Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Franchise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Spokane County OKs amendment to Flock Safety franchise to expand license-plate reader cameras
Summary
The Board of County Commissioners unanimously approved an amendment allowing Public Works to add more Flock Safety license-plate reader cameras after a staff presentation and a public hearing with no public testimony.
Spokane County commissioners unanimously approved an amendment to a telecommunications franchise that will let the Public Works Department add more Flock Safety license-plate-reader cameras, the board decided Tuesday during a public hearing.
County road engineer Matt Saracore told the commissioners the amendment would authorize additional cameras at locations shown as red dots on a county map and that the proposal was made in coordination with the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office.
The amendment was presented during the board’s public hearing on agenda item 5A. Saracore told the board, “Here to tell you about a amendment to an existing franchise we’re proposing. It’s for Flock Safety. … Essentially, what they are is their license plate readers.” The chair opened the hearing for testimony; no members of the public signed up to speak. After closing public testimony, a commissioner moved to approve the amendment, a second was given, and the motion passed unanimously.
The board recorded the motion as approved with all four commissioners present voting in the affirmative. The meeting record notes that Commissioners Jordan, Waldorf, Kearns and Cuny were present; Commissioner French was absent on county business.
County staff said Justin Elliott from Flock Safety was available for questions but no public questions were offered. The amendment does not appear to set a public comment condition or deployment timeline in the discussion recorded at the hearing; staff described the map locations but did not state the total number of new cameras or provide a timetable for installation during the public presentation.
Because no public testimony was offered at the hearing, commissioners voted to approve the amendment as presented by staff. Implementation details, such as exact camera counts, installation schedule and any data‑use or retention practices tied to the franchise amendment, were not specified in the hearing record and would need to be confirmed in the franchise documents or future staff reports.
The action concludes the public‑hearing step recorded in the board’s May 20 consent-agenda meeting; staff or the sheriff’s office will be the next points of contact for additional implementation or privacy‑policy questions.
