Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Enforcement Workzone topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables proposal to host work‑zone speed enforcement program using off‑duty troopers and private vendor
Summary
The Hancock County Board of Supervisors heard a presentation on a work‑zone speed enforcement program run by a private vendor with off‑duty state troopers and automated camera equipment; after questions about authority, footage capture and funding, the board voted 5-0 to table the item for further vetting with county staff and the attorney.
The Hancock County Board of Supervisors heard a vendor presentation on a proposed work‑zone speed enforcement program that would use off‑duty state troopers and a private vendor’s camera and lidar equipment to ticket speeding drivers in construction work zones.
Mark Dunston, introduced as a partner with IntelliSafe and a retired police chief, described the program structure: off‑duty troopers would operate handheld lidar devices, pull the trigger when they decide to record a violator, and the system would produce a diversion‑style citation option. The vendor described a fee split in which the private company would receive a portion of diversion program fees, the state would receive a share and the county would receive a portion if the county authorized participation and accepted the program through its justice court process.
Supervisors and sheriff’s office representatives raised questions about authority, the role of state patrol troopers, whether the state already performs similar enforcement, and how cameras are triggered and recorded. County staff clarified the device does not automatically record unless an operator points, aims and pulls the trigger; the vendor said recordings and citation intake follow a processing pipeline.
After extended questions about chain of custody, court processing, who would staff hearings, and whether the county should instead rely on MDOT or DPS resources, the board voted 5-0 to table the item and asked county staff and the county attorney to vet legal, procedural and insurance questions before bringing it back.
Ending: The item is tabled for further review; staff will consult with the sheriff’s office, county attorney and MDOT/DPS to clarify authority and program details before the board considers it again.
