Many of the flock cameras in my city were disabled by bashing in the solar panels or damaging the camera lens. Unfortunately, flock's contract is such that the city pays for repairs/replacement

▲

rationalist a day ago | parent | next [-]

Is there an inflection point at which the city would decide it's not worth renewing the contract?

	▲	mjevans a day ago \| parent [-]
		Given the utter lack of enforcement on actual nuisances (noise / burning violations, 'eyesore' / private property abuse via trash / abandoned things / unsanctioned business actives in residential zones, petty theft prevention / enforcement) and the aggressive enforcement on any revenue generation laws that target citizens who will responsibly pay? I anticipate the apathy to continue, and the bill to be passed along as some form of regressive tax.

▲

loteck a day ago | parent | prev [-]

What city is this?

	▲	chrneu a day ago \| parent [-]
		i live in oregon and a bunch of the flock cameras have been vandalized. a lot of the oregon towns/cities decided to cancel or not renew their contracts though, so I think they just let em get broken and then didnt pay to repair them.