The safest communities are those in which everyone plays their part. By contrast, communities that are less safe are inclined to place all of the burden for safety on city government, particularly its police department.

Nothing is more effective in fighting crime than creating a spirit of cooperation among city government, citizens and businesses.

And the best way for city governments to achieve that spirit of cooperation is through encouragement not coercion.

The city of Starkville is currently considering an ordinance that would require businesses with more than 5,000 square feet or 25 parking spaces to install surveillance cameras at their entrances, exits and parking lots. It’s a good idea, one that has been proven to reduce crime. For police, surveillance camera footage is a powerful tool in solving crime and just the presence of these cameras has proven to be a deterrent to crime.

The city held the first of two public hearings on the proposed ordinance Tuesday evening.

While we find no fault with the ultimate goal of the plan, we are concerned that the city is foisting public security on the shoulders of business owners. As proposed, the ordinance is overreaching. To make matters worse, the city’s sales job has been presented more as an edict than an inducement. The city isn’t asking for cooperation as much as it is demanding it.

After a one-year grace period, those businesses who haven’t installed cameras face severe penalties – $1,000 per day until the business complies.

Meanwhile, those businesses that do comply incur the costs, but are offered no incentives. The cost of installing camera systems range from a couple thousand dollars to as much as $20,000, depending on the size of the property and number of cameras required.

While some insurance policies provide discounts for businesses that install cameras, those discounts vary.  What is universally true is that even the best discounts don’t cover the full cost of the cameras.

It’s a carrot-versus-stick proposition and, to date, all the discussion has been about the stick. We believe that’s the wrong approach.

This ordinance applies to hundreds of businesses. When you are dealing with those kinds of numbers, getting the buy-in from those businesses is critical if the city hopes to achieve its goal.

“Carrots” could take a variety of forms:

n The city could provide a per-camera rebate to offset costs. This could be done using ARPA funds or other allocated monies. Currently, Starkville spends $100,000 annually on providing garbage bags to citizens. A one-time allocation of that same amount to fund $100 rebates per installed camera would result in 1,000 new cameras around town. Alternatively, the city could use the fines collected for businesses who don’t comply to pay for incentives to those businesses who do comply.

n The city could negotiate a bulk discount with a camera manufacturer.

n Even some sort of public recognition of businesses who voluntarily install cameras could help induce buy-in from the business community.

To employ another euphemism, a spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down.

If a business is required to take on the cost of this ordinance, offering them some kind of incentive is a good strategy because sometimes the path of least resistance is the best path to follow.

We urge the city to consider some carrots.

The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.

READER FAVORITES

• 

  Our View: CPD: Finally, stability at the top?

  By Dispatch Editorial Board • 2 days ago

• 

  Slimantics: The recycling game has changed a bit

  By Slim Smith • 21 hours ago