South Florida residents could have heard two very different announcements about license plate readers in September 2026. The Miami-Dade sheriff said her office was suspending its entire program. In neighboring Miami Beach, elected officials were looking for ways to retain useful cameras, tighten safeguards and potentially place some equipment on private property.
Both responses followed the same Florida order removing license plate readers from state highway rights-of-way. The contrast illustrates why the words ‘Miami’s cameras are off’ can be misleading. Miami-Dade County, Miami Beach and the City of Miami have different police agencies and different rules. One agency’s decision doesn’t automatically describe what the others are doing.
Miami-Dade’s sheriff went beyond the state order
On September 1, Sheriff Rosie Cordero-Stutz announced that all readers on state transportation infrastructure would be taken offline and the Miami-Dade Sheriff’s Office program would be suspended in its entirety.
That exceeded the basic statewide requirement, which affected cameras located within state highway rights-of-way. The sheriff argued that the cameras had helped apprehend violent suspects, locate missing people and protect children. She also emphasized that police technology requires clear policies, oversight, transparency and respect for constitutional rights.
The announcement is about the sheriff’s office, not a claim that every municipal agency and privately owned camera throughout Miami-Dade County shut down. That’s a particularly important distinction in a county with many separate cities and police departments.
Miami Beach wanted to keep a useful tool
Miami Beach Mayor Steven Meiner took a different approach. He publicly challenged a blanket state-road restriction and proposed working with property owners willing to host readers outside state-controlled rights-of-way. CBS News Miami reported on September 10 that hotels, condominiums and neighborhood groups had expressed interest.
The idea was not simply to put cameras back on state highway land under a different name. It involved placements on private property with the owner’s permission, subject to local standards. That brings up questions about who owns the records, who pays for equipment, and whether police searches of privately collected information receive the same scrutiny as government searches.
The September 10 Miami Beach commission agenda contained two competing policy responses: a 90-day pause on new or expanded reader deployments while privacy and security safeguards were reviewed, and a proposed public-private partnership framework with a budget ceiling of $50,000. Subsequent coverage and a published meeting summary described an approved framework for the private-property approach. That approval is not proof that every proposed camera was subsequently installed.
Flock and license plate readers are not the same thing
A further complication is the vendor. Reports about Flock Safety cameras have dominated the discussion, but Miami Beach’s municipal readers have also used Motorola Solutions and Axon technology. Separately, a Venetian Islands homeowners association operated privately funded Flock cameras. Those are not necessarily the same database, contract or set of access permissions.
An October 14 commission agenda record references Resolution 2026-34469 calling for the city to help the Venetian Islands homeowners association move from Flock to another compatible vendor when practicable, subject to contractual limits. That’s a direction about a particular relationship; it is not the same as banning all license plate readers from Miami Beach.
Understanding who operates a camera matters because one police department may own the hardware, another may merely request information from it, and a private group may pay for the system. Camera location, vendor access and retention rules are separate issues that should not be collapsed into a single company name.
Police can point to specific public-safety benefits
Miami Beach Police Chief Wayne Jones told CBS News Miami about a case in which a suspect allegedly threatened people with a rifle in Coral Gables. A witness provided a license plate number, and information from the system helped officers find the man in Miami Beach about 90 minutes later.
That is a concrete example of why investigators want rapid regional access: a vehicle can travel across city boundaries faster than detectives can independently search every roadway. Still, an example of a successful investigation doesn’t answer how searches involving unrelated drivers are logged, supervised or eventually deleted.
Commissioner David Suarez argued that data should not be controlled solely by police and called for stronger civilian oversight. Supporters of continued camera use emphasized the technology’s ability to help find suspects and deter crime. The underlying disagreement was less about whether criminals should be caught than about what limits should apply to a tool that can also map ordinary travel.
Don’t confuse the county, the beach and the city
Miami-Dade Sheriff’s Office serves a countywide role, Miami Beach is its own municipality, and the City of Miami Police Department is a separate department again. The sources discussed here do not establish that the City of Miami Police Department suspended its entire program when the sheriff did. Any claim about city-specific equipment or current use requires city-specific verification.
We saw a similar jurisdictional split in Daytona Beach and Volusia County. In both regions, readers need to ask which agency made a decision before drawing conclusions about which cameras remain in service.
The next test in the Miami area is whether public officials can describe their remaining cameras and databases as clearly as they describe the benefits: who owns the data, who may search it, how long it remains available, what audits occur, and what the public can learn about misuse. Until those questions are answered, ‘on’ or ‘off’ will be an incomplete description of the situation.
Compare Florida cities: Jacksonville · Tampa · Orlando
Sources
Miami-Dade Sheriff’s Office, September 1, 2026, suspension announcement; CBS Miami, September 1, 2026, county program suspension; CBS Miami, September 10, 2026, Miami Beach proposals and police examples; Miami Beach September 10, 2026 commission agenda, proposals C7BE and C7BH; Florida Record, Miami Beach September 10 meeting outcome summary; Miami Beach October 14, 2026 agenda materials referencing Resolution 2026-34469; Axios Miami, September 2, 2026, regional agency and vendor differences.