Jail, courthouse security cameras in need of prompt replacement

     A project that could cost between $25,000 and $30,000 was approved by the Jones County Supervisors during their March 25 board meeting, in an effort to upgrade and provide better quality security cameras throughout the Jones County Courthouse.

   Both IT Coordinator Lisa Mootz and Sheriff Greg Graver presented the data and information to the board.

   The proposal would be to purchase a total of 17 security cameras, 11 for the jail and six for the interior and exterior of the courthouse. Mootz offered to have the funds come out of her budget, following a $10,000 purchase IT purchase courtesy of the Assessor's Office.

   "I always try to say how long can we make old crap work," Graver shared honestly when the idea of replacing cameras was brought to his attention.

   Both Mootz and Jail Administrator Sarah Tate brought the situation to Graver's attention.

   The security cameras in the jail, he explained, are set up for incandescent lightbulbs, which are the old style of lightbulbs.

   "So what we’ve run into is the old cameras with the new style of lightbulbs (florescent, LED) is creating this dark (image) that you just absolutely cannot see," Graver said.

   In addition, Tate has been unable to find replacement bulbs, with only one incandescent bulb left.

   "We haven't bought them in years," added Graver.

   "Our jail is in a pretty bad predicament right now that we are extremely dark at night and they (jail staff) have no idea what’s going on in the cells," he added.

   Most of the jail cell cameras were replaced in 2020. While that's not that old of a camera, Graver said when you're dealing with technology, five years is considered old. Two of the jail cameras have already been replaced before now.

   "To me, we have no choice in this; we have to move forward," urged Graver. "If the state (inspector) saw what was going on here, safety-wise it’s not good for the inmate or the staff."

   While the jail contains more than just 11 security cameras, Graver said they are choosing to just replace the 11 for now; the others still offer decent cell coverage.

   "They are in areas that lighting is good, coverage is good, the camera is new enough that right now we don’t have to replace those. We want to replace those we’re having issues with," he said.

   Eight years ago in 2017, 22 security cameras were purchased courthouse-wide. Graver and Mootz are predominantly the only two employees who handle requests from the outside public pertaining to footage from those cameras. When someone falls, for example, or there's a fender bender in the parking lot, footage is reviewed.

   "We are consistently pulling camera footage, downloading and maintaining that, mostly to protect our civil liability," Graver said.

   From those 22 cameras, Graver and Mootz have identified six that are in need of upgrades, in addition to the 11 in the jail. Those six include the cameras that cover the common areas on the first and second floors, the camera in the elevator, the exterior northeast and southwest corners, and the camera overlooking the west entrance.

   The cameras in the common areas are too pixelated and difficult to see in detail when you zoom into an image. The elevator camera is a priority because inmates are taken to and from the jail via the elevator. The three exterior cameras cover a wider area of the more heavily traveled areas of the courthouse.

   The courthouse cameras now have 3 megapixels. Mootz said the new ones will be 8 megapixels.

   "It's a significant increase from what we're able to see," Graver said. "Right now, you can’t even begin to see a (license) plate."

   Mootz shared that the west entrance camera was already replaced once, but it required a return visit for new sealant due to the constant moisture inside.

   Beyond these 17 cameras, Graver and Mootz said there are many others that they'd like to replace on a schedule, pending funding. Graver suggested the supervisors could consider putting aside $10,000 to $12,000 a year specifically for this project.

   "Then we’re looking at every five to six years, which is probably appropriate," he said of the replacement cycle.

   Graver said they need to jump on this project sooner rather than later due to a six-week turn-around time, "which is a long time with what’s going on in the jail."

   Supervisor Jeff Swisher inquired as to whether the county's Safety Committee would consider putting some funding toward the security camera project, considering the purpose of the cameras are for the safety of the county's employees and the public.

   "I think this a pretty good safety project," he said.