Jacksonville City Council Meeting on Automated Surveillance Equipment and Proposed Moratorium - August 28, 2026

Councilmember Jimmy Peluso called the meeting to order at 10:31 a.m. on August 28, 2026, to discuss automated surveillance cameras (e.g., Flock), their installation, data use, constitutional concerns, and a possible temporary moratorium. No draft legislation was presented, but Peluso outlined potential goals. The meeting included introductions, discussion among council members, and public testimony from over a dozen speakers.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Aaron Perkins (Springfield resident) raised fiduciary concerns about maintenance costs, urged a pause to avoid deploying technology before establishing policies, and called for clear public information to prevent speculation.
• Brooke Benur (Babano?) expressed concern over Flock companies accessing driver’s license information and questioned how private cameras were installed on public right-of-way without restrictions.
• Frederick Rudolph argued against broad collection of movement data, citing recent historical parallels, and noted that current legal thresholds for accessing ALPR data are too low (only a case number required). He described the surveillance as an invasive cancer.
• Tim Vergenz (software engineer) stressed security flaws at Flock and other tech companies, predicted that penalties for misuse would be ineffective, and suggested a moratorium that includes disabling existing cameras (e.g., bagging them) until policy is decided.
• Michael Melton (archaeologist) compared data collection to Facebook’s model and warned of risks if Flock goes bankrupt and sells its data assets.
• Ben Alcorn (construction industry) supported a moratorium as a pause, not a ban, called for transparency on costs and data sharing (e.g., with ICE), and noted JSO’s budget authorization should be scrutinized.
• Laura Harris described her 2022 car theft experience and argued cameras could have helped recover her vehicle faster, costing her over $5,000. She acknowledged privacy concerns but said tracking already exists via phones.
• Matt Hammond cited U.S. Supreme Court cases (U.S. v. Jones, Carpenter v. U.S.) to argue warrantless ALPR use violates Fourth Amendment, and questioned conflict with Florida’s anti-stalking statute.
• Addison Patrick raised national security concerns about data stored on AWS, noted a 9-month backlog for body camera records requests, and opposed all such surveillance, supporting either full contract cancellation or a moratorium.
• Jennifer Dean distinguished security from surveillance, called for clear limits on data collection, audits, and public input before expansion, and suggested less intrusive alternatives.
• Rachel Beabout (first-time speaker) spoke on behalf of her son, quoted Thomas Jefferson, and referenced a researcher’s comparison of Flock to pre-crime.
• Marshall Branick (retired Navy) warned that aggregated movement data could be exploited by foreign adversaries, especially given Jacksonville’s military presence, and compared risks to the military’s prohibition of Fitbits on base.
• Latasha Hobbs (mother of murdered son) cited JSO statistics: Flock cameras helped solve 15 murders, 17 kidnappings, 6 forcible sex offenses, nearly 100 shootings, and 172 missing person cases since 2024. She strongly supported continued use with safeguards.
• Chad Sharland (State House candidate) argued he is under constant surveillance while driving from Fernandina Beach, opposed mass surveillance, and warned of targeting political minorities.
• Albert Stern criticized Flock’s history of abuse, called it a tech company not a security company, warned of price changes and hacking risks, and supported a moratorium.
• Dragon Balloit noted cameras were installed overnight by Dish, raised safety issues (no breakaway plates), criticized lack of accountability in JSO, and mentioned Pasco County canceling its Flock contract.
• Casey Jones (South Jacksonville Beach) cited Fourth Amendment violations via third-party loophole and quoted Governor DeSantis calling ALPR usage out of control.
• Yadhira Gonzalez (UNF student) argued against compromising privacy for crime-solving, called for investment in violence prevention programs, and said camera funds should address homelessness and food insecurity.
• Robert Jeffers urged proactive rather than reactive policy, supported moratorium, and flagged AI risks.
• Andrew Scott (software developer) warned that a year-long data retention (as JSO reportedly extended) enables massive correlation, that data is vulnerable to hacking even on AWS, and that Flock’s recommendations for retention are insufficient.
• DL Cummings questioned actual efficacy of cameras, provided a case study where cameras were only supplemental, and argued that solving crimes does not automatically mean cameras were necessary.
• Sean Costello noted a camera pointed at a community pool where it could not read license plates, raising concerns about capabilities and purpose.

Discussion Items

• Councilmember Peluso outlined four draft proposal goals: (1) a 120-day moratorium on new camera installations; (2) an inventory of all cameras in Jacksonville; (3) a new public participation process via Community Planning Advisory Committees (CPACs) for future installations; (4) a petition process for neighborhoods to request camera removal, similar to speed hump petitions. He acknowledged JSO’s support for the cameras but stressed constitutional and community awareness concerns.
• Council President Helen urged a careful, community-wide debate, noting she is the JSO liaison and that Sheriff Waters shares concerns about misuse and Fourth Amendment rights. She mentioned the state legislature may also address the issue and suggested proactive measures like increased penalties for LPR data misuse.
• State Representative Dean Black (in attendance) emphasized balancing security and liberty, warning against creating tools that could enable a police surveillance state. He expressed support for local discourse.
• Councilmember-elect Monet Holder recognized the need to align benefits of public safety with concerns about surveillance and privacy.
• Brittany Norris (administration) committed to researching how cameras were installed and other questions.
• Shannon Matt Gillis (General Counsel) noted that legal authority depends on facts (e.g., ownership, location of road) and warned that ordinances passed elsewhere may not be fully lawful; she offered to research further.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken; the meeting was informational.
• Councilmember Peluso stated he intends to continue working on draft legislation and will move forward, but wants to ensure JSO can still solve crimes while protecting privacy.
• Public comment was cut short due to time; Peluso remained after adjournment to speak with remaining audience members.
• Peluso provided his email (jpeluso@coj.net) for additional comments.
• The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:30 a.m.