September 8, 2026
Whose Government is it?
The debate over Flock cameras is also a debate about self-government.
The debate over Flock cameras in Avondale Estates is about surveillance, privacy and public safety. But it has also raised a more fundamental question: What does it mean to be a self-governing community?
Surveillance technology is not new, nor is the difficult balance between public safety and personal privacy. Governments around the world have drawn that line in very different places. There are reasonable arguments about whether tools like Flock cameras help law enforcement, whether their benefits outweigh their risks, and what safeguards should be required before a government uses them.
I have my own objections about Flock cameras and their complete lack of regulation and transparency. But there is an issue here that precedes even that debate: We govern ourselves.
In a representative democracy, we do not personally vote on every contract, ordinance or policy decision. We elect neighbors to do that work on our behalf. Most of the time, residents are not attending meetings, circulating petitions or contacting elected officials about every decision before them and nor should we have to. We elect representatives precisely because governing requires thousands of decisions, and we entrust them to exercise good judgment in our interest. But that arrangement does not transfer ownership of our government from the people to the people we elect; it simply delegates authority. And there is an important difference.
When the public is largely silent on an issue, elected officials necessarily have to use their judgment. But when residents do show up, when they speak at meetings, contact their representatives and organize around a specific issue, that deserves more than acknowledgment before officials proceed with what they had already decided was best.
On Flock cameras, I attended the last Avondale Estates Board of Mayor and Commissioners meeting and listened to residents speak. There is now a petition asking the city to cancel the Flock There is considerable opposition to the cameras but, what also matters is there is not a corresponding groundswell of residents asking the city to keep them.
Our elected officials are members of this community, just as we are. We chose them to represent us, not to stand above us. Election to public office gives someone a responsibility to exercise judgment; it does not give that person’s judgment greater ownership of the community than the people who live here.
There will inevitably be issues where public opinion is divided. There will be competing petitions, packed meetings on both sides and difficult decisions where someone will leave disappointed. That is democracy too.
But when a community is actively telling its government, “We do not want this,” elected officials should need an astoundingly extraordinary reason to answer, “We know, but we are doing it anyway.”
Subscribe