Every answer Springdale gives about these cameras is the same letter. This is how it was written.
One resident emailed his councilman on a Tuesday. By Thursday night the Chief had published a public statement, and by Friday morning the Mayor was attaching it to his own replies. The City produced every message below in response to a records request.
- Tuesday, July 28 · 3:37 p.m. Email
A Ward 3 resident, to his councilman
“I am a Ward 3 resident, I wanted to share my opposition to the use of the Flock cameras in Springdale… As Chairman of the Police and Fire Committee, I hope you will advocate for removing the Flock camera system and explore public safety measures that do not require widespread collection of residents' travel data.”
One email, from one resident, to the councilman who chairs the committee that heard the sales presentation.
- Tuesday, July 28 Text message
Councilman Brian Powell, to Chief Derek Wright
“Chief — Seeing a lot of noise over Flock cameras. I got an email from a constituent after the news about Pea Ridge abandoning Flock. Have you been hearing anything?”
- Tuesday, July 28 Text message
Chief Derek Wright, replying
“I haven't been contacted directly, but I've seen a lot of posts on social media about it. We've had 4 cameras stolen and one vandalized. I'd be happy to have a conversation about what it is and what it isn't, and how we're monitoring how our officers are utilizing it.”
Four cameras stolen and one vandalized. Destroying these cameras is a crime and it is wrong, whatever anyone thinks of the contract.
- Tuesday, July 28 Text message
Chief Derek Wright, on the theft investigation
“Not yet. We have detectives working it. We're waiting on cell tower information to get in from the phone companies. The MO is similar, so we think it's the same people.”
- Wednesday, July 29 · 7:10 a.m. Email
Councilman Brian Powell, replying to the resident
“I am no expert concerning Flock, but in a conversation I had with our police chief last night, he talked about the license plate reader, how it is used, who can access it, how long data is stored and I am comfortable with what was explained to me.”
- Wednesday, July 29 · 7:14 a.m. Email
Councilman Brian Powell, forwarding it to the Chief
“Wanted to forward this email showing a concern from a citizen for the city using Flock as a resource to keep our city safe. As we discussed last night, there may need to be some public comment showing the extent of the usage of this resource.”
- Wednesday, July 29 · 9:41 p.m. Email
Chief Derek Wright, replying
“Thank you for sending this to me. I'm working on a statement to put out regarding how we use it. Also, thank you for your support, it is greatly appreciated.”
- Thursday, July 30 · 5:07 p.m. Text message
Chief Derek Wright, to Mayor Doug Sprouse
“Hey Mayor, with you and the council being contacted about Flock, I think it would be a good idea for me to put something out on social media about what flock is, what it is not, and how we use it. I wanted to check with you to see if you have any objection to it. It's going to generate negative comments, but I feel like it would be good to get some facts out there.”
- Thursday, July 30 Text message
Mayor Doug Sprouse, replying
“I think we should.”
The Chief then wrote: “Thanks. I plan on getting it out tonight.”
- Friday, July 31 · 8:41 a.m. Text message
Mayor Doug Sprouse, to Chief Derek Wright
“I thought your letter explaining how we are using Flock was very good. Would you please email that letter to me as an attachment so I can include it when I need to respond to a resident. I've only gotten one so far, but I anticipate more.”
From here the letter is not only the department's statement. It is the answer the Mayor's office attaches when a resident writes in.
- Saturday, August 1 Text message
Councilman Brian Powell, to the Chief
“I saw the statement about Flock. You did a fantastic job explaining. I know there will be backlash but I support you and our police department.”
- Saturday, August 1 Text message
Chief Derek Wright, replying
“I'm happy to do whatever the Mayor and Council think is best for Springdale. I just hope some of the citizens read the facts and make their decision based on that rather than misinformation. Asking us to dictate policy based on misinformation and emotion is a slippery slope.”
The Chief says the decision belongs to the Mayor and the Council. That sentence is worth holding on to — it is an invitation to bring the question to them.
What the Chief did that most departments don't
He wrote it himself, put his name on it, and published it where residents could read it and argue with it. He checked with the Mayor first and said out loud that it would draw negative comments. He said the decision belongs to the Mayor and the Council. None of that was required of him.
Cutting down a camera is a crime
Four cameras were stolen and one was vandalized in Springdale. That is theft and destruction of public property, and there is no version of this argument that it helps. It gives the answer to anyone who would rather talk about vandals than about the contract.
What the letter is, and what it isn't
It is a police chief's account of how his own department uses its own cameras. It is not a reading of the agreement the City signed, and it does not claim to be. The letter describes what Springdale officers may do. The agreement describes what the vendor may do. Those are two different documents, and only one of them is on the City's website.
The letter answers what Springdale's officers are permitted to do. Ask the City to answer the other half in writing: what the vendor is permitted to do with the data after it leaves the City's hands, and under which provision the City could stop it.
Records produced by the City of Springdale under the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act, August 2026. Text messages and emails between the Mayor, the Chief of Police and a member of the City Council. The resident who wrote the first email is not named here.