County Commissioner Candidates Answer the ALPR Question
Hubert United asked each of the five candidates for the Onslow County Board of Commissioners the same written question concerning the county’s automated license-plate-reader program. Below is the question exactly as submitted, followed by a brief neutral summary and each candidate’s complete written response.
The question
Knowing that the Onslow County Republican Executive Committee has voted in support of the county’s automated license-plate-reader cameras, and after reviewing the financial documentation and unresolved accounting questions published by Hubert United, do you personally support the county’s continued use—and any future renewal or expansion—of this system? If your support is conditional, what specific financial documentation, performance results, privacy safeguards, oversight or public reporting should be required before additional county funds are committed?
The candidates’ responses
Rebecca Cooper
Cooper opposes the continued use, renewal, or expansion of PlateRanger and similar systems. She cites the collection of innocent motorists’ movements, risks of misuse and incorrect alerts, the lack of public input, and unresolved financial questions; she says a complete financial accounting would not change her opposition.
Whitney Cantrell
Cantrell says she understands the technology’s potential law-enforcement value but opposes spending county tax dollars to continue, renew, or expand it. She identifies privacy, cybersecurity, potential liability, and fiscal responsibility as her principal concerns.
Dr. Michel Leandre Jr.
Leandre would consider continuing the program only after reviewing its funding and costs, documented performance, privacy protections, access controls, and legal compliance. He also calls for regular reporting to the commissioners and the public and says he would not support additional funding unless those standards are met.
Tim Foster
Foster supports PlateRanger only if it is used lawfully and does not violate constitutional rights. He calls for Sheriff’s Office control of the collected information, no third-party access beyond storage, no expansion beyond reading license plates, and full financial transparency.
Royce Bennett
Bennett supports what he describes as the responsible use of law-enforcement equipment within legal guidelines and says his support is not conditional. He notes that the sheriff is independently elected and encourages Hubert United to pursue its unresolved questions directly with the Sheriff or through additional records requests.
Editorial note: The summaries above are intended only as plain-language overviews. Each candidate’s complete response is provided so readers can review the original wording and reach their own conclusions.