DeFlockNC.org 2026 Candidate Questionnaire: Councilmember and Mayoral Candidate Kim Roney
Word Limit: 100
Data Collection: Should police be allowed to collect and keep records of where vehicles travel when no one in them is suspected of a crime?
No. Flock and other brands of automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) are designed to document, cross-reference, and track the public without a warrant. In additional to concerns about a growing number of cases of abuse by law enforcement across the country, North Carolina state statute does not allow municipalities to withhold information from state and federal agencies, so collecting the data in the first place is the problem. It’s the duty of local electeds to secure the safety and privacy of constituents, to protect Constitutional rights to privacy and due process, and to resist and/or cancel Flock contracts.
Public Hearing and Approval: Should a government agency be required to give advance public notice, hold a public hearing, and obtain approval from elected officials before it begins, expands, or renews a license plate reader program?
Yes. A warning tale from Asheville: Public participation was cut short while tech company sales reps were given unlimited time to engage electeds and staff. Most concerning, the Real Time Intelligence Center funding was approved 6-1 by Asheville’s Council without a contract for approval.
I have consistently voted against Flock and mass surveillance technology use in Asheville. These decisions are often in consent agendas reserved for non-controverial items, which require careful review and pulling items for separate consideration. I urge fellow electeds to use resources from ACLU, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Local Progress to educate staff and the public before votes.
Outside Access: Should out-of-state or federal agencies be able to search North Carolina license plate reader data without a warrant or court order?
No. As cities across the country wrestle with failed attempts to protect data and Constitutional rights of residents to justify use of Flock and ALPRs, the instances grow of data being misused and abused.
In addition to seeking guidance from civil liberties attorneys, I urge fellow electeds in North Carolina to consider NC Statute § 20‑183.30 and § 132‑1.4A.
Resolutions aimed at protecting civil liberties are statements of values. I acknowledge many are hopeful resolutions carry weight, but I couldn’t find serious legal advice for a resolution strong enough to protect the data and Constitutional rights of residents.
Audits: Should every agency permitted to access North Carolina license plate reader data, in state or out, be subject to independent audits by a North Carolina authority, with the results made public?
Yes. Transparency is key to public trust. Dashboards with public-facing audit information should be a minimum expectation, and were helpful in building the case with my community for City Hall to cancel Asheville’s Flock contract.
Local control: Should cities and counties have the authority to prohibit or restrict the use of license plate readers and license plate reader data within their borders?
Yes. Given North Carolina’s retaliatory preemption limiting local control, I encourage NC cities to unite on this. Protecting resident data and Constitutional rights from for-profit mass surveillance tech is non-partisan. We can help each other across jurisdictions, especially since resident data is being shared across jurisdictions.
The majority of residents I’m hearing from aren’t confused: they don’t want Asheville to switch from Flock to another brand of ALPRS.
As of October 2026: Asheville’s new Real Time Intelligence Center is meant to include integration of Axon ALPRs. My motion for a moratorium on purchasing new ALRPs failed for lack of a second.