A routine briefing on license plate cameras turned into a heated confrontation Monday night, as residents pressed city officials over how much surveillance authority local government has quietly amassed — and how long it plans to hold onto their data.

Plant City Police Chief Richard Mills and a Flock Safety public affairs representative, Jalen Johnson, presented on how the company’s cameras work, how officers access the footage, and what safeguards exist. But several residents made clear they aren’t satisfied with assurances from either the police department or the private vendor supplying the technology.

Plant City has expanded the program steadily since 2025, when commissioners approved the first 20 cameras. By November, commissioners had unanimously signed off on 22 more, which Mills said are still being installed — a rapid buildout that critics argue has outpaced any real public debate about limits on government data collection.

Mills touted the results: 101 “positive outcomes” between January and July, including 11 arrests, one homicide arrest, one fatal hit-and-run arrest, three recovered stolen vehicles, and two missing people located. Those numbers will matter to residents who want local government focused on core public-safety functions rather than expanding bureaucracy elsewhere.

But the meeting’s tension centered less on results than on oversight. Flock Safety recently cut its default data retention period nationwide from 30 days to seven — yet Plant City Police intend to keep holding onto residents’ license plate data for the full 30 days anyway, longer than the company itself now recommends. Sixty-one sworn officers currently have access to that information, according to Mills.

Residents also raised concerns about the department’s expanding use of artificial intelligence, including a new AI dispatcher fielding non-emergency calls — another sign, some argued, of government leaning further on unaccountable automated systems rather than direct public service.

“Please, get the Flock out of here,” resident Allie Kipling told officials, questioning where the line should be drawn on emerging surveillance technology.

Aaron Pickern, who runs a website organizing opposition to the cameras, was more blunt. “I think it’s a horrible system to be honest,” he said, before being asked to leave the meeting after tensions rose. Pickern has argued residents need to scrutinize more closely how their local government is deploying surveillance tools funded by taxpayers.

Chief Mills defended the program, saying the department has policies, auditing procedures, and multi-factor authentication in place to control who can access the data.

Notably, Monday’s meeting was never a vote — the City Commission had already approved the cameras, leaving residents to air grievances after the fact rather than before expansion decisions were made. The remaining 22 cameras approved in November continue to go up regardless of the pushback.

Follow the St. Pete-Clearwater Sun on Facebook, Google, & X

St. Pete-Clearwater Sun: local St. Pete-Clearwater & Tampa Bay, FL news at PIE-Sun.com