officers it's not an inexpensive proposition the estimate was about fifty thousand dollars now that's covered over a five year period of time and that includes everything from the cameras to the cloud storage and maintenance agreements and what have you for the cameras because as you can imagine being worn they're going to wear in addition that new technology will come out we elected at this point to decline no i should say that the law has recently changed i think in july that has created this opportunity amongst law enforcement in pennsylvania prior to july and the new law change in regards to the wiretap standard there was no exception for for law enforcement to record a conversation without either having a court order or devising the party that they were being recorded there's there's a lot of issues that surround it that the new law kind of takes that element of this away and so years i advised each of the companies that you know what we were not going to pursue this for twenty eight this time we're going to kind of wait and see at that point i was contacted by x on which is one of the premier companies actually and they said you know what we give you the cameras free for a year we gave you the cameras the cloud storage everything free for a year you try and if you don't like  give back in the year no obligation if you like them you pick it up at that point and sign up for the deal with us no obligation sounds a little too good to be true to be worked out in the law and with the camera systems and the some challenges and some things i'm quite certain of in the coming year or so and i think the technology continues to evolve but i think regardless in a year or two we're going to be going down this road and so this is an opportunity for us to look at number departments have already made the jump the city of pittsburgh has made the jump the bones of a state police are making the job philadelphia is making the job and there are more and more a good friend of mine is the chief of police in logan township blair county he bought them last year even before the law changed so there are a number of agencies that are started moving this direction u think it's fifteen or sixteen thousand dollars the first year and then you're increment over the next outlying years that bring it up to about fifty thousand we would have to do it through some competitive process of i had t officers sooner or later my only concern is that if we put them on them now i think you'd have a very difficult time at the end of the year saying we're not going to continue with cameras i think people would then question why cameras are on the officers number of legal issues have come up in other states for example police officer makes a dui arrest that cameras running into the hospital two nurses discussing a patient in their situation he was inadvertently recorded and came to their knowledge that resulted in a lawsuit because of the heap of oil ation you also have what about when the officers stop home for dinner and does a camera in the camera recording all the time you can certain window of time and try to find a video it can be very complex if it's not tagged but the possibilities there the other issues you have with the body cameras as i said when the officers at home when using a restroom school when in the high school if we walk into the high school we have juveniles in an elementary school juvenile or daycare juveniles you know there are issues there so all of those kinds of issues still kind of have to be worked out time of the videos but you're also looking at if you do get a right to know request we have to have the technical expertise and the capability which comes with this particular package the capability not techni to redact that video for anybody who is not who we cannot release their information to the requestor so there's a lot of different hurdles and you're starting to see more and more technology creepin fortune which is an important element of it but it comes at a cost both personnel costs financial cost so yes to the one point you made now all the different potential uses yes is that within the realm of possibility yes it is and again just because you know there is a way for them to physically shut that camera off so that it's not required but they have to remember to do  that and that's you know that's the concerning part of all of this because you know when in the heat of the moment or when you've made an arrest in your you're walking into a hospital last thing especially somebody who's maybe a little bit combative or some type of an issue last in your thinking about turning a camera off pluses to this you know from again some of the other classes i sat in and considerations you know when you a camera does not like your memory or your perception of an incident the camera exactly what happened and there are many instances where police officers react based on their perspective or their analysis of what is happening and so sometimes those two can conflict changes that in your mind it does not change it on the camera or in the audience but in regards to this particular company this particular company is is kind of advanced in my opinion in what where they're going with this technology one of the opportunities i had at this conference was to see their product and they're moving in a direction where this camera and this audio will in effect become your police report would be some tweaks because we're in washington county but beyond that you know like the retention schedule their retention is sixty five days we would have to take a look at that and see is that sufficient for any all you know sixty five days assuming it's a no on incident type video if it's a police criminal incident type video it's a whole different game if it becomes evidence part of the cost of this is taking into consideration the fact that if a police officer involved in a  the incident that hammers used to record that camera probably going to the camera itself is probably going to be placed in evidence so you have to have an additional camera three place that would the approach and the way i view these cameras is as if they were a weapon where each officer gets his own camera and i think that's important we could go with half as many but the cameras have to george and they take three hours or so to charge full you know we run twelve our shoes who is no real pretty there from one shift to the next for cameras the chores well so i think the fact that accountability wise you know the cameras aren't quite as expensive as everything else it goes with this but in this particular package you brought up about the pager package attack program is what they refer to in regards to tasers where they're replaced incrementally that's part of the payment of the program and this forty nine thousand dollars does not replace these cameras however they have a seventy six thousand dollars over five year program that the cameras are replaced in thirty months and it's sixty months with the newest technology that they have one of the safest places i've ever lived or worked it's kind of astounding the lack of criminal activity that we see on a day to day basis here to me and so i think the camors are necessarily going to change that for us that said if we get into a high liability type incident that's where their value which would be pointless because even you know one thing that is that is certainly been proven to be true the video from the cars of haves certainly helped us resolve issues where there's a discrepancy between what the police officer recollected about an in  they have now five or six policies that are probably that are to a point where they're ready for review policies in our case are adopted by council so  officers you know we could we get into situations were right he says she said you know we just had one of those about three weeks ago where somebody came in to complain about an officer i reviewed the audio footage from the meaning we normally would not do anything like that and a reorganization but the reason why i think it's important is that we have this appeal on the sprinkler ordinance and one of the things that we discovered in reviewing the ordinance this industry as the ordinance was adopted the setbacks do not create a fifteen foot spacing between buildings we need to get that resolved before the hearing by labor and industry which there is a process by which after one year you can come in and compare the actual comes that are her at your property with that which was projected in this particular case the all but there are other than there are centers that are twenty four percent i presume compare that dad when he first get his projection but is there a reason why he only counting at certain times during the day or is that lot of these kind of businesses and like for mers is going to be another one to talk about i don't know that they have completely build up their clientele within a one year period and so i don't know the traffic counts are what they will eventually be so we're going to we're going to look at was possible to construct a single line intersection there without having to create a turning point and the answer was brief but it was yes the and that if it was to be constructed there would have to be significant turning lanes on water main road and you know it at that point this project becomes a a very expensive undertaking day or ready to begin construction and have submitted an application for a building permit what they have asked is that they be a big consideration for from the township  designed this and normally my my recommendation would be to you that we have no obligation to certainly to reimburse them  their engineering fees but what they have suggested and i don't know whether counsel would want to entertain this is that it would fact we did not require them to pay the entire fee but the fee less the money they've credibly expensive and it's not what they agreed to do the ribbon calls out the strong but the problem that happens is because of this development that traffic situation will be even worse the traffic improvement program this intersection right now is not included in that program it will be and has additional properties developed in that area or in this traffic improvement area the township will be in a position to be able through those traffic and permit fees the follow that improvement to that intersection but the ultimate answer is that now as a result of ten dollars to terminations this building gets built and there is no and quite honestly i wouldn't be suggesting this if we don't get a release that says they won't feel because i would see reimbursing them for the seventy five hundred dollars that's you know that values established there's a value to the township  ground in terms of i have a question about the planning commission meeting minutes when they talk in terms of the power bouncer parking area here was confusing and there you giving them an extension i think that is to be in a gap in there somewhere l and what he has proposed is to add an additional on the back of the building that kind of mirrors the architecture of the existing and as is the case when there are significant variances being asked for we like the form house will have a time to find out whether or not you want to take a position so what's required for that school is a minimum of two acres sure of in is is that perhaps the million could be smaller in the use of the additional building could be smaller in size which might reduce slightly some of those requirements but the size of the property is the size of the