Your Candidates, on the Record About Surveillance

The survey asks five questions, each answerable Yes or No, with room for a written statement. They are the right questions — the ones that separate a position from a slogan:

1. Collection. Should police collect and keep records of where vehicles travel when no one in them is suspected of a crime?
2. Public hearing and approval. Should an agency have to give public notice, hold a hearing, and get elected officials’ approval before it starts, expands, or renews a plate-reader program?
3. Outside access. Should out-of-state or federal agencies be able to search North Carolina plate data without a warrant or court order?
4. Audits. Should every agency that can touch North Carolina plate data face independent, public audits by a North Carolina authority?
5. Local control. Should cities and counties be able to restrict or prohibit plate readers within their borders?

What the statewide answers show so far

As of October 20, more than 80 candidates had responded, and the striking thing is how little daylight there is between them. The respondents are not from one camp — Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens, and unaffiliated candidates are all on the list — yet on the questions that matter most, the answers line up almost to a person:

• Nearly every respondent said No to keeping travel records on people suspected of nothing.
• Nearly every respondent said Yes to a public hearing and an elected vote before a program begins or grows.
• Nearly every respondent said No to out-of-state and federal agencies searching North Carolina data without a warrant.
• Nearly every respondent said Yes to independent, public audits — and Yes to letting cities and counties say no.

A handful broke from the pattern on one question or another — a few would allow collection, or outside access, or would deny local control — and their answers are on the page too, in their own words. That is the point of publishing verbatim: you can read the nuance, not just a checkmark. But the headline is a rare one in 2026: on warrantless mass plate surveillance, there is broad, cross-partisan agreement that the current rules are too loose.

The Cape Fear, on the record

Closer to home, five Cape Fear candidates had answered as of October 20 — and every one of them gave the privacy-protective answer on all five questions:

• Dane Scalise — NC House District 20 (R), a current New Hanover County commissioner. He noted: “In my current role as County Commissioner, I made the motion to cancel the Flock ALPR contract here in New Hanover County.”
• Tim Merrick — NC House District 20 (D).
• LeShonda Wallace — New Hanover County Commissioner (D).
• Patti Hewett — Brunswick County Commissioner, District 2 (R). On local control she added simply: “I don’t support ALPR’s at this time.”
• Jessica Bichler — NC Senate District 7 (D), New Hanover. Her answer was the most detailed in the survey, citing the 66 million-plus plate scans recorded on New Hanover’s state-road cameras in a single year, the county’s September cancellation vote, and the Wrightsville Beach and Brunswick audits that led to criminal charges.

Two things stand out. First, the agreement crosses party lines right here at home — a Republican and a Democrat running for the same New Hanover House seat both answered the same way, and commissioners from both parties are on the list. Second, the map still has gaps: as of this writing, no candidates from Pender, Columbus, or Onslow counties had responded, and many New Hanover and Brunswick races remain blank. A blank is not a “no” — it simply means that candidate has not answered yet.

How to read it yourself — and why to check back

The results are public, free, and updated continuously as new replies arrive — several of the Cape Fear answers landed on October 18, 19, and 20. You can read every response, including the written statements, here:

deflocknc.org/2026-candidate-survey →

A few honest caveats. These answers are self-reported by the candidates and posted as written; DeFlockNC presents them verbatim rather than fact-checking each statement, and a candidate’s words are a promise, not a record of votes. Positions can change. And because responses come in daily, the list you see today is a snapshot — the candidate who is missing this morning may be there tomorrow.

So the ask is simple. Before you vote, look up your races. If a candidate you’re considering has answered, read what they said in full. If they haven’t, that is a fair question to put to them directly: Will you tell voters, on the record, where you stand on warrantless plate-reader surveillance? The ballot is the one audit every official has to pass.

Source: DeFlockNC 2026 Candidate Survey (responses posted verbatim and updated as received; figures above reflect the responses available on October 20, 2026). DeFlockILM is not affiliated with DeFlockNC.