Candidate Matt Holway and N.C. Rep. Neal Jackson talk Flock cameras, education, data centers and election law

Both Matthew Holway, and North Carolina Rep. Neal Jackson were provided the same questions concerning data centers, Flock cameras, education and election laws. Each are running for the North Carolina House of Representatives in District 78 over Randolph and Moore counties in the Nov. 2026 election.

Democrat Matt Holway is a retired small-business owner, former high school football coach, now grandfather, and resident of West End. His compassion and attention extend to all people, of all backgrounds, not just those he rubs elbows with. He is running because even at the local level he sees politics answering to money, not to concern for people in our community. He’s angered that Republicans diverted taxpayer money earmarked for public schools to private school vouchers, and that his opponent in this race pushes legislation diminishing voting access. Holway was a poll worker, becoming an assistant judge with the Board of Elections, and knows how safe and secure our voting system has been; he does not want voting access weaponized to keep us from getting what we need.

1. Data Centers

If elected, how would you alter SB 730’s data center provisions on environmental/noise assessments, utility costs, and local incentives?

The state aims to attract data center funds while addressing resource and incentive issues. What legislation would protect residents from paying development expenses?

I am not opposed to the idea of data centers themselves or to attracting companies and investment to North Carolina. In fact, I believe economic development is important to the future of our state. What I oppose is development without adequate understanding and accounting for its costs.

Data centers are not innocuous warehouses that bring jobs and sit quietly in our landscapes. A data center exists merely to drive AI computing power, not to produce goods to be sold here or anywhere. The promise of jobs is patently false as the construction jobs will only last for a short time and they will be outside contractors. Operation of a data center requires very few permanent full time employees. Data centers place extraordinary demands on electricity, water, and other infrastructure that can affect utility rates, water resources, surrounding communities, and the environment. The state should not offer an open invitation to development and then leave ordinary residents to absorb costs that should properly belong to the companies creating those demands.

SB 730 moves in the right direction in several respects. Its provisions appear, to a degree, to address water use, site assessments, utility contracts, and local incentives, including requirements intended to prevent other customers from subsidizing data-center electricity costs. (North Carolina General Assembly). That said, there are areas where it does not go nearly far enough. Example: language around the use of closed water systems is very vague “for cooling systems to the maximum extent possible”–this is so vague that it is unenforceable so of no real consequence to preserve our water quality. Likewise, the suggestion that the assessment of the area within 500 ft of an immense (multiacre) data center for its sound profile is not inclusive enough. The distance needs to be greater than 500 ft and needs to include at least a heat profile in addition to the sound profile. This also means that if the data center is to be suppling it’s own power “off the grid” that it does not bear the environmental burden of burning fossil fuels.

If elected, I would support requiring a comprehensive, independent assessment before approval of a large data center. That assessment should consider water consumption and availability, electrical demand, noise, air quality, heat generation, environmental impacts, infrastructure requirements, and the effect on surrounding residential and agricultural communities.

I also support requiring data center companies to bear the full incremental costs of infrastructure and utility improvements that are attributable to their operations. Homeowners and small-business customers should not be put in a position where they are effectively subsidizing a massive industrial user by paying higher utility rates to have a data center anywhere.

Citizens and local governments should also have meaningful input and choice in that assessment. Economic development incentives from local, state, or federal governments should only be available when the companies can demonstrate that the long-term economic benefit reasonably outweighs the public’s cost (pollution of water, noise, heat, whatever). I favor transparency requirements for those agreements, including disclosure of incentives, projected utility and other costs, expected local employment, and measurable economic benefits.

I want companies to invest in North Carolina. I simply believe that investment should clearly be a good deal for North Carolina, as well.

• Flock Cameras

Automated license plate readers are allowed on NC highways, and data retention is restricted. Specifically, what amendments would you propose for privacy and the Fourth Amendment, without hindering crime investigations?

Do you favor legislation mandating judicial oversight for accessing Flock-camera data, and what should it include? If not, what protections would you establish to ensure this technology doesn’t watch lawful individuals?

I understand why law enforcement is interested in “automated license plate readers” (ALPRs, which actually record far more information than that, and feed it into databases) and similar surveillance. Cameras that can help locate a stolen vehicle, find a missing person or assist in a legitimate criminal investigation can be valuable, but I’ve never been shown any legitimate data that they deter crime. If these cameras “fight crime” then it must be crimes that have already occurred, so my immediate question is: which crime rates increased so much in our area that law enforcement cannot keep up? I presumed sheriffs in our area were elected because of their effectiveness as trained professionals. Why has that changed so that crime is outstripping their abilities?

North Carolina already has statutory requirements governing ALPR data, including agency policies addressing retention, sharing, training, supervision, security and auditing. The law also attempts to limit the use and disclosure of captured data to law-enforcement purposes. (North Carolina General Assembly). My concern is that the existence of rules is not the same thing as having sufficient independent oversight. If we are going to use this technology, protections need to be built into the law, not left primarily to agency policies, vendor settings, or the good intentions of individual users. What happens when a technology designed for a legitimate law-enforcement purpose is now a system capable of tracking the movements of ordinary people who have done nothing wrong?

We need a much stronger system of accountability before surveillance technology becomes even more widespread. I also believe the public deserves transparency about how these systems are being used. At the very minimum, there should be clear legal limits on who may access the information, what constitutes a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, how long information can be retained, who it can be shared with and what penalties apply when those rules are violated.

Aside from agencies should being required to maintain auditable access records and provide regular reports (showing digestible details of every search including when, why, and by whom the searches occur), there should be punishments for those breaking the rules around the technology, not just in the public but also within law enforcement and the companies making systems or aggregating the data.

As to legitimate use of the collected data, I would support requiring a warrant or judicial authorization when law enforcement wants to use ALPR data to reconstruct or track the movements of a person or vehicle beyond a narrowly defined immediate law-enforcement need. There may need to be clearly defined exceptions for emergencies such as responding to an immediate overwhelming threat to public safety. But the Fourth Amendment should not become less meaningful simply because technology has advanced. The mere ability to do something technologically does not automatically mean government should have the authority to do it without limits, not to mention giving a corporation power over this collected data.

• Schools and Education

Eligibility for North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarships has broadened. Would you change the legislation on public funds for private-school tuition, including income limits or eligibility criteria, if elected?

Supporters favor parental choice in school funding, while opponents worry about public school revenue loss. What laws would you propose to adjust private-school choice and public school funding?

I strongly believe that parents have the right to choose the educational environment they believe is best for their children. Public schools are not simply another option on a list—they are the foundation of an educated workforce and a functioning democracy, and they serve every community regardless of a family’s ability to pay. As such, we can’t continue to short-shrift our children and our own success by taking money away from public schools. In the past, NC spent an average amount of money per child on education; in recent years our state has pulled so much money away from education that we now rank dead last in the country on what we spend per child, less than half as much as top spenders (per the NCEA). Who can succeed with children continually being stunted by poor education?

Tax money that is designated for public schools needs to go to public schools. My opponent supported the decision to take money designated for public schools—$300 million in NC—and re-direct it for private school vouchers, called Opportunity Scholarships. Understand that the vouchers have no “guardrails” (North Carolina General Assembly: the people who can already afford private school get vouchers which makes it cheaper for them, while the rest of us don’t get enough from a school voucher to begin to pay for a private school, so who benefits there? Only those who don’t need it, and our public schools are undermined, making the gap bigger. And let’s also be clear that private schools do not have the same safeguards as public schools regarding discrimination (by race, religion, gender, any other “identity”) nor preventing the promotion of a state-sponsored religion.

If elected, I support returning public taxpayer money to public schools that serve the vast majority of North Carolina children. If there are public funds going to private schools, there need to be clear guidelines and accountability that includes rigorous auditing. We need guardrails on the voucher program to make sure money is goes only to families who genuinely lack the financial ability to otherwise choose a private education.

My goal would not be to take choice away from parents. Parents who can afford private school should absolutely have that choice. My opposition to the current direction is the state choosing to use limited public resources to subsidize that private choice while public schools are struggling to provide competitive salaries, adequate staffing, updated facilities, and the resources teachers need.

Education is one of the best long-term investments a state can make. A strong public education system gives children from every economic background a better chance to succeed.

• Voting Access and Election Laws

Election procedures, like the absentee ballot deadline, were changed by SB 747. What specific law changes and mail ballot grace period policies would you pursue if elected?

How would you amend the NC election law to help voters with work, transport, or mail issues while keeping security?

I believe strongly in secure elections, as is shown by my role as a Precinct Judge with the Board of Elections. I also believe that security and accessibility are not opposing values—having both is imperative and is historically the norm.

SB 747 changed North Carolina’s absentee-ballot rules so that, in general, ballots must be received by the county board of elections by the statutory deadline rather than receiving the former 3-day grace period for ballots that were postmarked by Election Day. (North Carolina General Assembly)

I would support restoring a reasonable grace period for absentee ballots that are properly completed, legally cast, and postmarked by Election Day. The purpose of an election deadline should be to establish a clear and manageable process, not to discard the legitimate vote of an eligible citizen because of a delay in the mail that was outside the voter’s control.

I would also support maintaining early voting and making it easier for people who work long hours, lack reliable transportation, care for family members, or otherwise have difficulty getting to a polling place during traditional hours to vote. An example of how this is being undermined is the current bill trying to reduce early voting for the primaries from 17 to 10 days.

When we talk about election security, we should focus on the integrity of the entire process. That means secure ballots, accurate voter rolls, appropriate (not burdensome) identification procedures, transparent counting, bipartisan observation, and strong chain-of-custody requirements. It also means making sure eligible voters are not unnecessarily excluded, like women who married and changed their name.

I am not categorically opposed to voter identification requirements. I am opposed to making the constitutional right to vote dependent upon a person’s ability to navigate a complicated or cost-based process to obtain identification.

If the state requires identification to vote, then the state has a responsibility to make that identification genuinely accessible to every eligible citizen. That means providing ID without cost to those who need it, making ID reasonably accessible to people who cannot easily travel to a DMV or government office, and establishing practical alternatives for people who lose or cannot readily access their ID.

We have elderly citizens in care facilities, people who are homebound, people with limited transportation, and people living in poverty. We should not design election laws around the assumption that every citizen has a car, flexible work hours, internet access, or the ability to spend hours navigating government offices.

I favor a uniform statewide system that makes voting secure, accessible, and manageable for election officials. We should make it easy for eligible citizens to vote—that’s how the will of the people is expressed. That should not be a partisan principle. It is an American principle, answered Holway.

______________________________________________________________________

Republican Representative Neal Jackson, according to Ballotpedia, is a member of the North Carolina House of Representatives, representing District 78. He assumed office on January 1, 2023. His current term ends on January 1, 2027.

Jackson is running for re-election to the North Carolina House of Representatives to represent District 78. He is on the ballot in the general election on November 3, 2026. He advanced from the Republican primary on March 3, 2026. Jackson was born in Pinehurst, North Carolina. Jackson earned a bachelor’s and master’s degree. His career experience includes owning an insurance and financial planning firm and working as a pastor in Florida and North Carolina as well as at the Beulah Baptist Church in Bennett, North Carolina.

Learn about bills Jackson supported here.

Jackson is running for re-election to the North Carolina House of Representatives to represent District 78. He is on the ballot in the general election on November 3, 2026. He advanced from the Republican primary on March 3, 2026. Jackson was born in Pinehurst, North Carolina. Jackson earned a bachelor’s and master’s degree. His career experience includes owning an insurance and financial planning firm and working as a pastor in Florida and North Carolina as well as at the Beulah Baptist Church in Bennett, North Carolina.

Learn about bills Jackson supported here.

1. Data Centers

If elected, how would you alter SB 730’s data center provisions on environmental/noise assessments, utility costs, and local incentives?

The state aims to attract data center funds while addressing resource and incentive issues. What legislation would protect residents from paying development expenses?

I believe local government should be the strongest voice in deciding whether a data center is right for the community, not the state. Moore County leadership best understands our local needs and the concerns of adequate water and power to support major new development without burdening existing residents.

Economic growth is a good thing, but it should never come at the expense of local taxpayers or utility customers. SB 730 puts the responsibility where it belongs, on data centers to pay for the power, water, roads, and other infrastructure required, while ensuring proper assessments of water, power, noise, and environmental impacts.

Economic development should bring private investment – not a bill for Moore County residents.

• Flock Cameras

Automated license plate readers are allowed on NC highways, and data retention is restricted. Specifically, what amendments would you propose for privacy and the Fourth Amendment, without hindering crime investigations?

Do you favor legislation mandating judicial oversight for accessing Flock-camera data, and what should it include? If not, what protections would you establish to ensure this technology doesn’t watch lawful individuals?

I support giving law enforcement the tools they need to catch criminals and keep our communities safe, while protecting the Fourth Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

I support safeguards on access and retention of license-plate data, with accountability for misuse, but do not want to tie the hands of law enforcement or hinder legitimate investigations.

Protect our communities, protect our Constitution, and keep government surveillance focused on criminals, not law-abiding citizens.

• Schools & Education

Eligibility for North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarships has broadened. Would you change the legislation on public funds for private-school tuition, including income limits or eligibility criteria, if elected?

Supporters favor parental choice in school funding, while opponents worry about public school revenue loss. What laws would you propose to adjust private-school choice and public school funding?

I support Opportunity Scholarships and the principle that parents, not government bureaucrats, should have the primary say in their child’s education.

I believe every child deserves a quality education, whether they attend a public, private, charter, or homeschool setting. We should continue supporting strong public schools while expanding opportunities for parents.

• Voting Access & Election Laws

Election procedures, like the absentee ballot deadline, were changed by SB 747. What specific law changes and mail ballot grace period policies would you pursue if elected?

How would you amend the NC election law to help voters with work, transport, or mail issues while keeping security?

I voted for SB 747 because I believe North Carolina elections should be secure, transparent, and consistent. I support reasonable, clearly defined procedures for absentee ballots while maintaining voter ID, verification, chain-of-custody protections, and firm election deadlines. We should make it easier for eligible citizens to vote, not easier to cheat.

Election integrity and voter access are not competing values. We can protect both.

Aug. 11, 2026

Answers provided.

Stephanie M. Sellers

Subscribe to Sandhills News and support this conservative journalism with advertising.

Submit news tips, events and interview requests to editor@sandhills.news.

Sandhills News is plain-English local government reporting that explains how decisions affect your land, taxes, schools and rights.