Surveillance camera issue in Libby to be discussed

Libby Mayor Doug Roll plans to introduce to the city council his latest proposal for Mineral Avenue surveillance cameras at Monday’s council meeting.

Roll first brought up the contentious issue during his “state of the city” address at a January chamber of commerce luncheon. He suggested installing cameras, partially at the expense of business owners, to protect businesses that had been hit hard by vandals in the past year.

Business owners were wary of the cost, and critics accused Roll of trying to keep tabs on bar patrons. Others argued that surveillance footage rarely holds up in court because of its poor quality.     

Roll said he has kept the issue off of the agenda for the past few council meetings because he was still conducting research. He will introduce his idea Monday in order to get council permission to continue researching and to take it to businesses.

“My basic idea here is to bring it to the council, and just get the approval from the council to continue this,” Roll said. “They wouldn’t be approving the installation of the cameras or the cost.”

If business owners agree to shoulder part of the cost, the item would then go back to the council to vote on, Roll said.

Roll has scaled the project down to the four blocks between West Lincoln Boulevard and East Third Street, excluding the Mint and Pastime bars, as well as the business of project critic, Wayne Hirst.  

The first set of cameras Police Chief Jim Smith looked into didn’t have high enough low-light capability, Roll said.

Roll said he received the $102,000 price tag for better cameras only an hour before the last council meeting.

“I took it off the agenda that night because we can hire an officer for two years for that kind of money and just have them stand on Mineral,” Roll said. “I said that’s way out of the realm of reality.”

Downsizing the project to only four blocks will cost a “more realistic” $60,000, Roll said. The cameras would be capable of picking out faces and vehicle plates on the street and on parts of the sidewalk, even in low light, he said. 

Smith has been consulting with Darby’s police chief, who has set up 26 cameras in his town, to come up with an even cheaper alternative, Roll said. The city may be able to save money by reducing the amount of memory used. Darby’s cameras are motion sensitive and only take five high-resolution frames per second.

“It’s a real jerky type of thing, but it gives you the ability to have mega pixels there so you can pick something out,” Roll said. 

Roll and Smith have also discussed making the cameras operational only during nighttime hours.

With only one city officer on shift at night, it’s difficult to catch vandals, Roll said. Mineral Avenue businesses were hit particularly hard last year during window-breaking crime sprees in April and November. In addition, six weeks ago two men were arrested for allegedly shooting out the windows of four Mineral Avenue businesses.

Managhan’s Furniture owner Mark Managhan and Timberline Auto owner Terry Andreessen were victims in the most recent incident. They said they will have to wait and see what Roll’s proposal is before they will have an opinion about it.

“I’m all for using every tool they can to stop the vandalism of my building but at the same time I don’t think it warrants spending a whole bunch of money,” Managhan said. “It’s got to be cost-effective.”

Managhan contemplated putting up his own cameras when it cost $3,100 to replace windows after the November incident and an estimated $800 in the latest act of vandalism. 

“My first reaction was we need cameras up,” he said, “but when I learned how much it cost, I thought we should hire a new officer.”

In other city news, the council will hold a public meeting about the proposed bicycle ordinance at 6 p.m. Monday, one hour before the regularly scheduled city council meeting.

The proposed ordinance would ban riding bicycles on the sidewalk in the business district, which encompasses the Highway 2 corridor and east of Highway 2 on Mineral and California avenues.

If the council votes for the measure at the 7 p.m. meeting, it would go into effect 30 days later.