In Providence, the City Council held a public hearing Thursday night that drew more than two hours of testimony from residents weighing whether the cameras are an invasion of privacy or a valuable law enforcement tool. The council is considering an ordinance that would ban the city's use of the automated license plate readers. The measure advanced unanimously out of committee last month.

Providence currently operates 60 Flock cameras. The proposed ordinance would not only prohibit their use but also bar city agencies from accessing or using data collected by the devices.

Mayor Brett Smiley has publicly opposed the ban and defended the technology. Police Chief Oscar Perez and his department also want to keep the cameras running.

The hearing drew speakers on both sides of the debate, reflecting a broader regional and national reckoning over how much surveillance technology communities should allow.

A similar dispute is playing out in New Bedford, where the City Council has already passed a ban on the cameras. Mayor Jon Mitchell plans to veto that measure and instead pursue an ordinance that would restrict the cameras without eliminating them entirely. Mitchell was expected to introduce his alternative ordinance at Thursday night's City Council meeting.

The two cities' approaches illustrate the range of options available to local governments: an outright ban, a veto-and-restrict strategy, or continued use backed by mayors and police departments who argue the cameras aid investigations.

For residents, the stakes center on how license plate data is collected, stored and shared, and whether the benefits to public safety outweigh concerns about surveillance of ordinary drivers. The Providence hearing and New Bedford's veto fight are likely to shape how other Southern New England communities weigh similar proposals.