The Miami Lakes Town Council voted down a proposal on Nov. 18 to adopt a vendor-run school-zone automated speed camera program.

Staff and police briefed the council on a model used elsewhere in the county: cameras would operate 30 minutes before and 30 minutes after school hours, issue civil citations for speeding in school zones, and allocate fines per state statute (example breakdown presented: $20 to the state general fund; $60 split between county and town; $12 to the school district; $3 to FDLE training funds; $5 to a crossing-guard fund). Police said the cameras include license-plate-recognition (LPR) capability and that the vendor offered LPRs tied to system installs.

Supporters of the pilot said the cameras can reduce speeding in sensitive zones and generate targeted enforcement without a large recurring town cost; some council members said revenue could support school crossing guards and other safety programs. "The main focus is to mitigate the speeding," the police representative said.

Opponents questioned the program’s legal and policy trade-offs: Council members flagged due-process concerns (civil citations issued by a private vendor), the challenge for residents to contest fines, vendor transparency about calibration and notice procedures, the perception that the cameras are a revenue generator, and limits on local control over program hours and fines under state law. Several council members cited broader controversies about automated enforcement and said they were uncomfortable delegating enforcement to private contractors.

A motion to defer the item to gather additional vendor documentation and calibration proof failed. On the substantive motion, the council rejected adoption by roll call. The staff presentation and police briefing will remain available for future consideration if council revisits the issue.

What happened next: Council asked staff to document vendor calibration and notice processes and to clarify how contested citations would be handled locally; but no further action was adopted at this meeting. The vendor model used in nearby jurisdictions — and the allocation of fines set by state statute — remain legally binding constraints on any future program. The council may revisit automated enforcement if additional safeguards or statutory changes appear.