Oregon Cities Are Rejecting License Plate Readers. Here’s Why You Should Care.

Eugene did it. Springfield did it. Bend did it. Across Oregon, cities are canceling their contracts with Flock Safety, the company behind the license plate reader cameras that have quietly blanketed American roads.

They’re not alone — at least 30 cities nationwide have deactivated or canceled Flock cameras since early 2025. But Oregon has become ground zero for the backlash.

What Are Flock Safety Cameras?

Flock Safety makes automated license plate readers — cameras mounted on poles along public roads that photograph the rear of every passing vehicle. They capture your plate number, the time, your location, and your direction of travel.

Flock operates in more than 5,000 communities and has contracts with over 4,800 law enforcement agencies. Their cameras scan approximately 20 billion vehicles per month. If you’ve driven through any community with a Flock installation, your plate has likely been logged.

What Went Wrong

The ICE connection. In May 2025, reporters discovered that local police officers were searching Flock’s database on behalf of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Flock’s policy explicitly prohibits immigration-related searches. But policies don’t stop searches — they just create liability. ICE doesn’t have direct access. But local cops do. And local cops can search on ICE’s behalf.

The abortion tracking. Texas sheriff’s deputies searched Flock’s network to track a woman who had obtained an abortion. In a post-Dobbs landscape, license plate readers became a tool for tracking people seeking legal medical care across state lines.

The protest surveillance. An Electronic Frontier Foundation analysis found police departments searching Flock’s network in connection with protest activity. A crime-fighting tool was being used to monitor people exercising their First Amendment rights.

Why Oregon Led the Backlash

Portland banned city government use of facial recognition in 2020. Oregon passed one of the strongest consumer privacy laws in the country. When the Flock revelations hit, Oregon communities were primed to act.

Eugene’s city council voted to end their Flock contract. Springfield and Bend followed. Statewide regulation is reportedly being developed.

The Data You Can’t Opt Out Of

There is no consent mechanism for license plate readers. You can’t opt out. There’s no form to fill out, no database to remove yourself from. Every time you drive past a Flock camera, your plate gets logged.

And the network effect makes it worse. Your local department might have a strict retention policy. But if their Flock data is accessible to agencies that share with federal agencies, your data can end up places your city council never intended.

What You Can Do

Map your exposure. DeFlock.me has mapped the locations of more than 76,000 license plate readers across the country. Search your city, your commute, your neighborhood.

Check plate lookup sites. Your plate number may be searchable on commercial sites like SearchQuarry and FaxVIN. Most have opt-out processes.

Register for Flock SafeList. If your community uses Flock and offers SafeList, you can request your vehicle be excluded from search results. This doesn’t prevent logging — it flags your vehicle as excluded from active searches.

Check connected car data sharing. If you drive a newer vehicle, your car may be sharing location data with the manufacturer. OnStar, Tesla, FordPass, Toyota Connected — most have opt-out processes buried in their apps.

Support local oversight. City councils decide whether to install, renew, or cancel camera contracts. Community pressure works — Oregon proved it.

Oregon’s Privacy Law Adds More Protection

The Oregon Consumer Privacy Act gives residents additional rights. As of January 1, 2026, the 30-day cure period expired — companies face penalties immediately for violations. The law also prohibits the sale of precise geolocation data within a 1,750-foot radius and the sale of minors’ data.

The Bigger Picture

The Flock backlash isn’t about being anti-technology or anti-police. It’s about a fundamental question: should a network of cameras track the movements of every driver in a community, with that data accessible to agencies beyond local control?

Oregon communities answered no. At least 30 others agreed. The question is whether your community will be next.