Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners add court security officer after public raises alarms about Flock cameras and transparency
Summary
The Livingston County Board of Commissioners voted 9–0 to add one full‑time court security officer despite multiple public commenters urging a pause on Flock Safety camera networks and calling for more transparency and independent review of court security policy.
The Livingston County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously to add one full‑time court security officer, even as residents urged the board to delay action until the public could review incident data and legal authority for expanded court security.
At the start of public comment, a cybersecurity‑trained resident warned that automated license‑plate reader networks such as Flock Safety allow searches without probable cause and share data widely. "The public deserves independent audits, transparency or transparency reports, and meaningful civilian oversight," the commenter said, urging the board to "pause or stop or remove entirely the Flock or similar systems." The speaker cited FOIA records they said showed interstate data sharing with "1,098 total systems" and retention policies that range from 30 to 730 days.
Another resident asked the board to deny or postpone Resolution 202605057, which would expand court security functions, until the county provided incident reports and legal clarification. The commenter said the county's comprehensive security policy is currently the subject of federal litigation and pointed to a court decision they referenced as People v. Justina (1996) to underline limits on court security authority.
Despite those remarks, the board moved forward. Commissioner Gross moved the measure to authorize an additional court security officer; the motion was seconded and approved in a roll‑call vote recorded as 9 to 0. Chair announced the motion carried.
The board did not publish incident statistics or the full legal analysis during the meeting. Public speakers repeatedly asked for a formal review of contracts and policies governing surveillance systems and for clear disclosure of the data‑sharing scope and retention rules. Several commenters also suggested adding civilian oversight, independent audits and agenda time for contract review.
The board's action creates a new full‑time position for court security staff. The motion text and roll‑call were placed on the record at the meeting; the board then proceeded with other agenda items. The resolution’s effective date or implementation timeline was not discussed in the public proceedings recorded at this meeting.
