Wednesday, June 3, 2026
Two Public Meetings
Bend, Oregon
Action Guide — What to Know Before You Go

Two Meetings. One Issue.
Show Up for Both.

If you helped stop the La Pine data center, this is the next fight — and it is happening in your backyard. On June 3rd, Axon surveillance contracts are before both Deschutes County and Bend City Council. The same principle applies: demand answers before infrastructure gets locked in.

Morning — Deschutes County
Board of Commissioners
Business Meeting
9:00 AM
Deschutes Services Building
1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Agenda: Proposed procurement of body-worn cameras, tasers, and fleet cameras — pulled from the May 27 agenda and moved to this date.
3 min. public comment
Evening — City of Bend
Bend City Council
Business Meeting
6:00 PM
Bend City Hall
710 NW Wall St., Bend
Agenda: Stationary Axon ALPR camera add-on to existing contract — brought to Council after public pressure prevented a procurement bypass.
2 min. public comment
The La Pine Lesson: Demand Answers Before Infrastructure Locks In

La Pine residents did not wait until the data center was built. They demanded answers before land, power, water, and public infrastructure were committed — and the council voted unanimously to reject the proposal. Surveillance contracts work the same way. A signed Axon platform deal can mean years of vendor lock-in, data stored in Axon's cloud, and capabilities that expand beyond what the public originally understood was being approved. The time to set conditions is before the contract — not after.

What Axon Actually Is

Axon is not just a camera company. It is a public-safety technology platform. A single Axon contract can bundle body cameras, tasers, in-car cameras, automated license plate readers, cloud evidence storage (Evidence.com), AI-generated police reports, drone integration, and — through its acquisition of Fusus — real-time crime-center software that aggregates feeds from public and private cameras across a jurisdiction.

Fleet ALPR already in Bend
70+
Bend PD cruisers with Axon Fleet 3 ALPR since July 2023 — AI plate reading already active
Federal database violations
279
Times federal immigration authorities queried Bend's Flock database in June 2025, per The Source — described as violating Oregon sanctuary law
ALPR grant used as entry point
$19K
Oregon Criminal Justice Commission grant cited to add stationary cameras — nearly bypassed Council entirely
Procurement bypass threshold
<50K
City code allows manager to approve contract add-ons under 50K — public pressure forced this to a Council vote

Policy 428 Needs Council Review

The Immediate Problem at City Council

Bend's ALPR policy (Policy 428) does not require reasonable suspicion or probable cause before use or access. It permits use during routine patrol, stores data in Axon's Evidence.com cloud, and allows sharing with other law enforcement for "legitimate law enforcement purposes." This controls location data on ordinary drivers — it is a public-governance question, not an internal police procedure. Council should review Policy 428 before any expansion moves forward.

SB 1516 Is a Floor, Not a Local Policy

Oregon's SB 1516 requires end-to-end encryption and limits retention to 30 days. But Oregon's Chief Information Security Officer has raised concern that agencies may not retain their own encryption keys under some vendor systems. Bend needs local rules — not just state minimums.

Four Things to Say at Both Meetings

No surveillance contract without full public oversight Any surveillance contract — body cameras, tasers, fleet cameras, ALPR, drones, real-time crime-center tools, AI reporting software, or platform add-ons — should require a Council or Board vote with public comment, regardless of dollar amount or grant funding source.
Require real encryption and local key control Before approving any surveillance contract, require end-to-end encryption with agency-controlled keys, multi-factor authentication, audit logs, and written limits on vendor access to raw data.
Adopt a surveillance ordinance before expanding Bend and Deschutes County should require public notice, a Surveillance Impact Report, elected-body approval, annual reporting, and renewal votes before acquiring or expanding any surveillance system — cameras, ALPR, drones, AI tools, or real-time crime-center software.
Close the procurement loophole Surveillance capability should not expand through grants, pilots, amendments, or sub-threshold add-ons. Any new capability requires explicit elected-body approval — that is true at the county level today and at the city level tonight.

This Is Not "Never Use Technology"

The ask is: no new surveillance without elected-body approval, a public impact review, strong encryption and key-control requirements, documented retention limits, access logs, and annual public reporting. That standard protects residents and limits the jurisdiction's legal exposure under Oregon law.

Speaking at Both Meetings

County (3 min): Sign up on a blue form at the door. State your name and address. Citizen Input covers topics not on the agenda — the Axon procurement item will be on the agenda, so address it during that item.

City Council (2 min): Lead with name and ward. State your ask specifically. The ask is accountability before the contract — not after.