Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bedford County board approves alcohol checkpoint grant after divided vote
Summary
The Bedford County Board approved Resolution R022425-01 to apply for an alcohol selective enforcement grant to fund DUI checkpoints and overtime patrols. The sheriff defended the practice as constitutional and necessary for public safety; two supervisors voted no, citing Fourth Amendment concerns.
The Bedford County Board of Supervisors voted to adopt Resolution R022425-01 to apply for an alcohol selective-enforcement grant that would fund DUI checkpoints and overtime patrols.
The grant, presented as part of the sheriff's office requests, passed on a roll-call vote after a period of debate over the constitutionality and fairness of checkpoint stops.
Sheriff: "It is constitutional, and it is protected by the Supreme Court... we try to protect 81,000 people in this county," the sheriff said in explaining the purpose of checkpoints and overtime the grant would fund. He told the board the department uses checkpoints and active patrols to find people driving under the influence and that the funding mainly pays overtime for officers to perform those duties.
Board debate centered on civil‑liberties objections. "I feel like it's a violation of my civil rights ... if I'm driving in a proper manner, no one has any business pulling me over for no reason at all," said Supervisor Mr. Davis, who voted against the resolution. Another supervisor who opposed checkpoints said they are contrary to the Fourth Amendment, even if the Supreme Court has upheld them.
Supporters cited public-safety benefits. One member of the board, speaking from personal experience, said: "I've had lots of friends... killed by drunk drivers. For me to be stopped I think it's a small price to pay to get the drunk driver off the street before he gets to somebody else."
Procedural notes: The motion to adopt R022425-01 was made from the floor and seconded; the roll-call recorded two No votes (Mr. Davis and Miss Sharp) and affirmative votes from Mrs. Parker, Miss Johnson, Mr. Stark, Ms. Bangeli and the Chair; the motion carried. The grant as described would fund checkpoints and overtime for speed and alcohol enforcement.
The discussion took place during the board's consent- and action-item sequence, after members removed one consent item for separate consideration. No dollar amount for the grant award or the county match for R022425-01 was specified during the discussion.
