TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2003 CMR: 131:03 SUBJECT: COST ANALYSIS AND TIMING FOR INTERNET BROADCASTING OF COUNCIL MEETINGS RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council direct staff to further investigate Internet broadcasting solutions and return to Council with a proposed contract for consultant services to provide the solution, along with a budget amendment ordinance (BAO) to provide funding. BACKGROUND In July, Council asked staff to review the potential for broadcasting Council meetings over the Internet and report back with an analysis. Council has received communications from the community expressing an interest in the City exploring Internet broadcasting as an alternate way of providing live coverage of Council meetings. City Council meetings are currently broadcast live on the cable system on government Channel 26. The live broadcasts are available to all cable subscribers in the cable joint powers agreement (JPA) service area, which includes Atherton, East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Palo Alto and portions of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties. City Council meetings are also re-broadcast on Channel 26. DISCUSSION Broadcasting Council meetings over the Internet involves using technology that allows for audio and video signals whether live or taped, to be broadcast over the Internet. The components of this technology include hardware, software, and sufficient network bandwidth. In addition, dedicated staff resources are needed to manage an Internet broadcasting solution. CMR: 131:03 Page 1 of 5
Hardware The primary hardware components needed are servers and video encoding equipment. The most costly hardware components are servers, which store the video and ultimately deliver it to viewers. The network servers must be capable of storing large amounts of compressed video data. Another hardware component is the video encoding equipment. This equipment takes the live audio and video signals and converts those signals to digital, which can be stored on servers. Software The software component of the Internet broadcasting solution serves a vital role. The software for an Internet broadcasting solution has the primary functions of encoding the live audio and video signals, indexing the Council meetings, and broadcasting the signals to the viewer over the Internet. The indexing function of the software is what allows staff to mark the encoded video with the agenda items for easy retrieval. Software that provides a good indexing function allows the user to easily search video streams by topic in order to view only those segments that are relevant. Software also serves the role of delivering the video to the City website for easy access. The more powerful software solutions are those that encode live broadcasts at the same time staff is performing the indexing function. The software then automatically updates the City website with the new video files. Network Bandwidth Once the audio and video signals are encoded and stored on the servers, it is necessary to have sufficient bandwidth to deliver the audio and video signals to viewers over the Internet. This includes sufficient internal network bandwidth as well as bandwidth to the Internet. Staff Resources In order to manage and maintain an Internet broadcasting solution, it is necessary to have dedicated staff resources. This staff would be responsible for encoding the video and audio signals, managing the media files on the server, indexing the meetings and monitoring the Internet broadcasts. Approaches Staff looked at two possible approaches for delivering an Internet broadcasting solution to cover Council meetings: 1) an internal solution where City staff perform and manage all aspects of the Internet broadcast; and 2) a hosted solution where a third party provides support for the broadcast. The internal solution would require the acquisition of hardware, software and staff resources. Additional network bandwidth would be assessed and augmented as needed. As the number of Council meetings that are archived increases over time, additional hardware would be needed. Cost estimates are broken down as follows: CMR: 131:03 Page 2 of 5
Hardware Network servers and hardware (one-time) $22,000 Encoding hardware (one-time) $2,000 Total one-time costs $24,000 Software (ongoing) $5,000 Staff (ongoing) 0.5 Technologist (salary/benefits) $60,000 Total ongoing costs $65,000 Total start-up costs $89,000 The estimated timeline for implementation of the internal solution is four months to allow for the recruitment and selection of staff and for the purchase and installation of the hardware and software. After the four-month implementation, a trial phase would start where the Internet broadcasting solution is tested. This trial phase would last one month before the live broadcasts and archiving are offered over the Internet. An external solution would involve contracting with a third party to provide the Internet broadcasting solution. The contractor would provide a complete end-to-end solution, which would provide the hardware and software and much of the staffing requirements. An alternative approach is for the contractor to provide primarily the software and maintenance support, including staff time, and the City to provide the hardware. Based on a preliminary review of potential providers, the estimated cost for the contracted approach would fall within the following ranges: Low High Alternative 1: Contract for complete solution (one-time) $40,000 $70,000 Ongoing costs $3,000 $7,000 Total start-up costs $43,000 $77,000 Alternative 2: Contract for software and maintenance $15,000 $25,000 support only (one-time) Additional hardware costs $20,000 $25,000 Total one-time costs $35,000 $50,000 Ongoing costs $3,000 $7,000 Total start-up Costs $38,000 $57,000 The estimated timeline for implementation of the contracted solutions would be two to four months with an additional one month for the trial period. This estimate includes the request for proposal process for selecting a vendor. CMR: 131:03 Page 3 of 5
A possible third alternative involves partnering with the Stanford University radio station, KZSU, for an Internet broadcasting solution. This possible alternative is only in the discussion phase and related costs and an implementation plan have not been developed. KZSU currently broadcasts the audio portion of City Council meetings on the KZSU website. KZSU staff recently approached the City to discuss the possibility of KZSU hosting Internet broadcasts of City meetings. Recent equipment acquisitions by KZSU have given the station added Internet broadcasting capacity. It is this added capacity that KZSU has discussed using for the Internet broadcasting of City meetings. Staff will continue to explore the viability of a partnership with KZSU. Should a partnership with KZSU become a realistic alternative, staff will develop a proposed contract with the radio station and present the contract and any related costs to the City Council for consideration. The preliminary review of Internet broadcasting has revealed that other cities have implemented both internal and contracted solutions. City staff visited the City of Davis, where an internal solution was chosen for broadcasting council meetings. Davis uses existing staff and some additional hardware to broadcast, archive and post meetings to the city website. The City of Sacramento uses a contracted solution which provides viewers access to live meetings as well as archived meetings over the city website. The archived meetings are searchable by keyword. This feature is particularly useful for individuals who are interested in viewing council discussion on particular topics. Users can search for a topic and view the meeting segments for that topic. The City of San Jose and Burbank also use outside vendors for their Internet broadcasting needs. RESOURCE IMPACT Funding to support an Internet broadcasting solution is not included in the 2002-03 Administrative Services Adopted Budget. A budget amendment ordinance would be needed to increase expenses to fund the project. An increase in expenses would represent an increase in base-line expenses and would impact the City s ability to fund the budget stabilization reserve and the infrastructure reserve. Although the costs associated with partnering with KZSU have not been developed, this alternative may be a cost effective option. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Approval of the agreements is consistent with existing City policies. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. CMR: 131:03 Page 4 of 5
PREPARED BY: DAVID RAMBERG IT Manager, External Services DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: CARL YEATS Director, Administrative Services CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: EMILY HARRISON Assistant City Manager CMR: 131:03 Page 5 of 5