Palmyra is a town of only about 3,600 people. Yet we now have 8 to 9 advanced Flock Safety cameras covering our main roads and entrances.

These are not regular security cameras.
They are AI-powered systems that:

Capture every vehicle that passes,
Records license plates, make, model, color, and a unique “vehicle fingerprint” (stickers, damage, roof racks, etc.)
Stores the data in a searchable database for 30 days.

Can detect and log more than just cars — including other objects and people in the frame on certain camera models

Flock is continuing to expand the technology. There are growing concerns and reports that the systems are being upgraded or paired with capabilities to detect Bluetooth signals and device identifiers, which could allow tracking of phones and other personal devices in addition to vehicles.

Who can access this data?
It is not limited to the Palmyra Police Department. Once the system is active, data can be shared with other law enforcement agencies across the country. Multiple departments can search the network, meaning information about vehicles and movements in our small town can be viewed far beyond Marion County.

Security risks
These cameras have been shown in independent testing and reporting to have serious security vulnerabilities. Researchers have demonstrated that the devices can be accessed or compromised relatively easily. That creates a real risk that the same system meant to “protect” the town could be used against residents.

How extreme is the density?
Denver (a city of over 700,000 people) had roughly 110 Flock cameras at its peak — about 1 camera for every 6,400 residents.
Palmyra currently has roughly 1 camera for every 400 residents.
Our small, low-crime town is under denser high-tech surveillance than many major American cities, and the community never voted for it.

We are asking the Mayor and City Council of Palmyra to:

Cancel or refuse to renew the Flock Safety contract and remove these cameras from our town.

These systems do more than read license plates. They create a permanent, searchable record of where ordinary citizens go, when they go, and who they associate with through their vehicles. That kind of continuous tracking of lawful activity is exactly the type of power the Fourth Amendment was written to restrain.

The Founders understood that liberty and safety are not opposites — they are connected. As Benjamin Franklin warned, those who trade essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither. Once a government normalizes the ability to log the movements of an entire community without a warrant, that power does not stay limited to “good” uses. History shows that surveillance tools built for security are later available to whatever administration holds them.

A future government that decides certain political views, associations, or peaceful activities are undesirable would already have the infrastructure in place to monitor, pressure, or target people. The data is retained, shared across agencies, and largely invisible to the public. In a free society, the burden should be on the government to justify invading privacy — not on citizens to justify why they should be left alone.

These systems also create the technical foundation for something far more dangerous. When location and movement data is collected at scale, it can easily be combined with other databases — financial records, online activity, social media, or government lists. That is the same basic architecture used in China’s social credit system, where everyday behavior is scored and used to reward or punish citizens. Once the tracking infrastructure exists, expanding it into a broader system of social control becomes a political decision rather than a technical one.

Palmyra is a small town with low crime. We do not need a dense network of AI cameras that treat every resident as a potential suspect. The real question is not whether these systems can occasionally help solve a crime. The question is whether we are willing to accept permanent, warrantless tracking of the entire community as the new normal.

We still have a choice. We can reject this expansion of surveillance power before it becomes permanent. Sign if you believe our community deserves better.