Woodstock City Council Meeting - September 1, 2026

The Woodstock City Council held a regular meeting on September 1, 2026, at 7:00 PM in City Council Chambers. Six of seven council members were present, with Councilwoman McMahon participating by video conference. The meeting included extensive public comments on construction disruptions and renewed opposition to the Flock camera system, as well as approval of the consent agenda.

Consent Calendar

• Approved the August 18, 2026 regular meeting minutes.
• Approved warrants #4211 and #4212.
• Accepted the August 6, 2026 Environmental Commission minutes.
• Approved Manager’s Report No. 300 items:
  1. Appointments of board and commission members.
  2. Ordinance amendment for a special use permit allowing a drive-through window at 601 S. Eastwood Drive (Terrabis Dispensary).
  3. Resolution waiving bidding and authorizing a purchase agreement with Aqualitec Corp. for a mechanical bar screen and washer compactor at the North Wastewater Treatment Plant (not to exceed $238,400).
  4. Resolution authorizing purchase of new fitness equipment from Direct Fitness Solutions for the Recreation Center (not to exceed $248,038.65).
  5. Resolution awarding a contract to Gizynski Construction LLC for Dane Street storm system updates (Base Proposal plus Alternates 1 and 2, not to exceed $64,030).
• Council members asked clarifying questions on items D3 and D4 before the unanimous vote. The consent agenda passed 6-0.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Marissa (new Woodstock resident): Described repeated disruptions from construction on Route 47 and 14: 20 cable/internet outages in August alone, a $240 bill with no service, gas leak smells, and discolored water. She requested city reimbursement. City officials apologized, explained the work is a state project, and offered to follow up with the state and send a safety inspection. Councilman Seegers suggested she contact her cable company for a credit.
• Linda (former Woodstock resident): Strongly opposed the Flock cameras, arguing that council ignored public will. She disputed earlier council examples (Pingree Grove abduction—stating the child escaped herself; Walmart fire—noting existing CCTV). She criticized the reliance on AI surveillance without human oversight and urged council to reconsider.
• Mike (non-resident, works in Woodstock, Army veteran): Criticized council’s rationale for Flock cameras, drawing on his military experience to argue that trusting colleagues in life-or-death situations is different from trusting them with surveillance data. He raised concerns about qualified immunity and the inability to hold officers accountable for misuse. He opposed turning public data over to a for-profit company.
• Don Francis (415 Lincoln): Updated the council on a petition against Flock cameras, reporting over 2,200 total signatures—more than 1,000 from Woodstock residents. He read several petition comments opposing surveillance and citing privacy concerns. He also noted that Florida Governor DeSantis had ordered a stop to Flock cameras on state highways, urging the council to cancel the contract before the fee (approximately $64,000–$68,000) expires in October.
• Manda (Jackson Street): Argued that the mayor’s examples supporting Flock cameras came directly from Flock’s PR team. She called for a renewed public discussion given new information and public outcry, and criticized the mayor for stating he had already decided with friends before the last meeting.
• Chuck Courier (Woodstock): Accused the council of failing to implement adequate safeguards. He read from the city’s own policy language that “misuse … may be subject to sanctions,” calling it weak. He stated he no longer trusts the council or police to manage the system and recommended immediate termination of the Flock contract.

Discussion Items

• Councilwoman McMahon requested that the council again formally discuss the Flock cameras, citing the volume of public opposition and new developments. She also mentioned considering an advisory referendum. City Manager Roscoe Stelford explained that to bring the item back, either four council members would need to place it on a future agenda or the mayor could choose to add it. He offered to survey council members to see if any had changed their position. The request was noted but no vote was taken.
• During the consent agenda, Councilman Seegers asked about the new mechanical bar screen, confirming it would help prevent clogs from plastic bags and support the bag fee ordinance. Councilwoman McMahon asked about the fitness equipment purchase; staff explained that the city declined a low trade-in offer (under $10,000) and would auction the old equipment instead, anticipating a much higher resale value.

Key Outcomes

• The consent agenda was approved unanimously (6-0).
• The council took no formal action on the Flock camera issue, but the city manager agreed to contact council members to gauge interest in reconsidering the contract.
• The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:00 PM. The next regular meeting is scheduled for September 15, 2026, at 7:00 PM.