Why GA's child protection agency paid $1M for a Chevy

Let's get an update on a developing story that we are learning about from Johnny Edwards, investigative reporter at the Center Square. And the question here is, Why is Georgia's Child Protection Agency spending $1 million on a Chevy? Johnny joins us live. And, Johnny, I understand that the department isn't exactly explaining why they spent so much money. No, they would not explain it. All they would say was that, you know, I spoke with the chief of staff for the Department of Human Services, And he said, we had some equipment bolted onto this Chevrolet Traverse. I tried to press him on exactly what that is. He said it was something for their Special Victims Unit. Would not say exactly what it is. But we were able to use various records we obtained, not only from the Department of Human Services, but also from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, to draw the conclusion that what they purchased, the reason why this Chevy Traverse cost nearly a million dollars, was because it came with something called a cell site simulator. And that is a very, very powerful spying device that is very invasive to cell phones and typically is only used by law enforcement. Interesting, Johnny. Yeah, because you would look at this vehicle and see a midsize Chevrolet SUV, a Chevy Traverse, and you might not think anything of it until closer inspection. I understand you had originally reported on the fact that DFCS has proposed this or they were looking at potentially spending this amount of money on all of this technology. But it's interesting because, correct me if I'm wrong here, but DFCS or Child Protective Services, they are not a law enforcement agency, are they? No, they're not. They're a social services agency. I mean, part of their mandate is to associate with and assist and cooperate with law enforcement, but they're not supposed to be doing police functions. And that's one of the big questions being raised here is, is DHS or do they even have a mechanism for DHS to obtain warrants? Because a lot of this surveillance technology that they've purchased would arguably require a warrant. And that means going to a judge and making a case that we need to be able to search this person remotely and find out what's going on because we have probable cause. So that's the contention here is that DHS, the Department of Human Services, has formed a special victims unit who has a very noble task of tracking down foster children who've run away and are in danger of being sex trafficked or possibly even being sex trafficked and exploited. But come to find out through records requests that they're buying very sophisticated surveillance technology. Yeah, Johnny, I mean, you hit the nail on the head in the standpoint that no one doubts the noble mission of this agency. I mean, they're here to protect vulnerable kids and to make sure that they are safe and placed in proper care. But to your point, you know, you don't you have a bureaucratic agency essentially doing the job potentially of what a law enforcement officer would do. That law enforcement officer is supposed to take an oath. They're supposed to go through specialized training. And you're looking at some of the technology that's on this one million dollar SUV and it's sophisticated spying equipment. I'm looking at some of your notes and it's just a lot of things that raise some concerns. And so it's how how does this affect people's constitutional rights if they're going to be going and to your point, executing law enforcement functions, but they haven't asked a judge to sign off on a warrant? It's there's a lot of questions about what does this look like? Right. Well, a cell site simulator is a device that basically mimics a cell phone tower and you set it up somewhere remotely because it's in a vehicle. and it basically tricks all of the cell phones in a certain radius into connecting to the cell site simulator. And then it can read what phones are in the area. Depending on how savvy they are, they can downgrade your connection to 2G and then potentially start intercepting phone calls, intercepting texts. I mean, you can really, really get up close and personal on somebody with one of these things. You know, the other technologies that they bought that were in an earlier story. I actually discovered those technologies through trying to find this. Those are tinker toys compared to a cell site simulator. Tinker toys, my goodness. Johnny, we are running out of time here, but in the last 20 seconds or so that I have you, what's next? Any follow-up questions that you're going to try to push the state for or the agency on for more answers regarding this? Well, I think the follow-up questions are going to be coming from state lawmakers. There's a hearing coming up later this month by one of the oversight committees where I think they're going to be asking some very pointed questions of Commissioner Candace Brose or one of her subordinates asking questions based upon the last two stories we've done about all of this technology that's been bought. You know, the lawmakers were, you know, a little myth that they plugged a shortfall in that budget with $81 million earlier this year. And that came amid all these service cuts that there was a lot of outcry about. And now to find out that they've been using TANF money, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, federal money, to equip this special victims unit. So I think there's going to be a lot of questions asked there. Another thing happening is that Representative Beth Camp, who's been trying to get these records as well, is crafting legislation that would require more transparency from human services and how it spends its money. Johnny, as always, appreciate our conversations. A lot of follow-up questions to be had. We're going to keep our eyes closely glued, if you will, to that hearing, because I can understand that lawmakers might have a lot of questions. And I look forward to our next conversation, conversation, Johnny.