Surveillance is on the Ballot

Does Flock have a place in Cherokee County and Georgia?

I have several police officers in my family, so I know how much support officers need to keep our communities safe. Cameras that read license plates can help solve crimes. But Flock and similar systems go too far. I believe they violate our Fourth Amendment rights.

The government should not be able to track where people go just because it can. Technology companies should not be able to use that information for their own purposes, either.

I have worked in government/Department of Defense for many years. These systems are already deeply connected to public safety services, so removing them may be difficult. Even so, I would not approve any further expansion. I would also work for strong safeguards:

• Keep camera data in Georgia and end nationwide searches.
• Stop other companies from using the data without permission.
• Require a warrant when one county or agency wants to search another county's data. The same rule should apply when a state agency wants to search data across Georgia.
• Require a case number for every search.
• Regularly check how officers use the system, including which plates they search and how often.
• Create a standard way to label training searches so they can be reviewed. (IE search for "test-officer ID" or known agency service vehicle tag)
• Send an alert to command to audit usage when a plate is searched more than three times in 24 hours.
• Stop private cameras from tracking people on public roads. Private camera data should also stay in Georgia.

I would also create a technology advisory committee to help county leaders and police understand new technology before contracts are signed. The committee could help us update our rules before problems arise.

Some of these protections would require action by the state. I will do what I can in Cherokee County and ask our state lawmakers to take up the rest.

Do other surveillance companies, like Axon, have a place in Cherokee County and Georgia?

New technology can help police, but we should not approve it until we understand the risks and have rules in place to protect the public.

I have worked in technology for 20+ years. I have seen useful tools put to harmful uses. As commissioner, I would work to balance the needs of law enforcement with the rights of the people they serve.

I can see why officers may find Axon’s tools useful. Cameras in patrol cars can provide information about nearby vehicles. Artificial intelligence may help officers write reports faster, though officers must still check them for accuracy. Drones may also help officers understand a scene before they arrive.

Sheriff Reynolds has explained how he believes the contract would help his officers. I respect that, but I have not seen enough assurance that Axon will protect our data. For now, I would vote against the contract.

We should not expand surveillance until the public knows what information is collected, who can see it, how it is used, and what happens when someone misuses it.

1. Better cameras do have a place in our community. The issue becomes when we allow 3rd party companies to manage these cameras with highly sophisticated algorithms that track us. So ALPR's have a place, technically. Flock and ALPR's as it stands today? No, absolutely not.

2. I do not support any company that will manage the data. I believe these companies should build the hardware and sell them to the state for the state to operate. Will it be expensive? Yes. I believe this is the only "safe" way for these cameras to exist in our community.

1. At this time I do not see the benefit or need for Flock cameras or similar from other companies. I will try to remove them, require evidence they are needed before they can be considered again, and better guardrails for what remains.

2A. Yes, I support body cams and dash cams for all law enforcement in Cherokee County. They protect the law enforcement officers and the people they are dealing with. We should require them on for all interactions across all agencies such as ICE, GBI, etc.

2B. I do not support the current Axon expansion, it's too much bundled together for too long. Some items are reasonable, others such as the integrated intelligence provisions are questionable. The time period is too long to answer and adjust to those questions.

2C. I would immediately require that searches through correlated surveillance systems require a warrant signed by a judge that includes probable cause and allowed scope. The system should require both of those and then limit to the restrictions given.

"The only way this data doesn't get abused is if it isn't collected. We need clear benefits we can all agree on to justify it. We aren't there yet in Cherokee County"

1. As a lifelong technologist, I have a lived experience that says that technological advancement is generally positive and can lead to so much good for society. However, that advancement needs to be met with regulation and oversight that ensure that it is working for the betterment of society. If a technology can't be reined in and corporations can't be controlled to ensure that society is better for the advancement, then the technology should be blocked.

2. I think Franklin said it best “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” These technologies and the integration of AI with the data feeds are taking us closer and closer to Minority Report. There was a time when that movie was viewed as dystopian. I'm afraid that now it is viewed as an idealized future by some of those in law enforcement. I'm all for finding ways to deliver justice more quickly to those who are harmed, but that should not come at the cost of harming society in general. Until such time that we can ensure these technologies are only used for legitimate investigative purposes backed by all the due process rights currently afforded everyone in this country, and that the data does not become a forever trove of the lives of everyday citizens, then Axon and all automated surveillance technologies should be decommissioned.

1) Does Flock have a place in Cherokee County, and in Georgia? If elected, would you work towards ousting Flock entirely, or on implementing guardrails? If so, which guardrails?

1a) No absolutely not. Unlike normal intersection cameras, flock cameras have been seen in playgrounds, in front of gyms, and neighborhood pools.

Since September alone we have seen over 50 law enforcement misconduct violations regarding Flock. We need to stop it now, and we must ensure that these Flock devices are not just replaced with new ones such as Axon.

If elected I would advocate for the banning of Flock and Axon cameras.

2) Do other surveillance companies, like Axon, have a place in Cherokee County, and in Georgia? Do you support the intended expansion of the Axon being voted on by the Cherokee County Board of Commissioners on Election Night? What, if anything, would you support in terms of ousting or restricting surveillance technology in our county and in Georgia?

2a) I will always oppose mass surveillance of our families, that is true of both Flock and Axon, as well as whatever other companies attempt to do the same thing.

I would encourage the board of commissioners to re-think their decision to allow Axon in Cherokee County. It has absolutely no place here, and our elected officials need to take a stand against this technology.

I am deeply concerned about the rapid expansion of surveillance technology in Cherokee County and the lack of clear guardrails governing that expansion. We are seeing these systems grow in reach and capability faster than the policies designed to protect residents from potential misuse. I do not believe that unchecked expansion should continue without clear standards for necessity, oversight, privacy, data use, and public accountability. Residents should also have a meaningful voice in decisions about the deployment of surveillance technologies in their communities.

That is why I believe the issue before us is bigger than Flock.

We need to take a serious look at the use of mass surveillance technology as a whole. I would hate to spend significant time drafting legislation that addresses one company, only to find ourselves facing the same concerns with a different technology or provider a few years from now. We need to regulate the industry, not simply regulate Flock.

If elected, I would work to establish clear statewide guardrails governing the use of surveillance technology. Those rules should clearly define the legitimate purposes for which these systems can be used; what information they can and cannot collect; who is authorized to access that information; how, where, and for how long data can be stored; when information can be shared with other agencies or third parties; and when judicial authorization should be required.

Just as importantly, there must be transparency, community input, and accountability. Communities should know which surveillance technologies are being considered before deployment, understand how those systems will be used, and have a meaningful opportunity to provide input on their implementation. Decisions that affect the privacy and civil liberties of an entire community should not be made without the people who live there having a voice in the process.

That level of transparency needs to remain once the programs are put in place. Residents should be able to understand how surveillance technology is used, what data is collected, and whether agencies follow the rules governing its use. We also need meaningful consequences when an individual, agency, or company abuses these systems or uses data outside of its authorized purpose.

Public safety matters, and technology can have a role in helping law enforcement address legitimate threats. But public safety cannot come at the expense of our constitutional rights, privacy, or freedoms.

So my goal would not be legislation aimed narrowly at ousting one company. It would be creating strict, enforceable rules that put citizens first, protect against abuses of power, and apply to Flock as well as whatever surveillance technologies come next.

I am, in general opposed to the entire A.I. - Data Center - Surveillance ecosystem, that I have taken to calling "Digital Asbestos". I believe that it has no place in our general infrastructure. While the individual technologies may have uses, those uses must exist in a tight focus and with expert, as well as public, oversight. As it stands, we are going to be digging this out of our walls for years to come, and it will be causing problems the whole time.

1) Flock: I am not sure that I believe the Flock specifically is salvageable on the community level. Unless there are DRASTIC changes, I am of the opinion that it should be removed entirely.

2) More broadly, we should expand our focus to surveillance in general. Flock is but one company, and the current budget is going towards Axon. I know you know this, but it is worth emphasizing; the people do not want surveillance, Flock or otherwise. I am opposed to the budget increase. And I have many other concerns that reach beyond the bounds of the Cherokee Board of Commissioners. For example, that "Data Utility" on Rabbit Hill is technically a different jurisdiction, but is also troubling.

If elected, I would seek to strictly limit, or even outright eliminate these surveillance systems. Likewise to limit the use of A.I. and data centers. The A.I. bubble is ready to burst, and signing a 10 year contract just guarantees a failing company a source of government backed money, paid out of the taxpayers pockets. When things like housing or healthcare are brought up, I am always asked the question: "where will we get the money?" I suggest starting with the $37 million surveillance budget that no one wants.

Does Flock have a place in Cherokee County, and in Georgia? If elected, would you work towards ousting Flock entirely, or on implementing guardrails? If so, which guardrails?

Mass, unconstitutional surveillance has no place in a free society. While I support an outright ban, I am realistic about pushing legislation that can actually pass and be signed into law. While there may not be enough support for an immediate total ban today, public awareness is growing rapidly, largely thanks to the education and advocacy work of organizations like DeFlock. If a ban lacks the necessary support today, I will fight for the following guardrails without exception:

1. Georgia currently allows data to be stored for up to 30 months. I will push to cap non-match data retention at 30 days, with mandatory, irreversible deletion afterward.
2. We must require law enforcement to obtain a judicial warrant based on probable cause to query historical location data or track an individual's travel history.
3. We must ban facial recognition, facial tracking, and AI-driven profile building.
4. We must ban black-box cloud networks with opaque data-sharing arrangements. Data must be stored locally with clear, auditable logs and a strictly enforced protocol for permanent destruction.
5. We must prohibit ALPR contracts from being quietly passed on consent agendas. We must require dedicated public hearings, public votes by elected representatives, and regular audits of query logs by the Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts.
6. Contracts for ALPR camera services cannot have a duration longer than 24 months.

Do other surveillance companies, like Axon, have a place in Cherokee County, and in Georgia? Do you support the intended expansion of the Axon being voted on by the Cherokee County Board of Commissioners on Election Night? What, if anything, would you support in terms of ousting or restricting surveillance technology in our county and in Georgia?

ALPRs, regardless of branding, have no place in Cherokee County or Georgia. I strongly oppose the proposed 10-year, $37.2 million contract expansion with Axon. Committing taxpayers to a nearly decade-and-a-half deal that expands AI-powered cameras and report generation, drone integrations, and real-time intelligence monitoring is irresponsible. Scheduling a vote of this magnitude on election night, when public attention is naturally focused on the future of our government, is extremely lacking in transparency. Local taxpayers deserve competitive bidding, full contract disclosure, and dedicated public hearings before committing tens of millions of dollars to any private company. The six hardline guardrails I outlined above apply equally to Axon, Flock, and all future surveillance vendors, and they are non-negotiable.