Flock cameras

Said the city pays three ALPR vendors (Axon, Vigilant, Flock) and demanded permanent removal, not suspension, citing Institute for Justice data that only 0.1% of plate reads connect to crimes.

Argued 'suspension' isn't removal — a suspended camera can be turned back on tomorrow — and urged the city to follow Oviedo's lead in banning ALPRs.

Asked why the promised public briefing on ALPRs wasn't on the agenda and requested a complete public inventory of devices, ownership, data access and retention; distributed a fact sheet.

Said his young daughter is scared of the cameras proliferating around town and demanded their removal, also alleging his Fourth Amendment rights were violated in an arrest.

Warned about mass surveillance of innocent people and asked what safeguards prevent reasonable use from becoming abuse.

Called for immediate removal of all ALPR cameras as Fourth Amendment violations, citing ACLU data and documented officer misuse.

Cited error rates, misuse cases, and the absence of consent, arguing warrantless mass surveillance reverses innocent-until-proven-guilty.

Opposed both the cameras and the library closure, saying the data shouldn't be collected at all and the library shouldn't be a yearly fight.

A lifelong resident who grew up in the library, he supported any funding option and raised concerns about cameras at Merrill Park playground.

A new resident shocked by both issues, she detailed a documented case of an officer misusing Flock to track an ex-girlfriend.

Questioned who holds the Flock contract and how much Homeland Security pays, calling the arrangement untrustworthy and costly.

Cited a 71% error rate audit and a study showing libraries reduce crime, arguing the city should invest in libraries instead of surveillance.

Argued today's tolerable technology could become tomorrow's tool of abuse as capabilities grow.

Citing her tribal law background, she said removal — not regulation — is the answer, and warned of targeting of women and people of color.

Said he learned about the cameras from Instagram and fears unregulated data storage; also described the library's importance to his daughter.

Cited Supreme Court GPS-tracking precedents and reported Flock reinstalling cameras in cities that ordered removal.

Urged the commission to honor residents' priorities from two years ago and stand against both the closure and the surveillance.

A federal contractor who noted the one place he's untracked is federal property; also defended libraries as places to read banned books.

Cited a Flock executive's access to gymnastics class footage and a journalist's browser-based data access as proof of security failures.

Rejected budget 'scare tactics,' argued public safety spending is bloated, and criticized consent-agenda decisions made with an empty chamber.

The newly appointed BZA member thanked Commissioner O'Malley and warned the cameras erode community trust in the police department.

Argued the city can't claim control over the contract given 2026's track record of data breaches and technology outpacing oversight.

A Longwood resident who said the cameras simply appeared one day without public notice, which he called scary.

Asked commissioners to watch the tape and truly hear why residents fear a surveillance state, not just rebut with audits and court cases.

A 30-year resident who said the footage going to DHS/federal agencies is unacceptable and asked what happens to the $750,000 library savings.

Requested the upcoming briefing include data on whether the cameras actually reduce crime.

Raised the key question of whether DHS could add facial recognition to the cameras via software update, calling it critically important.