OCEAN SPRINGS, MS — The Ocean Springs City Attorney and Police Chief presented a program to the Board of Aldermen that would help get uninsured motorists off the streets. What the aldermen did not know was that both men would financially benefit from the city adopting the deal.
On Saturday, former Police Chief Mark Dunston confirmed reports he was on the Securix payroll while simultaneously overseeing the program as the city’s top law enforcement officer. When asked by GC Wire if he and his assistant were paid by the company while serving in their official city capacities, Dunston responded, “Absolutely.”
As Chief of Police, Dunston oversaw the controversial Securix ticketing program that used cameras to cross-reference license plates with the state’s insurance database.
Securix Chairman Jonathan Miller confirmed Dunston was paid $5,000 each month to tout the system, while his personal assistant, also a city employee, was paid $2,000 monthly. Miller says this arrangement was insisted upon by Wilkinson.
Earlier this week, City Attorney Robert Wilkinson confirmed to GC Wire he too was employed by Securix, but claims he advised the city of his role — a claim that has been repeatedly rebuked by Alderman Rickey Authement and former Mayor Shea Dobson, who served at the inception of the Securix agreement.
Both officials also maintain the city was unaware of Dunston’s $5,000 a month arrangement with Securix.
Possible Violations of Ethics and Law
State law and the Mississippi Ethics Commission are clear: public officials are prohibited from using their positions to secure personal financial gain.
Furthermore, officials are required to fully disclose potential conflicts of interest and must recuse themselves from any discussions, decisions, or actions that could result in personal benefit, ensuring public trust and transparency. This level of recusal would have been impossible for Wilkinson and Dunston to achieve while actively promoting the Securix program to the Board of Aldermen or overseeing its implementation.
Dunston said he performed work for Securix on his free time, but that distinction is irrelevant because his dual role as Police Chief and a paid promoter inherently created a conflict of interest, as his official position directly influenced the program’s operations and credibility.
As for Wilkinson, his dual role as City Attorney and representative of Securix is even more concerning, as it positioned him to influence the city’s decision to adopt the program while standing to benefit financially. The alleged failure to disclose this conflict to the Board of Aldermen and Mayor undermines the transparency and accountability expected from a legal advisor to the city.
The Ethics Commission calls for a “total and complete” recusal for a city attorney with conflicts. According to a 2004 ruling, the city attorney must “not only avoid debating, discussing or taking action on the subject matter during an official meeting, but also avoid discussing the subject matter with board members, staff or any other person prior to and after the official meeting.”
Through a public records request, city officials provided the agendas and minutes for five Board of Aldermen meetings in which Securix was discussed or voted on. Wilkinson presided over three of the meetings in his role of City Attorney. The remaining two were presided over by Will Norman, a junior attorney employed by Wilkinson’s private firm. The city’s YouTube channel also features Wilkinson addressing resident concerns about Securix.
The Commission calls for a city attorney to physically vacate the room when a conflicting topic is mentioned and requires the city to record in the meeting minutes that he has left the room during any related discussions or actions — neither of which occurred.
Contradicting Statements by Wilkinson
In his email to GC Wire, Wilkinson’s carefully crafted denials rely on a web of selective wording and omissions, leaving more questions than answers.
Executives at Securix claim that a March 2021 agreement, which they say was negotiated by Wilkinson, outlined “a commission rate of 24 percent” on all uninsured motorist citations issued by municipalities Wilkinson’s team brought into the program.
According to Jonathan Miller, the agreement listed Wilkinson as an individual party to the contract with specific language stating:
“This Agreement made and entered into this 28th day of March 2021 by and between on one hand, Frontier Consulting, LLC, and Mr. Robert Wilkinson, a Natural Person… and on the other hand, SECURIX, LLC.”
Wilkinson acknowledged the existence of the document, but stated that specific contract was not executed. “I was mentioned in that contract but did not sign the contract,” he wrote. “Not only did I not receive any monies from [the] Ocean Springs program I never received a penny from Securix LLC. Ever.” Wilkinson further claims he was not compensated by Frontier Consulting, either.
Yet, in the same email, he stated that he represented the company and worked “throughout the state and southeast for Securix.” Various news articles at the time also quoted him as an active rep for the company. If Wilkinson received no payment from Securix or Frontier, it begs the question: Who was funding his efforts?
Miller calls it word games. “He can say he wasn’t paid a dime by any number of companies, but it doesn’t mean he wasn’t paid by a company he didn’t mention,” the Securix chairman said. “Frontier could have easily put the money into another entity that paid Robert. These are just games he is playing with his words. Wilkinson represented Securix and he was well paid for it.”
Ocean Springs signed on to the program in May of 2021, just two months after the creation of the commission agreement Wilkinson says he did not sign.
Contract Renegotiated in 2022
A March 2022 email from Wilkinson to Miller reveals the City Attorney renegotiating terms on behalf of himself and Frontier partners Josh Gregory and Quinton Derickson. The email provides further evidence suggesting Wilkinson’s compensation.
“Attached is an updated contract for our group,” Wilkinson wrote in the email to Miller. “After our meeting yesterday, I changed this to all states we bring to the program or future programs. I also changed the length to an additional 10 years after the initial term. The only item not addressed is expenses. Mostly Josh and Q, but we have all had a lot of cost getting us to this point. And we are not charging for the collective 40,000 miles we have driven in the last 12 months.”
The email not only shows Wilkinson’s active role in enhancing his deal with Securix, but also raises serious questions about the extent of his financial stake and the transparency of his involvement as a city official.
Future Interests ‘Depended’ on Ocean Springs Signing
The importance of convincing Ocean Springs officials to sign on to become the inaugural city in Mississippi cannot be overstated. Miller says both Dunston and Wilkinson’s future interests depended on city officials to sign the original agreement.
Even if Wilkinson personally did not accept commissions through the Ocean Springs contract, the adoption in Ocean Springs was still paramount to his future financial gains. By becoming the first city to adopt the program, Ocean Springs served as a proof of concept — a “model city” that Wilkinson and his partners could showcase when pitching the system to other municipalities.
After its implementation, Wilkinson and partners hit the road to pitch the program to other cities, relying heavily on Ocean Springs’ adoption to validate the program’s viability. Wilkinson’s alleged dual role as City Attorney and private beneficiary positioned him to facilitate the city’s agreement while standing to gain financially as the program expanded.
The System Unraveled
The Securix program in Ocean Springs ended up collapsing under the weight of its own flaws and mounting controversies.
The unraveling began with a flood of complaints from residents who received erroneous citations despite having valid insurance. Alderman Authement described how some residents, including veterans insured through USAA, reported receiving erroneous citations. “It’s disheartening when people like that are getting insurance tickets,” he said, referring to the undue stress placed on law-abiding residents.
Authement also expressed concerns to the Board about Wilkinson’s son running the operation, telling fellow Aldermen, “It’s not a good look.”
Further scrutiny revealed that the program was marred by a lack of transparency and oversight. Miller alleged that the system in Ocean Springs bypassed proper procedures, saying certain vehicles are being whitelisted, protecting them from citations.
A class action lawsuit was also filed, stemming from tickets received from the Ocean Springs program.
Where are they Now?
Currently, Wilkinson and Dunston are partners in a company called Intellisafe. This time, the duo is selling ticket generating radar systems to municipalities. Their program has been adopted by Moss Point and Hattiesburg. Both cities are facing lawsuits related to the use of the Intellisafe system.
Robert Wilkinson remains the active City Attorney for Ocean Springs, guiding elected officials with his legal advice.
Click here for more on the Securix Saga in Ocean Springs and Biloxi.
Relevant Laws, Rules, and Guidelines
- Mississippi Code § 25-4-105 (1)
- Public officials are prohibited from using their official positions to obtain personal financial gain other than compensation provided by law.
- Mississippi Ethics Commission Opinion 12-014-E
- Requires public officials to recuse themselves from any action that could result in personal financial benefit, including abstaining from discussion, advocacy, or voting on matters where they have a financial interest.
- Mississippi Ethics Commission Recusal Requirement
- Public servants must avoid not only actual conflicts but also the appearance of impropriety. Recusal requires total and complete withdrawal from the matter, including refraining from discussing the subject with colleagues or stakeholders.
- Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct (Rule 1.7 – Conflict of Interest)
- Attorneys must avoid representing clients when there is a significant risk that their personal interests will materially limit their ability to fulfill their professional responsibilities.
- Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct (Rule 8.4 – Misconduct)
- Prohibits attorneys from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, as well as conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
- Mississippi Code § 97-11-53
- Prohibits any municipal officer from profiting from contracts related to the municipality unless explicitly authorized by law.
- Mississippi Ethics Commission Advisory Opinions
- Clarify that public officials cannot use their position to secure a financial advantage for themselves or related parties, even indirectly, and that failure to disclose or recuse can lead to penalties.
- Federal Hatch Act (Applicable to Local Officials Receiving Federal Funds)
- While primarily addressing political activity, the Hatch Act emphasizes the need for public officials to maintain ethical boundaries and avoid misuse of their authority for personal benefit.
- Mississippi Code § 25-4-103 (Definitions and Conflicts of Interest)
- Defines conflicts of interest and lays out scenarios where public officials are expected to disclose financial relationships or other interests that may conflict with their duties.
