Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Surveillance Privacy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident raises privacy concerns about Flock license‑plate cameras in Wakulla County

Wakulla County Board of County Commissioners · June 5, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A public commenter told the Wakulla County commission the Flock contract allows broad use of license‑plate and vehicle‑feature data and warned of recent camera exposures; commissioners said the cameras were not placed by the board and asked staff to review the system and contract.

A resident identified in the transcript as Gervais told the Wakulla County Board of County Commissioners on Monday that the county’s contracted license‑plate camera system could pose privacy and security risks if the private vendor controls use of the data.

"According to the contract from Flock, in section 4, they can use any of the data for any purpose at Flock's sole discretion," Gervais said, arguing the system collects not only license plates but vehicle features that could identify individuals.

Gervais said there are "approximately 27" cameras at points of ingress and egress around the county and cited a recent report that some cameras were accessible online, which he said could expose people under protective orders or reveal patterns of life. He said he plans to inspect cameras and review state statutes to determine whether they meet safety standards.

Chair (speaker 3) responded that, based on the meeting record, the camera system did not come before the board and said he shares concerns about the technology. "If it's up to me, they'd go away tonight," the chair said, while urging that jurisdictional responsibilities vary and staff should review the matter.

Commissioners and staff said they would look into the contract and the equipment. The chair noted the board did not put the system in place and asked staff to follow up on compatibility and contractual terms.

The exchange concluded without a formal direction recorded in the meeting; the chair closed the public‑comment period and continued the regular agenda.

What happens next: Commissioners asked staff to review the contract and the equipment; the transcript records no formal motion, vote or directive to remove or alter the system during the meeting.