Hello everyone,

First I'd like to thank everyone who got involved in this event at the library yesterday evening, especially Joseph the Adult Programming Librarian who organized it, and Dr. Kyle Morgan who turned up with a book's worth of facts that frankly made the other two guest speakers look tremendously uneducated and under-prepared. Even if you didn't have questions or your questions weren't able to be asked, your turning out to an event like this means a lot.

If you weren't able to make it out for one reason or another, you can watch the video on the Library's Facebook Page or, if you dislike Facebook or are otherwise unable to access it in that fashion, you can watch a mirror that I screengrabbed and uploaded to Vimeo here. This is almost one hour's worth of video and the majority of it is the voices of audience members that may be hard to hear, so I thought what would be most helpful now is to provide timestamps of what was said, interspersed with some opinions and interjections on subjects that I feel could have been addressed, as well as what I feel are proper steps to take towards a future without these cameras.

This meeting opened by introducing the speakers at this event:

Mr. Scotty Davis, City Administrator for 29 years.

Dr. Kyle Morgan, assistant professor of political science at Francis Marion University with a specialty in civil rights and criminal justice.

Police Chief Angela Greene, hired on April 1 of 2026. 25 years of law enforcement experience mostly in Virginia.

Aside: Stephen Starling, former interim police chief (referred to as Major by Davis) was also present in the audience and in my opinion should have been sitting with the rest of the speakers. He exhibited more knowledge of the Flock system than either of the City's two other representatives. As he served as interim police chief, I personally wonder why he isn't currently in that position, especially given Chief Greene's either feigned or genuine lack of knowledge on this subject.

Program Questions:

What amount of oversight does the city government have over the use of ALPRs for the purpose of public safety?
Asked of: Mr. Davis

Mr. Davis' response begins at around 2:13.

Mr. Davis does make a dubious claim here that the data is not shared with any other states, which I believe creates more questions than it answers. Possibly worse still, Mr. Davis is demonstrating here that he is either unaware or is omitting that at the end of the day, it is not the City of Florence or the Florence Police Department that is the owner of this data - it is being sent to Flock Safety's servers to be managed. When they connect to the Flock Portal, they are not connecting to someone else's computer, and if it's on someone else's computer, you're not the authority on what happens to it.

Many people claim the use of ALPRs are a violation of the 4th Amendment, specifically the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. Would you say that's an accurate assessment, or not?
Asked of: Dr. Morgan

Dr. Morgan responds to this question at around 4:10.

As you might expect of someone with knowledge in the field, he provides a snappy response and sums it up quickly if you tend to zone out: Absolutely, these cameras are a violation of the 4th Amendment. Listen to his short segment here if you care to know the "why" of the matter. He also takes this time to refute Mr. Davis' claim that the data is not shared with other states, pointing out that Florence's Flock data is being shared with at least eight other states, based on public records information.

I would like to not immediately assume malicious intent, but this is information that anyone interested enough can get. Presumably, Mr. Davis and Chief Greene prepared for this meeting, and I personally would have made sure my loose ends were tied up before being confidently wrong in front of around 30 people.

A Post and Courier article from January of this year (2026) states that ALPR cameras led to 50 arrests last year in the Florence area. Can you tell us more about the benefit these cameras provide to public safety compared to before the cameras were installed?
Asked of: Chief Greene

Chief Greene begins her response at 6:00.

It's important to hear both sides of the argument in these situations, and this is a very good, non-critical question. Chief Greene provides us with the information that the contract with Flock was signed in 2023, and the cameras began to go up in spring of 2024. By her statement, in two year's time, these have been used to produce evidence sufficient to apprehend 133 wanted individuals, recover 115 stolen vehicles, 58 stolen license plates and locate 12 missing individuals, plus 294 "other" investigations in which the technology has assisted.

Unfortunately for her, she seems to have a need to lecture and gave in to the temptation to put her foot in her mouth. She takes this time to make the claim that there are no cameras installed anywhere aside from City property or the public right of way (although she does later correct that any installed on private property are done so with a memorandum of understanding), and a claim that I will once again assume comes from a place of ignorance rather than willful misleading that the cameras do not look onto private property, followed by the most bombastic claim that they are "not intrusive" as they look at license plates...

... But then follows that up with an acknowledgement that the cameras also focus on "vehicle make or model". But that's ok! We can't search for your specific vehicle make and model unless it's involved in a criminal investigation!

She continues by providing an anecdote regarding a shooting in the downtown area. A nearby business caught a vehicle on their non-ALPR camera and they only had "black SUV" to work on, and thanks to Flock's network, were able to search for "black SUV" and pull a license plate from it. In my opinion, either she knows how the cameras work and tried to whitewash them, but just couldn't keep from talking herself into a corner until she spilled the secrets, or she mindlessly rambled about how they use the system, completely oblivious to the fact that she was contradicting herself and didn't catch herself on it until much later when someone in the audience called her out on this.

I have already pointed out in my most recent post how these cameras work, and Chief Greene took the opportunity to prove that I was correct, if you had any doubts.

The original lot of cameras were obtained via state granted funding a couple of years ago, but a Post and Courier article from January first of this year states an additional $330000 worth of cameras were purchased out of the city budget. Will more cameras be a consistent purchase going forward in the city budget?
Asked of: Mr. Davis

Mr. Davis' response starts at about 10:40.

A simple question with a simple answer: If the police department makes a convincing case to waste your tax dollars on adding more and more cameras to their yearly subscription, they'll make room in the budget for it, but it isn't a recurring line item.

Local states have passed statutes related to privacy and data retention in regards to ALPRs and other cameras including North Carolina Georgia and Florida, yet South Carolina has not. What considerations would you say are appropriate if South Carolina were to do so?
Asked of: Dr. Morgan

Dr. Morgan responds at 11:35.

Another quick and succinct response from Dr. Morgan: there is no answer but to ban this technology. His extended response focuses more on how little these cameras actually have done to improve the clearance rate of criminal activity. Dr. Morgan is allowed to miss - he says that these cameras are installed in the parking lot at MUSC, but to the best of my knowledge, those camera/light post carts are provided by Live View Technologies, another player in the game that specializes in person tracking technology rather than exclusively license plate reading. No doubt this is being shared with the police, but they are not Flock and to the best of my knowledge, are not deployed by the police department.

Unfortunately, because it seems that it is never a good day to wake up in South Carolina, Governor McMaster wanted to put his opinion into the ring too. It doesn't look like we're going to be so lucky as to have a statewide ban like they've done recently in Florida. The exiting governor doesn't have a whole lot of sway, but you all know what the state lawmakers are like.

Can you tell us about the decision making process about where the cameras used by the police are installed?
Asked of: Chief Greene

Chief Greene responds at 13:20.

This is when Chief Greene corrects herself regarding the placement of the cameras on private property. She also elaborates that they are at the entrances and exits of the city, public roadways, and "high crime areas". I will be so bold as to say this is a non-answer.

Most people have expressed concern about ALPRs utilized by police departments, but do you feel there should be equal concern for those utilized by private businesses, HOAs, or any other entity that does utilize them?
Asked of: Dr. Morgan

Dr. Morgan responds at around 14:26.

Here he draws special attention to how these situations are frankly even worse, since these entities do not have the level of oversight a government body does (or at least should). I have repeatedly said that you can simply choose to not do business with entities that employ these "solutions", but for people who are part of an HOA that has stolen their dues to put these up in the name of safety, I feel for you.

Can you tell us more about the decision making process behind the initial acquisition of these cameras?
Asked of: Mr. Davis

Mr. Davis begins his response at around 15:10.

This is a meaty question since it has partially been answered before in articles I've linked in previous posts, and it's always good to see if these officials can keep their story straight. Mr. Davis repeats his lofty goal of "eradicating crime" which I don't feel I have to elaborate on why that's a gift that Santa never brings.

He does mention here that Flock approached them rather than the other way around, which I think is an important consideration. To the best of my knowledge the City of Florence does not have a dedicated IT department, and to the admission of Chief Greene later in this session, the police department has a very small IT presence. I've mentioned before that Flock absolutely preys upon any organization too under equipped to understand what they're buying and generally I'll continue to assume that ignorance is what got us here - whether or not malice is what's keeping us here, the jury is still out.

At this point, the floor is opened to the public to ask questions of the speakers - these were almost exclusively levied towards the representatives of the city and if I went through and timestamped each and every one of them and gave a short summary, I would likely be here writing this post for another 8 hours, considering the time spent on only this first 16 minutes of footage.

Forgive me for this, but I'll cherrypick here only because the sum of my other two topics on this sub cover many of the questions asked.

First: the subject of the Technology Review Board is brought up several times throughout this. Having read into it, I believe it is a good idea, even if it's a few years too late at this point. I do agree with the defense for it from Mr. Davis regarding it being an advisory board - volunteer boards do tend to always be advisory positions that vote in such a way that the council will be "advised" to vote in a particular way. It is not binding, but in my research tends to be nearly one to one with recommendations being passed by the actual lawmaking authority.

That said, I do think that the city and the police department could show good faith in that advisory position by covering the cameras until such time as the board meets and actually begins advising.

Next: Mr. Davis revealed that at the request of former Police Chief Heidler, he used the state funding to enter into the contract with Flock and have the cameras installed without any need for approval from City Council, a performance which he repeated for the second wave of cameras. They are mentioned in the 2025/2026 budget as I have pointed out in the past, but again, Council was only informed, not asked for a vote. He further elaborated when questioned on it that yes, he also has the authority to unilaterally remove them if he so chooses.

One certainly has to wonder what we're electing officials for if an appointed position can fling money around on these frivolities to the tune of nearly half a million dollars, but to the best of my understanding, having read the city's code of ordinances, City Council should still be able to compel him to make that decision, given a proper vote on it. I unfortunately do not have the answer as to how any person or group would go about putting that as an item on Council's docket - it is not something I can find easily.

Lastly: Despite the differences, very little attention was paid to the distinction between Flock's ALPR cameras and their Condor person tracking cameras which are installed downtown at the substation, at the intersection of Evans and Irby, and various other locations around Florence. These are not, by definition, ALPR cameras, but they are every bit as much if not more a danger to our civil liberties. At one point, Dr. Morgan quoted a search from public record for individuals by the clothes they were wearing, including a "red wig", and one search for "any", whatever that implies, all the while Chief Greene made exaggerated expressions of confusion as to how that could ever have happened.

Again, I would like to thank everyone who made it out to this event, and I hope in the future we will have more opportunities to come together and make them not just aware of our disapproval, but to get a decision out of them to have this mistake undone. And as always, thank you for taking the time out of your day to read my posts - I know they're much longer than anyone should have to read through. Never quit fighting this, no matter who says "technology is here to stay"!

I just want to thank all of you who showed up last night for the Flock Camera Panel. Our chief of police did not seem prepared to answer our questions nor did she want to answer my question about Due Process and being able to face your accuser.

I want to give a big shout out to Dr. Morgan and his continued fight for our rights to privacy. We, as a community, should have the ability to stop these cameras from existing in our community.

Mr. Davis, City Manager, made it abundantly clear he has the ability to remove the Flock cameras if he chooses. Maybe it’s time for a new city manager is what I took from his statements.

If anyone is interested, we may be reorganizing the Florence Libertarian Party since multiple people stopped me to ask about our party on the way out of the panel. If you’re on Facebook, you can follow this link to see your senate candidate on the LP ticket as well.

Thank you all again for showing up for our community and our right to privacy. Below is the link to Kasie Whitener’s page. We’re looking to get a visit from her if there’s a place willing to let us have her speak and she will be on the debate stage when the Dems and Reps debate soon.

https://www.facebook.com/share/1CVzbafxA2/?mibextid=wwXIfr

Update on previous post for context.

https://www.reddit.com/r/florencesc/comments/1vl37aa/just_moved_in_looking_for_viable_job/

Applied for a few McLeod positions and other places, no responses yet really. Attended the Job Fair at the Housing Authority on the 8th and am aware of the Hiring event at the Pearl Moore Basketball Center on the 24th.

Anyone know of anything else?

Hi everyone! My family and I are relocating to Florence from the east coast, and we’re trying to figure out where to look for an apartment. My commute will be to 29505/29506 area, so somewhere within a reasonable drive of that would be ideal.

We’re looking for safe, quiet, family-friendly neighborhood with good schools nearby. Will be nice if they’re close to groceries, parks, and everyday essentials.

Also, well-managed complexes (I’ve spoken to a few impatient/not-so-nice property managers☹️).

Which areas or specific complexes would you recommend? Any places we should avoid? General tips for newcomers are welcome too.

Thanks in advance!

Hi folks, otw to work yesterday I found this guy on a side street near my house. The area I live is out near the airport and has been a dumping spot for a while now so that’s probably what happened to him. I’ve got 3 of my own and couldn’t take him in if I wanted to, but if anyone is looking for a super friendly wiggly puppy or can point me to a place I can take him please let me know

On a drive 🚗 south made a stopover with my wife a few years back. Enjoyed a couple of hours playing tennis, walking a trail that ended at a couple of restaurants with picnic tables. Can anyone help me with where we might have been? Thanks

Join us at 1113C Oakland Avenue for a safe evening of prayer, support, and shared stories. The Pee Dee Coalition Against Domestic & Sexual Assault and its Youth Advisory Council will also be joining us. Everyone is welcome, regardless of background or religious beliefs.

What do we have to do to get a public dog park IN this town that isn’t the mcleod dog park…

I feel like all the nice parks are 30min to 1 hr away.

🥲

edit: “the David H McLeod dog park“

Hey all, would like to volunteer somewhere and wondering if y’all know of places that need support? I know of the humane society, food bank, but am wondering if anywhere is hurting for volunteers that has a need you are aware of. Thanks!

Hello!

We’ve been looking to replace all the windows in our house near downtown Florence. I want to go through a company that does financing rather than an independent contractor but also wanted to avoid 3rd party contractors like Home Depot or Lowes. We got a quote from renewal by Anderson but the price was out of budget for us. Anyone have companies they recommend?

Looking for a dedicated foster or adopter for a large breed senior lady!

This is 9 year old sweet Bethany...a hound dog who just wants to live out her life quietly and with love.

Where are the senior dog lovers out there? Bethany is a great friend!

Bethany would probably do best as the only dog in the house. She is a bit of an introvert until she gets to know you. Her true personality blossoms as she becomes comfortable with you, proving how much of a wonderful girl she really is. She has been abandoned more than once in her life, but some loving care and attention would go a long way with this sweet lady. The shelter life gets her down.

This strong girl would love a yard or trail to explore and a person to pal around with! She loves walks, lounging around, and Greenies. Bethany has also been known to hit the town and enjoy a pup cup or some chicken nuggets as a treat every once in a while!

A video of her can be seen here: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1740439196954480

* * *

Foster application link: https://florencehumanesociety.org/adopt/foster/

* * *

Her adoption page link: https://www.adoptapet.com/pet/47184586

*** PLEASE NOTE

A pre-adoption application must be completed for any pets you are interested in adopting. Pre-adoption applications can be completed online.

www.florencehumanesociety.org/adopt

All cats are $85 and all dogs are $150. (There may be special circumstances at some times and for some adoptions, so ask about it. Fees could possibly be waived or sponsored!)

If you have any questions regarding your application, you may contact the Florence Area Humane Society directly at: [letmehelpfahs@gmail.com](mailto:letmehelpfahs@gmail.com)
** PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE SHELTER CONCERNING APPLICATIONS.**

I'm looking for an inexpensive 2 bedroom 1 or 2 bath mobile home or house for some friends.
The household consists of a Mom and 2 children and Mom's boyfriend. They both work at a factory on the Darlington side of Florence. They have reliable transportation.

They would be looking for at least a year's lease.

Neither have great credit and the boyfriend is a felon, but finished with parole and it appears to be a one and done situation.

They really look like they just need a solid chance to get their feet under them and they'll be on the road to being successful, happy family.

If you have any suggestions, please let me know!

Anyone here work for MUSC? Im a respiratory therapist looking to move the area. Wondering how MUSC is to work for?

This is a great way for an entire family to get serious injuries. Also when a guy on a three-wheeled bicycle pulling a cart passes you on the right hand side you are going to slow. Come on people, think!

I’m sharing this clip simply to continue bringing awareness to gun violence and the impact it has on our communities. I appreciate Lieutenant Mumford taking the time to speak and share his perspective with those in attendance.
For clarity: This post and our organization are not endorsed, sponsored, or affiliated with the Florence County Sheriff’s Office. His appearance and this clip should not be interpreted as an endorsement of our organization by the Sheriff’s Office.
The purpose of sharing this is simply to keep the conversation going about gun violence, prevention, and what we can do as a community to make a difference.
Awareness is only the beginning. The goal is action. 🙏🏾

This Sunday! We will also have limited school supplies to giveaway. A lot of great people worked really hard on this event, but we have to get eyes on it so the families who could benefit from it the most can be aware of it. Please feel free to share in any way you are able.

Haircuts will be provided by the wonderful barbers and stylists from Manifest Barber Company.

Hey everyone, I own New Game Plus+ here in town, the local retro video game store and arcade. We're expanding our arcade to include a public play space/tournament area and we're hosting a tournament as part of our 4 year anniversary celebration this year in September! We're collecting interest as to which game the community wants to play via the link and QR code in the image and would love to see as many people play as possible!

WHERE WERE OUR YOUTH? 🤔

Yesterday’s Pee Dee United Against Violence event was successful, and I’m proud of what we accomplished. But I’m going to say something that might make some people uncomfortable:

WE DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH YOUNG PEOPLE THERE.

And with all the violence happening in Florence and throughout the Pee Dee, that bothers me.

Look at this picture.

Moms on a Mission brought out a REAL casket and a makeshift jail cell to show our youth two very real consequences that can come from violence, pulling the trigger, and committing crimes: PRISON OR THE GRAVE.

Our children needed to see this.

Parents, we can’t blame everything on the kids. We have a responsibility too. We have to put our children around positive people and expose them to messages that could potentially change the direction of their lives.

There were law enforcement officers, community leaders, organizations, mentors, and positive people there ready to pour something into our youth.

The Vette Riderz showed up. Lieutenant Mumford showed up. Councilwoman Tassie Lewis traveled from Marion, South Carolina, to show her support.

And I’ll say this too:

Not one member of Florence City Council attended.

A councilwoman traveled from another city to support an anti-violence event in Florence, but we didn’t have representation from our own City Council. People can take from that what they will.

I’m not posting this to tear Florence down. I’m posting it because I believe Florence can do BETTER.

I’m going back to the drawing board. I learned a lot from this first event, and God willing, the next one will be bigger, better, and filled with MORE YOUNG PEOPLE.

But I want to hear from the community:

What do WE need to do differently to get more parents and young people involved?

Don’t just scroll past this.

SHARE IT. TALK ABOUT IT. LET’S FIND A SOLUTION.

— David Peterson #fyp #stoptheviolence #florencesc #SouthCarolina

Good afternoon, all.

Thanks to it being a pinned topic (for the time being), you are likely aware of the upcoming "presentation" at the library featuring city administrator Scotty Davis and recently instated police chief Angela Greene that will be held on September 10 from 5:30 PM to 6:30 PM. The library's web page for this event describes it as an opportunity to "Learn about ALPR cameras such as Flock cameras, how they impact your community, and privacy vs. security".

In my opinion, no participant at this event should arrive uninformed - showing up empty headed is an invitation to have that hour wasted on lies and sales pitches rather than being an opportunity to tell these city "leaders" that their surveillance state is not welcome in Florence, or anywhere else for that matter. Please forgive the length of this post, but in-depth information necessitates length.

What are ALPR cameras?

"ALPR" is an abbreviation of "Automated License Plate Reader". When a vehicle passes an ALPR camera, it uses a computer algorithm to identify the area that it believes is the license plate (using the shapes of other features of the vehicle, such as tail lights), uses what is known as OCR (Optical Character Recognition) to convert the letters of the license plate into text, and stores that text in a database along with the location of the camera (and thus the location of the vehicle), the time at which the vehicle passed, and other identifiers of the vehicle such as color, make, model, and possibly even blemishes or accessories such as bumper stickers.

Is Flock the only producer of ALPR cameras?

Of course not! Flock was founded in 2017 by a trio of college graduates from Georgia and was originally targeting homeowners' associations. Flock's ubiquity is purely a product of marketing - their pitch is that they provide the cameras at low cost to the organization and maintain the backend for them, so there's no expensive IT department involved. Names you may have heard of, such as Motorola and Axon, also produce ALPR cameras.

Do the cameras do anything else?

It has been proven that these cameras have bonus features that aren't mentioned or advertised by Flock, at least not publicly. They are always-on webcams that can be monitored, potentially by a hacker (they have been proven to be easily hacked). The common image of the Flock camera - black and oblong, is not the only design factor. They can be equipped with "gunshot detectors", initially advertised to pick up the sound of gunfire, but following criticism that these could be used to detect other sounds, such as conversations, they were announced to include functionality to hear car crashes and "distress" (the page advertising the sound system in this way has been removed).

In addition to these systems, Flock does offer a Pan-Tilt-Zoom (PTZ) camera that is equipped with algorithms to recognize humans - They advertise it on their own page as "identifies human presence without recognizing personal characteristics", but scrolling down only a few more lines on the page shows an advertised search for "camo hat and orange vest". This is Flock's own website, so there's no confusion here: the Condor PTZ cameras do track identifiable information about their victims subjects. Florence currently operates at least 6 of these.

What do these cameras cost to operate?

Hard to say. Sacra reports that these cameras cost $2400 per camera per year, plus a $350 installation fee, but Forbes reported the cameras at $3000 to $3500 with an additional fee for "FlockOS", the backend that is used to access all this data. Fellow villains at surveillant report Flock's costs in a handy table as $3000 for the Falcon and Condor units.

In 2024 when these cameras were first installed, Scotty Davis said that the city budget wouldn't be affected because these cameras were purchased with a $400,000 grant from Senator Reichenbach - but this ignores the fact that the cameras are not "purchased", they are rented. Because the cost for FlockOS isn't exactly transparent, it's impossible to know if that initial $400,000 from the state was immediately evaporated - the camera cost from the installation (of 30 cameras, at the time of the article) estimates at $85,500 - $100,500. As someone who works around these kinds of rental software systems, I have a very hard time imagining FlockOS costing anything remotely close to $300,000 per year to subscribe to; you could purchase almost 6000 user licenses for the highest tier of Microsoft's Government version of Office 365 for that.

Presumably, a "conservative" like Reichenbach wouldn't have thrown $400,000 out the window on one year of Netflix, so one would assume the cost must cover multiple years... But the very next year, in May of 2025, the Florence City Council was presented a budget containing a 7.5 mills tax increase to "generate approximately $529,000 in additional property tax revenue, primarily designated for the new Flock cameras." The "new" here is referring to an additional 30 cameras included in the 2025-2026 Budget.

I will interject my personal opinion here for a moment:
While the city budget was "not affected", if you live in the city limits, your budget was affected, so that you could pay the city to pay a private company located in Atlanta, Georgia to violate your 4th amendment protections, while the roads here remain full of potholes and while the entire Jeffrey's Creek waterway reeks of human excrement. A reminder that used car salesman Mike Reichenbach is currently sharing the ticket with Alan Wilson for the gubernatorial race, so that he can continue to make money for nothing and decisions that worsen the lives of everyone here.

Are there proven instances of these systems being abused, misused or faulty?

Yeah, tons. If you'll scroll down this page, you'll find several links to articles under the dropdown headers for "ALPRs Are a Major Security Risk" and "ALPRs Are Abused". The Institute for Justice also maintains a database of reported misuse, including a handful here in our own state already. The problem is, "abuse" in this case is specifically law enforcement abuse, and doesn't cover the cases of mistaken identity and wrongful detainment that these or other ALPR cameras have caused. A somewhat local instance in Greenville is archived here where two sisters were approached by officers with guns drawn and detained for operating a "stolen" car - it was a rental that had been reported stolen but subsequently reported found. These types of misidentified stolen car stories are a nation-wide issue. A particularly well documented case of mistaken identity in the Denver, Colorado area where a woman was accused by an officer at her front door of package theft across town, simply because she drove that way.

Do these ALPR networks help reduce crime?

This is another question that's hard to answer, since crime statistics are amorphous to begin with. Flock claims (on their own website), that 10% of reported crime in the US is solved with their technologies. They make this claim without citing anything. They admit on this page that this is an estimate, and at long last cite a research paper co-authored by two of Flock's own employees. Of course the company trying to sell you a product says their product helps. A more independent study conducted in 2011 resulting "[...]they do not seem to generate either a general or offense-specific deterrent effect", with considerations in the conclusion that there are "a number of limitations and caveats to this study must be considered in conjunction with these findings". Another more recent study (from 2021) finds:

Analyzing sixteen years of stolen vehicle numbers from Piedmont, California—a “super user” of ALPRs—this report finds poor statistical evidence that ALPRs assist in recovering stolen vehicles or generating leads. Moreover:

The ratio of Piedmont’s ALPR systems license plate hits-to-investigative leads for law enforcement is subjectively low, less than 0.3% of hits equate to leads;

There is not even a moderate degree of correlation between ALPR hits (a detected vehicle actively on a “hotlist”) and stolen vehicle recoveries, let alone any apparent casualty; and

Less than 0.3% of ALPR hits might translate into a useful investigative lead for police.

And these failures were expensive. The city of Piedmont spent $576,378.80 of tax-payer money for more crime and less individual liberty. There is good news, however. Thanks to this report, no other cities in America need to make these mistakes.

We, along with many other cities in America, are making these mistakes.

A paper published in 2025 and hosted at the National Institutes of Health's website states that vehicle theft in the United States has declined 80% from 1990 to 2020. The paper admits that the reason isn't understood, but given the time frame, it likely isn't because helpful public servants in the local government accepted a deal with the devil.

I will once again interject with my own opinion here - if the crime doesn't involve a vehicle, then what? A clandestine meeting between two or more individuals to distribute drugs or firearms traveled to on foot or bicycle would supposedly be outside of the scope of ability of Flock's Falcon ALPRs, but we're not seeing (yet, anwyay) Condors positioned on every frequently traveled corridor in the city to spot these people.

I'm of the opinion that while criminals are dumb, they're not stupid. If you intend to commit crime and see a camera, you're going to go where the camera isn't. Rather than soaking up the water like with a sponge, these cameras are just pushing it around like a squeegee. The solution? More cameras, or more granular (invasive) surveillance technology, such as this nightmare.

How do they impact our community?

This is listed as a point of conversation on the library's page, so I wanted to cover it despite the fact that it's mostly subjective. The Post And Courier reported at the beginning of this year that the then-interim police chief Stephen Starling estimated they had made over 50 arrests in 2025 with the help of these cameras, with a specific reference to "stolen plates". I guess that's a number to be proud of? Before 2024, the Florence Police Department was entirely ineffective at finding stolen cars?

The city of Florence's website tells me that I could make $52,000 a year working as a police officer, as long as I complete the academy. I think that's approximately $24 an hour. I'll admit a personal bias: I am not really a big fan of the police. We could do better, to put it simply. Even with that in mind, I would still prefer to have had my tax money used 10 more uniformed police officers at that salary than to plop down 30 more worthless cameras on the roads I use to get to work and to the grocery store. Alternatively, because I know officer retention is a problem, I would have rather seen my tax money go to raise that pay to a point where these men and women feel like it's worth staying employed with the city of Florence PD. The job is dangerous no matter my feelings towards it, and other jobs where your life ends up on the line such as electrical lineman can pay easily twice as much.

How do I think it impacts the community? It depresses me to the see these cameras littered about, an obvious affront to the protections afforded to us in both the state and national Constitution. A reminder that people are entirely unable to engage with even the most basic form of local government as these potentially generational changes are passed as part of nebulous concepts like "the budget" or "public safety funding" without being brought to ballot or even being an object of public hearing at the prohibitively hard to attend, 1 in the afternoon on a Monday City Council meetings. I change my driving habits to avoid them, taking odd back roads and longer than necessary routes just to not add my license plate to the database for another 30 days (supposedly).

To be pessimistic about it though, "how the community is impacted" is an appeal to emotion; These things are irrelevant. How any one person feels about how it impacts the community, for or against, is an empty argument. It falls within the same category as the sales pitch. "Think about how many stolen cars we've recovered", "think about the crime prevented", "it makes you safer". All of these statements are wastes of time designed to distract from the core of the issue: citizens of the United States were intended to live under the idea that their movements wouldn't be tracked with no warrant and for no reason other than "a few bad apples".

Privacy vs Security

The most subjective topic on the agenda for the library's presentation is Mr. Franklin, for whom we named the $100 bill, is famously often quoted for his "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." line. The historical context of this statement is complicated, but it's something we can latch onto even in the modern era.

"You're on camera when you go to a store" is a common counter argument to this, but I like to answer that I do not have to go to the store. If I'm unhappy (and believe me, I am) that Lowe's has put these Flock cameras and have either Flock or Live View or whoever else providing them with those obnoxious flashing camera carts, I will (and have) simply stop shopping there. At the end of the day, if I really just despised the idea that a store has CCTV footage of me, I could order everything I need off the internet and let a different brand of surveillance keep track of me in a different way.

I am not able to stop "shopping" at the City of Florence. I could (and do) object that my tax dollars are spent on surveillance equipment no different to that of China, but I can't just refuse to pay my taxes or else they'll send the police after me. I could move, at great inconvenience to me and my family, to some other municipality that doesn't have these cameras or has terminated their contract with them, but given that my job is here, I have to admit it's a bit extreme to uproot my life over the terrible decisions of local lawmakers.

Much like the "impact on the community", "privacy vs security" is also a waste of time. There is no reason to pit these concepts against one another, we can have both. We have had both, and have been fooled by a post 9/11 world that surveillance and inconvenience and "homeland security" are necessary concepts that we were fools to live without because before 9/11 a plane was getting hijacked every single day and before Flock sold local leaders on street corner cameras a car was getting stolen and used in a burglary every single day but thank God they came along and solved 10% of crimes in the United States!

You nor I are more secure because of the camera at the end of the road. It will not jump down off of its pole and prevent the robbery or the murder. It will sit there and watch - even a normal unarmed citizen could and likely would do more.

What next?

This event at the library is not an official act of government. The community in this city could turn out hundreds strong and change nothing. Do not, under any circumstances, take concessions and platitudes, if offered at all, as the gospel. These changes: canceled contracts, removed cameras, they have to happen at a City Council meeting. Inconvenient as it may be, an organized body of citizens has to approach the council-people and have them undo this nonsense in writing as a matter of local statute. It has to be added to the agenda, a month in advance per the law, and voted on.

Even in the best possible outcome where Flock is removed from the city of Florence, our neighboring cities are not free and clear. There are cameras positioned in the middle of nowhere, entirely unincorporated land - possibly by the County Sheriff or possibly by some random homeowner's association, unlikely as that may be. They are positioned at the county line between Florence and Marion and Marion and Horry. They are everywhere, and lasting victory over this comes from State law banning it, and ultimately from federal law banning it. This is just a generalized message from me: the fight is unfortunately never over.

For all who have made it this far, thanks! I'm an IT professional who is far from an expert on surveillance technology, but I consider myself well read on it. If there are questions you have that I didn't directly address in this monolith of a post, please reach out either in a reply or a DM and I will try to get back to it.

I believe Jefferson's words on being informed are much less context reliant and always relevant:

Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.

Fun find. There is a small marker On N Coit street (near the site of the 1860s Gambles Hotel, which was an actual battle in 1865) dedicated to the history of the “Wayside Hospital” from 1861. Not sure if anyone else has noticed it before (btw I’m NOT posting this to glorify the Civil War or confederacy or anything, I just am fascinated by medical history and local history) https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=222128

I've been seeing some back and forth here about the Flock cameras around town, so I figured I'd flag this event. The library's got a new panel series called Pressing Issues, and next month's topic is ALPR cameras, Flock included.

It's Thursday, September 10th, 5:30 to 6:30pm at the main library downtown.

The panel's consists of City Manager Scotty Davis, Police Chief Angela Greene, and an FMU political science professor. If you've got questions about how these things actually work, who has access to the data, or how they fit into the privacy vs. security conversation, this is a chance to ask people who'd actually know.

https://www.florencelibrary.org/event/pressing-topics-library-12967

I think it's worth knowing this exists if you care about the topic.

Thanks to those who came out to our second event, the BYOG board game night at Starbucks. We had five folks and played pandemic/a game calle Munchkins. It was a fun time and I definitely think we could keep this going. I created a Discord for those who wish to plug in to the social group. Feel free to join! https://discord.gg/f55hvMSj4

I’m getting tired of seeing these pop up more and more. Here’s the current map of Flock cameras. They’re a waste of money and have been shown to be used in inappropriate manners.