Original video https://youtu.be/t-i-CCEDXLQ?t=174

For those that prefer vertical video…

View this post on Instagram

@mountainindivisible

Speakers at the May 4 Mitchell County Commissioners Meeting talking about the risks of using Flock #flock

♬ original sound – Mountain Indivisible – Mountain Indivisible

There were 62 signatures on the petition we presented to the commissioners. Thank you to everyone who signed!

The petitions and reference material are available here https://mountainindivisible.org/news/2026/04/23/flock-petition-references/

Michael Harrison

Thank you all for allowing me to speak tonight.

“You shouldn’t have anything to worry about if you’re not doing anything illegal”

“There is no right to privacy if you can be seen from a public vantage.”

These are just a few of the comments in discussions about Flock on local Facebook groups and most people are choosing to ignore the larger point.

The cameras aren’t the issue, cameras are everywhere these days and we’re being recorded by several at this very moment.

The lack of privacy in public as law was put into place back before ubiquitous video was a thing. Back before having security cameras on every corner was a thing. Back before all the cameras were linked into one big network. Back before that network was controlled by “AI” that can track and collate video data orders of magnitude faster and better than anyone before.

And yes, anyone who has a modern cell phone, onstar or a cloud connected car is being “tracked” but in those cases there is at least the expectation that a warrant is required before that tracking data is handed over to anyone.

In the case of flock, you’re being tracked by a company that isn’t accountable to anyone except, at best, their paying customers.

It’s the Platform that’s the problem. Not simply the camera.

Many people think that users of Flock only have access to still images of plates, and not occupants. Flock’s platform goes further:

• FreeForm include AI search for people by physical description based on their patent which classifies people by race, gender, height, and weight in a searchable database.
• Raven, sold for gunshot detection, now listens for “human voices in distress.”

It’s also been demonstrated that Flock’s platform is insecure — there are more than 22 confirmed vulnerabilities in the federal cybersecurity database. A camera can be taken over in 30 seconds. Condor cameras found online without passwords included live footage viewable by anyone.

Flock also has a history of making changes without notifying customers. A few examples:

• Mountain View, CA — Flock enabled a “nationwide” setting without police knowledge. Federal agencies accessed local data without Mountain View knowing.
• Cambridge, MA — Flock installed cameras after council ordered their deactivation.
• Washington — Border Patrol accessed 10 departments’ data that those departments never agreed to share.

When was the last time anyone in Mitchell county performed an audit, as required by North Carolina statute, to see how local footage is being used? When is the next scheduled audit and where will the results be published?

These cameras can and have been used for good purposes but unfortunately the company behind the cameras is not concerned with the privacy and security of the citizens of Mitchell County.

Any further use of flock cameras in Mitchell needs to be accompanied by the fully informed consent of the citizens of Mitchell County.

Thank you for your time.

Lea Charlton

I’m talking about flock abuses. I live in the estatoe neighborhood of spruce pine, where there are at least 2 cameras.

(Unfurls long — 12 pages — of abuses taped end to end and drapes it over the podium)

These are documented abuses up until March of 2026. Obviously, I won’t have enough time to tell you all of them in 3 minutes so I’ll leave this long list for you to further examine at your leisure.

1. Johnson county TX. cops used 83,000 cameras to stalk a cross state lines a female who got an abortion
2. Flock employee accessed private live camera to watch young girls in swimsuits at a pool and a gym
3. Lenexa KS. Went AFTER MAN who wrote op-Ed, they did it twice.
4. Eugene OR., EVANSTON IL AND CAMBRIDGE MA. Cameras still active after city specifically asked flock safety to turn them off.
5. MO detective stalked wife using cameras
6. Milwaukee detective stalked girlfriend
7. Georgia police chief used to harass and stalk several people
8. Wichita police LT stalked wife
9. Menasha police officer stalked on numerous occasions his ex girlfriend
10. GA reserve officer used to commit corporate espionage
11. congressional oversight committee documented many instances of national abuses to harass and wrongly arrest.
12. GA police officer accepted a bribe to check for a woman’s plate number
13. Thornton CO police officer ran 20,000 unauthorized searches
14. Costa Mesa CA Officer harassed a woman 1,000s of times and stalked her using data from cameras
15. Minneapolis —innocent drivers caught in dragnet surveillance
16. Virginia. Innocent drivers caught in dragnet surveillance
17. Bonner springs KS. EX Detective used to stalk wife and commit child sex abuse
18. Dunwoody GA. Unauthorized sharing of data and innocent drivers caught in dragnet
19. Riverside county CA. Over 500 cameras leased to wrong permittee who then continued to use them for over a year.
20. False arrests and stops including one of man repeatedly stopped, possibly bc of a zero in his plate number instead of an O.
21. CA. Class action lawsuit for unauthorized sharing leading to unauthorized immigration enforcement and dragnet surveillance.
22. Woodburn OR. Unauthorized sharing and immigration dragnet
23. Milwaukee officer used to stalk a woman
24. National Unauthorized sharing with ICE and innocents caught in dragnets
25. ICE taps school security camera to aid immigration and innocents detained
26. FLOCK SAFETY changes many times it’s Terms of service, no one notified of changes, which leads to investigative report
27. Mountain view CALIF. Unauthorized sharing
28. Joplin MO. Previously fired officer for unauthorized use again uses camera in stalking incident
29. expose’ by electronic frontier foundation of multiple agencies for unauthorized use.
30. Staunton VA. Cancels contract and it’s cameras still used
31. FBI instructs users how to evade audit transparency
32. Richland county SC sheriff charges journalist $9,152 for FLOCK audit logs
33. Greenville WI police officer charged with stalking and domestic abuse
34. San Jose CA. WARANTLESS MASS SURVELANCE
35. National DATA BREACH leads to congressional investigation
36. Another EFF investigation on how cops are using flock to surveil activists
37. National Data breach again leads to investigation that flock cameras are easy to hack
38. evidence found that Cops nationally are stripping their own names and plate numbers from audit logs
39. Sandy springs GA. OFFICER uses for personal gain
40. Columbine valley CO. FALSE arrest of woman who had to prove her own innocence at her own expense. Lawsuit pending. She is one of many.
41. Washington state. Unauthorized Sharing and immigration dragnet
42. Virginia. Federal ICE unauthorized use
43. Toledo OH. $35,000 settlement to man falsely arrested
44. Colorado. FLOCK denies it shares data after whistleblower claim.
45. Sedona AZ cancels contract. Cameras in use after cancelling.
46. Illinois —investigation shows FLOCK shares data for immigration dragnets
47. National – Another of flock giving ICE data
48. Denver co. Flock giving ICE data again
49. Richmond va. Flock giving ICE data
50. Spartanburg SC. Sheriff pleads guilty to unauthorized use
51. Flock uses dark web data for warantless tracking
52. ICE taps into nationwide network again
53. Norfolk VA. Innocents caught in Dragnet use
54. BraSELTON GA. police chief charged with stalking
55. Sedgwick KS. Police chief tracked ex girlfriend 164 times
56. Greenville SC. Another FALSE ARREST
57. Kechi KS. POLICE LT stalked wife
58. Aurora CO. numerous wrongful stops and arrests across county
59. LA uses for dragnet with innocents arrested
60. South Carolina. Lawmaker asks for restrictions after domestic abuse enablement

Sources:
Madisonforprivacy.org
GitHub.com/kansas-watch/alpr-abuse-library

Jeremy Wise

Good evening. My name is Jeremy Wise, and I’m a resident of Mitchell County.

I’ve been following these meetings closely, and I want to start by saying I appreciate the effort to make them more accessible to the public.

I also want to be clear that this is not a personal attack. I believe everyone on this board cares about this community.

I’m here because of the Flock cameras that have been installed on our roads.

This AI-powered system collects and stores data on everyone in our community, and I believe that decision was made without public input, without clear policies in place, and without most people even knowing what these cameras are.

That’s a problem, because this affects everyone who lives here, every time they leave their home and drive on these roads.

That’s not how decisions that affect everyone should be made, especially when they involve powerful new surveillance technology.

This isn’t as simple as being “for” or “against” these cameras.

It’s about whether the public is informed, whether there are safeguards in place, and whether people can trust how this technology is being used.

Right now, those things are not clear to the public.
So moving forward, three things that are necessary.

First, full transparensy: the public should have access to the contracts, the costs, and understand how this system currently operates.

Second, a clear written policy that defines who can access the data, how it’s used, how long it’s kept, and what safeguards are in place.

And third, public accountability so decisions like this are not made without the public being informed and involved.

Public safety matters but so does keeping the public’s trust, and trust isn’t built by asking people to accept something after the fact.

It’s built by bringing them into the process from the beginning.
That’s all I’m asking for. A process people can trust.
Thank you.