Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance And Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hundreds in public comments urge commissioners to drop Flock camera funding; sheriff defends system
Summary
During a May 5 budget hearing dozens of residents urged Bib County leaders to remove funding for Flock automated license-plate readers from the FY27 budget, citing privacy, misidentification and equity concerns; Sheriff Davis urged continued use, saying the system aids investigations and vehicle recoveries.
A packed public budget hearing on May 5 brought repeated calls from residents to remove funding for Flock automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) from the proposed FY27 budget, while the Bib County sheriff defended the technology as an investigative tool.
Speakers who identified themselves from the podium described privacy and safety concerns. "I am here tonight to ask you not to fund the Flock contract, effectively cancelling that contract," said Angela Holmes, representing a coalition of concerned citizens, citing personal stalking experience and saying she felt surveilled by the cameras. Multiple speakers cited third‑party access risks, alleged data breaches, racial-bias studies and error rates; Rianna Wymer said industry research shows a roughly 10% misidentification rate for license-plate state reads and warned that even a low error rate can cause harm when systems run 24/7.
Other residents framed the question as a budget-priority choice: Cam Otter and Benjamin Tieran urged the board to invest in sidewalks, parks, youth programming and repairs rather than surveillance technology. Robert Daniels, owner of Central Georgia Crematory, used his time to press for raising the county payment for indigent cremations from $700 to $1,200, citing rising fuel and materials costs.
Addressing the crowd, Sheriff Davis defended ALPR use in Bib County, saying the technology has aided homicide and violent-crime investigations, helped recover 10–20 stolen vehicles per month, and reunited missing elderly residents with families. He emphasized local policies that require users to tie searches to ongoing criminal investigations and said some funding originates from state public-safety grants that supported system deployments.
Despite the sheriff’s remarks and comments that some funds were state grants, the public comments showed broad community concern about privacy, equity, data security and whether surveillance funding displaces investments in prevention and social services. The hearing ended after the public comment period; the mayor noted the final budget vote would be expected on June 16.
