Pershing County Sheriff | Leased body cameras, and the footage nobody could release
Pershing County leased body cameras in 2023. Twenty-one months later its Sheriff told the commissioners he had no way to redact the footage for public release within the deadlines state law sets, and that his camera vendor could not do it either.
At a glance
- The contract
- LensLock as a new body camera vendor, "$343,675.00 over 5 years", approved 1 February 2023 on condition the District Attorney's wording changes were made [1]
- Bought or leased
- Leased. "Mr. Shields also stated that this is a lease agreement" and the county insures the units [1]
- What it replaced
- WatchGuard body-worn and vehicle cameras, later removed from the Sheriff's inventory as replaced [3]
- Redaction capability at purchase
- none. In November 2024 the Sheriff reported the office had no equipment to redact footage for release, and the District Attorney noted the vendor could not meet the requirement either [2]
- What closed the gap
- A separate computer at $5,040.97 and redaction software at $4,346.00, approved 6 November 2024 out of contingency funds [2]
- Funding sources declined
- The 911 telephone surcharge fund, on a commissioner's recommendation; and opioid settlement money, ruled out by the District Attorney as statutorily restricted [1] [2]
- Retention period, access rules, or the written policy NRS 289.830 requires
- none found in the county record [4]
How it happened
- Decision
The lease approved, and the 911 fund declined
The Board approved a contract with LensLock as a new body camera vendor at $343,675.00 over five years, conditional on the District Attorney's revisions, and separately authorised the Sheriff to sign. During discussion a commissioner noted the 911 Fund held $110,000 that had taken ten years to accumulate, and recommended budgeting $80,000 from the Sheriff's own budget instead. The District Attorney confirmed the arrangement is a lease and that the county insures the units. [1]
- Decision
The county buys the ability to release its own footage
The Sheriff reported that his office lacked the equipment to redact photographs and body camera video for public release, especially within the timeframes NRS 239 sets, and that he had no funds for it. A commissioner asked whether opioid settlement money could be used; the District Attorney said it must be used in fighting opioid abuse and that this is statutorily required, adding that the current vendor did not have the capacity to meet the requirements. The Board approved $9,386.97 from contingency funds. [2]
Buying cameras is not the same as being able to release what they record
In February 2023 Pershing County leased body cameras. The contract was with LensLock, at “$343,675.00 over 5 years”, and the county’s District Attorney confirmed during the meeting that it is a lease and that the county carries the insurance on the units.
In November 2024 the Sheriff came back to the same board with a problem. From the minutes:
“Sheriff Allen stated that they do not have the proper equipment to redact the photos and body cam videos, especially to meet the timeframes in NRS 239.”
NRS 239 is Nevada’s public records law and it sets deadlines. Redaction is what has to happen before footage can go out: faces of bystanders, children, victims, anything the law protects.
A commissioner asked whether the Sheriff had funds in his budget. He did not. And the District Attorney added the sentence that generalises beyond this county: “the current vendor doesn’t have the capacity to meet those requirements.”
The board approved $9,386.97 from contingency for a computer and software.
What that means, said plainly
For twenty-one months, this county had body cameras and no practical way to give the public what they recorded.
Not because anyone refused a request. Because the equipment to comply with the law had not been bought, and the camera company did not supply it.
Nobody behaved badly here. The Sheriff raised it himself, in public, and the board paid for the fix. It is on this site because it is the clearest documented answer to a question every other county page raises: when footage is hard to get, this is often why.
Two funding sources the county turned down
Nevada lets telephone-surcharge money buy body cameras, and Washoe County runs that mechanism continuously across five agencies. When Pershing’s contract came up, a commissioner noted the 911 Fund held $110,000 “which has taken 10 years to build up to that”, and recommended budgeting $80,000 from the Sheriff’s own budget instead.
And when the redaction equipment needed funding, a commissioner asked about opioid settlement money. The District Attorney said it “must be used in fighting opioid abuse” and that this “is statutorily required”.
That refusal is worth setting beside Mineral County, where in February 2026 the commissioners considered putting $50,000 of opioid settlement funds toward deputies’ in-car and body-worn cameras.
Two counties in the same state, reading the same restriction, reaching opposite conclusions. This page takes no view on which is right. It notes that only one of them can be.
What we do not know
- Whether the redaction equipment brought the office inside the NRS 239 timeframes, and what a footage request costs and takes today.
- What the LensLock lease says about retention, access and what happens to the footage when the five years end.
- Whether the Sheriff's Office has the written body camera policy NRS 289.830 requires, containing all six named elements.
- How many requests for body camera footage the office received in the twenty-one months before it could redact.
What you can do
Show up
Systems like this one are approved by boards, councils and committees that meet in public. We have not yet confirmed where each of them meets in Pershing County.
What we have documented in Pershing County →Protect yourself
Practical steps to shrink your personal data trail. Our guides publish at launch; until then, EFF's Surveillance Self-Defense is the best starting point.
Surveillance Self-Defense →Sources
- 1. Pershing County Board of Commissioners minutes, 1 February 2023 · Meeting record · · accessed
- 2. Pershing County Board of Commissioners minutes, 6 November 2024 · Meeting record · · accessed
- 3.
- 4.
Get the digest
A regular digest of what changed in the world of surveillance: the counties we published, the devices that appeared on the map, and the public meetings where these decisions get made. We send it when there is enough to report.
One click to unsubscribe. What we do with your address is on the newsletter page.