Maryville Residents for Privacy

East Tennessee Regional ALPR Transparency Center

East Tennessee Regional ALPR Transparency Center | Flock Safety Camera Map & Public Records
Deflock.me ALPR map across East Tennessee
Regional view of Flock Safety & ALPR camera locations across East Tennessee — via Deflock.me
Note: This is a regional East Tennessee overview. For detailed contracts, timelines, and cost analysis specific to Maryville, visit MaryvillePrivacy.org.
TL;DR for East Tennessee: This page documents ALPR and Flock Safety camera deployments across multiple jurisdictions — with maps, public-records outcomes, and accountability logs for the elected officials who approved each program.
Why it matters: Even if your city has “only a few cameras,” regional data-sharing creates a multi-city tracking net that follows drivers across jurisdictions without any warrant or probable cause.

The Region at a Glance

200+
ALPR Cameras Documented
Across 7+ East TN jurisdictions; Johnson City alone has 145
~360K
Residents Under Coverage
Combined population of documented jurisdictions
30 Days
Standard Retention
Default Flock policy in TN; longer for “evidence”
0
TN State Oversight Laws
No retention cap, audit, or vendor restriction in Tennessee
Short clip illustrating continuous ALPR surveillance across East Tennessee. Tap to play.

Fourth Amendment · Constitutional Analysis

How Mass ALPR Surveillance
Violates the U.S. Constitution

A breakdown of the legal principles that govern government searches — and how Flock Safety‑style deployments conflict with each one.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

What Flock captures on every innocent driver — on every pass

🎪License PlateEvery vehicle, zero suspicion
🕐Exact TimestampPermanent date & time
📍GPS LocationWhich road, which city
🔁Daily PatternsRoutes profiled over months
🔗Multi-City DataShared across all jurisdictions
⛪Sensitive LocationsChurch, clinic, protest

The four constitutional principles ALPR mass collection violates

🎯
Particularity
✗ Mass collection, not targeted

The Fourth Amendment requires warrants to particularly describe “the persons or things to be seized.” ALPR captures everyone — not named suspects, not specific vehicles, not people under investigation.

📋
Probable Cause
✗ No cause required to scan

Searches require probable cause that a crime has been committed. Flock cameras photograph law-abiding drivers with zero suspicion — no crime, no complaint, no basis. Innocence is no protection.

🔒
Privacy in Movement
✗ Pattern-of-life tracking

In Carpenter v. United States (2018), the Supreme Court recognized that aggregating location data over time reveals “the privacies of life.” In Chatrie v. United States (2026), it extended that protection to location history held by third-party companies — even a two-hour window. A single scan is trivial; a searchable movement history is constitutionally significant.

⚖️
Judicial Oversight
✗ No warrant, no judge, no review

Flock cameras collect and retain data automatically, continuously, with no judicial warrant and no external audit. Any officer with system access can query any vehicle’s history without seeking court approval.

How a warrantless “pattern-of-life” profile is built

You drive normallyNo crime · No suspicion
→
Camera scans plateTime + GPS + image logged
→
Repeat across citiesMaryville · Knoxville · Alcoa…
→
Data retained 30+ daysSearchable — no warrant
→
Your full movement historyAvailable — no warrant needed

“Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power. The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”

Daniel Webster — U.S. Senator & Secretary of State · Speech at Niblo’s Saloon, New York · March 15, 1837

Where the ALPR question stands in the courts: In 2024, a Norfolk, Virginia circuit judge suppressed evidence from that city’s 172-camera Flock network as a warrantless search — but the Virginia Court of Appeals reversed that ruling in October 2025 (Commonwealth v. Church). In January 2026, a federal district judge upheld Norfolk’s network against the Institute for Justice’s constitutional challenge, while cautioning that ALPR surveillance “could become too intrusive” as the technology expands.

That case is now on appeal as Schmidt v. City of Norfolk (4th Cir. No. 26-1227) — the leading Fourth Amendment test of Flock-style networks in the country, with amicus briefs from the ACLU, EFF, Cato Institute, and EPIC. Every East Tennessee deployment documented on this page raises the same question that court will decide.

Sources: Virginia Court of Appeals, Commonwealth v. Church (Oct. 14, 2025) · Schmidt v. City of Norfolk, E.D. Va. (Jan. 27, 2026), appeal pending · Institute for Justice Plate Privacy campaign

U.S. Supreme Court · Decided June 29, 2026

Chatrie v. United States: Location Data Held by a Third Party Is Still Yours

In a 6–3 opinion by Justice Kagan, the Supreme Court held that pulling a person’s cell-phone location history through a geofence warrant is a Fourth Amendment search — even for a window as short as two hours, and even though the data sat on a third party’s servers (Google’s). The Court rejected the government’s argument that handing data to a company strips it of constitutional protection, and rejected the argument that a small slice taken from a massive database is too trivial to count, extending Carpenter v. United States (2018).

What this means for Flock: The Court was not addressing license plate readers, and Chatrie does not directly rule on ALPR networks. But every element the Court found constitutionally significant is present here — retrospective location history, held by a private third-party vendor, revealing the movements of people suspected of nothing. And where Chatrie at least involved a warrant, routine Flock queries involve none. Defenders of ALPR networks lean on United States v. Knotts (1983), which found no privacy expectation in a single trip on public roads; whether that 1983 rule or Chatrie’s aggregation logic controls a networked, multi-week, searchable movement archive is precisely the question now before the Fourth Circuit in Schmidt.

Sources: Chatrie v. United States, 609 U.S. ___ (2026) (opinion) · SCOTUSblog coverage. Analysis of ALPR implications is this site’s editorial assessment, noted as such.

No public vote in any of these jurisdictions gave residents a meaningful say in being tracked. No independent audit oversees who queries the data, what they search for, or why.

Your neighbor’s freedom is your freedom An innocent person’s privacy matters Good intentions are not enough

Mass surveillance does not target only the guilty. When the government builds a warrantless record of everywhere a person goes—their church, their doctor, their meetings, their friendships—the loss of liberty belongs to all of us. When one community’s freedom is eroded without consequence, every community’s freedom becomes negotiable. The Constitution was not written for easy days. It was written to protect us on the hard ones.

“The ‘good intention’ of reducing crime does not suspend the Constitution.”

A Principle That Travels With You

The Fourth Amendment Doesn’t End at Your Front Door

The First Amendment protects your right to speak, assemble, and worship — not just inside your home, but in public squares, parks, churches, and on the street. The Second Amendment protects your right to keep and bear arms — not just behind your own front door, but as you move through your community. These rights travel with you, by design, because the Founders understood that liberty confined to private property is not liberty at all.

So why should the Fourth Amendment stop at the end of your driveway?

The Fourth Amendment protects your “persons, houses, papers, and effects” against unreasonable searches. The word doing the work is unreasonable, not indoor. The Founders did not anticipate a world in which a private company could photograph every vehicle on every road, log the time and place of every trip, and sell the resulting database back to the government as a paid subscription. But they did anticipate that government — and anyone else — would find new methods to watch the people. They wrote the Fourth Amendment to govern those methods regardless of how the search is conducted.

A search is a search whether it is conducted by a constable peering into a wagon in 1791 or by an automated camera network photographing 127,000 vehicles a day in Maryville in 2024. The technology has changed. The constitutional question has not. And in June 2026, the Supreme Court confirmed in Chatrie v. United States that the question does not disappear just because a private company holds the data.

Protect the Constitution now — before the technology makes it irrelevant. Once a mass surveillance infrastructure is in place, it does not unbuild itself. Cameras stay on the poles. Contracts auto-renew. Data accumulates. The cost of removing the system rises every year. The window for democratic action is open right now — at the procurement vote, at the budget meeting, in the letter to your representative. Wait too long and the question becomes academic.
Your rights are not for sale to private surveillance companies. Flock Safety, Axon, Critical Tech Solutions, and the rest of the surveillance-as-a-service industry have built a business model around a single proposition: that constitutional protections do not apply to data collected by private vendors and sold back to local governments. That proposition is wrong. The Constitution does not contain an exception for technology that did not exist in 1791. It contains a principle — that the government may not conduct warrantless dragnet surveillance of innocent people — and that principle survives the invention of any new product line.

The pages below document, jurisdiction by jurisdiction, the actual record of Flock Safety camera deployments across East Tennessee — who voted to approve them, what records have been released or withheld, and what residents can do about them.

What Other States Have Done — And What Tennessee Hasn’t

State-Level ALPR Action: A Comparison

The Fourth Amendment is the floor, not the ceiling. States are free to enact their own additional restrictions on ALPR surveillance. Maine and Virginia have done so. Tennessee has not. The table below summarizes the contrast.

Protection Maine Virginia Tennessee
Broad prohibition on ALPR use YES (with narrow government / LE exceptions) No No
Data retention cap (ordinary captures) 21 days 21 days (unless tied to active investigation) No state cap (Flock default 30 days)
Written agency policies required Yes Yes No
Audit trail and internal audits required Yes Yes No
Mandatory public reporting Yes Yes No
Vendor practice restrictions Yes Yes No
Restrictions on out-of-state data sharing Yes Yes No
Penalty for violation Class E crime Statutory civil and administrative remedies None
What this means for Tennessee residents: every protection in the Maine and Virginia columns is something the Tennessee General Assembly could enact tomorrow. The reason it has not happened is political will, not legal complexity. A Tennessee state legislator who refused to support a 21-day retention cap, mandatory written policies, or audit trail requirements would be choosing to leave Tennesseans with fewer protections than residents of Maine or Virginia currently enjoy. This is the legislation that the elected representative for any East Tennessee state house district will vote on, oppose, or sponsor.

📍 Maryville, Tennessee

Active Network

Maryville has deployed a Flock Safety ALPR network across city streets and key intersections. MaryvillePrivacy.org documents the contracts, policies, email correspondence, public-records disputes, and a controversial “ghost vehicle” whitelist that allows private cars to bypass system alerts.

~16 cameras Approved July 2, 2024 Population ~31,569 Drone program pitched $300K–$600K/yr
🧾 Maryville City Officials on Record — Flock Approval (July 2, 2024)

City Council unanimously adopted “A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF LPR/CAMERAS IN MARYVILLE, TN FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC SAFETY.”

  • Andy White — Mayor. Presided; declared resolution adopted.
  • Fred Metz — Vice Mayor. Made the motion to adopt.
  • Tommy Hunt — Councilmember. Seconded the motion.
  • Drew Miles — Councilmember. Voted in favor.
  • Sarah Herron — Councilmember. Absent.
  • Greg McClain — City Manager. Present.
  • Sherri Phillips — City Recorder. Authorized to transmit certified copy to TDOT.
  • Melanie Davis — City Attorney. Approved as to form.
  • Tony Jay Crisp — Chief of Police / Director of Public Safety. Primary implementer.
  • Lt. Rod M. Fernandez — MPD point of contact with Flock Safety. Arranged March 20, 2024 meeting with Flock rep.
Source: City of Maryville Council Minutes (July 2, 2024), agenda background materials, and TPRA email records.
🎪 State legislative angle: Maryville Police Chief Tony Jay Crisp is a candidate for the Tennessee House of Representatives in District 8 (Republican primary, August 6, 2026). The seat is being vacated by Jerome Moon, who is running for Blount County Mayor. The state legislator elected from District 8 will vote on legislation governing every protection in the Maine/Virginia column above. See: The Maryville PD–Flock Safety Vendor Relationship: A Constitutional Record for District 8 Voters.

Maryville Flock Camera Map

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Maryville, TN →

📍 Alcoa, Tennessee

Active · Expanding

Alcoa sits directly adjacent to Maryville, sharing major commuter routes. Regional deployments across both cities create a combined tracking net — residents commuting through Alcoa may be scanned by multiple jurisdictions in a single trip.

Launched October 2020 10 cameras at launch Expanded FY 2021–22 & FY 2024–25 Data retention 30 days
Public Record: Alcoa PD Strategic Plan — Flock LPR Program
  • October 2020: 10 stationary Flock Safety LPR cameras installed at major Alcoa entry points.
  • FY 2021–2022: Two additional Flock LPRs added.
  • FY 2024–2025: Further cameras added.
  • Retention policy: Data held 30 days unless needed for an active investigation.
Source: Alcoa PD “Five Year Strategic Plan” (revised July 1, 2025). View Alcoa PD Strategic Plan (PDF) →
🧾 Alcoa Officials in Public Record During ALPR Program Period
  • Odis Clint Abbott Jr. — Mayor · Vaughn Belcher — Commissioner
  • Jim Buchanan — Commissioner · Tracey Cooper — Commissioner
  • Tanya Martin — Commissioner · Mark Johnson — City Manager
  • Stephanie Coleman — City Attorney · Kim Wade — Assistant City Recorder
Source: City of Alcoa Board of Commissioners Minutes. Example: Jan 12, 2021 Minutes →

Alcoa Regional Map (Deflock.me)

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Alcoa, TN →

📍 Blount County, Tennessee

County ALPR · Regional Hub

Blount County government surrounds Maryville and Alcoa, and the Blount County Sheriff's Office polices the unincorporated areas between them. In 2020, BCSO sought its own Flock Safety ALPR network through a federal Department of Justice grant. The county's project description said the goal was to combine its cameras with surrounding cities' data into “a much larger grid.”

9 Flock LPRs sought in 2020 $47,250 federal DOJ grant request NCIC hot-sheet sync every 24 hours Sheriff Berrong in office since 1989 Regional drone pitch $300K–$600K per year
Public Record: BCSO Flock ALPR Procurement, 2020
  • August 2020: BCSO sought nine stationary Flock Safety license plate readers, according to a project description submitted to the Blount County Commission.
  • Funding source: Project Safe Neighborhood East Tennessee, a U.S. Department of Justice initiative. The total grant request for purchase, installation, maintenance, and operating costs was $47,250.
  • NCIC integration: the proposed system would compare scans against National Crime Information Center hot sheets that the project description said were “updated every 24 hours.”
  • The regional-hub plan: after installation, BCSO said it would request data from Oak Ridge, Maryville, Alcoa, Lenoir City, and other local agencies using the system.
  • The county project description stated: “This will allow for local access to a much larger grid and promotes interoperability.”
  • Personnel appearing in the record: the project description was authored by Shankle of BCSO. Public Information Officer Marian O'Briant responded regarding camera placement. Then-Maryville Police Chief Tony Crisp told the Daily Times that Alcoa and the county had been looking at the system since Maryville obtained it.
Source: The Daily Times, “BCSO looking to get stationary license plate readers” (August 2020)
Why county-level ALPR matters more, not less: A county network fills the geographic gaps between city systems. A driver who never enters Maryville or Alcoa city limits can still be scanned on county roads. BCSO's stated plan to obtain neighboring agencies' data would make the county the connective tissue of a regional vehicle-tracking network. Federal grant funding can also allow surveillance infrastructure to begin without a clear, standalone public vote specifically addressing the technology.
🧾 The 21 Blount County Commissioners Who Can End the County's ALPR Program
Public notice: This information is provided for transparency and government accountability, not as a call for harassment. Every official is listed in an official capacity using contact information published by Blount County for constituent communication. The request is specific and lawful: end the county's ALPR program or decline to fund its renewal.
How surveillance can be approved without a clear vote on surveillance: The Blount County Commission adopts the county budget and authorizes grants under which BCSO programs operate. Surveillance expenses may appear inside broader budgets, grants, renewals, or consent items rather than through a standalone vote specifically labeled as license plate surveillance. No recorded commissioner vote opposing the county ALPR program has yet been located in the records reviewed for this project. Any commissioner can publicly request a standalone discussion, seek a recorded vote, propose restrictions, or oppose future funding and renewal.

Blount County Commission, 2022–2026 term, based on the county's published roster. Commissioners marked Budget Committee participate in the committee where county funding proposals are reviewed before reaching the full Commission.

District / Seat Commissioner Official Contact
District 1, Seat A Jessica Hannah
Blount County Commissioner 		jhannah@blounttn.org
District 1, Seat B Earl McMahan
Blount County Commissioner 		emcmahan@blounttn.org
District 2, Seat A Mike Akard
Blount County Commissioner 		makard@blounttn.org
District 2, Seat B Dyran Bledsoe
Blount County Commissioner · I.T. Committee 		dbledsoe@blounttn.org
District 3, Seat A Scott King
Blount County Commissioner 		sking@blounttn.org
District 3, Seat B Mike Caylor
Blount County Commissioner · Budget Committee 		mcaylor@blounttn.org
District 4, Seat A Robbie Bennett
Blount County Commissioner 		rbennett@blounttn.org
District 4, Seat B Dawn Reagan
Blount County Commissioner 		dreagan@blounttn.org
District 4, Seat C John Giles
Blount County Commissioner · Parliamentarian 		jgiles@blounttn.org
District 5, Seat A Jared Anderson
Commission Chairman · Budget Committee · Finance Committee · Audit Committee 		janderson@blounttn.org
District 5, Seat B Rick Carver
Blount County Commissioner · I.T. Committee 		rcarver@blounttn.org
District 6, Seat A Nick Bright
Blount County Commissioner · Budget Committee 		nbright@blounttn.org
District 6, Seat B Misty Davis
Blount County Commissioner 		mddavis@blounttn.org
District 7, Seat A Quentin Caldwell
Blount County Commissioner 		qcaldwell@blounttn.org
District 7, Seat B Staci Crisp-Lawhorn
Blount County Commissioner · Finance Committee 		slawhorn@blounttn.org
District 8, Seat A Brad Bowers
Blount County Commissioner 		bbowers@blounttn.org
District 8, Seat B Jeff Jopling
Blount County Commissioner · I.T. Committee 		jjopling@blounttn.org
District 9, Seat A Ron French
Commissioner Pro Tempore · Audit Committee 		rfrench@blounttn.org
District 9, Seat B Steve Mikels
Blount County Commissioner · Finance Committee 		smikels@blounttn.org
District 10, Seat A Linda Webb
Blount County Commissioner 		lwebb@blounttn.org
District 10, Seat B David Wells
Blount County Commissioner 		dwells@blounttn.org

Executive and Program Officials

  • James Lee Berrong · Blount County Sheriff. The ALPR program is operated through the Sheriff's Office, and the 2020 project description was submitted during his administration.
  • Ed Mitchell · Blount County Mayor, Chief Fiscal Officer, and Budget Committee Chairman during the program's proposal and operation.

The 2020 Commission of Record

The 2018–2022 County Commission was the governing body that received the 2020 BCSO grant proposal. A complete historical roster can identify who was serving at the time, but attributing approval or opposition to individual commissioners requires the actual meeting agenda, minutes, grant resolution, and roll-call vote. Those records should be published before assigning a specific vote to any official.

Sources: Blount County Commission official roster, committee assignments, and constituent contact information · Blount County Commission structure and authority
⚠️ Records Gap: What the Public Record Does Not Yet Show

Assigning the 2020 grant approval to individual commissioners requires the Commission agenda, meeting minutes, grant resolution, and roll-call vote for the Project Safe Neighborhood application. Those records are not yet published here.

Also outstanding are the county's:

  • Current number and locations of ALPR cameras
  • Current Flock Safety contracts, renewals, invoices, and funding sources
  • Written ALPR use and retention policy
  • Agency and user access lists
  • Data-sharing agreements with neighboring agencies
  • Search and audit logs
  • Misuse investigations, complaints, and disciplinary records
  • Records showing whether the original nine-camera deployment expanded

These remain active Tennessee Public Records Act targets. If a commissioner opposed the program, requested restrictions, or voted against its funding, the public record should identify that action.

Update: Flock Pitched a Regional Drone Program Including Blount County
  • Tennessee public records show Flock Safety pitched a regional drone-as-first-responder program involving Maryville, Alcoa, Blount County, and the Blount County 911 Center.
  • The estimated regional program cost was $300,000 to $600,000 per year.
  • The proposal demonstrates how an ALPR network can become the foundation for a broader surveillance system involving cameras, vehicle tracking, real-time intelligence software, and police drones.
Full investigation: Inside Maryville's Flock AI Drone Program →
🗳️ The accountability request: Blount County residents can ask every commissioner and county official to publish the complete ALPR record, require a standalone public vote for future surveillance spending, and end or decline renewal of the county's license plate surveillance program.

Blount County Regional Map

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Blount County, Tennessee →

📍 Knoxville, Tennessee

Flock → Axon + Drones

Knoxville’s Flock contract expired Dec 31, 2025; cameras went offline Jan 1, 2026. The city is transitioning to Axon ALPR while rolling out a $9.4M drone program with 12 drones and city-wide docking stations. A vendor change is not a privacy fix. Axon is also marketing “Connect Knoxville,” a program asking residents and businesses to link their private security cameras into KPD’s platform.

18 Flock cameras (offline Jan 2026) Axon ALPR planned “this summer” Drone program $9.4M 12 drones + city-wide docking stations 5 vehicles on exempt list NEW: fususCORE home/business camera integration
Knoxville surveillance stack infographic
Knoxville surveillance stack: ALPR + drones + Axon data fusion. Click to enlarge.
Update: Knoxville Flock Offline + Axon Transition
  • 18 Flock cameras placed around Knoxville (City of Knoxville “City Matters” page).
  • Contract expired Dec 31, 2025; cameras turned off Jan 1, 2026.
  • KPD plans to transition to Axon ALPR “this summer.”
City of Knoxville (18 cameras) · WBIR (contract lapse + Axon plan)
Update: $9.4M Police Drone Program Approved (Jan 2026)
  • $9.4M approved by City Council for KPD tech expansion.
  • Plan includes 12 drones + docking stations around the city.
  • Package covers drones, body & dash cameras, and Tasers from Axon.
  • KPD promised a public dashboard showing drone flight paths, duration, and launch purpose.
  • Drones not operational for at least ~6 months; KPD must finalize policies with Axon.
WVLT (Jan 21, 2026)
🎥 Local News: Knoxville’s Expanding Surveillance Network

Watch this local news report discussing Knoxville’s transition from Flock to Axon ALPR, the city’s expanding drone program, and the growing surveillance network.

▶

Facebook does not permit this video to play directly on external websites.

Watch the Video on Facebook →
External video hosted on Facebook.
Why switching from Flock to Axon is not a privacy fix: Axon acquired Fusus — technology that aggregates live video, data, and sensor feeds from multiple sources into one platform. When ALPR, drones, body cameras, and fixed cameras are all connected and searchable together, the system becomes a search engine for movement and associations. The Fourth Amendment concern does not disappear when the vendor logo changes.
🏠 New (2026): “Connect Knoxville” · Axon Hardware Inside Private Homes & Businesses
Axon fususCORE private camera integration device sold to Knoxville residents
The Axon fususCORE device residents are asked to purchase and plug into their camera systems. Click to enlarge.
  • connectknoxvilletn.org asks residents and businesses to register their cameras with KPD (Level 1) and, at Level 2, to purchase a fususCORE device that gives KPD conditional live access to private camera feeds.
  • Despite the civic-sounding .org name, the site is Axon-operated: the footer reads “Powered by Axon, ©2026 Axon Enterprise, Inc.” and the contact address is connect@fusus.com.
  • Residents pay for the hardware themselves; feeds route to AWS GovCloud into FususONE, the platform behind KPD’s Real Time Information Center.
  • AI-enabled CORE devices come “pre-loaded with dozens of search and analysis variables and profiles” that trigger automatic alerts across a designated area.
  • The program FAQ claims registry data is “protected non-public data” and not subject to public records disclosure: a database of citizen camera locations the public cannot inspect.
How Connect Knoxville links private home and business cameras into the KPD surveillance network
How Connect Knoxville routes private camera feeds into KPD’s real-time platform. Click to enlarge.
Our recommendation: do not install third-party surveillance vendor hardware inside your private network. A fususCORE is a remotely managed computer you cannot independently audit, placed behind your firewall next to your family’s devices, with capabilities defined by firmware the vendor can update. Footage you consent to share with police requires no warrant, no probable cause, and no judge. Intention does not limit the system: the same live access and AI search tools are equally available if an investigation ever turns toward you, your family, your employees, or your guests. You are trading a constitutional protection for a settings page, and you cannot un-share it later.
Warning: connecting home cameras to police networks waives Fourth Amendment protections for shared footage
What you give up when you connect: no warrant, no probable cause, no judge required for footage you volunteer. Click to enlarge.
Connect Knoxville (Axon-operated site) · Program Privacy FAQs · EFF on Fusus private camera networks · Full investigation: Who Is Axon? →
Knoxville Police Department seal🧾 Knoxville Accountability Log — Who Approved These Programs
Public notice: For transparency and governance accountability — not a call for harassment. Documents who approved and implemented these programs.

A) 2026 Drone + Axon Program — Elected Officials

  • Mayor: Indya Kincannon
  • Council Districts 1–6: Karyn Adams, Nathan Honeycutt, Doug Lloyd, Matthew DeBardelaben, Charles Thomas, Denzel Grant
  • At-Large A/B/C: Lynne Fugate, Debbie Helsley, Amelia Parker
  • Police Chief: Paul Noel

B) Flock ALPR Procurement (Dec 2020) — Historical Record

  • Kenny Miller — Deputy Chief; KPD Flock order-form contact.
  • Natalie Reyes — Contract Manager, City Purchasing; managed sole-source letter.
  • Penny Owens, Stacey Payne — CC’d on sole-source email thread.

Knoxville Regional Map (Deflock.me)

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Knoxville, TN →
Flock’s Multi-Geo & Convoy Tools →

📍 Sevierville, Tennessee

TPRA Denied

Sevierville denied a TPRA request for sample ALPR images, citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-504(a)(32). The City did provide a complete list of its camera locations — reproduced below.

Sevierville’s TPRA Response
“We will not provide ALPRS images as requested. The justification for withholding these images is Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-504(a)(32)… Captured plate data must be treated as confidential and shall not be open for inspection by members of the public.”
🧾 Sevierville Officials (Board of Mayor & Aldermen)
  • Robbie Fox — Mayor · Mitch Rader — Vice Mayor
  • Wayne Helton, Devin Koester, Travis L. McCroskey, Joey Ohman — Aldermen
  • Dustin Smith — City Administrator · Lynn McClurg — CFO/City Recorder
  • Ed Owens — City Attorney · Joseph Manning — Police Chief
Source: Sevierville Board of Mayor & Aldermen minutes (Nov 3, 2025).
📷 Sevierville ALPR Camera Locations (as provided by the City)
• SB Veterans Blvd (KFC area)• NB Hwy 66 north of Gists Creek • NB Hwy 66 (West Mount / Rocky Top Dodge)• SB Hwy 66 (Flea Traders area) • SB Parkway (Belk area)• I-40 inbound / Hwy 66 (×4) • Parkway @ Collier Drive NB• Dolly Parton Pkwy @ Robert Henderson Rd SB • Veterans Blvd @ Collier Drive NB• Hwy 411 @ Old Newport Hwy WB • Hwy 411 @ N Circle EB• WB West Main St @ Kilby St (×2) • Hwy 416 @ John L Marshall (×2)• EB Dolly Parton Pkwy @ Birchwood (×2)

Sevierville Map (Deflock.me)

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Sevierville, TN →

📍 Oak Ridge, Tennessee

TPRA — No Response

Oak Ridge has a documented Flock Group ALPR lease renewed by City Council vote — and failed to respond to a TPRA request for basic camera records within the legally required 7 business days, likely violating Tennessee open-records law.

July 2024 renewal: ≤$53,800 August 2025 renewal: ≤$52,000 TPRA sent November 2025 · Response: None
🧾 Oak Ridge Officials on Record — Flock Lease Approvals
  • July 8, 2024 (Res. 7-103-2024): Voted Aye: Mayor Pro Tem Jim Dodson; Councilmembers Derrick Hammond, Charlie Hensley, Chuck Hope, Ellen Smith. Absent: Sean Gleason, Mayor Warren Gooch.
  • August 11, 2025: Renewed Flock lease (≤$52,000). Roll call: Mayor Warren Gooch, Mayor Pro Tem Jim Dodson, Councilmembers Sean Gleason, Derrick Hammond, Charlie Hensley, Chuck Hope, Ellen Smith.
  • City Manager: Randy Hemann
Source: Oak Ridge City Council minutes (July 8, 2024) and legal notice of August 11, 2025 proceedings.
⚠️ Why the Non-Response Likely Violates Tennessee Law

Under Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503(a)(2)(B), a records custodian must — within 7 business days — provide records, issue a written denial with legal basis, or give a written time estimate. Silence is treated as denial of access and is likely non-compliant with the statute and OORC guidance.

Oak Ridge Map (Deflock.me)

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Oak Ridge, TN →

📍 Johnson City, Tennessee

145-Device Deployment

Johnson City approved one of the most extensive Flock Safety deployments in East Tennessee — a 10-year agreement covering 145 LPR devices, 145 PTZ cameras, gunshot detection, mobile security trailers, and a Real Time Crime Center. The per-capita camera density is among the highest in the region.

145 LPR devices 145 PTZ cameras 2 mobile security trailers Gunshot detection Real Time Crime Center 10-year agreement Approved July 17, 2025 · 4–0
Scale context: Maryville: ~16 cameras for ~31,569 residents. Johnson City: 145 LPR devices for ~72,589 residents — roughly 2.8× higher per-capita density. The Institute for Justice challenged Norfolk, Virginia’s 172-camera network. Johnson City’s count nearly matches that figure for a city roughly half the size.
🧾 Johnson City Officials on Record — Flock Approval (July 17, 2025)

Approved on Consent Agenda, 4–0 vote.

  • John Hunter II — Mayor. Presided; present.
  • Greg Cox — Vice-Mayor. Voted in favor.
  • Jenny Brock — Commissioner. Voted in favor.
  • Joe Wise — Commissioner. Voted in favor.
  • Todd Fowler — Commissioner. Absent.
  • Cathy Ball — City Manager. Present. · Stephanie Laos — City Recorder. Present.
Source: Johnson City Board of Commissioners minutes (July 17, 2025).

Local Coverage — Johnson City Flock Cameras

Local reporting on Johnson City, Tennessee Flock / Safe City Project.

Johnson City Map (Deflock.me)

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Johnson City, TN →
Local mapping resource: The independent Johnson City Mapping Project provides additional local documentation and mapping related to Johnson City’s surveillance-camera deployment.

📍 Crossville, Tennessee

Active Network

Crossville marks the western edge of the documented network, in Cumberland County on the plateau between Knoxville and Nashville. Crossville PD has operated Flock Safety ALPRs since 2022, originally pitched by Chief Jessie Brooks as “extra eyes” for investigations. The dedicated companion site CrossvillePrivacy.org documents the full procurement trail, taxpayer cost projections, the Tennessee misuse record, and a City Council liability brief.

11 cameras (Atlas of Surveillance, Sept 2025) Contract start Aug 26, 2022 $25,000/yr recurring (Quote Q-00234) 10-yr projection ~$253,500 Published policy / map / audits: None
Public Record: Crossville PD Flock Procurement
  • June 2022: Chief Jessie Brooks presents Flock to council and local media as “extra eyes” for investigations, Amber/Silver alerts, and database hits — not red-light ticketing.
  • Flock Quote Q-00234: 10 Falcon ALPRs at $2,500 each = $25,000 recurring, plus $3,500 implementation ($28,500 total before tax); 12-month term starting Aug 26, 2022.
  • September 2025: EFF’s Atlas of Surveillance lists 11 Crossville PD Flock ALPRs — one more than quoted, with no published public map explaining the growth.
  • Cost trajectory: At quoted rates, cumulative spend reaches roughly $128,500 over five years and $253,500 over ten — before tax, add-ons, or the 11th camera.
Sources: Flock Quote Q-00234 (PDF) · Atlas of Surveillance — Crossville PD · Crossville Chronicle (June 27, 2022) · 3B Media (Dec 5, 2022).
🧾 Crossville Officials on Record — ALPR Program Governance
  • R.J. Crawford — Mayor (term expires 12/3/2026)
  • Art Gernt — Mayor Pro-tem / Councilmember
  • Mike Turner — Councilmember · Mark Fox, MD — Councilmember
  • Jessie Brooks — Chief of Police. Primary implementer; pitched the system in 2022.
  • Valerie Hale — City Manager · Baylee Rhea — City Clerk
  • Randall A. York — City Attorney
  • Greg Wood — City Manager at the time of the 2022 Flock work-session discussion (historical).
Source: City of Crossville council roster and reporting compiled at CrossvillePrivacy.org.
What Crossville has not published: a written ALPR search policy, monthly audit summaries, an official public camera map, or a city-authored list of outside agencies that can query local plate reads. A Flock partner transparency portal exists at transparency.flocksafety.com/crossville-tn-pd, but a vendor portal is not a city-published policy or audit log.

Crossville Map (Deflock.me)

🔗 Open DeFlock.org centered on Crossville, TN →

🗺️ East Tennessee ALPR Coordination Map

This map plots agencies invited to Flock Safety’s “Deep Dive” regional training event in Sevierville on March 1, 2024. Markers reflect agency headquarters. Data from a TPRA-obtained internal Flock Safety email distribution list.

💡 Inclusion indicates regional coordination and invitation — not necessarily in-person attendance.

Who Was on Flock’s Regional Training List

RegionAgencyPersonnel in TPRA records
MaryvilleMaryville Police Dept.Rod Fernandez, Daniel Dockery, Adam Russell, Chief Tony Crisp
AlcoaAlcoa Police Dept.Underwood, Carswell, Sparks, Nielsen, Hughes
KnoxvilleKnoxville Police Dept.McVay, Harvey, Marshall, Chadwell, Sisk, Henderson
Knox CountyKnox County Sheriff’s OfficeSheriff Tom Spangler, Jennifer Ward
SeviervilleSevierville Police Dept.Milliron, Brantley, Turner, Powers
Sevier CountySevier County Sheriff’s OfficeCassidy, Russell, Legg
Tri-CitiesKingsport Police Dept.Charles DeGreen, Martin Taylor, Kevin Ewing
RegionalAdditional agenciesLenoir City PD, Sweetwater PD, Rocky Top PD, Bluff City PD, Monroe County SO, Hamblen County SO, Unicoi County SO, White Pine PD, Dandridge PD, Bean Station PD, Tazewell PD, Maynardville PD, Blaine PD, Spring City PD, and others.
Why vendor-led “Deep Dive” events matter: Flock organized the event, circulated the invite list, and led sessions on regional investigations and how to use Flock tools — combined with hosted lunches and sales-oriented follow-up. When one company controls the tools, hosts the training, and sets the playbook, the risk is that policing decisions follow product marketing rather than narrowly tailored, accountable, constitutional practice.
🎯 A Second Surveillance Vendor in the Region: Critical Tech Solutions

Flock Safety is not the only surveillance-equipment vendor operating in East Tennessee. Propel Ops LLC dba Critical Tech Solutions of Knoxville sells mobile surveillance towers, solar surveillance trailers, IP cameras, antenna masts, and rapid-deploy police camera systems to law enforcement, military, and government agencies across the region. According to its corporate website at criticaltechsolutions.com:

  • The company markets a no-competitive-bid purchasing path for government agencies under TIPS Contract #230105, advertising “No bid documents, no RFP, no delay.”
  • It identifies itself as a 2026 Strategic Alliance Partner of the FBI National Academy Associates.
  • It publishes a customer case study titled “Maryville PD’s Rapid Watch Ensures Biker Bash Safety” (December 22, 2023, updated July 8, 2025), describing the Maryville Police Department’s deployment of a Hitch-Mounted RATT mobile surveillance tower during Smoky Mountain Bike Week. The case study quotes Lt. Rod Fernandez.
  • Its homepage displays a testimonial section featuring Chief Tony J. Crisp’s name alongside the Maryville Police Department identifier as part of its sales marketing.
  • Propel Ops LLC dba Critical Tech Solutions contributed $1,000 to Chief Crisp’s Tennessee House District 8 campaign on February 5, 2026, per filings on OpenTN.org.

The pattern this regional page documents with Flock Safety is not vendor-specific. The same dynamics — direct vendor-to-command-staff communication, marketing use of municipal identifiers, no-competitive-bid procurement pathways — are visible across multiple private vendors operating in East Tennessee.

Sources: Critical Tech Solutions corporate website at criticaltechsolutions.com; OpenTN.org campaign-finance filings for Tony Jay Crisp.
🧾 Regional accountability footnote: Sitting police chiefs in two East Tennessee jurisdictions have contributed to a District 8 state-house campaign for Maryville’s police chief: Chief Mark Gibson, Cleveland Police Department ($110), and Chief Richard Catlett, Pigeon Forge Police Department ($101). Pigeon Forge sits in Sevier County, the same county where the March 2024 Flock Safety “Deep Dive” regional training was held. The donations are public record on OpenTN.org and do not constitute formal endorsements, but they reflect a regional law-enforcement network in which command staff are actively engaged with both the surveillance-vendor ecosystem and the political races that will shape state-level surveillance legislation.

National ALPR Map — East Tennessee Regional View (Deflock.me)

🔗 Open DeFlock.org — East Tennessee regional view →

Tools & Transparency

📚 Resources & Transparency Tools

External tools to understand ALPR systems, map cameras, review audit logs, monitor local-government discussions, and pursue open records in Tennessee.

🗺️ Camera Mapping
MapsCrowdsourcingALPR locations
🧾 Audit Logs & Portals
Audit logsTransparencySearch activity
⚖️ Legal & Policy
PolicyLitigationFourth Amendment
📄 Tennessee Public Records
TPRAOpen recordsHow-to
Tip: Share by linking directly to a city section using the anchor links in the navigation bar above. ↑ Back to top

Common Questions

❓ Q&A — East Tennessee ALPR

Why include multiple cities on one page?
ALPR systems share data across jurisdiction lines. A regional view helps residents understand the full tracking net — not just one town’s hardware. A driver between Maryville and Knoxville may be captured by both systems on a single trip.
Is Deflock.me an official government map?
No. Deflock.me is a community-sourced project. It is useful for discovery, but city-provided records and on-the-ground confirmation remain important for accuracy.
Why do some cities deny ALPR image requests?
Some agencies cite Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-504(a)(32), which treats captured plate data as confidential. This page documents the exact exemptions cited and whether cities responded at all — Oak Ridge did not.
What’s the most useful record to request?
Even when detection images are exempt, cities may still have: contracts, camera location lists, vendor communications, policies, audit logs, data-sharing agreements, and administrative configuration records. Request them separately.
Does switching from Flock to Axon fix the privacy problem?
No. The concern is warrantless, mass collection of movement data on innocent people — not the vendor’s name. Axon’s integrated platform (ALPR + drones + Fusus data fusion) can be even more comprehensive. The same Fourth Amendment questions apply regardless of brand.
Does Maine or Virginia have laws Tennessee could copy?
Yes. Maine broadly prohibits ALPR use except for narrow government and law-enforcement exceptions, caps ordinary data retention at 21 days, and makes violations a Class E crime. Virginia requires 21-day deletion unless tied to an active investigation, mandates written agency policies, audit trails, internal audits, public reporting, vendor restrictions, and limits on data sharing. Tennessee has none of these protections. See the State Action Comparison table above for the full breakdown.
Did the Supreme Court’s Chatrie decision (2026) outlaw Flock cameras?
Not directly. In Chatrie v. United States (decided June 29, 2026, 6–3, opinion by Justice Kagan), the Court held that a geofence warrant pulling cell-phone location history is a Fourth Amendment search — even for a two-hour window, and even though a third party (Google) held the data. The Court was not addressing ALPRs, so Chatrie does not by itself shut down any Flock network. But its reasoning cuts hard against warrantless ALPR databases: retrospective location histories of ordinary people, held by a private vendor, searchable with no warrant at all. The Fourth Circuit must now apply that logic to license plate readers in Schmidt v. City of Norfolk, the Institute for Justice’s challenge to Norfolk, Virginia’s Flock network. See the Constitution section above for the full litigation status.
How can I help improve accuracy?
Send public records, official document links, or verified camera locations to info@maryvilleprivacy.org. When reporting a camera, include cross-streets, direction of travel, and a photo if possible.

Have public records, maps, or local information about ALPR cameras in East Tennessee?
Help grow this community resource by sending documents, tips, or verified camera locations.

💌 Send Records or Tips

This page consolidates public maps, city-specific records, and accountability data for automatic license plate reader (ALPR) and Flock Safety deployments across East Tennessee — including Axon-integrated surveillance ecosystems and emerging police drone programs — so residents understand how surveillance infrastructure is being built across the region, who approved it, what data it collects, and what they can do about it through public records, civic action, and engagement with their state and local representatives.