 57 cameras across the city, with the first installed in May, police have said. So far Springfield police have announced plans for the cameras, but none have been installed so far.

Both cities have struck deals with Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based company, to provide the cameras.

Several speakers at Monday’s council meeting expressed concerns about federal agencies possibly accessing data to enforce immigration laws or target certain populations. Eugene police have said they will only share data with Oregon law enforcement agencies.

“Any risk to our most vulnerable members of our community is not worth the hypothetical good that it could do,” Erin Kirkman, a Eugene resident of 19 years, said at Monday’s meeting.

But Eugene police say their data on arrests supports the use of the cameras.

License-plate readers have helped to arrest suspects in homicide, arson and domestic violence cases, police say. Ahead of the city council meeting, the department on Monday announced 64 times when license-plate readers proved “instrumental” in police investigations, leading to 43 arrests from May to Sept. 1.

The technology also assisted with the recovery of 19 vehicles. Melinda McLaughlin, a Eugene police spokesperson, said there was no easy way to compare the number of recovered vehicles to the same time period a year ago.

“If we were to look for the total number of recovered vehicles from that period it’s a difficult number to pin down because our database includes all recovered vehicles, regardless of where it was recovered from or by what agency it was recovered. For example, we have cases where vehicles were recovered from Portland and Redmond, also those from [Springfield Police Department], and other local [law enforcement] agencies,” McLaughlin said in an email. 

In a video statement released hours before Monday’s city council meeting, Eugene Police Chief Chris Skinner emphasized what he called the “great success” of the technology.

“We’re in the crime-fighting business, and this community is asking us to fight crime and solve crime, and we need to leverage technology to be able to do that,” Skinner said. “And this is a really important piece of technology that lets us do that.”

Police agencies in Springfield and Eugene moved to adopt the technology without seeking approval from city council members or informing the public. Elected officials in both cities — criticized for inaction by several speakers at Monday’s meeting — now say they’ll study the issues involving the technology, with the Eugene city council planning a work session on the topic. Councilors did not announce a date for the work session.

McLaughlin on Tuesday said Skinner was not available to answer questions from Lookout Eugene-Springfield about opposition to the technology.

“Now that [the] city council has established a work session, he needs to hold off providing information ahead of that,” McLaughlin said in an email.

ACLU shares concerns 

Kelly Simon, legal director for the ACLU of Oregon, in a phone interview called the technology concerning.

“The ACLU of Oregon absolutely thinks that municipalities should pause implementation of new Flock systems,” Simon said.

Simon called for cities to “engage the public and assure the public that these systems aren’t going to violate Oregon’s laws or the constitutional protections that we have.”

Skinner, in his video statement, described the technology as “kind of industry standard for law enforcement across the nation.” But he acknowledged concerns, calling it “an unprecedented time in our country, around the levels of nervousness around how we’re using technology and who can use technology.”

It’s also the first year of the administration of President Donald Trump, with multiple speakers Monday citing his aggressive immigration enforcement and also actions viewed as targeting the transgender community.

Simon, with the ACLU of Oregon, said her organization has for a long time had concerns about police technology interfering with privacy rights, but she also acknowledged the influence of Trump.

“We additionally have heightened concerns when we know that there are technologies like Flock that feed into a national mass surveillance network, at a time when there’s a president in power who would like to get their hands on such a powerful tool to control and oppress the people of the United States,” Simon said.

The Eugene Police Department has issued frequent news releases touting arrests, including of a man wanted on suspicion of murder in Wisconsin. Police have issued news releases touting less high-profile cases, like that of a 43-year-old man suspected of lighting a U-Haul truck on fire; with the suspect known, police said license-plate reader technology allowed them to locate a vehicle associated with the man, leading to his arrest.

Sarah Hamid, associate director of activism for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said it’s unsurprising that Eugene police have been talking up its license-plate readers. The advocacy group opposes the technology.

“In cities where contracts are under threat because of public outrage, you’re seeing police attribute all of their successes to that contracted technology,” Hamid said. “That is play-for-play from the playbook.”

After Monday’s meeting, Rob Sheldon, an organizer with the community group Eyes Off Eugene, said the “community really showed up.”

But it wasn’t without effort, Sheldon said.

In a statement, the organization referred to working with other local organizations, including the Lane County Immigrant Defense Network, Party for Socialism and Liberation, the Trans Alliance of Lane County, and others.

“Members of all the aforementioned organizations are active in our communities, handing out flyers and knocking on doors,” Eyes Off Eugene said in an email in response to questions from Lookout.

More than 75 people attended a rally on Saturday, Sept. 6, near City Hall opposing surveillance technology, according to Eyes Off Eugene.

While several who spoke Monday had shared their opposition at previous meetings, Sheldon on Monday night noted how others were speaking out for the first time.

“We have been working really hard over the entire summer, and our number one challenge has been just to make people aware of the system,” Sheldon said. “What we have found is that once people understand what it is, that it’s here in our community, and that it was done without their input or any open public discussion, they are able to pretty quickly reach their own conclusions on it.”

In his video statement, Chief Skinner spoke about the “controversy” related to the technology.

“Anytime we have a piece of technology that’s designed to pay attention to people’s comings and goings, as it pertains to fighting crime, people are going to wonder about whether or not it’s overreach and whether or not it’s a level of surveillance that’s not good for a community,” Skinner said. “What I would say, though, is, I would say that, you know, as an organization and as a policing organization, we have to leverage technology to do our job.”