Fears of misuse scuttles park’s request for security cameras – for now
Martin Kidston
(Missoula Current) A request to update outdated security cameras at four Parks and Recreation facilities didn't make it through a full public hearing on Monday night before a majority of City Council sent it back to committee for further discussion.
The city's Parks Department is seeking a budget amendment to replace what it described as failing technology and sign a contract for the security system upgrade.
Parks Director Marina Yoshioka pushed back on some public concerns that the camera system would lead to “mass surveillance” through the use of artificial technology. Instead, she said, the cameras would be used at four facilities, which are already under camera watch.
However, those cameras are old and produce degraded quality that has proven useless in solving several recent crimes, she said.
“We've had cameras at the Currents Aquatic Center and Splash since they were built in 2006, and cameras at Fort Missoula that were installed at the time of construction in 2014,” Yoshioka said. “The existing cameras are outdated and degraded in quality and provide minimal usable footage.”
Yoshioka said access to the existing cameras is limited to only three department individuals and footage is reviewed only after a specific incident. If no incident occurs, then the images are deleted after 30 days, she said.
But in recent years, the cameras have been useful at times in identifying the suspect of a crime. That included the 2024 assault of a concession's worker at Fort Missoula and the 2023 assault of a patron at the Currents Aquatics Center.
Yet in other instances, the old cameras have failed. In 2025, the windows at Currents were smashed, throwing glass shards in the pool. The facility was shut down for days and the windows replaced at the tax-payer's expense while the perpetrators were never identified.
“Near MOBASH (skate park), we've had muggings and assaults. The police have requested footage to these muggings. But because we don't have cameras, we have been unable to provide evidence and the victims have not received justice,” Yoshioka said.
Unsolved crimes have also cost taxpayers money, along with private businesses. In 2022, two individuals drove cars across the soccer fields at Fort Missoula. The incident damaged the turf at a cost of $30,000 and prompted the city to cancel a planned youth soccer tournament, resulting in the loss of $40,000 in fees.
The loss to area businesses as a result were never calculated but included canceled hotel rooms and restaurants that could have gained patrons. The new cameras would help provide security in a modern but controlled system, Yoshioka said.
“While these cameras have AI features, our intent is not to use them and we plan not to use them,” she said. “This is a modest, targeted and fiscally responsible proposal. We are asking to replace equipment that is failing and therefor failing the public.”
But some members of the public believe the requested system represents mass surveillance and said Verkada, the chosen vendor, is a risk.
“We oppose the use of mass surveillance systems in the U.S. by any entity for any purpose, including the use of law enforcement agencies and crime detection evaluation or punishment,” said former Missoula resident Lea Bossler. “The myth that cameras solve crimes is false.”
Others recognized the need for security but feared misuse of the system and its content.
“Most of us here would agree we need security and don't mind the need for security cameras,” said Jane Borish. “It's the idea of a toggle switch that can be flipped to provide surveillance.”
City officials said the cameras would not provide surveillance, nor use facial-recognition or license-plate reading technology. The chosen vendor would not have access to the camera content unless the city authorized it.
“The city owns and controls the data,” said Eric Hallstrom, the city's chief operations officer. “The vendor has no access unless we give them access. They don't share their client data with others unless the clients ask them to do that for a purpose.”
However, Hallstrom said the city currently lacks a written policy guiding the use of security cameras, even though it currently disallows the use of facial recognition and reading license plates.
Council member Mike Nugent proposed an amendment to explicitly state as much and direct the city to adopt a policy around camera security. However, council member Bob Campbell pushed to send the issue back to committee until that policy is in place.
Council voted 8-3 to send it back to committee, ending any council discussion on the issue.
“We have these types of needs at facilities all over the city,” said Jesse Neidigh, the city's internet technology director. “It's bigger than just cameras. We have a need for door security and access, and intrusion detection too.”