The International Village Board of Directors will hold its regular monthly meeting tonight (Monday, Sept. 16 at 7 p.m.), but the Board meeting may just be a warm-up act for what could be the week’s main attraction on Tuesday at 6 p.m. when the Projects Committee meets to discuss a proposed $100,000-plus special assessment to install 26 security cameras in each of the association's 11 residential buildings.
Proponents of the idea – which could translate into a $150 special assessment hit per unit owner – say cameras are needed to catch people in the act of dumping garbage in front of laundry rooms, stealing mail packages from people’s front doors and various other violations. Opponents counter that it’s a violation of privacy, reminiscent of a maximum-security prison, and an unnecessarily burdensome expense at a time when many owners are still recovering from the last special assessment and other big projects on the horizon are threatening to wipe out our rapidly dwindling 2012-13 special assessment fund. Critics also question cameras’ effectiveness, noting that a set of dumbbells recently disappeared from the clubhouse gym despite the presence of cameras in the gym room and throughout the clubhouse. Even advocates of security cameras in every building are balking at the high price tag, saying a surveillance system could be installed for a fraction of the proposed cost, either by finding a more reasonable vendor or by forgoing the Quantico Prison model in favor of a more modest system with fewer cameras.
Regardless of the cost, it might instructive to first examine the outcome of the Zurich building’s experiment with cameras before making any decisions on this issue. In June 2009, a committee of Zurich owners won the Board of Directors’ approval to install surveillance cameras in that building at their own expense. What were the results of that effort?
It’s also worth noting the ironic fact that this issue is coming up only a few short months after the owners of a Bordeaux unit were refused permission to install a security camera in front of their door at their own expense. Does this mean that cameras are good if they’re paid for by a special assessment, but bad if they don’t cost us anything? Where’s the logic?
Proponents of the idea – which could translate into a $150 special assessment hit per unit owner – say cameras are needed to catch people in the act of dumping garbage in front of laundry rooms, stealing mail packages from people’s front doors and various other violations. Opponents counter that it’s a violation of privacy, reminiscent of a maximum-security prison, and an unnecessarily burdensome expense at a time when many owners are still recovering from the last special assessment and other big projects on the horizon are threatening to wipe out our rapidly dwindling 2012-13 special assessment fund. Critics also question cameras’ effectiveness, noting that a set of dumbbells recently disappeared from the clubhouse gym despite the presence of cameras in the gym room and throughout the clubhouse. Even advocates of security cameras in every building are balking at the high price tag, saying a surveillance system could be installed for a fraction of the proposed cost, either by finding a more reasonable vendor or by forgoing the Quantico Prison model in favor of a more modest system with fewer cameras.
Regardless of the cost, it might instructive to first examine the outcome of the Zurich building’s experiment with cameras before making any decisions on this issue. In June 2009, a committee of Zurich owners won the Board of Directors’ approval to install surveillance cameras in that building at their own expense. What were the results of that effort?
It’s also worth noting the ironic fact that this issue is coming up only a few short months after the owners of a Bordeaux unit were refused permission to install a security camera in front of their door at their own expense. Does this mean that cameras are good if they’re paid for by a special assessment, but bad if they don’t cost us anything? Where’s the logic?
Yes we do need cameras in the buildings so the nasty, dirty, and the persons that are doing damage to the condo property and people can not put the garbage where it belongs and can't not even recycle so yes for the stupid people that can not do the right thing.
ReplyDeleteNew people coming in to shop for units here and seeing an over-abundance of surveillance cameras are going to think that we have a real crime problem here, when in fact we have NO CRIME here. Trashing laundry rooms and mail rooms may well be violations of our rules, but not crimes. If the place looks like Guantanamo Bay it will not only discourage new buyers, and investors, but will drive down our property values. People have been trashing laundry rooms and mail rooms for 20+ years. That's why we have maintenance people we pay to keeps things clean and orderly.
ReplyDeleteThere are also civil liberties and privacy issues that come into play when you have an over-abundance of surveillance cameras.
I agree with the comment from Sept. 17, 2013 we do not need surveillance cameras to control who doesn't place the trash where it belongs. We could instead take action ourselves and report those who do the wrong thing. Also there are other more important things to take care of in our buildings that cameras, (like maintaining, and replacing the very old water pipes for example.) We pay a lot of money for our maintenance people to keep this place well kept but there are occasions where maintenance had neglected to do their job replacing the garbage container in a timely manner. I have seen the garbage trash to be over flown all the way to the 3rd floor!
ReplyDeleteWhat we need is a better security and maintenance crew instead of cameras.
Bringing cameras to our community will give a wrong impression to new buyers.
How is it that having two security cameras in the gym and a security employee watching them all the time, the gym equipment keep on disappearing???
ReplyDeleteor how good the cameras at the Zurich building were when someone broke into the storage??? today we still have no idea of who, when or how...
Thank you John and Jerry. I just got around to reading That email sent out on 11/10/13 , I must admit I am never surprised by that gentleman whose name I shall not mention it pains me to do so, What is clear he Is only exposing himself for the Bully that he is.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Jerrys comments I am pleased to know There is intelligent life out there and so not much more can be said, I hope That he read the comment. And understand what others think about him, The real Shame is he has none. He said he spoke for the majority who wants the cameras and we all know that is not so.
The problem with his Idea of Democracy is, He believed that His ignorance is as good as our Knowledge. …. Keep up the good work John and Jerry I’m sleeping better knowing you're out there. Carl.