Oversight in Action: How Civilian Oversight Bodies Can Shape Surveillance Accountability

On October 29, 2025, I had the honor of moderating a groundbreaking discussion at the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) Annual Conference themed Reckoning & Resilience in the Post-George Floyd Era in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The session called “Oversight in Action:  How Civilian Oversight Bodies Can Shape Surveillance Accountability,” brought together national and local experts to explore how communities can ensure transparency and ethical governance over the rapidly expanding landscape of surveillance technologies, facial recognition systems, and artificial intelligence in public safety.

As the Founder of Mayers Strategic Solutions, LLC and creator of the C.A.T. Method® (Community Empowerment, Accountability, and Transparency), my work centers on helping cities design systems that balance safety with civil liberties. This conversation was timely and necessary because while technology advances faster than legislation, oversight must keep pace to protect the public it serves.

A Perfect Storm:  The Rise of Surveillance and the Gap in Oversight

Across the country, law enforcement agencies are increasingly purchasing and deploying advanced surveillance tools such as automated license plate readers (ALPRs), unmanned aerial drones, gunshot detection technologies, real-time crime centers, FUSUS camera integration platforms, and predictive AI systems; often without clear policy frameworks or consistent community input.

As I noted in my opening remarks, “While federal and state governments have been slow to regulate these technologies, local governments and civilian oversight bodies must lead the charge in developing laws and policies that ensure accountability and protect residents’ rights.”

This session explored exactly how that can be done and why it matters now more than ever.

Panelists Who Are Moving the Needle

We were joined by three distinguished panelists, each representing a unique but complementary layer of the oversight ecosystem:

• Beryl Lipton, Senior Investigative Researcher at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), offered a national perspective, drawing from EFF’s Atlas of Surveillance, the largest public database tracking law enforcement surveillance deployments across the U.S. She discussed EFF’s investigations into tools like Fog Data Science, which aggregate cell phone location data, and the growing use of drone-as-first-responder programs. Her insight underscored how investigative journalism and open data empower communities to hold agencies accountable.

• Jill Fitcheard, Executive Director of the Nashville Community Review Board (NCRB), shared how Nashville’s oversight authority collects, analyzes, and reports data on surveillance technologies used by the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (MNPD); including ALPRs, facial recognition systems, and FUSUS camera integration platforms. She described how NCRB has navigated the post-2023 Tennessee law preempting community oversight boards, forcing the agency to adapt its Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) while continuing to advocate for transparency in data access and legislative guardrails for surveillance use.

• Brandon D. Davis, Esq., Managing Director of Equity and Accountability Services for the City of Grand Rapids, Michigan, highlighted how their Office of Oversight and Public Accountability (OPA) collaborates with community members and city officials to implement Administrative Policy 15-03, which governs all surveillance technologies used across city departments. He detailed the city’s robust oversight process (from quarterly departmental reports to annual public audits) and the mechanisms allowing the Public Safety Committee to disallow technology use if policy violations are found.

From Oversight to Ordinance:  Building Local Power Through Data

The discussion revealed that data collection, transparency, and collaboration are not abstract ideals; they are instead practical tools that enable oversight authorities to influence real policy change.

In Nashville, NCRB’s data analyses on police technology usage have directly informed proposed council legislation on ALPRs and FUSUS systems. In Grand Rapids, annual surveillance reports have shaped local laws and provided the community with evidence to advocate for or against specific technologies and services. And through EFF’s national work, we see how investigative findings can spur public awareness campaigns that lead to legislative and administrative reform far beyond one jurisdiction.

As moderator, I emphasized how these case studies demonstrate the C.A.T. Method® in motion:

• Community Empowerment:  Public reporting that allows residents to gain knowledge on how their taxpayer dollars are being spent and public comment periods that ensure residents’ voices are heard on the record.

  
  

• Accountability:  Regular audits, complaint mechanisms, and data transparency requirements.

  
  

• Transparency:  Policies mandating disclosure of surveillance tools and data-sharing practices that support the collaboration of community safety stakeholders to solve community development and safety challenges.

Key Themes from the Discussion

1. The Need for Local Legislative Guardrails

Without federal or state standards, local ordinances remain on the frontline of privacy protection. Civilian oversight must ensure that technology acquisition follows democratic processes, not vendor-driven demand.

2. Surveillance is Not Neutral

Oversight must consider equity impacts, especially on marginalized communities disproportionately surveilled by these systems.

3. Collaboration is the Currency of Oversight

Partnerships among oversight boards, journalists, advocates, and technologists (like those between EFF, NCRB, and OPA) strengthen accountability and public trust.

4. Oversight Bodies Must Be Technologically Fluent

To regulate complex tools like AI-driven analytics and integrated data systems, oversight professionals must be equipped to understand technical risks, data flows, and civil liberties implications.

A Call to Action

As I closed the session, I reflected that “We’ve now heard two models of local oversight playing hands-on roles, not only in reviewing police surveillance but in shaping the laws and policies that govern it. Nashville shows us the power of legislative collaboration; Grand Rapids demonstrates procedural rigor and community inclusion; and the EFF reminds us that transparency and data access are the bedrock of democratic accountability.”

Our collective challenge moving forward is to ensure that oversight evolves as fast as technology does; and that civilian authorities, community leaders, and lawmakers work together to craft surveillance governance rooted in justice, privacy, and human dignity.

Because, as I often remind communities through the C.A.T. Method®, the process reflects the outcome.

When we lead with a process that advances empowerment, accountability, and transparency, we build safer, freer, and more equitable communities for all as the outcome.