Will the city pick up the tab? We know our city government elected officials jettisoned public access television, will they be as quick to defund government access when it is the channel with their faces on it? Will that make them think twice? If not, what is a government access tv station to do? Will they take the Mayor’s advice to WYOU and just do it on YouTube? What will they do if half their budget disappears?
This is from the first meeting of the Madison City Channel Ad Hoc Advisory Subcommittee. Say that 10 times fast. MCCAHAS, what a name. Sounds like something my cat barfed up. And what are they a Subcommittee of? And why is their quorum listed as 5? Anyways, this was, as I said, their first meeting. The agenda is here. The meeting was last Thursday, so I’m a bit behind, but here’s how it went and what they talked about.
THE DIFFICULTY OF GETTING STARTED
What do you do when you’re a new committee and have no chair to call the meeting to order? And clearly there was no pre-determined plan about who would be elected chair . . . let’s watch and see . . . oh, wait, they didn’t televise their own meeting! Probably costs too much. 🙂
After a bit of discussion Judy Compton calls the meeting to order, asks staff to take a roll call. The members of the committee present are:
Judy Compton
Judy Olson
Barry Orton
Mary Cardona
Eli Judge
Peter Kleppin
Maniaci was absent but shows up later.
Staff present are Paul Kronenberger and Sarah Edgerton from IT and Doug May, Brad Clark and Jennifer Hilgendorf from City Channel as well as Rachel Strauch-Nelson from the Mayor’s office.
Member of the public: Zero. The press: Zero, just a solitary blogger who needs city channel to cover the meetings!
ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
This is a little confusing, but here’s the short, less complicated version and the outcome.
– Alders can’t chair the committee, that takes out 2 of the 7 members, Compton and Maniaci.
– Olson looks around the room and quickly nominates Eli Judge as chair, probably fearing she would be nominated if she wasn’t careful.
– Cardona nominates Orton, he declines, noting he chaired the committee last time.
– Judge accepts with caveat that Judy Olson is the co-chair because there is a 100% chance he’ll be leaving the city in late-July or mid-August and they might not be done.
– Olson suggests she be vice chair and says she is willing if nominated.
– Orton asks if they might be done by then.
– Olson says if they were, it would be the most unusual city committee ever.
– They discuss have Olson chair and Judge vice chair.
– Judge is elected chair. He says they have to elect the vice chair at the next meeting because its not on the agenda.
– Compton tried to move suspension of the rules. What? You can’t suspend the rules to follow open meetings laws! This is embarrassing.
– Judge temporarily questions it, but does it anyways.Shoulda went with his gut. I thought he said the city attorney said it was ok, but there wasn’t one in the room that I was aware of.
– Compton nominates Olson, Orton seconds. There are no other nominations and she is voted vice chair (illegally) and by acclamation.
WHAT MATERIALS DO THEY HAVE, NOT HAVE
Judge says that he hopes people read their materials. He says they were sent in an email a while back. He says there was a work plan, but I think he mis-spoke. He asks staff to fill them in if there is anything else left on the table.
One of the committee members asks what they were supposed to have received.
They said there was a survey of stakeholders, a needs and goals handout (I’m not sure what this is), a spreadsheet about comparisons about where funding comes from for other government channels (I have this and will scan and post later today), policies of committee (I think they mean the mission statement and usage policy which is attached to the agenda?), committee goals (I didn’t see this), a fact sheet about city (linked to agenda) and letter from mayor (linked to the agenda). [In the materials they handed out they also has a list of special ad hoc productions. So, I’m not sure what they got in their email and what got handed out and why only some of it was attached to the agenda?]
Compton asks staff to make copies for those of us who might not have gotten the email. More confusion, Jennifer can’t leave to make copies if she is taking the minutes, Brad offers to take notes, Jennifer says she needs a key, May goes to make the copies. I’m confused.
GOALS AND WORKPLAN
Judge asks what goals that they want to see.
Compton says that she would like to ensure that city channel is funded and remains vital part of the city and an independent organization.
Maniaci asks about web 2.0. Judge asks her it o introduce herself since she was late. Cardona asks to talk louder.
Judges echoes her comments as we move into the future, even Facebook had their system evolve again today, how will we evolve into other multimedia, excited about that.
Olson has a question about letter from mayor – collaboration with IT – what does that mean?
Kronenberger says that doesn’t know what meant, but some of things Maniaci mentioned are the focal point, web facilities, access to citizens, organizational tuning to be improved – really are looking for suggestion from committee to help us move further in that direction.
Maniaci asks if City Channel can do more video production.
Edgerton explains that city channel charges, she says that they could train other department staff to use the cameras, but they have to think about if city channel is charging how do they deal with lost revenue. We won’t have that presence. She also says that all city agencies says have to use city channel to produce videos, departments are not moving forward.
Clark says that we want to get away from that, that is the way the budget evolved, had to charge agencies to have staff, would like to get away from that, it is a road block if they have to charge and they do not have money in their budget.
Maniaci asks what the money is used for.
Clark says staff.
Maniaci asks if there is equipment check out.
Clark says not really.
Edgerton says they have looked at it, with the concept of YouTube, shaky, bad video is ok if it does not look great, but trying to get and reach your constituents and want to reach a new audience, we could do that so goes on YouTube but we have to get over hurdles of APM to move forward. They are all for it otherwise, but they are hindered from doing it.
Cardona asks what the APM is.
Edgerton says that it is an administrative procedure memorandum and there is one that says that for any video technology, the department has to buy video and services, and city channel will charge back for it.
Compton says some things I didn’t quite understand, but here’s my interpretation of it. She says that city channel does not just sequester themselves, had to do that cuz of budget cuts and they were challenged, they have to be careful lending out cameras, they have to protect that cuz can’t replace them, Brad has done yeoman’s work to get what have, during BTRB (Broadband Telecommunication Review Board) they had many members who wanted expansion and that is great, but the city was not awake to that, if are now that is good, we need to supplement vs. reach in, wouldn’t want to break up or alienate city channel as a department. If we could connect it to another department, how would we connect with IT?
Edgerton says that City Channel is part of the IT department, it is connected with it.
Compton says that she knows that they have many meetings, but what she means is that she hates to think about if they would do like they did to the TV channel (I think she meant WYOU) without supplementing city channel which is where you want to expand, not understood how they have had to protect their budget. ??? That was kind of rough, I didn’t understand her.
Olson says so far only they only talked about expansion – problem facing them is a budget cut, that is the reality. She is thinking that what we need is some information concerning budget and how it is made up and what the APMs are that are perhaps a roadblock, we’re looking for moving ahead to future and we need info from staff but if we’re going to understand how to move forward we need more info, at least she feels she does. Maybe she should know more about budget than she does but needs more info.
Cardona says that need to find out how earn revenue now, expands revenue sources, key issue is how city channel and will make up for 250K shortfall, that needs to be the focus.
Kleppin says that for him this is fact finding, he needs more info about statistics on who watching it on the web, assume not drawing ratings over the air or cable, but on the web.
Edgerton says yes.
Kleppin says they are talking about expanding services, mission is to figure out what is core and what important services are and if can they can trim or modify, interesting to see who is using it, for what and when, are people using it in city? Or Wisconsin that info would be helpful.
Edgerton nods here head, she says sharing equipment, but bigger picture is what we need.
Orton says basic budget and historical information is needed but mission statement and usage policies are 15 years old, we should look at statement and try to update because when this was written we were just discovering you could buy things on the world wide web, we are a long way from that, YouTube was not there, I think fundamentally this needs to be rewritten and have to look at the mission – this is the old model of top down video production, model is not in many places any more.
Clark says that from his position, they talk about it in terms of what the core mission is, it is really us being cspan, just coverage of government meetings and programs? From where we sit, issue before us is how will be able to keep the same coverage of what going on in the city – social media vs. TV channel, he looks at it as they are alternate delivery methods, want to be amiable on any method they would expect, in terms of video production, that is big part of what we do, would like to get to point where we can look at charging people – that is a terrible roadblock, if Kevin Briski calls us up and wants to do professional video Clark wants to be able to schedule it and do it.
Compton says that is what she was trying to say about it being separate and many will not go on line and google anything or YouTube or facebook and tweet, she will turn on TV but not facembook, may people are like that. She says they should be putting this information in the foyer to the City-County building, you should walk in and see “hi I’m Nobel Wray and head of police dept”.
Maniaci asks about case, she says sister cities paid for that.
Compton says that we talked about having something like they have in other municipalities, kiosk with video screen with information on the city, she thinks the county when passed it at city county liason committee it was discussed that they would allow it to be in the foyer we needed something like that an maybe city and county would join – thinks it good for departments. Ask for it, but they need a budget.
Judge says that recurring themes, budget and how to expand is that we need to expand smartly and try to preserve the exposure that public now enjoys and find smart and cheap ways to expand into multi-media – Judge makes sure to point out he doesn’t tweet – thinks that is something that is a perfect goal if we ever seen one, as we continue discussions with more info we will get to that.
Maniaci says that she goes to hours and hours of meetings, staff working the cameras, how to we connect holistically, how much learning experience do we provide, she only sees them at a 7 hour UDC meeting, are the independently taking on work on their own, she asks for info in terms of data, she’d like to see and what they feed into, she feels strongly to use city hall as a learning tool and educational hands on experience, especially since so much is now expected when you come out of college employers expect you to know how to do simple editing and video, that is what they want to know about when hit job market, she would like to get that info to see what they do, do they take on projects and run with it or are they just hourly employees that work the camera.
Clark says the people on the crews are work study and hourly, with some exceptions, that is what they are hired for, work study is a cost effective way for us to get a crew, 50 cents on a the dollar, it is hands on experience, some of them do take on other tasks, like community bulletin board, but also staff over and above cameras is fairly technically sophisticated, when have Boyd and Chris there to do higher end of thing they don’t get to do it.
Maniaci asks if there are handheld cameras available to them to produce a segment, she feels like opportunity to do informational items, even they have district reports or know your candidate or mayor’s report, is their ability to do something besides talking heads, can they open it up – not much to take a Cannon Powershot or nice Cannon and many still cameras have video capability to them, we have traditional broadcast technology and a lot more platforms between high end full production and little camera, there is a nice middle level production.
Cardona says that started out as work study and can tell you that just being in a a practical situation you learn more than in lecture, so when I was there some years ago there were always opportunities to grow and do more if there, but have to be careful about production values that city channel represents, it is high quality production value and events, hear talk about YouTube with way lower production values, in some contaxt that is ok, online and more innovative on the web but as a presence on cable TV and channel you really are getting compared to what is next to them, what people are used to seeing if lower production values too much, viewers go away and not see it as legitimate, make sure city channel has the production value and quality.
Compton says that need to stick to goal and say want to see how we can maintain the nationally acclaimed city channel and give piecemeal – computers and google stuff – the lesser quality, on other venues than city channel, or need to be independent but lined up with city channel. This is where got confusing, wants to keep it separate, this is nationally renowned station and can’t go back in time, have to add to, how can we expand.
Judge says that will discuss when hit the pavement on new technology, need to look at how quality of programming matches up – when covering future meetings.
Olson says that she would like list of request made that not able to fulfill, committees people want to see on air or other videos, but beyond capacity, on the other end of things, list of staff thoughts about what can be done to save funds.
(ALLEGEDLY) FUTURE INFORMATION NEEDS FROM STAFF
Judge says that weaving into agenda item three – if have goal at any time, just shout it out or send an email to add to future agenda items. Judge says move to item three.
Compton says to expand on what Olson said, info on study on how to bring in more funds if the have information on that, put that down as a goal for the committee too.
Orton says that goal is to take a shot at rewriting mission stanment and usage policies, synthesize what hearing, city channel operating under big media, professional, largely driven by fact, mostly coverage of meetings and meetings are not done and lit and professional audio, hard to watch on cable and fatiguing to watch if trying to watch from home if not understand and not have head hit the floor, as long as on cable, I think has to by necessity be like big professional media, not handheld single camera at meeting. Tho they could do little media as well, or new media, those systems are have less quality to begin with – technical – quality of video and audio – get away with less, shorter snippets 5 – 10 minutes and causal viewing, thinks the channel should be doing both, they need a strategy to do both. You can do big media and make it into small media, but you can’t do small media and then try to make it big media. Needs to include both.
Judge says that in the technical discussion, they need to look at the implications of iTunes and YouTube, how to translate big media and make it immediately accessible as pod cast or on YouTube.
Orton says companies doing that on a turnkey basis for city – being done, whole range of small town with one camera with one guy to city level professionally done, we are on the professionally done end, I think we want to be both and through the spectrum.
Judge asks staff what steps city channel and city has approached to get on-line – iTunes, YouTube and perhaps if noticed any cost with that expansion. Or research done as to companies that are out there that we need to partner with to make sure
City channel is moving to windows, they will have integrated with YouTube, a lot of it is being addressed, but we can write something up letting us know what is being done, staff say it’s pretty much there, Judge wasn’t to know what it costs.
Edgerton says it is her cost not city channel, a lot of it is the web team with IT staff, they are her costs, not city channel budget.
(Doug) May says that they are really mixing all kinds of things up and calling it the same thing, world is changing in distribution method, not content and production and that is what we are here to talk about, not distribution.
Orton disagrees, thing they are fundamentally connected.
Sarah agrees.
Judge says that is a huge discussion, moving on with item three . . .
Compton Apparently ignoring Judge asks about the need for expansion for when have a meeting that has a great need for public to view it and we lose it cuz not enough . . . Maniaci helps her out and tells her the word she is looking for is bandwidth . . . .
Edgerton says that the Council passed it, it has been addressed.
Compton says that they are asking for information on capability, how much service do they have, we passed it and decided it was better than we had, need to know what we have, will it need further expansion in the future?
Judge says that they need to clarify potential benchmarks and limitations when comes to technology and hardware and software.
Kleppin says that he wants to know from staff if any sort of publicity or marketing is out there, there is a $250K shortfall and we need to make recommendations for that money to come from somewhere and we are talking about expanding which might cost even more, we need a marketing plan, why is it a good way of spending of their money, city is no different than any other place, he has direct TV, doesn’t see cable, surprised to see the offerings, haven’t heard about it in the past 20 years, not being reached out to as a resident to hear about it, need to market it, don’t market as cspan, if want people to look at it, if its just a public record, no one will watch, part of our marketing campaign is to sex up city cable.
Committee erupts with a whole slew of bad recommendations . . .
Compton says she has hopes and dreams for city channel but would like to see from staff what is their ultimate goal, what is what they believe about what we have and what we could be – see where we are and have a shortfall and figure out how work with what we got.
Kleppin says what if not get anything, we need a concrete plan.
Compton says we’re not going to lose city channel. [Remember those questions I asked in the beginning, it seems to be a whole different priority when their faces are on the video.]
Kleppin asks what service we would lose.
Judge asks for copy of last budget
Cardona says tried to get state legislation to continue the PEG fees, we didn’t get that, so based on budget shortfall, $250K in general fund or cut back or new revenue source, focus is to deal with that issue, incur revenue, cut back on expenses or efficiency? Would like to see us go through goals that we settled on – Judge please reiterate goals and where focus and what documents we need.
Orton says that goal we have to think about is a strategic plan – beyond mission statement, how do you get there, more broad strategic plan, without that, we are band aiding an issue as opposed to deciding what it is and where to go. Orton says they need to redo the mission statement, assess environment then strategic plan.
Olson says that reality of budget cycle and time frame operating in, when make impact on budget, 6 months before passed, not very strategic planning, but reality we have to deal with.
Judge says that asked a lot of questions – information has been requested – for goals he heard – big picture – 1) budget, keep the lights on, have to pay for the cameras, 2) quality and means of delivery, tech topics and how translate, maintain the quality we have while considering budget 3) how city channel moves forward, strategic plan, how changes are presented, 4) Cardona adds mission and how put forth and how consider itself and how know itself.
Edgerton says infrastructure is old and need to maintain it, they need to look at where they need to spend money in next year’s, important budget piece, need not just 250K, needs to be more.
Judge says include in info we need. Hopefully next meetings they will talk about introduction and background and why on the committee – one staff member can be an interesting budget.
Orton says they need the capital replacement plan.
Clark says they have a 5 year plan.
Edgerton says how the $200K and staff are separate, they have two budgets, sources of revenue and PEG and capital vs. . . . she asks to have them explain the slush fund and what it will have to cover.
SCHEDULES AND TRYING TO WRAP UP
Judge says moving forward – schedule of future meetings, to form work plan and strategic goal, we asked for quite a bit, we are essentially diagnosing an entire city division and would accept any ideas about how to form the work plan, strategic direction going in, wealth of institutional knowledge.
Maniaci says that from efficiencies, limited time before budget, need to start with budget and look at that instead of doing philosophical work to be done, wants to see budget first, will largely shape future and mission statement.
Judge says that to build off cramped for time concept, for the info we get, if readily available if at all possible between now and next meeting if could send it to Jenifer so committee members can start reviewing that could be of great value for this round of info and in future, so come into meetings not needing to read it while in front of us.
Compton says might have different reasons about why we are here, but the goal of being on committee is to have city channel and allow it to be production company it is there and keep them independent in the department, not part of big picture, but goal is to see what we can do to save it, fund it and keep it in place, budget is not as necessary, see budget and see what problem is, departments make the budgets and adjust them, find a way to ask departments to help fund the budgets, is our job to go into budget issues or say ok, here’s budget and here is what we don’t have and we need to restructure, maybe your definition of talking about budget is two different things.
Brad says that budgets are available on line, what he is thinking, he understands why people need to understand the budget, perhaps at start of next meeting, he could give info ahead of time, briefly, 5 minutes explain history where budget has been and where we are in 2010, he says he can do that in a few minutes, have stuff on paper so not start cold.
Cardona asks for core responsibilities and how interplay with budget,
Judge says even crystal ball predictions – what is your goal.
Olson says that she wants to encourage staff to be engaged in it and I for one can’t begin to be helpful in this difficult situation that MCC is in without substantial info from staff and participation.
Judges says that besides vote, he considers all staff are members of committee, if want to say something or send it, we need the info to get where need to go.
Clark says that absolutely they have a vested interest, we want you to have all info you need, and we have no sacred cows, willing and ready to start form scratch and reexamine what it is and should be.
Cardona wants Clark to make list of potential revenue earning projects – things must cross your mind, list of most and least likely revenue sources.
Judge says even those previously restricted.
Compton also wants to see grants, she is hearing that they don’t do a lot of that, she wants to know from your department if things focused towards city channel, refresh the research to see if grants available.
Edgerton asks what kind of grants.
Judge asks if there have been or potential for revenue not realized, Judge says pie in sky ideas and realizes that is a nebulous request for information.
I missed some back and forth here, the meeting was winding down but the members were not . . .
Kronberger says that they will look at public sector and government grants, arts grants, anything, bake sales, pay for view events, common council action figures . . . ok, the committee is chipping in to the list and getting silly.
Compton says should look for grants, investigate to see if something we are missing, she knows Clark is looking on a constant basis, maybe can find something.
Judge says interesting challenge here, discussions on channel 12 are connected it city department.
Maniaci says that for information, she wants market data, she doesn’t get city channel, what is our current address, how many direct TV users, how many charter, how many not at all, if trying to study this, big TV little TV discussion.
They explain that is proprietary information and likely not available.
Clark says he can extrapolate from some numbers.
Maniaci says search out data you won’t have the numbers, call and ask for the number.
Orton says good luck – they won’t tell you. AT&T won’t tell you – Charter won’t tell you.
Clark says they can guess from the franchise fees. They will get it in the ball park.
OK REALLY, WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO MEET AND CAN THEY WRAP IT UP?
They talk about meeting the 2nd or 3rd Thursday and check calendars. They decide to meet May 13th.
Meanwhile, Judge asks mayor’s staff – says they got the mayor’s letter, outlined goal and that was covered completely, take a holistic look.
Strauch-Nelson says that they covered what he has outlined in the letter.
They talk about if they should meet monthly with longer meetings or twice a month due to budget constraints.
They decide to meet on May 27th as well. They will meet the 2nd and 4th Thursdays.
Judge says he will talk with staff, hammer out next agenda and help with information flow and clarity, and if anything you need email is readily accessible or call – leave a message if don’t answer.
Compton reminds them about open meetings laws and to be careful with email.
Judge says don’t reply all and watch out for walking quorums.
Judge explains that when communicating about topic on the budget or with mission or objective of committee, those things can and may have open records requests, don’t delete and another important thing is quorum when email between members of committee if Maniaci and Judy talking, they could have a quorum over the internet, meetings need to be notified where people can visit, when talk about city committee stuff, do it one on one, if talk about city info he can find it from staff, generally don’t have discussions on line, threat of potentially breaking open meetings law. If staff send out an email, reply only to her. Attendance issues are fine. Ok to talk about favorite ice cream – 3 weeks is the next meeting.
And with that, they adjourn.
