ASHEVILLE, N.C. (828newsNOW) — Buncombe County commissioners pulled a $290,000 Sheriff’s Office funding request Tuesday night that would have paid for an Axon/FUSUS contract and a camera project that was not described in the meeting’s agenda materials.
The budget amendment called for taking $290,000 from the sheriff’s office forfeiture fund balance to cover fiscal 2027 spending needs. County documents say the money would pay for the FY27 FUSUS/Axon contract and a “Camera Project at IGrant,” but do not say how much would go toward each expense or provide details about the camera project.
Commissioners removed the item from the agenda near the beginning of Tuesday’s meeting. It was not brought back for consideration, and commissioners did not publicly discuss why it was pulled.
The proposal still drew questions during public comment.
Sarah Kent, a West Asheville resident who told commissioners she works as a cybersecurity and application security consultant, had signed up to speak about the item. Chair Amanda Edwards told Kent the item had been removed but allowed her to speak.
Kent raised concerns about the growing use of surveillance technology and what she called “mass surveillance as a service.” She specifically mentioned Axon FUSUS and Flock while discussing surveillance technology.
“We’ve heard a lot in the news about Flock, less so about Axon,” Kent said.
Flock is not named in the county’s budget request. The agenda materials identify the Axon/FUSUS contract and a separate “Camera Project at IGrant.” They do not explain what kind of cameras are involved or what the project would do.
Kent told commissioners she understood Buncombe County has a subscription to Axon and cameras connected to its real-time intelligence center. She questioned how surveillance information could be used beyond the local level.
“I’m more concerned about how it’s used on a national scale,” Kent said.
The agenda documents do not provide details about the sheriff’s office’s existing camera network or how it uses Axon FUSUS.
At the end of the board’s new business Tuesday, Edwards again noted that budget item No. 5 had been removed, and commissioners moved on to board appointments. No vote was taken on the $290,000 request.
