Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Cameras topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge removal of 'flock' surveillance cameras; county says it owns two of eight
Summary
Public commenters told the Marshall County Board they want so‑called "flock" AI surveillance cameras removed; the chair said the county owns two of eight cameras and that footage is used only for investigations requiring a case number.
A pair of residents pressed the Marshall County Board on July 16 over the county's use of so‑called "flock" surveillance cameras, asking the board to remove the devices and raise privacy concerns.
Colleen Soon told the board she has been following "the National Discussion on flock cameras for using AI for surveillance" and said she "would like them to be removed." Her husband, Hans Soon, asked whether repeated searches by an individual "would it flag a question," expressing concern about automated flagging.
Chairperson Travis McGlasson responded that "Marshall County only owns 2 of the 8 cameras, one being at the foot of Lacon Bridge and the other being in Wenona. We do not have any privately owned cameras in Marshall County. The other 6 cameras are owned by other government entities and Bennington Township." He said the county's cameras "have been installed for 2 years" and "have been used for investigation purposes and in order to use the data a case number has to be entered." The chair added the sheriff's department has a policy on file and that the information is stored on an outside server.
The exchange came during the meeting's public comment period and did not prompt a motion or change to county policy. Board members did not announce any immediate steps to remove cameras or modify data‑access rules; the sheriff's office and other agencies that own cameras were not present to respond during the meeting.
Looking ahead, residents who want more action may seek to request formal review by the sheriff or place an item on a future agenda; no follow‑up timeline was set at the July 16 meeting.
