Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Vigo County parks staff propose two‑camera security pilot, board to consider in March
Loading...
Summary
Parks staff presented two vendor quotes for a security‑camera pilot at Hawthorne Park — Security Pros ($4,114.21 install; $103/mo) and Evron/Everon ($5,102 install; $45/mo). The board discussed reliability, gate integration, and deferred a vote to March to gather more details.
Vigo County Parks and Recreation staff presented a proposal to pilot two security cameras at Hawthorne Park and asked the board to consider vendor quotes and operational details at the March meeting. The cameras would include a license‑plate‑reading unit and a secondary picture camera to document faces or vehicle descriptions.
The staff member leading the briefing said two vendors submitted bids: Security Pros quoted $4,114.21 to purchase and install two cameras, while Evron (identified in materials as an ADT branch) quoted $5,102. The staff noted recurring monthly service fees differ substantially: $103 per month for Security Pros versus $45 per month for Evron. “Security Pros is a little bit more, but I feel like they're gonna help you more,” the staff member said, citing faster post‑installation response and familiarity with the county’s existing gate system.
Board members asked about long‑term costs and whether the system could be expanded later. The staff warned that recurring fees accumulate and that cameras may become obsolete after a few years, and recommended a pilot approach to evaluate performance before a larger investment. The staff also noted installation constraints: cameras need internet access and 110‑volt power, and solar mounts are available but expensive.
The board discussed integration with the vendor that currently manages the park gates (Security Pros operates the gates under a separate service) and the practical risks if internet service drops. Staff recommended deferring the final procurement decision until March to obtain more technical details and confirm whether other local companies could provide competitive packages.
The board did not take a final vote on the purchase at the meeting; staff said they would return in March with additional comparisons and a recommended vendor package.

