Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Waite Park police audit finds no major discrepancies; policy updated after state changes
Summary
Police Chief presented the city’s biannual body-worn camera audit, reporting no discrepancies across inventory, retention, access and sharing; one policy discrepancy from an uncommunicated state change was fixed before the final report. The audit cost was reported at $1,000.
Police Chief Tony presented the city’s biannual audit of body-worn camera policies and systems and told the Waite Park City Council the audit found no discrepancies in major categories including data classification, retention, access and interagency sharing.
"During the data classification phase, there's no discrepancies noted by the auditor. Retention of data, no discrepancies noted," Tony said. He summarized the audit by listing categories checked and stating they were compliant. The audit report identified one discrepancy related to the body-worn camera policy after a state legislative change in August; the chief said that discrepancy was corrected and the policy amended and sent prior to the final report.
The chief also said the audit document must be forwarded to a range of state legislative and oversight bodies within 60 days, including the Legislative Commission on Data Practices and other legislative committees named in statute. The mayor or staff did not request additional action; the audit requires no specific council action but was provided for review.
The chief named the auditor, Lynn, who works for another government agency and provides audit services through a side company; he said that the city has used her since the onset of body cameras. He reported the audit cost as $1,000 per year.
Why it matters: The audit provides statutory compliance checks for the police department’s body-worn camera program and documents corrective action taken when state law changed. The required distribution to legislative oversight bodies makes the audit a public-record compliance item.
Ending: The council received the audit; staff will forward the final audit to the statutory legislative recipients within the required timeframe. No additional council action was requested or recorded.
