Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil - 2012-03-26 SSPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 26, 2012 CITY OF KITCHENER A special meeting of City Council was held at 3:40 p.m. this date, chaired by Mayor C. Zehr with all members present, except Councillors B. Vrbanovic and K. Galloway. Notice of this meeting had been previously given to all members of Council by the City Clerk pursuant to Chapter 25 (Council Procedure) of the Municipal Code. Council considered Finance and Corporate Services Department report FCS-12-048 (D. Adams), dated March 20, 2012, which provides an introduction to the City’s new internal online mapping tool, known as ‘Onpoint’. Mr. D. Chapman, Deputy CAO - Finance and Corporate Services, introduced the item advising that the City has been a leader in the field of online mapping resources and the purpose of the presentation is to provide orientation of the new system to members of Council as to how this product can assist them in the work they do. Ms. D. Adams, GIS Supervisor, took Council through a video demonstration of the internal online mapping tool, identifying the various functions and layers of information available to the user from their own desktop. Questions were raised concerning access to the online mapping tool by the general public and / or select groups, such as real estate merchants. Ms. D. Adams advised that the City provides an external online mapping tool for the general public which is to be updated to the new format in the Fall of 2012. She pointed out that the City provides all information that can be provided to the general public within the guidelines of privacy legislation and is therefore, not as extensive as what is available internally to staff. Councillor D. Glenn-Graham requested that the video presentation be made available online to the public to help promote use of the external online mapping tool and that Council be advised when the new format is going live on the website. Councillor B. Ioannidis raised concerns with the limitation of Council’s access to property ownership information. Ms. C. Tarling advised that introduction of the new product has provided opportunity for the City to become more compliant with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (MFIPA). She explained that under the legislation only employees and / or officers of the Corporation are permitted access to personal information necessary to perform their duties. Council is deemed under the legislation not to be an employee or officer of the Corporation and is therefore, restricted in access to property ownership information. Ms. Tarling pointed out that staff within the Office of the Mayor and Council will be fully trained in the Onpoint system and can assist members of Council as needed to respond to issues related to their constituents. Council then considered Finance and Corporate Services Department report FCS-12-047 (C. Goodeve), dated February 3, 2012 concerning a background study conducted on potential use of the robotic cameras in the Council Chamber. Mr. R. Gosse, Director of Legislated Services & City Clerk, introduced the item advising that the cameras installed in the Council Chamber are owned by Rogers Television and the City has an agreement with Rogers for their use. He noted that trained staff have recorded certain meetings on occasion and have been considering how best to utilize the cameras in terms of their daily work. Mr. Gosse advised that at this time staff is seeking direction from Council on certain matters that will help focus their investigation going forward. Mr. C. Goodeve, Supervisor of Legislated Services, presented details of the study and posed a number of questions to provide focus for further investigation, including: is there merit in recording all Council and Standing Committee meetings and making ? recordings available online; if so, what type of broadcast quality is preferred (single camera, multi-camera or Rogers TV quality); ? is there consensus to change the format of minutes to primarily reflect parliamentary actions ? taken at meetings; is there merit in pursuing live web streaming; and, ? is there merit in pursuing live closed captioning, or alternatively, investigating means to add ? transcript to a recording post meeting. Mr. Goodeve advised that the proposal to record meetings will require acquisition of a dedicated recorder unit and editing software amounting to capital costs of approximately $15,000. It was noted that without editing the cost would be reduced to around $12,000; however, that would require the viewer to watch through potentially lengthy videos to find an item of interest. Mr. Goodeve also noted that staff costs have to be further investigated to fully understand timing associated with doing recordings and editing, and will vary dependent on the level of production quality chosen. Mr. D. Chapman added that the information provided this date is preliminary pending direction on certain matters from Council that will help staff move forward in preparation of a business case. SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 26, 2012 - 77 -CITY OF KITCHENER Concerns were raised in respect to data that shows low viewership numbers and the costs associated with recording meetings. Comments reflected a desire to move forward with recorded meetings keeping within a cost effective approach. Questions were asked in respect to Rogers TV providing this service as an add-on to the seven Council meetings per year that they do now. It was noted that Rogers TV provides their current level of service to all of the municipalities in the Region, alternating between and it would be difficult for them to cover all of Kitchener’s meetings as the majority of Councils in the Region meet on the same Monday evenings and at the same time. Mr. Goodeve added that the City of Ottawa does have Rogers TV operate their cameras and has contracted with a third party for archival; with the cost at approximately $1,000 per meeting for Rogers service, plus the additional costs for archiving. Councillor Y. Fernandes questioned the feasibility of approaching Conestoga College to determine the viability of using the services of co-op students who are entered in the College’s broadcasting programs. Mr. Goodeve advised that Rogers has in the past relied on volunteers to operate systems; however, they have more recently backed away from this, relying more on their own staff due to technical problems and damage to equipment experienced through the inexperience of volunteers. Mr. Goodeve agreed to further investigate both the potential for Rogers TV to provide additional services and/or the use of College co-op students. Some members of Council were of the view that a high quality video would be necessary to attract increased viewership. Councillor J. Gazzola inquired if public consultation is planned. Mr. R. Gosse suggested that if direction is given to further investigate live web streaming this would be an area the public is more likely to have an interest in commenting on and a survey could be conducted to obtain feedback. It was noted that current data suggests that viewership is about four times higher for post recorded viewing rather than live. Councillor Z. Janecki raised concerns with the proposed reduction in minute content to a parliamentary format, commenting that particularly in regard to Planning matters minutes are provided as evidence in the event of an Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearing. Mr. Gosse advised that minutes for Planning matters will be the anomaly for which Committee Administrators would still record all delegates present and in brief, their respective positions on an issue. Mr. J. Willmer, Deputy CAO - Community Services, added that presentations at OMB hearings represent new evidence and only in particularly complex issues are minutes given any weight by the OMB. Councillor Janecki agreed; however, suggested that evidence must still be produced to show that a delegate participated in the public process prior to a hearing. Mayor C. Zehr noted that the Region of Waterloo has converted to a parliamentary format for its minutes and while it eliminates ability to judge the flavour of the discussion that took place many municipalities throughout Ontario are doing minutes in the shortened format. He expressed the view that the level of quality chosen for recordings is important to have a positive impact on viewership and if the decision to proceed with recordings is made, then it should be done to the highest quality product. Councillor P. Singh commented that he would like to know the cost savings should a change in minute format be agreed upon, noting that this represents a dramatic change. He suggested that even if recordings are edited persons are likely to still have to watch lengthy segments of video, whereas, the minutes now produced provide a good, quick overview. Mr. Goodeve advised that cost implications are to be further investigated in respect to potential efficiencies and any impact to reallocation of staff resources to accommodate the recording and editing processes. Several members agreed that having knowledge of the cost implications is important but expressed the view that the minute format should change given the video will provide a verbatim record of all discussion that took place. Members questioned the viability of pursuing live web streaming and / or live closed captioning services given the costs to do so for minimal viewership. Several members commented that it would be beneficial to use traditional and / or social media to market / promote live viewing. Mr. Goodeve advised that research undertaken suggests that even when marketed, interest in municipal governance is still primarily issue driven. Councillor F. Etherington added that local media reports published on specific issues post meeting helps to drive up interest. Councillor S. Davey questioned why it was intended to host recording / editing in-house, suggesting that use of YouTube capabilities be investigated for conversion of the recorded DVD to a digital format. Mr. Dan Murray, Interim Director, Information Technology, advised that the intent is to be able to obtain a video that can be edited directly from the Rogers TV system but on equipment owned SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 26, 2012 - 78 -CITY OF KITCHENER by the Corporation. He acknowledged that more research is required to build a process that is geared toward ease of use and which will be reliable. Mayor Zehr commented that closed captioning services should be set aside for now and considered at a future time, suggesting that staff investigate easier, more efficient means to provide the service, such as in the instance of interest in a particular issue rather than an entire meeting. He stated that archival of recorded meetings is more important at this time rather than live web streaming, and effort should go into producing as valuable a product as possible. Mr. Gosse commented that the intent originally was to expand capability for persons to search out and view a specific subject matter on a recorded video. As part of this study, it is also intended now to link specific subjects to corresponding reference materials, such as staff reports and minutes, so that a search returns a comprehensive package of information for the interested party. General consensus was reached on the following: meetings currently televised by Rogers TV should continue and the Council minutes produced be changed to a Parliamentary format; staff should undertake further investigation toward provision of recording Council meetings not currently done by Rogers TV and to the same broadcast quality as Rogers TV, together with a shortened format for minutes; the recordings should be archived for post viewing rather than pursuing live web streaming / closed captioning services; and similar investigation should be pursued for Standing Committees. Councillor S. Davey requested that cost options be provided for all proposed levels of broadcast quality, notwithstanding the desire to achieve a high quality product. Moved by Councillor D. Glenn-Graham Seconded by Councillor P. Singh “That an in-camera meeting of City Council be held this date to consider a land acquisition / disposition matter.” Carried. On motion, the meeting adjourned at 5:50 p.m. MAYOR CLERK