My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2012 02 13
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2012 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2012 02 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:48:38 AM
Creation date
6/8/2012 1:24:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Original Hardcopy Storage
6C6
Supplemental fields
Test
SSAGPKT 2012 02 13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
PAGE THREE <br />SUBJECT: DISCUSSION — PUBLIC ACCESS STATION MANAGEMENT <br />CONTRACT <br />DATE: FEBRUARY 13, 2012 <br />• Releasing the funds to CCTV; <br />• Assuming a new contract will be signed in May, the City may hold the money until <br />then and give it to whatever group gets the public access contract; <br />• Keeping the funds for use for Channel 8. <br />The City's last PEG distribution was made to CCTV on December 21, 2010 for the third <br />quarter of 2010. The City is currently holding PEG payments for the fourth quarter of <br />2010, the first quarter of 2011, the second quarter of 2011, and the third quarter 2011, <br />totaling $12,777.50. The 2011 fourth quarter invoice is expected imminently and will add <br />approximately $3,200 to that total. <br />2. What should be done with the equipment purchased with PEG money? The City <br />technically owns all of the equipment that CCTV has purchased with PEG funds. If the <br />City decides to end its Public Access program, or use a different contractor, a <br />determination would be needed on what to do with the equipment. <br />THE ROLE OF THE CITY IN PUBLIC ACCESS TELEVISION <br />One overriding issue of this discussion is the role of the City in Public Access television. As <br />staff has noted previously, while the City controls the contract for the station, the day -to -day <br />operations of the facility and the organization are the responsibility of the contractor. The City is <br />not, and should not be, involved in the day -to -day activities of the channel. <br />That said, in the past when residents have been unhappy with the contractor, they have called <br />on the City to require the contractor to change their operations. City involvement in day -to -day <br />operations of a public access TV contractor is not consistent with the idea of public access and <br />a media voice that is truly independent. The ease with which media can be posted to the <br />internet and viewed on the web has dramatically improved in the past few years. These and <br />other factors may be issues the Council wants to consider regarding what role the City should, <br />play in public access. <br />FISCAL IMPACT: <br />Dependant on what action(s) Council decides to take. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Discussion <br />ATTACHMENTS: <br />None <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.