Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Courthouse Security topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Curry County court official: 76 security incidents tracked last year; staffing, funding hinder screening plans

Curry County Board of Commissioners · June 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Trial court administrator Thomas Langford told the Curry County Board of Commissioners that courthouses have seen 'at least 76 new incidents' in 2025 and that planned upgrades (metal detectors, x‑ray, ballistic windows) are in place but full screening is limited by staff and recurring cost gaps; commissioners agreed to consider the request as part of the 2026–27 budget.

Thomas Langford, speaking to the Curry County Board of Commissioners on June 16, said the county courts have already installed several physical upgrades but that the ability to staff screening operations remains the principal obstacle.

Langford, who presented as the trial court administrator for Curry County, listed recent and planned investments: replacement of court-area doors with solid-core doors, two new metal detectors, an x‑ray machine expected to arrive within 30–90 days, upgraded NVR recording to capture courthouse cameras, and planned ballistic windows and panels for public-facing court spaces. He also said the courts are integrating panic and distress systems with the sheriff’s response network.

"We tracked at least 76 new incidents in and around the courthouse" in calendar year 2025, Langford said, noting that those counts reflect incidents the courts record and do not capture what is unknown. He added, "I'll say all of that with full acknowledgement of the facts, commissioners, that it comes down to cost and staffing." Langford said some items have been paid from court security special allocation funds but that recurring personnel costs for screening are not yet funded.

Commissioners responded by placing courthouse security high on budget priorities while acknowledging limited local revenue. One commissioner noted that local court security funding is derived from a share of the criminal fine account and that those percentages have not been updated in many years, making a larger funding shift a complicated state-level issue. Commissioners suggested contacting state lawmakers for possible assistance and agreed to share Langford’s presentation video with the budget committee so members can weigh staffing and equipment trade‑offs.

Board members said the request comes at a critical time: the county is finalizing the 2026–27 budget and must decide which positions and recurring costs to fund. The board did not adopt a final staffing plan at the June 16 meeting; instead, it directed that courthouse security remain in budget discussions and that staff add the matter to upcoming budget committee materials.

Why it matters: courthouse screening and staffing decisions affect public access, staff safety and the sheriff’s ability to respond. Langford’s incident count and the list of capital upgrades make clear that the county faces recurring personnel costs to fully implement screening, not just one‑time equipment purchases.

Next steps: Commissioners will consider security staffing requests as part of the 2026–27 budget process and will provide the budget committee with Langford’s video and materials for further review.