Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.3 CostProvidngLiveTransmissionCCMtgs (2) .....- '".~. :..... .. . ,.. ."" CITY CLERK File # [l][Q][5IIQ]-f7lfOlrw tt AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: (September 16,1997) SUBJECT: Prellminary Estimates of Cost Associated With Providing Live Transmission of City Council Meetings (Prepared By: Paul S. Rankin, Assistant City Manager) EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. . Letter Dated August 11, 1997 from Tom Baker, TCI - General Manager, outlining costs associated with providing for live transmissions from the Civic Center rJY. Determine whether Staff should pursue further information regarding a potential CIP project to accommodate live transmissions and provide an indication of the objectives the project is envisioned to meet. If this is desired: RECOMMENDATION: a) Direct Staff to prepare a request from the Mayor to TCI seeking a contribution from TCI to offset the cost. and b) Provide direction to Staff as to the, desired scope of the Capital Improvement Project. (Le. Cable system insertion point only, or inclusion of cameras and production equipment). tt "- If the Council chooses to pursue this proj~ the Development Services Data Processing Project (automated permit system) would be delayed another year because there would be inadequate Staff time to complete this project along with the other Data Processing related CIP projects included in this year's CIP. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: A budget adjustment would be required, .as funds were not included in the current budget to provide for this project. Minimum Capital costs to implement a live insertion point at the Civic Center are estimated to be $19,800. If the City also wanted to provide its own production equipment it is estimated that there would be an additional costs in excess of $30,000. These estimates are preliminary and further study is required to refine the cost estimates. The estimates do not include -any allowance for' building modification costs if required. DESCRIPTION: At Ii previous City Council meeting, Staffwas requested to obtain information from TCI regarding costs A associated with providing for live 1ranSmission of the City Council meetings. ~---------------------------------------------------------------~--- COpmSTO: . ITEM NO. s., G/eabletv/tftclliv/AGLIV$.dot . ~ .. ADVANTAGES PRESENTED BY LIVE BROADCAST Although the costs are presented as part of this report, it may be appropriate to consider fifst what is hoped to be achieved by a live broadcast. The primary difference from the current tape delayed broadcast .. is that the residents are able to view the information immediately. ,Residents who are using the tape .. delayed broadcast, to avoid personal schedule conflicts with the regular meeting time on the 1 st and 3rd Tuesday, would not derive any benefit from the live broadcast. The project would provide a different venue from which live programming other than City Council meetings could be broadcast. Presently the only connections are at CTV Studios, the Pleasanton Council Chambers, and TCI. The provision of live broadcasts will not affect the flexibility in scheduling the Regular Meeting date, since certain production equipment is provided by CTV.(In a later section of this report Staffprovides estimated costs to reduce reliance on shared CTV equipment.) TCI COST TO ACCOMMODATE LIVE BROADCAST CAPABILITIES Staffhas obtained preliminary cost estimates from TCI regarding the cost to facilitate live broadcasts from the Civic Center (Exhibit 1). It should be noted that these figures are only estimates, and that Staff has relied on the expertise of TCI in estimating the costs, without any independent review of the figures p~ented. TCI Staff have indicated that their estimates reflect equipment which will be compatible with their system and would provide a high degree of reliability. COMPONENTS OF LIVE TRANSMISSION CAPABILITY The connection to the TCI system involves the following the following components; 1) A direct fiber link from the Civic Center to either TCI headend or CTV studios. 2) Special electronic equipment to transmit and receive video signals over the fiber optic line. Optional 3) Production equipment and cameras, which would eliminate the need to use the CTV van and equipment. tt The letter attached as Exhibit 1 outlines the costs associated with items nwp.ber 1 and number 2. The cost to extend the fiber optic line is esnm$lfp,d at $4~OO. TCI represents that this is their cost without any mark-up. The infrastructm'e both cmrently in place and under cons1ruction serves primarily residential areas. Therefore the fiber 1rUnk line would need to be extended from the nearest node to the Civic Center. TCI has also estimated the additional cost for the trat)!::mi!::sion equipment The estimated cost is $15,600, which would assure that the City owned all necessary equipment without a need to rely on shared equipment with other cities and/or CTV. Of course, to the extent that any of the equipment could be shared this cost could potentially be reduced. Therefore, the total cost to implement live programmine from the Civic Center is $19,800 which includes the :fiber construction and transmi!::sion equipment. OPTIONAL PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT COSTS The final capital cost component associated with live production is related to cameras and production equipment. The need to consider these items is not a requirement of the basic goal of providing for a live broadcast connection at the Civic Center. The City could continue to utilize the CTV cameras and van to perform production services. The City could also phase the production efforts, initially purchasing the cameras and installing a control panel at a later date. tt The primary reason for considering on-site production equipment, is if the City Council desired to achieve greater control of the opportunity for the scheduling of live events. This altemative would also reduce the on-going cost to broadcast a meeting. The City currently pays CTV $401.50 per meeting to tape and -:J.- .. .... - ~ . brofdcast the meeting. If the City had its own production equipment CTV would provide personnel at an hourly rate. Only two staff would be required and the cost for a 4 hour meeting would be approximately $96.00. Assuming that the time required for all meetings averaged 4 hours, the annual savings to the City _ would be in excess of $8,000. As will be discussed below there is a significant up front capital cost to ., allow the City to realize any savings over current production costs. If production capabilities were added, the cameras could be mounted and controlled remotely by an operator. A basic control center would include a switcher to control the camera view to be broadcast. The control panel would also include: small monitors to view all camera angles and the broadcast picture, equipment to add subtitles, and other technical equipment. currently the City of Dublin broadcasts are prepared with this type of equipment housed in the CTV van. The City of Pleasant on has the production equipment on-site and does not use the CTV van. Staff would recommend that the City would continue to contract with CTV for personnel to operate the equipment and prepare the broadcast. . Staff does not have any detailed pricing for this type of equipment, however, we have information about costs in other cities which may provide an order of magnitude. The amount expended by the City of Pleasanton in 1993, was approximately $28,300 for the cost of the cameras, production equipment, and installation. A 1995 estimate prepared for another City would indicate that a multi-camera configuration could range in costs from approximately $40,000 to over $100,000. The cost for the City of Dublin would be affected by: I) The number of cameras required to adequately cover the room; 2) The cost of cabling and the availability of empty conduits and any other required building modification costs; and 3) Any design and project supervision costs. If the City Council desires to proceed with an further review of this project, Staff can evaluate with Tel and CTV stafffurther refinement of the cost information. .PRODUCTION FLEXIBILITY WITH LIVE TRANSMI$SIONS . If the City continues to rely on the CTV equipment, the availability of the CTV schedule will dictate when live broadcasts can be transmitted. It should be noted that even without this limitation the City Staff would still rely on the availability of trained CTV Staff to operate City eqUipment. The City will also be . limited based upon the availability of channel capacity to broadcast the transmission. The CTV .Staff and Board are in the process of developing a proposed allocation of the three public access ch8n.nels.(Channels 30, 69, and 70) The three ch8nnels will only be available in Dublin once TCI completes the upgrade. Currently the CTV Van is used utilized by the cities ofDub~ Livermore and San Ramon to produce tape delayed filming of City Council meetings. The following chart shows the current availability of the van: 1st and 3rd In Month 2nd and 4th In Month MONDAY Available LIVERMORE COUNCIL TUESDAY DUBLIN COUNCIL SAN RAMON COUNCIL Therefore, the City of Dublin would not have the option to change meeting schedules unless the City had its own independent production equipment. POTENTIAL FOR SUPPORT FROM CABLE OPERATOR In 1993, when the City ofPleasanton proceeded with the production of City Council meetings, the City reqUested support from Viacom, the operator of the Cable system. At that time the City received support .in ~e amount of $22,000 towards the cost of completing constJ:uction of a live insertion point and related eqwpment. ( \ -,- '<I In the event that the City Council desires to seek a live transmission connection, Staff would recommeritJ ' that a letter be drafted for the Mayor's signature seeking a fmancial contribution from TCI towards the project. It is most typical for negotiated contributions to occur within the context of franchise renewal negotiations. However, the support for community programming should not be incompatible with the A corporate community contributions by TCI.' _ CONCLUSION Based upon this preliminary information it is appropriate for the City Council to determine whether Staff should pursue additional information regarding a potential CIP project to provide for live cable TV transmissions from the Civic Center, and what objectives they envision that this project will meet. If the City Council desires to have a proposed CIP project developed Staff would also request the following items be addressed: a) Direct Staff to prepare a request from the Mayor to TCI seeking a contribution from TCI to offset the cost; and b) Provide direction to Staffas to the desired scope of the Capital Improvement Project. (Le. Cable system insertion point only, or, inclusion of options for cameras and production equipment). . " -... -~ . -'1- . . . @. Tel August 11, 1997 CITY' OF DUBLIN AUG 1 4 1997 FINANCE DEPT. RECEIVED City Of Dublin Attn: Paul S. Rankin Assistant City Manager 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Dear Mr. Rankin: RE: Costs of Live City COWlcil Sessions Dear Mr. Rankin: Sony this took so long to get to you. As we discussed. there are two elements of the costs associated with putting City Council meeting on live on any of the three PEG channels. First, we must have a dedicated fiber to tranSport the signal back to channel 30 or our headend (depending on where switching is done). As you can see by the examining the map of our rebuild, a fiber line will not pass the current city council location. Therefore we would have to extend neW fiber to the nearest node location. The cost to the city of extending the fiber is $4,200, which is our cost without any overhead. TCI would bear the cost of the dedicated fiber from the node back to the headend. Secondly, in order to transport and receive the signal, we need fiber optic transmit and receive equipment, a modulator at both the origination point and at the headend, and automated switching equipment. This equipment would need to be up to our specifications for transmitting signal. The total equipment cost is roughly $15,600. If the City has a modulator, the cost would be reduced by about $3,500. This system could be activated when the rebuild is complete, because until that time, we won't have a fiber going back to our headend. Therefore the total cost is approximately $19,800. We have assumed the the council chambers will provide rack space for the transmitter and there is suitable duct structure for pulling the fiber. !fyou have any questions or need. further information, let me know. Sincerely, ~j5~ Tom Baker General Manager TCI Tri-Valley TCI of California 2333 Nissen Drive Livennore, CA 94550 (510) 443-0470 FAX (510) 443.3618 Trl-Valley System Office EXHIBIT 1 An Equal Opportumty Employe'