Covington Police Chief Kevin Klason doesn’t feel it’s appropriate to talk about what may have happened in Ferguson, Mo.

It’s an important discussion and one he feels strongly about. But the truth is, he says, he doesn’t know any of the facts. And it’s possible nobody does.

“There is a lack of accurate, factual information as to the incident in Ferguson,” he said. “I’m not about to second guess or comment about what did or did not happen. It’s not fair for me to make such a comment.”

Just as was the case in Ferguson, none of the deputies or law enforcement vehicles in King County are outfitted with cameras or audio recording equipment. That means a lot of the suspect’s – or victim’s – word is against an officers.

It’s a decades long issue that came to a head as tensions remain in Ferguson, a St. Louis suburb, months after the controversial killing of Michael Brown, 18, who was shot to death by Officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9. Police have said there was a struggle between the two, while some witness’s claim Brown retreated from the officer with his hands in the air when he was shot.

In the wake of the shooting, the Obama administration voiced its support for outfitting officers with body cameras — a piece of technology that can help provide proof for both police and the public in contentious situations but also raise questions about privacy when the cameras go into homes and/or record sensitive conversations.

Beyond the ethical and public policy questions, there is also the matter of cost.

Sgt. DB Gates, spokesperson for the King County Sheriff’s Office, said in an email that Sheriff John Urquhart is an advocate for adding dashboard cameras to deputy vehicles, but noted that there “are huge cost, storage and disclosure issues that would need to be addressed.”

In September, during the throngs of the Ferguson debate, King County Councilman Dave Upthegrove introduced an ordinance that would create a pilot project for bringing video to the department. Upthegrove told The Reporter that his main focus is on body cameras, since dashcams, which have been widely available since the 1980s, have limitations with audio and what the camera actually captures. However, he said it made sense to do a thorough analysis of both options. He sees the experiment as a priority project next year.

“I personally think (the cameras) are probably a good idea and hold a lot of promise but we have to move cautiously,” he said.

Upthegrove said the ordinance starts the process of building a pilot project, but before that can happen a group of “smart people” — members of the ACLU, prosecutor’s office, experts of public disclosure — will help the sheriff’s office determine how many cameras would be needed, the cost and scope of the project and a set of policies. Any changes would require support from the deputies and their union, Upthegrove said.

“Not a single colleague has raised concerns with me yet,” he said.

Although implementing the project itself would be costly, Upthegrove said the first phase — setting up a task force and putting together recommendations — should be completed with existing funds.

The majority of the eventual costs wouldn’t come from purchasing the cameras themselves, but from storing thousands of hours of data.

Meanwhile, Upthegrove said the council must pay attention to how other local governments handle the situation and learn from their responses and experiments.

“I just want us to move the ball forward,” he said. “I think that in the future we are going to have these.”

According to the Washington Times, a 2013 report from the Department of Justice said police departments that use cameras found evidence that both officers and civilians “acted in a more positive manner when they were aware that a camera was present,” and that useful evidence of interactions often was captured on video.

Upthegrove believes the cameras improve the behavior of citizens and cut false accusations. They also provide assurance and transparency to the public.

“It really clears up the he-said-she-said, or he-said-he-said scenarios,” Upthegrove said. “That cuts both ways.”

The other consideration relates to the state’s public disclosure law. The cameras could cause compromising video available to the public through Freedom of Information Act requests.

“How do we reconcile freedom for information with reasonable privacy expectations?” Upthegrove asked. “We don’t want a bunch of mobile surveillance cameras going around. There are barriers, but they are not insurmountable.”

Upthegrove said the most likely scenario is to pass the budget in December and direct the sheriff’s office to consider a program. He would hope for results by late spring or early summer, with a decision to fund and implement the pilot project for the summer. Results from that would decide whether to scale up or scratch the effort.

Upthegrove acknowledged that the there is risk in waiting to enact the project, as the public is often fickle about the important issues of the day. But he doesn’t believe this issue is a flash in the pan.

“I think there will be a continued interest in transparency and accountability,” he said. “But as Ferguson fades from the TV screen, it may cut public interest as well.”

While Maple Valley and Covington contract their law enforcement services through the county, Black Diamond has its own police force. Similarly, however, none of Black Diamond’s seven officers have video or audio recording on their person or in patrol cars. Police Chief Jamey Kiblinger said there used to be VHS recorders in the cruisers, but the technology was not replaced or upgraded once they broke down.

“Certainly if we had the money right now to put them in our cars we would,” she said. “There’s just no budget for them.”