Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policing Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident raises racial-bias concerns about police during public comment; council accepts camera easements amid DOT/SLED limits
Summary
Resident Sharon Brown urged Bluffton Town Council on Feb. 11 to meet with the police department about alleged unequal treatment of Black residents; later the council unanimously accepted private easements for a public-safety camera project while staff explained DOT and SLED constraints on pole placement.
At the start of public comment on Feb. 11, resident Sharon Brown told the Bluffton Town Council she and others in Black and brown neighborhoods have experienced different treatment by police and requested a meeting with the police department to discuss impartiality and safety.
Brown, who gave her address as 163 Buck Island Road, said a resident earlier asked an officer to leave private property and the officer would not initially provide a name and said he had no reason to be on the property; Brown said that person later gave a card with a name. “There has to be the community has to be feeling safe. No one should roll up on anybody's property and not state why they're there,” Brown said, adding she felt Black residents are being targeted and cited officers “hidden in bushes with their cruisers.” She asked council for a meeting with the police department to address community concerns.
Councilmembers thanked Brown and acknowledged public-safety sensitivity in the community. Councilwoman Burton clarified a separate earlier remark about development agreements and noted she had not posted certain social media text that Brown referenced.
Later in the meeting the council approved, as part of the consent agenda, a resolution authorizing acceptance of donated easements from private property owners necessary to complete a portion of the phase 6 public-safety camera project. The motion passed unanimously. The council also heard from the police chief, who explained a state-level issue affecting camera placement: South Carolina statute and SLED policy on data retention require that license-plate/video records be retained for a short period (the department and vendor policy limit retention to 30 days), and SCDOT has declined placement of certain third-party cameras on its poles while SLED-related concerns are under review. The chief said Bluffton’s vendor (Flock) has agreed to relocate cameras to DOT poles at no cost if and when DOT allows it. “Right now, the DOT will not let Flock cameras go on to their live posts…so for those reasons, we have to go through this process, and put them on the side of the roadways for now,” the chief said.
The council’s approval accepted three private easements required to locate the cameras on privately owned parcels or rights-of-way where DOT placement is not currently permitted. Staff said that if and when SCDOT changes its position the vendor will assist at no additional cost.
