Boy, some bureacrats sitting behind desks REALLY seem love coming up with oppressive ideas to potentially burden citizens with taxation. But their latest plot is pure dystopian!
The word dystopian refers to societies where technology or authority is used to control people in ways which erode freedom, privacy, or trust. Cameras watching citizens definitely fit that description: constant monitoring and a loss of anonymity.
Santa Rosa County Commissioners on Thursday, Nov. 13 will vote on whether or not to schedule a public hearing to establish an ordinance to allow speed detection systems in school zones. It’s on their consent agenda, meaning it will likely happen, which is hard to believe in a county with a supermajority of Conservative voters.
The item is buried far down as item #13 on Thursday’s consent agenda under the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) as “School Zone Cameras.”
The county is blaming the School District and the Sheriff’s Office for approaching them with the idea. Shame on any of them for suggesting or supporting it!
School zone cameras are portable or fixed automated speed detection systems which use radar or LIDAR to detect speeding vehicles and capture images or video of violations.
These automated systems are plagued with problems. That’s why the City of Milton tossed out its use of red camera lights in 2021 after complaints from citizens.
Owners of vehicles receive the tickets but may or may not be the one who was driving the vehicle at the time, leaving them to fight paying for an unfair citation. If an actual officer was present, they would be able to correctly identify the driver to whom a citation should be issued.
So why can’t School Resource Officers (SROs) issue citations? Are they not already patrolling school zones before and after school?
For example, today is Veteran’s Day, a federal holiday, yet school zone lights across the county are flashing. A SRO would know that Nov. 10 is a holiday; actually, they wouldn’t even be on campus to issue speeding tickets today. But a camera wouldn’t know unless properly programmed. You’d depend upon the third-party vendor, which makes good money off each citation, to dismiss the citation, which could also increase insurance premiums.
Concerns over how the citation revenue was used was another reason the City stopped using its camera systems. A “significant” part of that money was going to the third-party vendor and the State of Florida, per a former City official.
Our readers had a lot of negative things to say about Commissioners supporting this idea:
- Robert Leek (Milton Councilman) – “Say NO to cameras! Cameras are a cash grab and do not protect our children. Attempt to prevent the speed with higher visible school zones.”
- Donna Richards Roson – “No I don’t want government cameras watching me all the time!”
- Martha Odom (Supt. Karen Barber’s campaign manager) – “It makes a bunch of money!”
- Lyall Kress – “Nope.”
- Bradley Fish – “100% No robot policing! Its starting to look more and more like 1984.”
- Justin Daniels – “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
- Paula Wilson – “It’s both a good and a bad idea. I think the bad idea outweighs the good.”
- Sam Alecto – “Absolutely not, it is not needed.”
- Ellen Benton – “Absolutely not!”
- Thomas Guidy – “I support regular, or alternating patrolling, or I support one of the resource officers with a radar…let’s do that.”
- Patience Prence Author – “Replacing police officers with automated surveillance in the name of safety erodes liberty and accountability, exactly the kind of tradeoff Franklin warned against. ‘Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety,’ stated Benjamin Franklin.”
- Mike Hutchison – “No big brother watching I do not support this…”
- Jon Runnels – “The vast majority of money goes to the camera company. Almost everything else goes to the State. A tiny sliver goes to the municipality”
- Shannon Rice (former Milton Councilwoman) – “When those cameras malfunction you have to prove your innocence. It’s guilty until you do the research and take off from work to prove your innocent then the camera company or county will not reimburse you for your time lost from work or pay you for having to defend yourself against being falsely accused. The camera company counts on you not taking the time to defend yourself.”
We agree with our readers. Using automated camera systems is a lazy, oppressive way to govern, and we should work hard to unseat not only any Commissioner who votes for it on Thursday but also any other elected official who advocates for dystopian communities.
If you’d like to share your concerns with the 5 Commissioners, who will choose to end or move forward this matter on Thursday, you can reach them via the following email addresses:
- district1@santarosa.fl.gov (Bobby Burkett)
- district2@santarosa.fl.gov (Kerry Smith)
- district3@santarosa.fl.gov (Rhett Rowell)
- district4@ssantarosa.fl.gov (Ray Eddington)
- district5@santarosa.fl.gov (Colten Wright)
During Monday’s meeting Commissioners Burkett, Eddington, Smith, and Wright voiced support for the cameras.
