Councillor: CCTV operational cost 'does not make sense'
“Having spent 40 years in the electronics industry I’m asking why is this costing so much? Show me the allocation of money.”
Get each of our Tribune editions sent direct to your email inbox.
Outspoken Invercargill City Councillor Ian Pottinger is questioning the annual $240k to $300k operational cost that ratepayers have ended up with as part of the CCTV project.
Work has started on the council’s CCTV camera system upgrade in the Invercargill CBD, South City, and Stirling Point in Bluff.
The council budgeted $2.3m for stage one of the project, to investigate and install CCTV cameras across parts of Invercargill and Bluff following requests from the community and Police.
The project has an ongoing operational cost estimated at $1.3m over the next five years. It ranged from $240,000 for the year 2024-25 to $300,000 in 2028-29.
Pottinger felt those figures were high and wanted more information to better understand the cost to the council and in turn the ratepayer.
“It’s a lot of money,” Pottinger said.
“Having spent 40 years in the electronics industry I’m asking why is this costing so much? Show me the allocation of money.”
“Coming from my professional background it doesn’t make sense, and I would like it to make sense. It’s very muddy and I don’t like muddy.”
Pottinger requested a breakdown of the operational costs from the council’s project management office program director Lee Butcher.
However, Butcher advised Pottinger the detail he wanted was commercially sensitive and could not be released.
On October 19 Pottinger then requested the information from council CEO Michael Day.
A council staff member replied to say Day would respond within 20 working days, as per any Local Government Official Information & Meetings Act request.
Pottinger felt it was a “bit on the nose” that a request from a councillor for council information was treated as a LGOIMA request.
“I was surprised given I thought it was an honest question from a councillor,” Pottinger said.
The council this week responded to Pottinger with a breakdown of the estimated operational costs for each year and what those costs would go towards.
It included the maintenance of the cameras, electricity costs, annual software licensing and cloud storage charges, tree trimming, training of staff, system support, software upgrades, and staff time to deal with CCTV governance and information requests.
However, Pottinger was again advised that the costs “were not able to be broken down to individual components because they were based on commercial contract negotiations and arrangements”.
Pottinger has been on council for five terms, and he acknowledged he had not previously requested the sort of breakdown he was after, regarding the operational costs for the CCTV system.
He said CCTV was a field he has worked in, and he believed the operational costs for the council’s project “did not make sense” which was why he had gone in search of more detailed information from council staff.
Earlier this month Invercargill Mayor Nobby Clark, who has been the council lead on the CCTV project, said he was pleased to see it underway.
“This is something the community has been wanting for some time now. All aspects of the project have been agreed on and we can now get to the next steps in keeping our community safe.
“This is designed to support and protect our community.”
Absolutely right Councillor Pottinger to ask such a question. Too often costs are not disclosed as it would be embarrassing, not commercially sensitive!
Quite right of Councillor Pottinger to ask the question. Why does the cost always fall on the ratepayer? Surely crime and order is the role of NZ Police, they are the ones who will require the footage, unless the council is going to start law enforcement and prosecutions.