Sondra Wilson on 2026 Midterm Elections

No One Wants to Live Under a Surveillance State Cut Public Funding for Flock-Style Surveillance Networks in Iowa Most Iowans believe in the promise of liberty and justice for all. But how many have actually tried to hold their government accountable in court? I have. What I discovered is deeply concerning: Government can possess the evidence, restrict access to investigative records, pay professionals to assemble a case against a citizen, and invoke immunity doctrines when that citizen attempts to recover damages. Now Iowa is using taxpayer dollars to expand an interconnected surveillance network capable of reconstructing citizens' movements. We are being asked to trust the government with even greater investigative powers before addressing the legal barriers that already prevent ordinary Iowans from holding it accountable. My position is to cut public funding for further expansion of Flock-style surveillance networks across Iowa. Approximately 60 Iowa government agencies already use automated license plate readers (ALPRs).[1] These cameras do more than photograph passing vehicles. Interconnected, searchable records allow government agencies to reconstruct people's movements across communities. My opposition to further public funding rests on five concerns: 1. Inadequate government accountability: Iowa's existing laws and immunity doctrines substantially restrict citizens' ability to obtain remedies for government misconduct. 2. Documented surveillance abuse: Wrongful accusations and deliberate misuse of license plate readers are already occurring. 3. Unequal access to evidence: Government agencies have publicly funded investigators and prosecuting attorneys, while ordinary citizens face substantial legal and financial barriers to obtaining the evidence needed to challenge an official's account. 4. Corporate and political interests: Iowa tax dollars are flowing to a privately owned surveillance corporation in Atlanta that is spending millions lobbying government and contributing to organizations affiliated with both major political parties. 5. Misplaced public-spending priorities: Iowa continues financing surveillance expansion while substantial needs involving healthcare, education, food security, and affordable housing remain unresolved. Before giving government additional power to monitor Iowans, examine what happens when officials abuse the power they already possess. 1. Iowa's Government-Accountability Laws Are Already a Problem Iowa law already protects the State from being sued for substantial categories of government misconduct—including abuse of discretion, false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, misrepresentation, and deceit. These protections are written directly into the Iowa Tort Claims Act: Under Iowa Code § 669.14(1), the State is protected from claims involving discretionary government decisions, expressly stating that the protection applies "whether or not the discretion be abused." Under Iowa Code § 669.14(4), the State is also protected from liability under the Act for claims arising from: * Assault and battery; * False imprisonment and false arrest; * Malicious prosecution and abuse of process; * Libel and slander; * Misrepresentation and deceit; * Interference with contract rights.[2] Yes, you read that correctly. Iowa law expressly excludes these categories of misconduct from the State Tort Claims Act's waiver of immunity. A citizen can suffer serious harm, file a lawsuit seeking compensation, and have that case dismissed under an immunity doctrine before a jury ever examines the underlying allegations. Iowa Supreme Court precedent creates additional barriers: Blanton v. Barrick (1977): The Iowa Supreme Court recognized absolute civil immunity for judges performing judicial functions and prosecutors performing protected prosecutorial functions—even when those actions are alleged to have been malicious or corrupt. The Court affirmed summary judgment for a county attorney who had initiated a prosecution despite an acknowledged conflict of interest.[3] Venckus v. City of Iowa City (2019; 2023): Following his acquittal on a sexual-abuse charge, Joshua Venckus sued officials involved in his investigation and prosecution. The Iowa Supreme Court held that judicial-process immunity barred nearly all claims against the county prosecutors arising from their prosecutorial functions. In 2023, the Court also affirmed summary judgment for the remaining city defendants.[4] Through summary judgment, Venckus's case was never allowed to see a jury. The judge threw it out before a jury could examine the facts. I am explaining this so that regular Iowans can understand what this type of case law means in the real world. Burnett v. Smith (2023): The Iowa Supreme Court overruled Godfrey v. State (2017), eliminating the previously recognized standalone right to seek monetary damages directly under the Iowa Constitution. Citizens must instead establish a separate legal basis for recovering damages, even when alleging that government officials violated their state constitutional rights.[5] Would you know how to challenge this in court, even if you could not afford an attorney? Imagine having only 15 days to file a resistance to the State's motion to dismiss, without an attorney, while a single judge determines whether your case will ever reach a jury. The State has publicly funded attorneys to defend its position; an ordinary citizen may have to undertake that work entirely alone, without funding for the extensive work required, only to discover that government-immunity doctrines can prevent them from recovering damages even after establishing that they were wrongfully accused. When I sued the State of Iowa, Assistant Attorney General Christopher Deist invoked Iowa case law and government-immunity doctrines, and my case was dismissed without trial. My underlying allegations were never decided by a jury. You can find my litigation, supporting documentation, and continuing efforts to obtain a fair trial on WildWillpower.org. If regular Iowans fully understood how Iowa's immunity laws and judicial doctrines operate in practice, I firmly believe most would strongly object to the government receiving these additional surveillance powers. I encourage fellow Iowans to independently examine these laws, judicial decisions, and my continuing documentation on WildWillpower.org. Their practical consequences deserve far greater public attention—particularly before we continue directing taxpayer dollars to an out-of-state corporation while receiving an expanding surveillance network in return. 2. Surveillance-Related Abuses Are Already Happening Investigative errors and deliberate misuse of automated license plate readers have already produced serious consequences. Lindsey Isaacs — Florida In October 2025, investigators used Flock records to identify Isaacs as a suspect in a multi-vehicle crash that killed three people. She was arrested on eight felony charges, incarcerated for 13 days, and had her vehicle seized for months. Her defense attorney's efforts prompted a reinvestigation that identified evidence pointing toward a different vehicle. All charges were dropped on May 22, 2026. Isaacs subsequently filed federal civil-rights litigation.[6] Chrisanna Elser — Colorado A police officer used Flock records placing Elser's vehicle near a package theft to accuse her of the crime. Elser assembled independent evidence, including personal camera footage, demonstrating her innocence. Body-camera footage subsequently obtained by journalists documented the officer's resistance to considering her exculpatory evidence. The charges were ultimately dropped.[7] These cases illustrate how surveillance records can contribute to wrongful accusations, even when the camera observations themselves are accurate. Both women had to obtain and assemble evidence to challenge the accusations against them. In Iowa, a citizen who subsequently seeks compensation for government misconduct must also contend with the immunity doctrines described above. Deliberate abuse has also been documented. An August 2026 Washington Post investigation identified at least 50 law enforcement officers accused of, charged with, or convicted of misusing Flock and other automated license plate reader systems, frequently to track women, former romantic partners, or other individuals for unauthorized purposes.[8] In September 2026, Albany County Sheriff's investigator Laurie Moore was arrested after allegedly searching her former girlfriend's license plate nearly 3,000 times through Flock for purposes unrelated to legitimate police investigations. She was charged with official misconduct and falsifying business records.[9] These are documented cases of wrongful investigation and alleged or established surveillance misconduct, not merely predictions about what a future administration might do. 3. Government Controls the Evidence. Citizens Must Fight to Obtain It. The Iowa Public Information Board has explained that police investigative records may include body-camera footage, dash-camera recordings, and other materials collected during criminal investigations.[10] Iowa Code § 22.7(5) provides qualified confidentiality protections for these records. I have personally experienced two Iowa police agencies invoking § 22.7(5) to deny access to reports and related footage I sought to prove serious official misconduct. Although criminal defendants have separate discovery rights, including the constitutional right to disclosure of material exculpatory evidence, those protections do not guarantee ordinary citizens comparable access to investigative records when independently investigating government misconduct or pursuing subsequent civil claims. Consider the resulting imbalance: A government agency has publicly funded investigators, access to surveillance systems, and prosecuting attorneys paid to assemble evidence against a defendant. A citizen challenging a false or misleading investigative narrative may need to independently locate, preserve, obtain, organize, and examine records from multiple sources—including footage that contradicts the government's account. And even when a citizen can establish that damaging allegations were false, Iowa case law creates another barrier: absolute privilege. Under the doctrine of absolute privilege, false and defamatory statements made as part of judicial proceedings are protected from defamation lawsuits when reasonably related to those proceedings. The Iowa Supreme Court has held that this protection applies even when the statements are made knowingly, falsely, or maliciously. See Aalfs v. Aalfs (1954) and Spencer v. Spencer (1991).[11] The result: A damaging false narrative can enter official court documents, while the person targeted may be barred from pursuing a defamation claim over those statements. Most Iowans Cannot Afford Legal Representation According to the Legal Services Corporation, low-income Americans received no or inadequate legal assistance for 92% of their substantial civil legal problems in 2022.[12] Clio's March 2026 analysis placed Iowa's average 2025 attorney billing rate at approximately $252 per hour, with civil litigation averaging $310 per hour.[13] For an Iowan earning $18 per hour, a $5,000 legal expense represents nearly seven full-time workweeks of gross wages—before taxes or basic living expenses. Expanding interconnected government surveillance without providing citizens meaningful access to evidence makes this imbalance worse. And even after meaningful justice reforms, why would Iowans want an interconnected government network capable of reconstructing their movements? Once this infrastructure becomes entrenched, dismantling it could prove practically impossible. Now is the time for Iowans to stand together and say NO to publicly funded surveillance expansion—not afterward. 4. Iowans' Tax Dollars Are Flowing to an Atlanta Corporation That Funds Both Political Parties Flock Safety is not a public agency or an investment in Iowa-owned infrastructure. It is the commercial brand of Flock Group Inc., a privately held surveillance corporation headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. Founded in 2017 by Garrett Langley (CEO), Matt Feury (CTO), and Paige Todd, the company is owned by private shareholders, including its founders and venture-capital investors such as Andreessen Horowitz, Greenoaks Capital, Bedrock Capital, and Matrix Partners. Its March 2025 financing round placed its valuation at $7.5 billion.[14] Iowa municipalities are directing taxpayer dollars to this corporation through surveillance contracts: * Johnston: $109,500 over three years. * Indianola: Approximately $24,000 annually for eight cameras.[15] Meanwhile, Flock is spending heavily to influence government policy. An August 26, 2026, OpenSecrets investigation documented more than $2 million in Flock lobbying expenditures since January 2025, including approximately $1.3 million federally and at least $1 million across state governments. Flock lobbyists were active in 34 states during 2025 and/or 2026.[16] A September 4, 2026, Intercept investigation documented approximately $240,000 in Flock contributions to political organizations since January 2025—an increase of approximately 700% compared with the preceding three-year period. The recipients identified in the investigation included organizations representing both major political parties: Democratic organizations: * Democratic Governors Association (DGA) * Democratic Attorneys General Association (DAGA) * Democratic Mayors of America Republican organizations: * Republican Governors Association (RGA) * Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA) * Community Leaders of America (Republican-affiliated municipal leadership organization).[17] The recipients represent political networks connected to precisely the officials responsible for shaping government procurement, law-enforcement policy, surveillance legislation, and public spending. Why are Iowans' tax dollars being directed into a privately owned corporation in Atlanta that is simultaneously spending millions lobbying government and financing political organizations affiliated with both major parties? Flock is not an investment in ourselves. It is an ongoing transfer of Iowa taxpayer money to an out-of-state surveillance corporation whose expansion increases its revenue and whose financial interests are increasingly represented within our political institutions. 5. Taxpayer Priorities Need to Include Food, Healthcare, and Education - Not Financing a Surveillance State While municipalities commit additional taxpayer dollars to surveillance infrastructure, Iowa faces substantial unmet needs: Healthcare: Federal healthcare changes are projected to reduce Iowa Medicaid enrollment by approximately 47,000 by 2027, while broader changes are projected to leave approximately 100,000 Iowans without health insurance by 2034. These projections overlap and should not be added together. Public education: Iowa's state general-fund contribution to public schools was approximately $239 million below FY2017 purchasing power, adjusted for inflation, according to KCRG's February 2026 analysis. Food insecurity: Feeding America's estimates identified approximately 385,000 food-insecure Iowans, including more than 120,000 children. Iowa's six member food banks distributed approximately 54 million meals during 2025. Affordable housing: Iowa faces a shortage of approximately 61,867 affordable and available rental homes for extremely low-income households.[18] For perspective, Johnston's $109,500 Flock contract represents approximately the purchasing power of: * 63 routine outpatient cataract surgeries; * One year of groceries for nine families of four; * One year's rent for eight Iowa households.[19] These are illustrative purchasing-power comparisons, not claims that the expenditures share identical government funding mechanisms. Iowans Need Justice Reform — Not More Government Surveillance The documented abuses are already occurring. Iowa's existing laws already restrict access to evidence and remedies for government misconduct. Meanwhile, taxpayers are financing the expansion of a privately owned surveillance network whose corporation is spending millions lobbying government and supporting political organizations affiliated with both major parties. An interconnected network capable of reconstructing citizens' movements also creates opportunities for political surveillance, retaliation, and selective use of evidence. Today's officials cannot guarantee how future administrations will use it. Those of us who have already experienced the barriers to holding government institutions accountable may be few, but our stories are real. We are the canaries in the coal mine. I support cutting public funding for further expansion of Flock-style surveillance networks in Iowa—not continuing to finance their growth while merely discussing additional guardrails. Iowa needs meaningful government accountability, accessible justice, and investment in the people who live here. You can read justice reform proposals here: https://wildwillpower.org/statewide-platform/people-empowering-justice-reforms/ Let's make Iowa a place people want to live—not a place they feel they need to escape. Sincerely, Sondra Wilson Independent Candidate for Iowa Governor Founder, Wild Willpower WildWillpower.org Endnotes & Supporting References Iowa Surveillance and Government Accountability [1] Iowa's automated license plate reader adoption. Iowa Public Radio, Luke Nozicka and Chad Davis, September 23, 2026, There Is Little State Regulation of Flock Cameras in Iowa. That Could Soon Change. Documents approximately 60 Iowa government agencies using ALPR technology and the existing 30-day statutory retention limit. https://www.iowapublicradio.org/political-news/2026-09-23/there-is-little-state-regulation-of-flock-cameras-in-iowa-that-could-soon-change [2] Iowa Tort Claims Act — statutory exclusions. Iowa Code §§ 669.14(1), 669.14(4). https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/669.14.pdf [3] Absolute judicial and prosecutorial immunity. Blanton v. Barrick, 258 N.W.2d 306 (Iowa 1977). https://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/supreme-court/1977/58790-0.html [4] Judicial-process immunity and Venckus litigation. Venckus v. City of Iowa City, 930 N.W.2d 792 (Iowa 2019); subsequent Iowa Supreme Court decision, May 19, 2023, No. 22-0581. https://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/supreme-court/2019/18-1280.html https://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/supreme-court/2023/22-0581.html [5] Elimination of standalone Iowa constitutional damages remedy. Burnett v. Smith, 990 N.W.2d 289 (Iowa 2023), overruling Godfrey v. State, 898 N.W.2d 844 (Iowa 2017). https://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/supreme-court/2023/22-1010.html Documented Surveillance Misuse and Wrongful Investigations [6] Lindsey Isaacs — Florida wrongful arrest. InvestigateTV, Emily Featherston and Brendan Keefe, September 14, 2026, A Flock Camera Hit Sent Troopers to Her Door. They Had the Wrong Car. https://www.investigatetv.com/2026/09/14/flock-camera-hit-sent-troopers-her-door-they-had-wrong-car/ [7] Chrisanna Elser — Colorado wrongful accusation. 404 Media, Jason Koebler, January 14, 2026, Cop Used Flock to Wrongfully Accuse a Woman Then Refused to Look at Evidence That Exonerated Her, Body Camera Shows. https://www.404media.co/cop-used-flock-to-wrongfully-accuse-a-woman-then-refused-to-look-at-evidence-that-exonerated-her-body-camera-shows/ [8] Nationwide officer misuse of automated license plate readers. The Washington Post, Drew Harwell, Douglas MacMillan and Aaron Schaffer, August 2, 2026, How Rogue Officers Turned a Nationwide Camera Network Into a Tool for Stalking. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/08/02/how-police-officers-used-vast-network-cameras-spy-their-exes/ [9] Albany County investigator — alleged unauthorized surveillance. ABC News, Ivan Pereira, September 10, 2026, Albany Investigator Arrested for Allegedly Using Flock Camera to Track Ex-Girlfriend: Sheriff. https://abcnews.com/US/albany-investigator-arrested-allegedly-flock-camera-track-girlfriend/story?id=136336144 Evidence Accessibility and Legal Representation [10] Police investigative-record confidentiality. Iowa Code § 22.7(5). Iowa Public Information Board, Advisory Opinion 23AO:0003, August 17, 2023, Confidentiality of Police Investigative Files. Additional guidance: Advisory Opinion 26AO:0004, March 19, 2026. https://ipib.iowa.gov/23ao0003-confidentiality-police-investigative-files https://ipib.iowa.gov/26ao0004-confidentiality-certain-records-related-police-investigative-reports-under-iowa-code-2275 [11] Absolute privilege for defamatory statements in judicial proceedings. Aalfs v. Aalfs, 246 Iowa 158, 66 N.W.2d 121 (1954). Recognizes absolute privilege for relevant defamatory allegations in judicial pleadings, including those made falsely or maliciously. https://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/supreme-court/1954/48533-0.html Spencer v. Spencer, 479 N.W.2d 293, 295–296 (Iowa 1991). Establishes that absolute privilege applies to statements made in connection with judicial proceedings when reasonably pertinent to the proceeding. The privilege does not automatically extend to subsequent dissemination to unrelated third parties. https://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/supreme-court/1991/90-601-0.html [12] Unmet civil legal needs among low-income Americans. Legal Services Corporation, April 2022, The Justice Gap: The Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-Income Americans. The 92% statistic concerns substantial civil legal problems, not criminal-defense representation. https://justicegap.lsc.gov/ [13] Iowa attorney billing rates. Clio, updated March 2026, How Much Should I Charge as a Lawyer in Iowa? Based on aggregated 2025 attorney billing data. The $5,000 example is illustrative, not a reported statewide average retainer. https://www.clio.com/resources/legal-trends/compare-lawyer-rates/ia/ Corporate Ownership, Public Contracts, and Political Influence [14] Flock Safety — corporate financing and ownership. Flock Safety, March 13, 2025, Accelerating Innovation: Flock Secures $275 Million to Advance Crime-Solving Technology. https://www.flocksafety.com/blog/flock-safety-secures-major-funding [15] Iowa municipal surveillance contracts. City of Johnston / Flock Group Inc., July 30, 2026, contract reported by Civic IQ: $109,500 over 36 months. Indianola's eight-camera program was reported at approximately $24,000 annually. https://civiciq.com/public-contract/city-of-johnston-ia-flock-group-inc-technology-2026-07-30 [16] Federal and state lobbying expenditures. OpenSecrets, Joedy McCreary, August 26, 2026, Flock Tracks Your License Plate. We Tracked the $2M It Spent on Lobbying. Documents approximately $1.3 million in federal lobbying and at least $1 million in state lobbying since January 2025. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2026/08/flock-tracks-your-license-plate-we-tracked-the-2m-it-spent-on-lobbying/ [17] Political contributions to elected-official organizations. The Intercept, Matt Sledge, September 4, 2026, Flock Donations to Local Politicians' Groups Skyrocket as Protests Against AI Cameras Mount. https://theintercept.com/2026/09/04/flock-camera-surveillance-protest-donations/ Iowa Public Spending and Economic Comparisons [18] Healthcare, education, food insecurity, and housing. Healthcare: KFF, July 23, 2025, federal reconciliation-package Medicaid analysis. Reuters, September 29, 2026, Soaring Cancer Rates in Iowa Emerge as a Key US Midterms Issue. Iowa Department of Health and Human Services, community-engagement implementation guidance. https://www.kff.org/medicaid/allocating-cbos-estimates-of-federal-medicaid-spending-reductions-across-the-states-enacted-reconciliation-package/ Public education: KCRG-TV9, February 18, 2026, FACT CHECK: Conflicting Facts on Iowa Public School Funding and Inflation. https://www.kcrg.com/2026/02/18/fact-check-conflicting-facts-iowa-public-school-funding-inflation/ Food insecurity: Iowa Food Bank Association, Feeding America estimates and May 2026 distribution reporting. https://www.iowafba.org/ Housing: National Low Income Housing Coalition, The Gap — Iowa, using 2024 Census data. https://nlihc.org/gap/state/ia [19] Illustrative purchasing-power comparison — Johnston's $109,500 contract. Calculations based on: Medicare Procedure Price Lookup, 2026 routine outpatient cataract surgery (CPT 66984), approximately $1,717. USDA Thrifty Food Plan, March 2026, approximately $946 monthly for a reference family of four. National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2026 — Iowa, approximately $1,112 monthly statewide two-bedroom fair-market rent. https://www.medicare.gov/procedure-price-lookup/ https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/cnpp-costfood-tfp-march2026.pdf https://nlihc.org/oor/state/ia

Wilson sent this revised statement by email, asking Dispute Index to replace her October 3 statement and its endnotes in their entirety. She wrote that her position is to cut public funding for further expansion of Flock-style surveillance networks rather than support a pause or moratorium. The link is to her campaign page; the statement itself is not published there. The text and endnotes are reproduced as sent, without her cover note.