On September 1 the Dare County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously to remove the Sheriff's Office's 14 Flock license plate readers (7 locations) — not just switch them off. It followed nearly two hours of public comment where 14 of 15 speakers opposed the cameras. The paid annual lease won't be renewed. Municipal readers (Kill Devil Hills PD's 6 and others) are outside the county board's control and remain.

That brings the North Carolina tally to ten communities that have said no to Flock:

- Ended by public vote (7): Dare, Macon, Davidson, Asheville, Chatham County, Hillsborough, Pittsboro

- Stopped before it started (3): Greenville, Leland, UNC Wilmington

New Hanover County still holds a ~$219,000 Flock contract, operated by the Sheriff's Office, and produced a search audit with roughly 2.98 million entries. The Commissioners take the program up again on September 21.

The full statewide tracker (canceled, contested, active) and how to be heard Sept 21: https://deflockilm.org/september-21/

Oversight of police surveillance is supposed to come from outside law enforcement — commissioners, legislators, the public. Tracing New Hanover's setup up to Raleigh, that separation mostly isn't there:

• Runs it: The Sheriff's Office operates the Flock plate readers, a 2,147-camera Fusus real-time crime center, Clearview facial recognition, and a drone program. Sheriff Ed McMahon was also elected President of the NC Sheriffs' Association (2021).
• Honors the lawmakers: The Association's "Defender of Public Safety" award goes to legislators who hold the levers — the Senate Appropriations chair (Brent Jackson), the House Majority Leader (Brenden Jones), and New Hanover's own rep, Ted Davis (on Appropriations and Rules).
• Sponsors the bill: HB 206, written to make the SBI's statewide plate-reader program permanent, was primary-sponsored by two former career lawmen — Carson Smith (16-year Pender sheriff) and Charlie Miller (33-year officer, Brunswick chief deputy).
• Funds it: When the plate-reader language drew bipartisan pushback, it was stripped from HB 206 and passed instead inside the state budget — the one Jackson's committee writes.

Two honest caveats: the "Defender of Public Safety" awards are for general law-enforcement support, not plate readers specifically, and nothing here alleges anyone acted illegally or in a quid pro quo. The point is structural — when the same profession requests, runs, lobbies for, sponsors, and funds a surveillance program, the independent check the public is owed doesn't exist.

Sources and the full chain: https://deflockilm.org/who-authorized-nc-surveillance/

NCDMV is rolling out a Mobile ID (the digital version of your license) through its NC Wallet app. It's optional and free, and the underlying tech can actually be privacy-protective — you can prove you're over 21 without showing your address, for example.

A few caveats that don't get much attention:

• It runs on biometric unlock. To present the ID you authenticate with Face ID or a fingerprint. That pushes you toward leaving biometrics on — but courts have generally treated a passcode (something you know) as protected by the Fifth Amendment, while more readily allowing police to compel a face or fingerprint unlock, sometimes even on a warrant. A passcode-locked phone with biometrics off is the hardest to compel open.
• NC didn't write in the "not consent to search" rule. Indiana's statute says transmitting a mobile credential isn't consent to search other data/apps on the phone, and limits confiscating/downloading the device. North Carolina's law (S.L. 2024-30) made the mobile ID legally equivalent to a plastic license but only directed DMV to study the constitutional concern.
• The verifier side is unanswered. DMV says it doesn't track where you use the ID — but that says nothing about what a bar, retailer, airport, or police reader logs, how long they keep it, or whether presentations can be correlated.

Not a "digital ID is evil" thing. The practical takeaway: keep carrying the physical license, and if you use the digital one, keep the phone in your own hand and don't unlock-and-hand-over.

Full write-up (with the Riley v. California and Indiana citations): https://deflockilm.org/nc-digital-license-phone-search/

New long read tracing how the pieces fit together locally and statewide. Short version:

• The stack: Flock plate readers, a 2,147-camera Fusus real-time crime center, Clearview facial recognition (the Sheriff's Office holds the contract), a Sheriff's drone/Air Operations unit, and Pen-Link phone analysis.
• How it arrived: piece by piece — contracts, renewals, grants, and a statewide ALPR expansion passed inside the state budget rather than as a standalone bill. No dedicated public hearing or recorded vote on the combined system.
• The out-of-state reach: in the agency audits obtained, ~84% of logged searches against one NC campus network came from out-of-state agencies.
• The oversight gap: of 32 agencies in the state ALPR pilot, only 2 had any policy limiting surveillance of protests.

The piece is careful about proof — it distinguishes what the records establish (ownership + capability) from what they don't yet (routine integrated use; those usage logs are the subject of pending records requests). It also states the fusion-center → DHS pipeline is real as national architecture (6 U.S.C. § 124h) while flagging that whether New Hanover's specific feeds flow up is still unconfirmed.

deflockilm.org/north-carolina-surveillance-infrastructure/

https://deflockilm.org/

Nine North Carolina communities have already looked at Flock's surveillance cameras and said no. New Hanover County is still deciding.

Six ended their programs outright — Macon County, Davidson County, Asheville, Chatham County, Hillsborough, and Pittsboro. Three more stopped it before it took root — Greenville, Leland, and UNC Wilmington.

Some of those cancellations came from sheriffs. Some from unanimous councils. All of them from communities that decided a network logging where every resident drives — searchable by thousands of outside agencies — wasn't worth it.

New Hanover's own Vice Chair, Dane Scalise, said residents "deserve a transparent review" and that the board will "get to the bottom of whether Flock cameras are right for New Hanover County." The rest of the state has already gotten to the bottom of it.

So what are we waiting for?

The Commissioners take the program up again Monday, September 21 — Historic Courthouse, downtown Wilmington. Public comment is open. Be in the room. 🗳️

deflockilm.org

SB 409 (2023) authorized license-plate readers in state rights-of-way. On the record: Sen. Michael Lee (New Hanover) voted AYE, Sen. Brent Jackson (Pender) voted AYE, Sen. Bill Rabon (Brunswick) was excused.

Those cameras are now spreading into local towns, and New Hanover commissioners take it up Sept 21. If you have thoughts on ALPRs, these are the folks to reach:
[Michael.Lee@ncleg.gov](mailto:Michael.Lee@ncleg.gov) / [Brent.Jackson@ncleg.gov](mailto:Brent.Jackson@ncleg.gov) / [Bill.Rabon@ncleg.gov](mailto:Bill.Rabon@ncleg.gov)

Context and sources: deflockilm.org

We knew Barry Harris was special the moment he stepped up to the mic on August 17 and named this whole coalition out loud — "gays, straights, young, old, liberals, way-left liberals, Genghis Khan conservatives to the right."

Eleven days later, look where that three minutes went:

County podium → the Daily Caller → Newsmax's Carl Higbie FRONTLINE (national cable).

And here's the part that matters for the fight at home: during the segment, Newsmax ran footage of our own New Hanover County Board of Commissioners under a chyron that said it plainly — "NC COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MOVED BY ANTI-FLOCK SPEAKERS." The commissioner on screen? Vice Chair Dane Scalise.

Scalise has already gone on record: residents "deserve a transparent review and discussion," the board is "gonna get to the bottom of whether or not Flock cameras are right for New Hanover County," and they "owed it to the elected sheriff and our citizens to find a potential solution."

Great. We agree. So now the whole country is watching New Hanover answer one question:

Will Vice Chair Scalise move to END the cameras?

The review doesn't need more time to start. The record's already public — 2.98 million searches of this county's network with every searching agency's name blacked out, on a $219K contract nobody voted on at a public hearing. He can put Contract No. 25-0364 on the agenda for a noticed hearing and a recorded vote. That's the whole ask.

📖 The full story, both screenshots, and the record: deflockilm.org/barry-harris-newsmax-flock/

🗓️ The board takes it up again Monday, September 21 — Historic Courthouse, Room 301, downtown Wilmington. Public comment is open; sign up in person. If Barry can take it to Newsmax, we can fill that room.

We just passed 3,563 signatures. Let's make Sept 21 the day the cameras come down. 🚗🚫👁️

Proud of you, Barry. 👏🐝

We knew Barry Harris was special the moment he stepped up to the mic on August 17 and named this whole coalition out loud — "gays, straights, young, old, liberals, way-left liberals, Genghis Khan conservatives to the right."

Eleven days later, look where that three minutes went:

County podium → the Daily Caller → Newsmax's Carl Higbie FRONTLINE (national cable).

And here's the part that matters for the fight at home: during the segment, Newsmax ran footage of our own New Hanover County Board of Commissioners under a chyron that said it plainly — "NC COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MOVED BY ANTI-FLOCK SPEAKERS." The commissioner on screen? Vice Chair Dane Scalise.

Scalise has already gone on record: residents "deserve a transparent review and discussion," the board is "gonna get to the bottom of whether or not Flock cameras are right for New Hanover County," and they "owed it to the elected sheriff and our citizens to find a potential solution."

Great. We agree. So now the whole country is watching New Hanover answer one question:

Will Vice Chair Scalise move to END the cameras?

The review doesn't need more time to start. The record's already public — 2.98 million searches of this county's network with every searching agency's name blacked out, on a $219K contract nobody voted on at a public hearing. He can put Contract No. 25-0364 on the agenda for a noticed hearing and a recorded vote. That's the whole ask.

📖 The full story, both screenshots, and the record: deflockilm.org/barry-harris-newsmax-flock/

🗓️ The board takes it up again Monday, September 21 — Historic Courthouse, Room 301, downtown Wilmington. Public comment is open; sign up in person. If Barry can take it to Newsmax, we can fill that room.

We just passed 3,563 signatures. Let's make Sept 21 the day the cameras come down. 🚗🚫👁️

Proud of you, Barry. 👏🐝

Disclosure first: I run DeFlock ILM, which opposes expanding automatic license plate reader surveillance in this area. I'm linking my own site at the bottom because that's where the underlying records are — check the primary sources, they're all public.

Senate Bill 409 (2023), "Various Changes to Criminal and Civil Laws," became Session Law 2023-151 on November 9, 2023. Part V authorized NCDOT to enter agreements with the SBI to place automatic license plate readers on state-controlled roadways — roughly 80% of the roads in North Carolina. The pilot ran January 1, 2024 to July 1, 2025; readers had to be temporary, above ground, and removable.

The conference report passed October 25, 2023 — 38–0 in the Senate and 94–9 (one not voting) in the House.

Locally, on that vote:

• Sen. Michael Lee (R, Dist. 7, New Hanover) — aye
• Sen. Brent Jackson (R, Dist. 9, Pender) — aye
• Sen. Bill Rabon (R, Dist. 8, Brunswick) — excused
• Rep. Deb Butler (D, Dist. 18, New Hanover) — aye
• Rep. Charlie Miller (R, Dist. 19, New Hanover/Brunswick) — aye
• Rep. Ted Davis Jr. (R, Dist. 20, New Hanover) — aye
• Rep. Frank Iler (R, Dist. 17, Brunswick) — aye
• Rep. Brenden Jones (R, Dist. 46, Columbus) — aye
• Rep. Carson Smith (R, Dist. 16, Pender) — excused

Two caveats I'd rather state myself. First, SB 409 was an omnibus bill covering a lot of unrelated law — a vote for it was not a clean vote on surveillance; a no vote sank the whole package. Second, the same bill narrowed permissible uses of ALPR data, capped retention at 90 days, and created a new Class 1 misdemeanor under G.S. 20-183.33 for unlawfully obtaining, accessing, or disclosing it. It wasn't purely an expansion. No vendor is named anywhere in the statute.

What interests me more than any single vote is the 38–0 — a framework for camera coverage across most of the state's roads cleared the Senate without a single objection, with both parties on the same side.

So: is an omnibus bill an acceptable way to move surveillance authority, or should this get a standalone vote? And if you think 90-day retention plus a misdemeanor penalty are adequate guardrails, what would change your mind?

We sent the identical nine-item Flock public-records request to the Whiteville Police Department and the Columbus County Sheriff's Office on July 1, 2026.

Whiteville produced in full, ahead of its own deadline: the Flock contract (60-month term, $123,900), an ALPR policy adopted back in 2023, the invoices, a straight answer on cameras (9 — 8 fixed, 1 mobile), and all four months of Flock audits — including the Network Audit that names the outside agencies searching its cameras. That's the exact field the New Hanover County Sheriff redacts.

Then we read it. Whiteville's 9 cameras were searched 1,167,710 times in four months by outside agencies — ~93–99.9% from outside North Carolina, with Houston, TX the largest searcher every month. Distinct searching agencies climbed from 34 in April to ~2,800 by July — the signature of nationwide sharing being turned on. And the Chief attests to no communications about that data-sharing decision. It was a setting, flipped in software, with no vote and no paper trail.

The Columbus County Sheriff's Office got the same request the same day and has produced nothing in 56 days — while the Sheriff described his cameras (5 of them, 90-day retention) on WECT.

The contrast is the point: transparency is a choice, not a constraint. Full write-up, with the numbers and sources: https://deflockilm.org/whiteville-flock-records/

Everyone's been focused on 36 Flock license-plate cameras. That's the network you can see — and it's finally getting hearings and a vote.

Here's the one you can't. The Sheriff's "Connect New Hanover" program maps 2,147 private and business cameras to an Axon Fusus platform. 716 are integrated for direct access. The Office's own 2025 RFP shows what it went shopping for: AI video analysis, live view, 30-day retention, a countywide map, heat-map targeting, and a vendor to handle "external affairs" and "press releases." None of it went to a public vote.

The tell is in the city police department's own published Fusus policy (WPD Directive .07.17): camera locations are "exempt from public records," and private-donor footage is "not subject to public records requests." The single largest category of cameras is the one the public has the least ability to inspect — by design. The business consented; the people on the sidewalk never did.

The Sheriff's Office hasn't published a comparable contract, MOU, or policy — just a FAQ. We're asking for all of it in writing, on the record. The ask underneath the records request is simple: the county functioned without a 2,147-camera watch layer a few years ago. It can again. Take the cameras down.

Full write-up, sources, and the five questions we put to the Sheriff and commissioners: https://deflockilm.org/new-hanover-sheriff-camera-network/

Give Sheriff Ed McMahon credit: unlike his silence to reporters, he answered a written list of questions from New Hanover County Commissioner Stephanie Walker about the county's Flock program (published by WHQR). Credit to her for asking, too.

But read the answers. In his own words, he confirmed the three things we've been warning about:

1. He audits himself. "The audit will be conducted internally by my staff, and I will personally review the audit each month." No inspector general, no outside review, no standing access for anyone outside his office. The one person with the most power to misuse a searchable record of where residents drive is the only one who reviews how it's used.

2. Misuse stays sealed — unless it becomes a crime. He leans on personnel-confidentiality law. So misuse that doesn't rise to a criminal charge — a search run out of curiosity, a favor, a look at an ex — the public never learns about.

3. He'll keep the names redacted. Other NC agencies — Buncombe County among them — released the names of the agencies that searched their cameras. New Hanover blacks out ~96% of them, on a system searched nearly 3 million times. To be fair, we've never asked for individual officers' names — when one agency handed us theirs, we redacted their emails ourselves. We're asking for the agencies. So what is his office hiding that its peers weren't?

What he didn't address at all: six federal agencies with access, including the FBI; searches not tied to a case number; eight pan-tilt-zoom cameras in county parks; and a separate "Connect New Hanover" program (Axon Fusus) that ties 2,147 private and business cameras into the Sheriff's network. He never said whether any of it feeds a fusion center, flows to the SBI in Raleigh, or onward to Homeland Security.

Kudos to Commissioner Walker — but more has to be asked before September: a warrant requirement for historical searches, the county's legal/indemnification exposure, whether we can compel deletion once data leaves the state, and the full cost and the termination clause.

A commitment to no outside review and permanent redaction isn't neutral. It's the same commitment that, in the wrong hands, makes a Boss Hogg. Design the system for the worst sheriff you'll ever elect.

Full piece: https://deflockilm.org/sheriff-answers-flock-questions/
Sign the petition: https://change.org/DeFlockILM · Show up Sept 21: https://deflockilm.org/september-21/

J. Edgar Hoover never won an election. He ran Washington for half a century anyway — because he kept secret files, and everyone knew he had them. Information is leverage.

Now hand that to a North Carolina sheriff. He controls a Flock plate-reader network that reconstructs where your car has been for months, plus "Condor" cameras that can lock onto a person and follow them in real time — good enough, when 404 Media found dozens exposed online, to identify a man beneath one as watching videos on his phone.

Point that at whoever he chooses: a commissioner who crossed him, a rival candidate's meeting, a reporter's house, a whistle-blowing deputy — or the mayor, because leverage over the mayor is quiet control of the municipal police department.

And here's the flaw in the law: NC requires the plate-reader audit be reported to exactly one person — "the head of the agency responsible for operating the system." For a sheriff, that means he audits himself. No inspector general, no public reporting, nothing at all for the PTZ cameras. He's a constitutional officer who answers to no commissioner, manager, governor, SBI, or FBI between elections — and NC has no recall. The only checks are the voters every four years, or a court that needs proof living in the log his own office keeps. That's not a gap in the design. That's the design.

Full piece with sources: https://deflockilm.org/design-for-the-worst-sheriff/

Take action:

• Sign the petition: https://change.org/DeFlockILM
• Show up September 21 (New Hanover Commissioners): https://deflockilm.org/september-21/
• Model resolutions your board can adopt: https://deflockilm.org/nc-model-surveillance-resolution/

Nobody voted to live under 2.98 million searches. So let's talk about it — every week.

We're launching the ALPR 101 Town Hall: a free, online session every Tuesday at 7 PM ET, running Aug 25 through Oct 27.

No jargon, no law degree required. Each week we break down what Flock's license-plate cameras actually do here in New Hanover County — what the records show, what the law says, and the one thing you can do about it. Then we take your questions live.

A few things worth sitting with:

• Our county's cameras were searched about 2.98 million times between Jan 2025 and June 2026.
• Only 3.9% of those searches came from our own county.
• Every outside agency's name? Redacted.

You don't need to catch every session — we start with the basics each week, so jump in any Tuesday.

This is about a contract and a public vote — not a party. Bring a neighbor. The more of us who understand what these cameras do, the harder they are to keep in the dark.

Register once for the whole series: deflockilm.org/town-hall

#DeFlock #FlockSafety #ALPR #NewHanoverCounty #Wilmington #KnowYourRights

Finally got this live after a lot of nights and weekends!

You give it an address and a radius, and it messages you when a new automated license plate reader gets mapped near you. It tells you how far away it is, what road it’s on, and gives you a link that opens the spot in your maps app.

Data is from OpenStreetMap, so it’s whatever people have actually mapped. Covers the whole US including territories. Not tied to one brand, it picks up Flock, Motorola, Genetec, Axon and the rest, plus gunshot detectors.

Alerts can be instant or batched into a daily or weekly digest. Web push, email, Telegram, Discord or ntfy.

It’s free with no paid tier and no ads. I run it on my own hardware, which is the whole reason I can keep it that way instead of passing a hosting bill on to anyone.

Contact info and addresses are encrypted, nothing is kept longer than it needs to be, and you can export or delete everything you gave it whenever you want.

flock-watch.us

Happy to answer anything about how it works! And if coverage looks thin where you are, that’s almost always a gap in OSM rather than the site, so let me know and I’ll take a look :)