Record-Journal
11-12-2007, 10:53 PM
SOUTHINGTON -- The cost of surveillance cameras at Crescent Lake is more than $7,000 over the budget, and members of the Board of Parks Commissioners are seeking ways to improve security at the park while minimizing any additional cost to the taxpayer.
After reviewing options, the board has asked Recreation Director William Masci to submit a letter to the Board of Finance asking for a special appropriation of $7,400 to complete the camera installation before winter.
“Part of the problem with the site is that costs include canopy improvements.
The site is not conducive for a project like this,” Commissioner David Kanute said. “If we chose to do this project in parts, some of the same costs and work would be repeated.”
The commissioners were faced with two options, either request a special appropriation from the Board of Finance or suspend the project and seek full funding in next year’s budget, Masci said.
Entering the new fiscal year, the department was budgeted for approximately $13,000 for camera installation at Crescent Lake.
The department had hoped to install the cameras, designed to help police monitor the site and prevent vandalism, before the first snowfall.
The decision came after several discussions looking at what would happen if the cameras were installed in phases.
That idea was rejected because the installation of just one camera would save only $1,000 and adding cameras in the future would cost more.
“The best option is to look at getting additional funding. If it is turned down, then we will roll the money over, but they need to realize that the prices may not hold,” Kanute said.
The commissioners determined it would be best to seek funding and talk with low bidders to determine if prices could be held until spring.
The commissioners have not yet awarded a contract for the installation.
Commissioner Joseph LaPorte said there is no guarantee that prices would rise, especially with the economic patterns associated with technological equipment.
“As technology continues to get more sophisticated, prices are also dropping,” he said during the last Board of Parks Commissioners meeting.
“It’s very possible that by next spring, the total cost will be lower than the expected costs today.”
The board has looked at several ways to reduce the overall cost of the project.
One suggestion is to use a pole already owned by the Parks Department to mount the camera equipment. Another is to use funds in the Crescent Lake budget line item to help offset additional costs.
The department does have a 10-foot pole that is not being used and would meet requirements to install the cameras, Parks Superintendent Richard Egidio Sr. said.
The pole could be used and installed by parks staff, reducing costs, to provide a connection point for electrical wiring.
<a href="http://forums.ctrecord.com/forumdisplay.php?f=83" target=”_blank"><img src="http://imagesource.zwire.com/local/Z/Zwire2755/zwire/images/icontalk14.jpg" border="0"></a>
After reviewing options, the board has asked Recreation Director William Masci to submit a letter to the Board of Finance asking for a special appropriation of $7,400 to complete the camera installation before winter.
“Part of the problem with the site is that costs include canopy improvements.
The site is not conducive for a project like this,” Commissioner David Kanute said. “If we chose to do this project in parts, some of the same costs and work would be repeated.”
The commissioners were faced with two options, either request a special appropriation from the Board of Finance or suspend the project and seek full funding in next year’s budget, Masci said.
Entering the new fiscal year, the department was budgeted for approximately $13,000 for camera installation at Crescent Lake.
The department had hoped to install the cameras, designed to help police monitor the site and prevent vandalism, before the first snowfall.
The decision came after several discussions looking at what would happen if the cameras were installed in phases.
That idea was rejected because the installation of just one camera would save only $1,000 and adding cameras in the future would cost more.
“The best option is to look at getting additional funding. If it is turned down, then we will roll the money over, but they need to realize that the prices may not hold,” Kanute said.
The commissioners determined it would be best to seek funding and talk with low bidders to determine if prices could be held until spring.
The commissioners have not yet awarded a contract for the installation.
Commissioner Joseph LaPorte said there is no guarantee that prices would rise, especially with the economic patterns associated with technological equipment.
“As technology continues to get more sophisticated, prices are also dropping,” he said during the last Board of Parks Commissioners meeting.
“It’s very possible that by next spring, the total cost will be lower than the expected costs today.”
The board has looked at several ways to reduce the overall cost of the project.
One suggestion is to use a pole already owned by the Parks Department to mount the camera equipment. Another is to use funds in the Crescent Lake budget line item to help offset additional costs.
The department does have a 10-foot pole that is not being used and would meet requirements to install the cameras, Parks Superintendent Richard Egidio Sr. said.
The pole could be used and installed by parks staff, reducing costs, to provide a connection point for electrical wiring.
<a href="http://forums.ctrecord.com/forumdisplay.php?f=83" target=”_blank"><img src="http://imagesource.zwire.com/local/Z/Zwire2755/zwire/images/icontalk14.jpg" border="0"></a>