Gregory A. Crawford : (FB Message Sent 8/8/26)
Syreeta Duncan Bailey : (Email Sent 8/8/26)
Robert Marcus :
Bibby Simmons : (FB Message Sent 8/8/26)
Marion J. Ackley : (8/21/26 Email Sent)
Kevin Elkins : (8/8/26 Response, Phone call scheduled)
Jose Harris : (FB Message Sent 8/8/26)
De'Anthony Powell : (8/11/26 Response)

“I believe residents deserve to know where candidates stand on issues that could affect their neighborhoods, privacy, infrastructure, and quality of life. On automated license plate readers and surveillance technology, I believe we have to balance public safety with residents’ constitutional rights and reasonable expectations of privacy. I would want clear safeguards regarding how data is collected, stored, accessed, shared, and audited. Before voting on funding or renewal of any system, I would review its effectiveness, cost, privacy protections, and potential for misuse.

Regarding hyperscale data centers, I support economic development that genuinely benefits Montgomery, but not at the expense of residents or our basic infrastructure. Any proposed development should be evaluated carefully for its impact on our power grid, water resources, surrounding neighborhoods, noise, infrastructure costs, tax incentives, and the number and quality of permanent jobs it would actually create. I would not support a project that places an unreasonable burden on residents or city resources.

As for Cypress Nature Preserve, I believe our natural spaces are valuable public assets. I would be very cautious about any proposal that would permanently diminish or privatize environmentally significant public land. Any proposal involving Cypress should receive full public transparency, environmental review, and meaningful community input before action is taken. My commitment is that I will listen, ask questions, review the facts, and make decisions based on what best protects and serves the people of District 3 and Montgomery as a whole.

I don’t believe in committing my vote on an issue before reviewing the complete proposal and its consequences, but I do commit to being accessible, transparent, and accountable about the decisions I make. Thank you again for reaching out and for being engaged in our community.”

Johnnie Sankey : (FB Message Sent 8/8/26)
Mark Bailey : (8/12/26 Response)

“While I share several of the concerns raised, I do not believe responsible governing means committing to blanket bans without considering the facts, safeguards, economic impact, and circumstances surrounding each issue.

AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS AND PRIVACY

I would not pledge to vote against funding or renewing Automated License Plate Reader systems such as Flock Safety. I believe they can be valuable law enforcement tools when they are used responsibly and accompanied by strong privacy protections.

We have a serious crime and enforcement problem in Montgomery, and I don’t believe there is another city in America you can travel to and see as many vehicles openly driving around without license plates as you see here. That may seem like a small issue to some people, but to me it represents a much larger problem. We have allowed basic laws to go unenforced for so long that ignoring them has become normalized.

With that reality in mind, I am not willing to take useful law enforcement tools away from our police department. At the same time, supporting law enforcement does not mean giving government unlimited surveillance authority.

I would support strict safeguards governing ALPR use, including limited data retention periods, requiring a documented legitimate law enforcement purpose for searches, maintaining audit logs, restricting unnecessary sharing with outside agencies, and requiring regular reporting to the City Council regarding effectiveness, usage, and any incidents of misuse.

I also would not support placing these cameras deep within residential neighborhoods where they can routinely capture residents entering and leaving their homes or driveways. I believe their appropriate placement is along major roadways, commercial corridors, and key transportation junctions where there is a legitimate public safety purpose.

Finally, continued funding should depend on results. If taxpayers are paying for this technology, the City Council should know how many stolen vehicles were recovered, how many violent crime investigations were assisted, how often the system produced actionable information, and whether its benefits justify its cost.

My position is responsible use with strict oversight, not unrestricted surveillance, but not a blanket ban either.

DATA CENTERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE

I support growing Montgomery’s economy, but I want that growth to be smart, sustainable, and beneficial to the people who already live here.

I would not support a large scale hyperscale data center in District 3. These facilities can require substantial land, electrical capacity, water resources, and supporting infrastructure. I do not believe that type of industrial use is appropriate for our district when Montgomery has industrial and outlying areas better suited for development of that scale.

However, I also would not support a permanent citywide ban on data centers.

Technology infrastructure will continue to be an important part of the American economy, and Montgomery should not unnecessarily remove itself from consideration for major private investment. The question should be whether a particular development is located appropriately and whether the benefits to Montgomery outweigh its costs.

Before supporting a major data center project, I would want a thorough analysis of its projected water consumption, electrical demand, infrastructure requirements, environmental impact, permanent employment, and economic return to the city.

I would also be extremely cautious about extensive tax waivers. Announcing hundreds of millions of dollars in private investment means very little if taxpayers are simultaneously being asked to subsidize infrastructure while receiving inadequate long term tax revenue or employment in return. I will not support giving away Montgomery’s tax base simply to announce a large investment number.

Large industrial energy users should also bear the infrastructure costs associated with their extraordinary demand. I would explore every legally available mechanism, including appropriate large load fees or taxes, to ensure those costs are not shifted onto residential ratepayers. Montgomery residents should not see their utility costs increase because the public is effectively subsidizing the enormous energy demands of a private industrial development.

My position is straightforward. I am not anti data center. I am anti bad development. If a project is appropriately located, protects our resources, pays its fair share, and produces a measurable economic benefit for Montgomery, I am willing to consider it.

CYPRESS NATURE PRESERVE

I strongly believe Montgomery needs major downtown and riverfront development. The Alabama River is one of our city’s greatest assets, and we have not done enough to take advantage of it as a place for people to live, visit, recreate, dine, and spend time.

But supporting development does not mean believing that every available piece of land should be commercialized.

Nature and wildlife preserves should be protected, and I would be strongly opposed to converting significant public green space into ordinary private commercial development. Appropriate improvements consistent with a state or national park style environment, such as trails, educational facilities, boardwalks, recreation, public access, or other conservation focused amenities, are fundamentally different from commercializing a natural preserve.

We also need to ask a very basic question before disturbing an irreplaceable natural area: Why here?

Montgomery has far too many vacant buildings, abandoned properties, and underutilized developed areas that desperately need private investment. I would much rather use economic development to bring those properties back to life before destroying green space that cannot simply be recreated somewhere else.

Regarding Cypress Nature Preserve specifically, I strongly favor protecting the preserve based upon what I know today. However, I will not pledge how I would vote on a hypothetical sale, rezoning, or development proposal that has not actually been presented to me. I would want to know exactly what is being proposed, what portion of the property would be affected, what environmental impact would result, and why the proposed use could not be located elsewhere.

Something involving a public asset of this size and importance to District 3 should also never be decided behind closed doors. Before I supported any significant change in its use, I would expect a public process and a District 3 town hall where residents could see the proposal, ask questions, hear the evidence, and make their opinions known.

I believe one of the most important responsibilities of a City Council member is to advocate for and represent the residents of the district. My personal preferences should not substitute for listening to the people I was elected to represent. Their input would carry substantial weight in any decision involving an asset this important to our community.

Any developer seeking to commercially develop significant portions of Cypress should therefore face a very high burden. They should demonstrate publicly why that land must be disturbed when Montgomery has substantial vacant and underutilized property available for redevelopment elsewhere.

AN OVERALL GOVERNING STANDARD

These three issues demonstrate the type of governing philosophy I intend to bring to the City Council.

I do not believe complicated issues should automatically be reduced to yes or no pledges or blanket bans.

On public safety, I support giving law enforcement effective tools while establishing meaningful protections against government overreach.

On economic development, I want Montgomery competing for investment and jobs, but not by sacrificing our neighborhoods, natural resources, infrastructure, or tax base.

On Cypress Nature Preserve, I support protecting significant natural spaces while also continuing to pursue the riverfront and downtown development Montgomery needs.

My standard will be consistent: Does the policy solve a real problem? Does the evidence support it? Does it protect the interests of our residents? And does it move District 3 and Montgomery forward?

Those are the questions I believe a City Council member should be asking before casting a vote.”

Montaski McCoy : (Email Sent 8/8/26)
Justin Hampton : ( 8/15/26 Response )

On Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs/Flock cameras):

As with most issues, there are pros and cons to this one. In my opinion, the pros far outweigh the cons now that new regulations are in place for the data these cameras collect. Law enforcement credits this tool with helping them catch violent criminals and thieves, locate stolen cars, and find missing people. Alabama sheriffs specifically credit Flock cameras with helping secure a conviction in a local murder case. These cameras also help prevent wrongful stops. Instead of a driver simply "fitting the profile" of someone police are looking for, officers can now stop a vehicle with a matching tag and description.

The camera companies and local governments are also listening to the community's data concerns. Companies have cut their default data retention from 30 to 7 days and now require officers to log a specific reason for each data search to prevent misuse.

There is still a lot of progress we need to make on the crime front. At the same time, contrary to the prevailing narrative, Montgomery's violent crime rate is down year over year. Alongside the fact that we rank first in the state in camera growth rate, it begs the question of whether these two things are correlated. Do more cameras mean less crime? It deserves a conversation, because the stats suggest they might.

That said, I have to side with the expertise of our law enforcement officers by giving them the tools they need to keep us safe, while at the same time protecting the privacy concerns of our residents.

On hyperscale data centers:

At some point, enough is enough. Montgomery has done its fair share of accommodating massive corporate investment that disregards our wetlands and biodiversity. As a Wildlife Ecology graduate (Environmental Science minor) from Tuskegee University, and someone who has held several positions with the USDA Forest Service, I fully understand the impact these centers can have on our quality of life and environment.

No need for a long, drawn-out explanation on this one: NO DATA CENTERS IN MONTGOMERY

On the Cypress Nature Preserve:

Presently, I'm not aware of any efforts to develop the Cypress land other than the River Region Trails project. From my understanding, that project is seeking to connect the space to the rest of the city through walking and biking access. That specific effort, if done in a manner that produces as little disturbance as possible, would give everyday citizens a tangible way to connect with the preserve and in doing so, give a broader group of people an appreciation for the space. That would lend itself well to current and future conservation efforts.

I'd love to see a formal proposal that conserves the space as an accessible, walkable nature preserve, free of large-scale development. This can be done in a respectful way that educates people about the area and builds their connection to it. I don't believe an event space would accomplish that.

Steven Lambert : (Campaign reached / candidate will follow up 8/10/26)
LaPawn Carter Jr : (8/8/26 Response)

“Thank you for reaching out and sharing these concerns. These are important issues, and I don’t want to give a simple yes or no without fully understanding all sides and how each decision could impact District 3 and Montgomery as a whole. When it comes to surveillance technology, I believe public safety and residents’ privacy both matter, and there should be transparency and accountability in how that technology is used. With data centers, I would want to look closely at the impact on our utilities, neighborhoods, environment, jobs, and overall benefit to the city. And with Cypress Nature Preserve, I understand the importance of protecting our natural spaces and making sure residents have a voice in decisions involving public property. If elected, my commitment is to listen, do the research, ask questions, and make informed decisions based on what is best for the people I represent. I appreciate you bringing these issues to my attention.

Safer communities is a major concern of mine. I worked law enforcement for 13 years and one of my jobs was watching surveillance on a college campus. Technology has changed over the years to better assist us”

Johnny Bannister : 
Michelle Summers : ( 8/11/26 Response from Phone Call Transcription)

ALPR/FLOCK Surveillance

"I can't emphatically say I will or will not, first of all, when you start speaking to things like flock cameras, some of those things are actual desires of certain residents in specific neighborhoods because of the crime or the rising crime, however, because I believe that this position is the voice of the community that would definitely have to be some town halls, some neighborhood association meetings, and some collaboration amongst the residents. But understanding that I do not agree with mass surveillance, specifically with black and brown communities or poor and disenfranchised communities, because they tend to be targeted. We tend to be targeted, harshly and suffer repercussions that other communities don't suffer, so it would not be an answer that I would arrogantly give right now whether I would emphatically vote for or against it, there would definitely have to be some conversation, and then once I hear from my community more conversation would then have to be had with the mayor and other council members."

Data Centers

"Oh, yes, and it will probably be a great fight that they would have with me, because I don't like what it does to the ecosystem. I don't like the strain that it puts on our water resources, specifically our natural water resources and I don't believe that the data is in enough on these centers and I can honestly say as an individual as a person who has a child, a lot of what I believe in fundamentally has to do with my child and potentially my grandchildren, so anything that has to do with our ecosystem, or something that could be a strain on it for generations to come. I'm gonna always be a no, for that I have not seen any research to show where the data center would be good for us, and so my question would be: Why do we want them here? What is the purpose of having them here?"

Cypress Nature Preserve

"I'm I've, I've spoken extensively about that on my page, and I think that it is probably one of the reasons why there are many entities that do not want to see me in this seat, you know, I think there is an absolute beauty in being in the south I am not originally from the south, I'm originally from Chicago born and raised and I still frequently go home, and so if you want a Metropolis and things of that nature, then you have places you can go I do think that there are places and spaces in our city where we can open up these types of venues or entertainment. Venues that they're speaking of but when it comes to the reserves and my personal history with the reserve, what I viewed, and what I saw that is going to be a no for me. I don't want any of that touched. Not only is it a beautiful space, it holds ancestry, and that is also very important to me. When we can still have parts of our nation that hold the history of our nation, and it specifically when it comes to our indigenous brothers and sisters and my ancestry, that's gonna be a big, no for me. Now, there may be other places where we look, and we do some overview and some analyzing, and you might be able to find some places where we may be able to negotiate, but that 250 acres will be worth the fight and out of all the questions that you have asked, I can promise my node to touching those, nothing of that should be put, it should all be preserved. Whether it holds specific artifact or things of that nature, but just for the lushness, and the beauty of it, that's enough."