Like our neighboring city, Methuen, which recently “got the Flock off the block,” I believe it is now Lawrence’s turn to say no to Flock Cameras.

As a student at Central Catholic High School in Lawrence, I spend a large part of my everyday life in this city. Lawrence is more than just the place where I go to school. It is a community made up of families, students, small businesses, and neighborhoods that are deeply connected. That is why I believe Lawrence residents deserve a say in how surveillance technology is used in our community.

Flock Cameras, also known as Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs), are designed to capture license plates and record vehicle movements. While they are promoted as tools for public safety, they also create the ability to collect information about where people travel and when they travel. When that information can be stored, searched, and shared across interconnected databases, it raises serious questions about privacy and accountability.

Lawrence has already seen firsthand why these concerns matter. A recent dispute involving a Methuen city councilor brought attention to how Flock's technology operates within the Lawrence Police Department. The councilor claimed that her license plate had been searched more than 350 times by Lawrence police, raising concerns about potential misuse of the system. The Lawrence Police Department disputed that claim, stating that its audit records showed only one search. According to the department, the discrepancy resulted from Flock's system automatically “fanning out” a single search across interconnected databases, which can generate numerous system hits from one query.

Regardless of which number is correct, the incident raises an important question for Lawrence residents: How much information can law enforcement access through Flock, where does that information go, and how can residents be confident that the technology is being used appropriately?

Public safety matters to me and to our community. But public safety should not require residents to give up the expectation that their everyday movements can remain private. As a student who spends my days in Lawrence, I should be able to drive through my own community without wondering whether my movements are being recorded, stored, or made accessible through a network of surveillance databases.

Methuen has shown that communities can question whether Flock Cameras belong in their neighborhoods. Now, Lawrence has an opportunity to have that same conversation.

The solution is clear: Remove Flock Cameras from Lawrence and establish meaningful transparency and regulations for any future surveillance technology. Residents should know what information is being collected, how long it is retained, who can access it, what other agencies can receive it, and how searches are audited.

I am asking Lawrence residents, students, families, and community members to join me in calling for the removal of Flock Cameras. We should demand that our local government prioritize both public safety and our civil liberties.

Sign this petition and join us in sending a message to Lawrence officials: we support keeping our community safe, but safety should never come at the cost of our privacy, our freedom, or our right to know how our own government is monitoring us.