Item 8F AGENDA ITEM # 8F
AUGUST 23, 2010
STAFF REPORT
City of Atlantic Beach
Commission Meeting
AGENDA ITEM: Report on Videotaping Commission Meetings
DATE: August 10, 2010
SUBMITTED BY: Donna Bartle, City Clerk
Keith Randich, IT Manager
David Thompso). j t-.-etty Manager
BACKGROUND: At a previous City Commission Meeting, staff was directed to research and report
back to the City Commission on the feasibility of recording videos of the City Commission Meetings
and making them available online. Since that time, staff members have reviewed and evaluated a
variety of options that are being utilized by other governmental organizations throughout the country.
The purpose of this report is to provide the City Commission with several of the most common
options, including some pros, cons, and approximate prices.
Option 1: Local Videographer: It is feasible to hire a local videographer to record the meetings. The
recordings can then be sent to a vendor who will post the recordings online, and the City can provide a
link to the website for citizens to watch the video. This requires very little staff time, and the
videographer is essentially responsible for the content and editing of the recording. Having a single
individual video recording people and events occurring at different locations within the room could
result in a fragmented appearance to the video.
Pros: a. No upfront costs,
b. Requires little staff time,
c. High quality video (allows for zooming and focusing)
Cons: a. Charges for taping each event,
b. Charges for posting online,
c. Will not provide a live feed,
d. No time stamping or indexing
Option 2: Single Preset Camera: A single video camera can be set up and focused where it covers as
much of the meeting as possible. With a wide angle lens, a single camera can record a panoramic
view of the meeting and the events. The data could be streamed live and posted with a company
online for people to view the recordings.
Pros: a. Inexpensive upfront costs,
b. Can provide live coverage of the meeting,
c. Can provide indexed, time stamped videos,
d. Unlimited meetings /events at no extra costs
Cons: a. Required to pay a vendor to stream the live coverage and to store,
b. Lowest quality video (does not provide pan, tilt or zoom),
c. Staff time required if indexed, time stamped
Option 3: Three (3) Cameras Directed by Staff Three (3) preset cameras can be placed and focused
to record the dais (elected officials), the public speaker, and the video screen with presentations on it.
A staff member will then coordinate which camera is recording, and pan, tilt, and zoom to the area of
interest. The data could be streamed live across the intereet and recorded. The video will be time
AGENDA ITEM # 8F
AUGUST 23, 2010
stamped and linked to the agenda item. Example:
http: // nassaufl.granicus.com /MediaPlayer.php ?view id =2 &clip id =299
Pros: a. Higher quality video than Option 2,
b. Live coverage of the meeting,
c. Will provide indexed and time stamped video,
d. Unlimited meetings without increasing vendor costs
Cons: a. Required to pay a vendor to stream the live coverage and to store,
b. Staff becomes responsible for the production of the video (which would require
paying someone to perform these tasks)
Option 4: Private Company Provides It All: In this option, the City would purchase at least three (3)
video cameras to be placed at various locations in the Commission Chambers, and staff would provide
the company with an agenda. The company would have remote control of the cameras, and an
employee of the company would index and time stamp the video, select which camera would be
recording, and basically be responsible for the production. This can be done live, and the recordings
can be posted for access afterward. Example:
http://www.claycountygov.com/streaming/streaming.htm
Pros: a. Private Sector All -In -One Solution,
b. High quality video,
c. Live coverage of the meeting,
d. Will provide indexed and time stamped video,
e. No staff time required other than original setup and sending agendas
Cons: a. Costs (highest direct costs of presented options),
b. Price based on forty-two (42) meeting block (costs increase for more than forty-
two (42) meetings)
Cost estimates are included in the attached table. It should be noted that there are numerous add -ons
that can be purchased with the basic options discussed above.
Note: The present audio recording system in the City Commission Chambers was acquired to provide
a recording for the City Clerk to obtain accurate minutes, and it has been adequate for this purpose.
However, there have been many times when the audio recordings were less than the quality one would
expect for listening/viewing online. If we start video recording meetings to post online, the collection
of the data will rely on the present sound system for the audio. To assure a quality product, it will be
necessary to provide training for appropriate staff members to service and maintain the equipment, or
the City will need to increase the frequency of outside expertise servicing and maintaining the
equipment. It is also possible that the quality of the audio may be enhanced by modifying the sound
equipment to improve the audio signal. No cost estimates for these factors have been included in the
attachment.
BUDGET: See attached table with estimates.
RECOMMENDATIONS: The purpose of this report is to provide information for review.
ATTACHMENTS: Table of options
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
GENDA ITEM NUMBER:
Options
Upfront Cost Staff Required
Service
Monthly Cost
1st Year Cost
; 5 Year Cost
Features
Drawbacks
Outside Videographer
None
Minimal
Swagit
$875
$10,500
$52,500
No upfront costs
Charged to tape each event,
no live viewing, no time
stamp or Zink to agenda,
concern with quality
Single Fixed Camera
$7,000
Minimal
Granicus
$390
$11,680
$30,400
Live feed, indexed video,
unlimited
meetings,inexpensive
upfront costs
Lowest quality video, no
time stamping to agenda
Three Camera System
$20,000
Yes
Granicus
$670
$28,240
$56,840
Live feed, indexed video,
highest quality, unlimited
meetings
Add9 staff member or
overtime required
Three Camera System
$20,000
No
Swagit
$695
$28,340
$61,700
Live feed, indexed video, no
staff required, highest
quality
42 meeting / year limit
*Estimates based on 42 meetings per year, and staff time estimated at $20 per hour