Eugene Releases Map of Flock Camera Locations, Sparking Debate
The Eugene Police Department reversed an earlier decision and published a map showing where Flock automated license plate readers are installed around the city, a move officials say responds to transparency concerns and policy review. The disclosure matters to Lane County residents because it raises questions about privacy, data sharing, and how police technologies are governed.
Listen to Article
Click play to generate audio

The Eugene Police Department on Friday released a citywide map identifying intersections with Flock automated license plate readers, reversing an earlier decision to withhold the locations over concerns about vandalism and criminal mischief. The department had temporarily turned the cameras off and said it would conduct policy discussions before resuming operations. The map was published alongside reporting from the Register Guard, which produced an interactive map of camera intersections.
City officials cited the experience of other jurisdictions that had published similar information as part of their reasoning for disclosure, and the release comes as local officials review how the system is being used and what limits should apply. The move follows wider scrutiny of automated license plate reader systems, including a recent report from the Electronic Frontier Foundation that alleged biased search justifications in some ALPR queries. The wider conversation also includes a report that a Flock camera in neighboring Springfield briefly activated unintentionally, a situation that authorities later reversed.
The Register Guard coverage also detailed conversations within the department about data sharing practices, the number of reads recorded since installation, and the potential need to renegotiate contract terms to limit sharing with other agencies. Those issues are now central to the city level policy review because they determine how long images and location data are retained, who can access them, and under what conditions cross jurisdictional queries are permitted.
For Eugene residents, the transparency step carries practical consequences. Knowing camera locations allows drivers and neighborhood groups to be aware of surveillance footprints, and it frames public debate about whether the devices should remain operational, be more tightly restricted, or be removed. It also places pressure on elected leaders and police oversight bodies to define clear rules for use, retention, and third party access to data. Lane County agencies that might receive shared data face renewed calls to clarify their own policies and to consider contractual changes that limit broad distribution of reads.
The disclosure is likely to prompt civic engagement at upcoming public meetings where policy options will be discussed. Community groups, privacy advocates, and law enforcement oversight boards will have an opportunity to examine the technical and legal details that underlie the deployment, including what constitutes a justified search and how to prevent misuse. As the city moves from secrecy to publication, the next phase of debate will determine whether transparency leads to stricter safeguards, unchanged operations, or a narrower footprint for automated license plate readers in Eugene and surrounding communities.

