Peinder says Huntsville does not need Flock and she is very anti-Flock
Candidate for Huntsville City Council, District 3
“And yes, I hear, you know, that it’s a tool, but we also have a lot of other tools that we use in investigation. And an example of that is the drones that the Police Department uses. And so I don’t think that we need the system. We already have people in place. And to me, it is an invasion of privacy and, you know, it goes against our Fourth Amendment. So my stance on that is I’m very anti-Flock.”
Source and context
Interview
About this source
256 Today asked both Huntsville City Council District 3 runoff candidates the same five questions before the Sept. 22, 2026 runoff.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Before the Sept. 22, 2026 District 3 runoff, 256 Today asked Peinder and incumbent Jennie Robinson what the city should do with its Flock camera system. Peinder first said many residents were dissatisfied and that she did not remember the community being educated on the system, let alone agreeing to be surveilled.
After the quotation
Peinder said that while the contract remains in place she would push the council to release audit logs, and that when the contract comes up in January she would vote against it.
How this statement is classified
Case context: Should Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks exist?
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
The reference point is whether networked license-plate cameras such as Flock should exist and be used. Peinder says the city does not need the system, calls it an invasion of privacy and describes herself as very anti-Flock, and she said she would vote against the contract in January. That is opposition to the system itself, so Condemned fits.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Flock Safety

Should Flock-style license-plate surveillance networks exist?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full case“Ohioans should not have their movements routinely tracked, photographed, and stored simply for driving on public roads.”Read statement
“Tennesseans should be free from a surveillance state.”Read statement
“We need to restore real limits, real oversight, and real due process.”Read statement