Residents urge Lane County to reject Flock surveillance system; local tech expert warns about data ownership

Multiple Lane County residents addressed the Board of County Commissioners on Dec. 2 to urge the county not to adopt Flock surveillance cameras, saying the systems risk privacy and that private companies can retain effective control of the data.

Denise Jessup, a District 3 resident, told the board that "greater efficiency in arrests does not warrant mass surveillance or the loss of freedom," and asked officials to "stop Flock in Lane County." Several other speakers amplified that message.

Chuck Arford told commissioners he opposed the county's potential use of Flock and argued that private data systems can be combined with federal databases to expand enforcement; he cited Palantir as an example of a private firm that could integrate data from camera networks. He said the county should not collect the images in the first place because "if the feds want our Flock camera photos, they will come and take it, and there's nothing we can do to stop it."

Rob Sheldon, a software-security professional who identified himself as an organizer with the local group Eyes Off Eugene, described specific technical and contractual concerns about Flock. He said that although contracts may state a local government "owns" the data, in practice the vendor has designed systems to retain access and control and can provide third parties access to data without the county's knowledge.

An online commenter, Joyce Peters, also urged the board to scrutinize Flock's security practices and warned that the tradeoff of privacy for small gains such as stolen-vehicle recovery is not worth the potential for broader surveillance.

Board members did not take a formal vote on the topic during the morning session. County staff and commissioners acknowledged the public comments and said they would continue to consider the technical and policy implications as they weigh any future procurement or contract decisions.