advertisement

Springfield, Ill., serving as case study for Columbia's cameras

Sunday, March 21, 2010 | 12:01 a.m. CDT; updated 6:54 p.m. CDT, Sunday, March 21, 2010

COLUMBIA — Examining the downtown cameras in Springfield, Ill., can help demonstrate how they might affect a city like Columbia. Springfield had a population of 117,352 in 2008, similar to Columbia's 100,733 in 2008, according to U.S. Census data. It's also a college town with two universities: University of Illinois - Springfield and Robert Morris University.

Springfield installed 12 cameras downtown three to five years ago.

“We knew we had a need,” said Michael Midiri, who oversees Springfield's cameras. “We knew that we had big crowds down there in the evening and we thought, ‘How do we get another set of eyes down there?’”

The cameras, which cost $45,000 to $50,000, were put at three major intersections with the most foot traffic, Midiri said. They film the street corners, not the middle of the intersection.

“We put them in because we have so much tourism because of the Lincoln sites,” Midiri said. “We wanted to have something that was more of a deterrent. They have helped us solve crimes, but they’re more of a deterrent.”

He called the cameras a “safety net,” and said he would be interested in getting more cameras.

“It might not catch everything we want, but every little bit helps,” Midiri said.

Springfield’s cameras are not pan and tilt, nor are they mobile units.

According to Springfield's citywide crime statistics, there was a 19 percent decrease in theft and 15 percent decrease in overall crime from 2003 to 2005, when the cameras were initially installed. From 2005 to 2009, both those numbers remained relatively constant.

These numbers are, however, citywide and Springfield’s cameras are only downtown.

“I’m not sure how much they were affected by the installation of the cameras,” said Donna Brown, records manager for Springfield.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Glenn Rice March 21, 2010 | 8:30 a.m.

Was $45,000 - 50,000 the price for each camera, or for all?

(Report Comment)
Victoria Guida March 21, 2010 | 9:59 a.m.

Mr. Rice,
Thanks for your question. The cost is for all of the cameras. They paid less than we would pay for four cameras because their cameras are stationary, without pan-and-tilt capability.

-Victoria Guida
Columbia Missourian Reporter

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro March 21, 2010 | 10:29 a.m.

(“We put them in because we have so much tourism because of the Lincoln sites,” Midiri said.)
-Springfield, Ill.
The District, the Chamber of Commerce, the Chamber of Commerce's hand-picked mayoral candidate wants to put them in because a mother's son was assaulted in an enclosed city-camera saturated parking lot.
-Columbia, MO

My conclusion.
One town is attractive for ongoing tourism.
The other has selfish, self-serving, self-absorbed followers of "the District" who have lost all reason during a period of economic challenges.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements