Facilities committee backs further review of districtwide security camera and access-system replacement

The Keystone Central School Board facilities committee on Sept. 23 reviewed a recommendation to replace the district’s aging security cameras, card‑swipe access and visitor‑management systems and asked vendors to demonstrate proposed solutions before the full board considers a purchase. The review focused on a commercial vendor (Verkada) and a cost comparison with continuing to replace equipment piecemeal.

Committee members said the district’s current system is fragmented, with equipment from multiple manufacturers that will reach end of life in coming years. Randy, a district facilities staff member, told the committee the district currently has “over 400 cameras” and that many pieces of the access system are obsolete and difficult to support. “It’s a very discombobulated system,” he said.

The committee discussed two basic options: replace components piecemeal now and again in five years, or install a single integrated system from one vendor and rely on that vendor’s warranty, remote support and ongoing licensing. Randy presented the district technology office’s estimates: replacing cameras, environmental sensors, servers and guest‑management components under the district’s current approach could cost roughly $910,000 over five years (excluding a replacement access/swipe system because the current system is obsolete and cannot be priced apples‑to‑apples). A vendor proposal from Verkada was presented as an integrated alternative; Randy said the Verkada five‑year total would be about $1.113 million and a 10‑year cost about $1.6 million. He said Verkada’s package includes a 10‑year warranty, swap‑out service for failed cameras during the warranty period, and ongoing licensing costs thereafter.

Committee members asked about funding and timing. Randy said he applied for a federal COPS grant (submitted in June, amount cited in presentation: $500,000) and that the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) grant program could provide roughly $274,000 if it becomes available; both funding sources were described as uncertain. He added that the vendor had proposed financing options to spread payments over five years (roughly $275,000 per year under one scenario). Committee chair Jeff said the district must decide whether to wait for grants or to proceed using district funds and internal budget adjustments.

Technical questions included bus‑camera connectivity and how the system would handle rural cellular coverage. Randy said bus camera uploads can be configured to upload either after the bus returns to a parking location or in real time using cellular service; he noted that cellular dark spots on some rural routes could make the real‑time option costly or less reliable. Committee members suggested coordinating with county efforts to identify cellular gaps.

Members discussed vendor support and warranties. Randy said the vendor proposal includes 24‑7 customer support and device swaps under the warranty. Committee members agreed they want an executive briefing with district security staff and building principals to review sensitive technical and operational details, followed by a public demonstration for the full board. The committee discussed scheduling an executive presentation and a public demo before the district’s November board vote, noting the vendor had warned of a potential price increase in November.

No formal purchase motion was made at the committee meeting. The facilities committee recommended inviting the vendor for an executive briefing and a public demonstration, and asked staff to return to the committee with scheduling and financing details so the full board could consider a November decision if necessary.

Ending: The district’s facilities staff will arrange vendor briefings and continue seeking grant and financing options; the committee signaled it will prioritize a decision timeline that accounts for both warranty benefits and the risk of escalating vendor pricing.