Flock Cameras in Pender County, NC — On Private Land, Unmapped

Sixteen North Carolina communities have already said no to Flock. Add your name ›  ·  The Cape Fear is under warrantless AI surveillance — it’s time to act.
← All updates

Flock Cameras in Pender County, NC

Eight fixed plate readers and a mobile one, on a $70,600 contract the commissioners passed on a consent agenda. Cameras hidden on private land through seven landowner deals. And the who-searched logs, still withheld.

250 Pender County petition signers

Residents of Pender County among the signers of the petition at change.org/DeFlockILM, as of Sept. 12, 2026.

The Pender County Sheriff’s Office, under Sheriff Alan Cutler, leases eight fixed Flock Safety ALPR cameras and one mobile ALPR unit. The county’s own purchase order (#451, $70,600) describes the whole package, simply, as “Flock Cameras” — and the Board of Commissioners authorized it on a consent agenda (January 21, 2025, Item 8.6), not a standalone, debated vote. Here is what the records show, and what the Sheriff still won’t.

Did New Hanover County’s vote end these? No. Pender is a separate county government that runs its own Flock network. Only the Pender County Board of Commissioners and the Sheriff can end it. (Sign the petition · email the Board)

Pender County by the numbers

8 + 1
fixed Flock cameras + a mobile unit
$70,600
purchase order #451, “Flock Cameras”
7
private landowner agreements
13.7%
of the Sheriff’s own searches coded “Traffic Infraction”
2,101,548
outside searches of Pender’s cameras in 3 months — none by the local sheriff
1,055
partner networks that can search its cameras
Redacted
the searching-agency name, on every row

The cameras, on the map

Live map of ALPR cameras across Pender County, from the crowdsourced DeFlock map.

What the record shows

Cameras on private land the Sheriff won’t map. Pender withheld its camera-location map — but its own production handed over seven landowner agreements that name the sites. The Sheriff put plate readers on private property along the county’s arterials — the roads you have to use — plus a speed trailer. The locations aren’t random; they trace the chokepoints. (The full reconstruction.)

A use North Carolina law bars, in the Sheriff’s own numbers. In Pender’s audit, 13.7% of the Sheriff’s own searches are coded “Traffic Infraction” — a purpose § 20-183.31(b) forbids for ALPR data. That is the department’s own use, not an out-of-state agency’s.

The Sheriff answered — but the records answer back. Sheriff Alan Cutler issued a public statement on the county’s Flock cameras. We reprinted it in full and held each claim against the documents; on the question of who else can search Pender’s cameras, the statement is silent, and the records are not. (Read the statement, checked line by line.)

Update — Sept 11, 2026: Pender produced the Network Audit — and the number is staggering. After a second notice and a litigation-hold demand, the County (Attorney Quinton Morgan) produced the June–August Network Audits in native CSV, cooperatively and ahead of deadline. This is the record of searches of Pender’s cameras run from outside the Sheriff’s Office — and there were 2,101,548 of them in three months. Every one was run by an agency other than the Pender Sheriff — but which agencies, the county will not say: it redacted the searching-agency name on every row. (Pender’s own office ran only about 2,526 searches in six months, in a separate log.) Outsiders reach these eight cameras through the county’s 1,055 partner networks. The production also conceded the search-ID field and confirmed no federal data-sharing MOU. And 83,346 of those searches are coded “Traffic Infraction,” a use § 20-183.31(b) bars for ALPR data.

Why does Sheriff Alan Cutler hide who is searching? Pender redacted the name of every searching agency on all 2.1 million rows — even as nine other North Carolina law-enforcement agencies produced that same field intact (NC A&T, UNC Charlotte, UNC Pembroke, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach, the Whiteville Police Department, Winston-Salem State University, and more). If they can name who searches their cameras, why won’t Pender? Redacting the one field that answers “who is watching us” — while the taxpayers of Pender County foot the bill — is not transparency. We’ve asked the Office to produce the searching-agency name or cite the specific statute; that one field is now the whole fight.
The county’s “transparency portal” tells a sliver of the story. Pender’s Flock transparency portal headlines “Number of Searches: 80” over the last 30 days. But that figure counts only the Sheriff’s own searches. The county’s own Network Audit shows its nine cameras were searched about 700,000 times a month by outside agencies — 2,101,548 in three months. The portal omits every one of them. A resident reading “80” would never guess the real number runs into the millions — the portal discloses roughly one search in every 8,700. It also lists “traffic enforcement” among its prohibited uses — yet 83,346 of those outside searches are coded “Traffic Infraction.” Real transparency would show who is searching, and how often. This shows neither.

One more question the records raise. In the portal’s own public search audit, the Sheriff’s Office’s searches stop abruptly on September 10, 2026 — with no explanation offered. We’re watching to see whether, and when, its use of the system resumes.

The full record

Your county commissioners or town council hold the lever that ends Flock where you live. They need to hear from you.

What you can do

Only the Pender County Board of Commissioners and the Sheriff can end this program. Tell them, on the record, to take the cameras down — and to release the audit logs so the public can see who has been searching them.

Sign the petition   Email the Board & Sheriff   Email your leaders

Your move

You’re not a suspect. So stop being tracked like one.

It takes one minute. Add your name — then tell the officials who represent you to take the cameras down.