Expanded cellular and Wi-Fi capabilities have led to an increase in streaming surveillance camera data for local agencies, according to Marc Pfeiffer, associate director of the Bloustein Local Government Research Center at Rutgers University. Pfeiffer noted that advances in fiber-optic networks allow remote devices to connect without incurring cellular or hardwired circuit costs. “Places have installed more fiber-optic networks over the years. You can tie these remote devices in so you aren’t paying cellular or hardwired circuit charges. That lets users create local Wi-Fi nodes and move the data from there,” Pfeiffer said.
While cloud storage is often considered for managing video data, it may not meet every municipality’s requirements. For example, Lewiston selected an on-premises storage option after being unable to find a cloud provider that could meet its recording speed needs.
Pfeiffer pointed out that some hardware vendors now offer Storage as a Service options, which could help state and local governments streamline their video data management processes. “You can buy cameras, pay for them over a number of years and get storage along with it,” he said.
As cities expand their use of video surveillance tools such as body-worn cameras and drones, they are likely to see increased demand for data storage solutions. Some municipalities might choose on-premises systems if they have sufficient staff and resources to manage server maintenance, updates, access control, and cybersecurity measures.
Pfeiffer explained the alternative: “Some would prefer to outsource it to third party such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon or other cloud service provider, whoever you bring in to do those things. Backups can be automated, drives can be monitored remotely, and when they see a potential failure, those systems can lift the data and put it on another one. But there’s a cost; you pay for it by the gigabyte or terabyte.”
