HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 06-08 City Council Manager Workshop PacketAGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
MANAGER WORKSHOP
5:00 P.M. Monday, June 8, 2009
Council Chambers, City Hall
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
E. NEW BUSINESS
1. 5:00 — 5:30 p.m. Webcast Video Streaming
2. 5:30 — 6:30 p.m. Update /Discussion on Gladstone —
Phase I: Development and Financial Options
F. ADJOURNMENT
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLAND
Agenda Item E1
TO: Jim Antonen, City Manager
FROM: John Nephew, Councilmember and RWSCC Alternate
SUBJECT: Web Streaming for City Meetings
DATE: June 2, 2009 for the June 8th workshop
Pik k_ "Z
Last year, the Ramsey - Washington Suburban Cable Commission formed a New
Technologies Committee to look at various topics related to changes in technology for
video and cable broadcasting. I serve as Maplewood's alternate for the Commission,
and volunteered to be a member of this committee.
One topic delegated to the committee was online video streaming for city meetings. The
committee's task was to explore the alternatives available for video webcasting of
meetings, and to determine if there were benefits from working together as a
commission rather than each city pursuing their own solution.
I was pleased to be part of this process, since we have several times spoken as a
council about our interest in webcasting city meetings. Since I was aware that our staff
had investigated this subject previously, I invited Maplewood's I.T. Director, Mychal
Fowlds, to attend the committee meetings. Mr. Fowlds brought the benefit of his past
research into the topic, and his familiarity with information technologies in the City of
Maplewood.
BACKGROUND: STREAMING
Streaming or webcasting is all about letting a computer user hear and/or view a live or
recorded broadcast over the internet. This is already familiar to many residents who
may watch video clips on YouTube, listen to an online radio station with iTunes, or watch
a missed recent episode of a favorite TV show on a network's website.
Streaming city meetings would complement but not replace our current cable television
meeting broadcasts. The very same video signal which currently goes out over cable
would be simultaneously digitized on a computer that we would install in the council
chambers control room. This digital stream would be served on the internet — anyone in
the world with an internet connection would be able to watch Maplewood city meetings
live on their computer.
The digitized video would be stored, allowing online users to obtain access on demand
to past meetings. Stored meetings are also indexed. This means that users will be able
to click on a specific agenda item of interest, and skip directly to that point in the video
recording of the meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORT
Attachment 1 is a memorandum to the Cable Commission from Executive Director Tim
Finnerty, conveying the report and recommendations of the New Technologies
Committee regarding video streaming for the member cities. After evaluating three
vendors of web streaming services, the Committee chose to recommend CTV North
Packet Page Number 3 of 21
Agenda Item E1
Suburbs. For all three vendors, it was clear that there could be substantial savings by
working as a consortium rather than as individual cities.
The report and recommendations were discussed at the Cable Commission's meeting
on May 14. After the meeting, Mayor Longrie wrote to ask several questions. Her e-mail
and the responses are appended as Attachments 2 through 6.
COMMISSION ACTION
The Cable Commission voted to proceed with the next steps in making streaming
available to its member cities. This will involve communicating with the city councils of
the member municipalities, to determine their interest in web - casting and to identify the
specific needs of each city (e.g., how many meetings a given city wishes to make
available online). Commission staff will be working on an agreement with CTV.
The final contract with CTV will be subject to approval by the Commission. In addition, it
will be up to each city to "opt in" and use the web streaming service. The more cities
that do, the greater the savings for all of them.
FURTHER INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION
Mr. Tim Finnerty, Executive Director of the Ramsey - Washington Suburban Cable
Commission, plans to attend our workshop. He has indicated to me that he will invite
CTV North Suburbs to attend as well.
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
Besides being here to answer our questions, our guests will be looking for input from the
City Council. Foremost, will we want to join our fellow RWSCC cities in offering
streaming to our residents via CTV North Suburbs? If we do, what specific services will
we require? For example, Council will need to give direction with respect to which city
meetings will be webcast, and the archive policy we desire.
Packet Page Number 4 of 21
Agenda Item El
Attachment
May 14,2009
TO: CABLE COMMISSION
SUBJECT: FROM: TIM FINNERTY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
New Technologies Committee report and recommendations regarding
video streaming providers/services
Please find below the report and recommendations of the New Technology Committee in
connection with video streaming of municipal meetings.
ln January, the Commission directed the Committee {n review the matter and report ou
whether the Commission could play u helpful role in facilitating the implementation of
video streaming on the part of member municipalities that may interested in telecasting
meetings via the iuierne| (in addition {o any oub|eoas|iog e[6`dm).
Since January the committee met several times and studied the matter, including having
presentations from three video streaming service providers: Graniuus,lmplex,and CTV
North Suburbs (also known as the North Suburban Cable [\`nzndosioo). Gronicusund
lnqplex one commercial businesses specializing in ioicrnci aUnuoziug and information
technology services. CTV North Suburbs is a joint powers cable coounoiominn comprised
of eight municipalities, including Roseville, that neighbor our cable territory. CTVNodb
Suburbs developed and operates 4o video streaming system for its member
municipalities.
The and North Suburban cable commissions have worked
for many years on joint technical projects relating to cable cnmuzuuicutk>uu and PEG
programming. Given that relationship, CTV North Suburbs decided to offer its streaming
service for consideration by the New Technology Committee ouit also considered the
options for commercial service providers.
Summary of Conclusions
1. The Committee n:vicvvcd three providers and found all tbccc to he viable candidates in
terms of the basic capabilities required and related technology.
2. The Committee found that savings can be realized for member cities through
collective purchasing o[ streaming service through asinrle contract between vendor and
the Commission (as opposed to cities contracting individually with vendor).
Packet Page Number 5 of 21
Agenda Item El
3. The Committee found that, while all three providers were viable from the standpoint
of basic capabilities, C77/NortbSuhud)mpromcotcd advantages over the other providers
io terms o[ cost, technical flexibility, and the fact that aworking relationship already
exists with Ramsey/Washington. See their video oieurniug u{b(Ln://wwn/.oLvl5.om/
Basic capabilitie
The basic nx:b streaming capabilities that »nn|v to all three x,
, and CTV North Subudbo—occasfollows:
Live streaming of city meeting over the internet: All.
Public access tolive streami via alink through the ci web site: All
Public access via imtrrurtio archives of previously u:coo1cd meetings (subject to
an agreed-upon retention policy or storage limitation): All
Agenda item i ndexing capability All
Document title indexing capability: All.
Option for either centralized or decentralized installation/configuration: All
Advanced capabilities
Live i ndexing is only p rovi ded hnGrauicuo. ln the case ofCT\/and
index io of�rtb� i iohJk/r�coz��� vvbiobcuobe dooe
with Granicus as well.
--' - -----,� --, "
Gruniuuu also incorporates keyword indexing (for doing searches within the archived
videoy),a provision for A/\ i ,aodRSS support, While Implex and CT\7dm
not have these capabilities directly engineered within their ,it is
conceivable that A/Vmodcasting and RSS support could be achieved by other means. It
isn't as clear that keyword indexing could be accomplished by other means.
Gcum\kruo offers numerous "add on" capabilities u1 additional cost that gm beyond
the basics noted above. Those include: A clerk annotat tool with Microsoft word
integration; closed captioning yuppnrt and indexing; agenda and document management
system ioiccgru1iouuvvidl all major vcodoru; nvoting system; training nyntcoo; ScnronCusi
integration with local CG players; and MobUeEouodex used for encoding and indexing
offsite or away from standard encoders.
Packet Page Number 6 of 21
Agenda Item El
Implex and CTV have not incorporated these types of add-on features, although it is not
clear that our municipalities would require such functionality integrated within a
streaming service.
Ultimately, the New Technology Committee determined that the provision such advanced
capabilities did not rise to the level of a mandatory requirement for its recommendation
of a provider.
Hardware, software, and connectivity
The basic streaming capabilities can be accomplished by all three providers via standard
hardware, software and connectivity.
Hardware: Generally, the locally installed hardware used in all three cases is similar.
They each utilize computer-based video encoders that produce a common stream format
(in the case of Granicus and Implex, the stream format is Window Media, while CTV
uses a RISC compliant MPEG-4 format).
Software: The Granicus software is MediaManager; Implex's software is called
QwikCast; CTV's is called Cassander. All are made available as part of the service
agreement.
Connectivity: A live stream must be encoded locally and then transmitted to the provider
who then re-distributes it to viewers on the web. In the case of Granicus and Implex,
cities would send their encoded signals via an internet connection. In the case of CTV, it
is possible that existing video interconnection could be used to accomplish connectivity
to the streaming service provider (CTV). That would eliminate the need (and potential
additional cost) for a separate internet connection from the origination location (i.e., a
city hall) . However, some additional equipment could be required depending upon the
set-up at each location. Ultimately, the use of the existing direct connection with CTV
has the potential to create other collaborative value that isn't possible via the other
providers.
Technical support and troubleshooting
All three providers provide for technical support and troubleshooting within their service,
Pricing
See attached pricing (reflecting individual cost and savings for group approach). Final
pricing would be subject to negotiation and acceptance of a final service contract.
Packet Page Number 7 of 21
Agenda Item El
FinanKLng
Committee members agreed that franchise fees are appropriate source of financing for
streaming for this important [euono: Tbeotberanurceuo{fuudy - - ,9EG gruo(a
received from Cooucamt--are dedicated for support o[ cable access channels and
programming. Internet streaming im not technically within the realm ofthe PEG
cublccustiug for which PEG grant funding support improvided under the 0uucbiac
agreement with Conxcuxt.
Since franchise fees are, therefore, iulo|icutcd,the (lonzni{krcnzcud7crsalso that
the consent ofeach participating municipality should be required. Obviously, using
franchise fees {oriutem/etmtreuodng --xnozedJoguotcxnlicitly within the Commission's
'oiui|mwempurpmaea —wnuldhuve the effect n[reducing the amount o[franchise fees
that would oNhcrn/ioc be redistributed to cities on an annual basis.
Committee members agreed that bislikely that not all cities will not wish bo participate
and WiUcrnio,for example, do not even docab|ecuxdng of council meetings
at this time), as well that there will likely hovarying amounts nfstreaming (and therefore
differences in underlying steaming costs) among cities that do choose tnp4diopate(for
example, larger cities would presumably want to stream not only council meetings, but
city comoodouinnu as well such as parks, planning, public safety, etc.). For this reason,
Committee members agreed each city's consent should include the specific cost nf
service desired by that city to be charged by Commission (per the providers contract
icing) against the franchise [ecy that would otherwise be redistributed to city on an
annual basis.
In effect, the Commission would contract with CTV North Suburbs for video streaming
services desired by each participating city, pay CT\/ Nk`db Suburbs for that service on u
monthly basis, then deduct the amount expended for each given oity from that city's
annual redistribution.
To this end, the Committee members agreed that the Commission's Finance Committee
and staff would need to address the accounting details needed k` accomplish this,
including budgetary and cash flow provisions needed |n cover monthly expenses under uo
annual reimbursement scheme.
Recommendations
|. The Commission should authorize the development ofa video streaming services
contract (subject to final approval by the Commission) with CT\/ North Suburbs.
2. The Commission should advise each municipality of the opportunity and related
benefits and cost savings of a joint coordinated approach to contracting for video
streaming services through the Commission with CT\/ North Suburbs.
Packet Page Number 8 of 21
Agenda Item El
3. The Commission should direct its staff to implement video streaming service desired
by each consenting city pursuant to a final contract approved by the Commission.
Packet Page Number 9 of 21
c 1.
Ln
c
u)
t,
v
U
Q
C
Q
:-
U
ry
C
C
"C3
Q
Q
ru
97
CZ
E
M
X
Q
u-
w
(CF
1L
a.+
tt3
a�
�r
Packet Page Number 10 of 21
Agenda Item E1
d'
d'
N
tD
0
c0
N
c0
M
co
Ca
N
{V
lD
tD
M
N
tf
d
et
fi
Ca
Q�
44
h
f
LI)
Ch
N
C?
N
N
N
C*)
OO
its
O
fit-
;:
Lr)
r+o
tD
h
06
h
h
h
Q)
Oo
CL)
O
L
d
�t
(
tD
0
OO
N
OD
Co
OO
0
N
�[
U)
CC?
tD
M
M
N
ct
Cn
Nr
It
d'
Ca
(3)
4
N
N
J
d
M
h
M
h
r`"
h
O0
Cm
IA
)
M
C
Ct
(,,
ti
Ln
t`�
Lr)
LC)
Lr
r`
h
�
u1
•i
�
tp
M
C
Z
q)
M
d
U �'�
C7
C3
C7C�C7C7
C�CaC�C7COC7
p
'C
La
4�
Ln
o00 00 00o 0 000
Lr)
m
Lt)
Lr)
Ln
Ln
m
LO
Lt)
Ltd
LC)
U
�
-1
1-4
1-4
-4
1-1
-
r-1
-4
,-4
OD
c
ra
�
0
M
Lr)
Lr)
V)
U)
LC)
Ch
C3)
Q)
M
M
(1
Ql
[r1
C7
CO
C?
C7
0
M
Q)
(COMM)
Q1
C31
d'
C
h
V)
Ln
L1)
Ln
Ll)
L()
,a
4
11
4
r-I
I",
, i
*a
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
m
N
C
�
Q
0
¢'
u
�y
�O
td
�D
tD
to
ry
tD
00
U
".
(n
4-1
00
N
00
N
OD
N
OD
N
00
N
r i
to
, �
Pa
< 1
1�
, 1
h
ri
h
L-
Y)
r�
r - 1
P
�
O
Q
rl
h
h
h
N
0
0
CO
0
0$
0�
L
V
U
- 69 -
-i r
ri
r^i
,-1
, A
r-1
-4
t
ii+
rl
Q
�
'C3
�
�
CT)
Q1
C71
Cn
C3)
q-i
.
r-1
,-i
,-i
C?
r•i
*i
t{7
tD
tD
tD
tD
OO
Q?
co
co
d'
M
rn
U
,-i
ri
v-I
rl
ri
ri
ri
ri
vi
Q
4-
CL
N
0
00
i1
M
.1
C,
rn
G7
r�
^Y
tD
r„
LU
Ln
.-i
N
v)
N
, i
tD
H
ko
00
i
c0
Cr
J
0
D
M
Lr)
In
Q4�
U
Q
Q
of
'
to
aa)
m
(U
CO
t11
ON
N
J
Z
—
c
�
C:
W
-0
Q
h-
—
�
F
:E
m0t�
>S'5
z
�0
c 1.
Ln
c
u)
t,
v
U
Q
C
Q
:-
U
ry
C
C
"C3
Q
Q
ru
97
CZ
E
M
X
Q
u-
w
(CF
1L
a.+
tt3
a�
�r
Packet Page Number 10 of 21
Agenda Item E1
Agenda Item E1
Attachment 2
';x You replied on 5/15/2009 12:09 AM.
John Nephew
From: Diana Longrie Sent: Thu 5/14/2009 11:59 PM
To: Mychal Fowlds; kimfacile @comcast.net; John Nephew
Cc: Tim Antonen; john @atlas- games.com; john @johnnephew.com
Subject: CTV Proposal for web streaming
Attachments:
Greetings!
In watching the Cable Commission meeting tonight regarding CTV's proposal for web streaming, I have a few questions:
1. If you are watching a meeting on the web site using the CTV proposed web streaming, can you enlarge the picture to fill the entire
monitor screen?
2. If you are watching a meeting on the web site using the CTV proposed web streaming, can you down load and save the entire
video of the meeting to your hard drive or a DVD?
3. If a person's hard drive doesn't have sufficient memory or a person doesn't have a newer computer, can they record a CTV web
streamed meeting directly to a DVD, by passing the hard drive?
4. What is the minimum operating system requirements for a computer to view web streaming using the CTV proposal? I watch
meetings on the web all of the time that implement the Granicus system with a Windows 98 system with no problem.
5. Please explain the statement made at the meeting that John has "been a part of the process" so I understand how far along the
project is prior to coming to the council for discussion. Who else serves on the technology committee? I heard discussion where the
archiving of the web streaming meeting videos was described as an "extreme ". Who's viewpoint is this? Please provide a
clarification - I am unsure who's opinion this was so I was hoping that tonight's meeting attendees (Mike /John) can help me out with
the answer.
6. Please forward to my attention a copy of tonight's report, along with supporting documentation, which addresses the various
research and proposals for web streaming of meetings.
7. How does the State Capital archive all of their web streamed meetings they have on the Internet?
8. How does Lakeville archive all of their web streamed meetings they have on the internet?
Thank you,
Diana Longrie
Mayor of Maplewood
651 - 214 -0859
Packet Page Number 11 of 21
Agenda Item E1
Attachment 3
John Nephew
From: John Nephew Sent: Fri 5/15/2009 1:21 AM
To: Diana Longrie
Cc: Mychal Fowlds; Jim Antonen; kimfacile @comcast.net; timfinnerty @rwcable.com
Subject: RE: CTV Proposal for web streaming
Attachments:
Madame Mayor,
Thanks for following the streaming discussion and watching tonight's commission meeting. I am copying this
message to Tim Finnerty, Executive Director of the RWSCC, so that he can be aware of the questions and
perhaps provide some answers. I am sure that other cities will have some similar questions and it may be
possible to get written answers to the technical questions from CTV to distribute to all of the commission's
member cities.
There are some questions I may be able to answer immediately myself.
> 5. Please explain the statement made at the meeting that John has "been a part of the process" so I
> understand how far along the project is prior to coming to the council for discussion.
As you aware, I am our city's alternate to the cable commission. I have attended most of the full commission's
meetings, but tonight was the first time I actually stepped in to fill Kim Facile's seat, since she had to attend
another commitment.
I volunteered to serve on the New Cable Technology Committee last year. I think I have attended all of its
meetings since it was first formed. We had some early meetings discussing changes in cable technology
(particularly the transition from analog to digital that is ongoing) and its possible impact. When the
commission decided to explore webcasting for meetings of member cities, it was referred to our committee for
study.
Over a series of meetings, our committee discussed streaming in general, and met with representatives of
three companies /entities that could provide streaming services (Granicus, Implex, and CTV). Each gave us a
presentation about their firm's services, and also provided follow -up information with specifics on cost and
options. Our approach was to obtain information both for an individual city and for the commission acting
together -- both so that we could see the financial comparison (the benefit of working together), and so that
the information could be useful to cities who decided to "go it alone" if the commission chooses not to pursue
streaming. A city would also find the information helpful if it decided that its specific needs were better suited
by a different vendor than was selected by the commission as a whole. After reviewing the price and features
of the services, the committee recommended CTV to the commission, per the report in tonight's meeting
packet.
> Who else serves on the technology committee?
Looking at the minutes of our last committee meeting, the members present were Duane Bengtson, Sheila
Davis - Stahl, Karen Gochberg, Lori Pulkrabek, George Rouse, Dave Zick, and myself. There may have been
other members who missed the meeting, but I don't have a listing of the appointed members handy. Also
attending were Mr. Finnerty and Maplewood's I.T. director, Mychal Fowlds.
• I heard discussion where the archiving of the web streaming meeting videos was described as an
• "extreme ". Who's viewpoint is this? Please provide a clarification - I am unsure who's opinion this was
• so I was hoping that tonight's meeting attendees (Mike /John) can help me out with the answer.
I wonder if you misinterpreted a comment I made. I recall describing the range of needs of cities that might
want to participate in streaming. On one extreme might be a city that only wished to stream its regular City
Council meetings, and make archives of those meetings available for a relatively short time. At the other
Packet Page Number 12 of 21
Agenda Item E1
extreme would be a city that might wish to stream not only regular, special and workshop meetings of its City
Council, but all city commissions as well; and it might want to make archives available a long time, perhaps
indefinitely. One factor differentiating vendors is their ability to accommodate this range of needs, and at what
price.
I expect that Maplewood's needs will fall on the latter end of the scale -- favoring more broadcasts and
archives. If this is what we would like as a council, it has a big impact on the service and pricing with some
vendors. Granicus, for example, has fees associated with longer archive retention (if memory serves, their
basic plan keeps meeting archives online for one year) and broadcasting the meetings of more bodies (e.g.,
commissions /boards in addition to the city council).
As you recall, I put a council presentation on the agenda this past Monday to update the council again on this
topic, but we didn't get to it before the meeting's end. I actually think it would be better if we could schedule
it as a topic for a workshop. The information you request could be included in the packet for the entire council
to review.
-John Nephew, Councilmember
Packet Page Number 13 of 21
Agenda Item E1
Attachment 4
John Nephew
From: Timothy Finnerty [timfinnerty @rwcable.com] Sent: Fri 5/15/2009 3:16 PM
To: Mr. Ian R. Cobb
Cc: Diana Longrie; Mycha) Fowlds; John Nephew; Kim Facile; Jim Antonen
Subject: Streaming questions
Attachments:
Hi Ian:
A few questions (below) came up about your (CTV's) streaming that I would like to pass along to you for response. I can follow up
with you directly if you have any questions about these. Otherwise, please reply to all with your response. Thanks!
- Tim
1. If you are watching a meeting on the web site using the CTV proposed web streaming, can you enlarge the picture to fill the entire monitor
screen?
2. If you are watching a meeting on the web site using the CTV proposed web streaming, can you down load and save the entire video of the
meeting to your hard drive or a DVD?
3. If a person's hard drive doesn't have sufficient memory or a person doesn't have a newer computer, can they record a CTV web streamed
meeting directly to a DVD, by passing the hard drive?
4. What is the minimum operating system requirements for a computer to view web streaming using the CTV proposal? I watch meetings on the
web all of the time that implement the Granicus system with a Windows 98 system with no problem.
Packet Page Number 14 of 21
Agenda Item E1
Attachment 5
John Nephew
From: Timothy Finnerty [timfinnerty @rwcable.com] Sent: Fri 5/15/2009 3:55 PM
To: Diana Longrie
Cc: John Nephew; Mycha) Fowlds; Jim Antonen; Kim Facile
Subject: Re: CTV Proposal for web streaming
Attachments:
a WOO M1.
You asked about how the State archives its web videos. According to the State Senate's web site
( http: / /www.senate.leg. state .mn.us /media /index.php ?ls =) , "the Minnesota Senate provides live and archive coverage of Senate
floor sessions, committee hearings, press conferences and special events. Capitol Report, a weekly public affairs program, and civic
education videos also are archived. All programming is produced by Senate Media Services. Audio coverage is recorded and reported
by Senate Committee staff and Senate Sergeant At Arms office."
It appears that Senate Media Services makes use of Flash, Windows Media, and Real Media formats. I don't know whether the
related video servers are internally operated or operated by some third party. I guess I've assumed that its an internal system
managed and operated by Senate Media Services, but I'm not exactly sure. Can't tell from the web site.
I think the MN House uses the same system. See: h! /Jwww. house. leg. state .mn.us /hinfoltelevision.htm
Regarding Lakeville, here is the link to on -line video: http:/ /www.ci.lakeville.mn.us /city - council /2.html
I'm not sure of the details about Lakeville's videos here. Seems like these are posted directly onto the web site server, but it's not
clear to me from the web site that they do live streaming of their meetings. Perhaps these videos are posted to the web just for
archived, pre- recorded viewing.
My guess is that both Senate Media Services and Lakeville maintain and operate their own web video servers internally within their
facilities. It doesn't seem that they are using a third party provider like a Granicus, for example. But I don't know for sure.
Does this get at your question? Let me know if not.
- Tim
Packet Page Number 15 of 21
Agenda Item E1
Attachment 6
Jahn Nephew
From: Timothy Finnerty [timfinnerty @rwcable.com] Sent: Tue 5/19/2009 1:52 PM
To: Diana Longrie
Cc: John Nephew; Kim Facile; Mychal Fowlds; Jim Antonen
Subject: Streaming - technical responses
Attachments:
Hi Diana:
I ended up speaking directly with Ian Cobb of CTV regarding the technical questions you raised last week. Please find below the
questions and related responses.
Please let me know if you have any follow ups.
Thanks!
- Tim
1. If you are watching a meeting on the web site using the CTV proposed web streaming, can you enlarge the picture to fill the
entire monitor screen?
Yes. The Cassander Stream Viewer features a button to go to a full screen mode.
2. If you are watching a meeting on the web site using the CTV proposed web streaming, can you down load and save the entire
video of the meeting to your hard drive or a DVD?
CTV's would provide streaming of live and digitized meeting video files stored on a server. While there is no general
download button within the Cassander Stream Viewer, the City would would have electronic administrative access
to the recorded digital video files and would certainly be free to copy /transfer those to a separate hard drive and
make those available to anyone via any other media of the City's choosing.
Also, the city will still record, playback, and retain a video copy of each meeting for the normal cable telecasting on
Ch. 16. The internet streaming would be in addition to what is currently done for Ch. 16. (Tim's note)
3. If a person's hard drive doesn't have sufficient memory or a person doesn't have a newer computer, can they record a CTV web
streamed meeting directly to a DVD, by passing the hard drive?
Ian indicated that he was not aware of any video steaming service that would perform this. CTV's does not.
4. What is the minimum operating system requirements for a computer to view web streaming using the CTV proposal? I watch
meetings on the web all of the time that implement the Granicus system with a Windows 98 system with no problem.
Browser: Internet Explorer (version 6 or 7) or FIREFOX (version 2 OR 3) with Quicktime 7 plug -in for either
Mac or Windows. This would cover most computers over past 6 to 7 years. Generally, for PCs this
implicates Windows XP or higher.
Packet Page Number 16 of 21
Agenda Item E1
Work Session Agenda Item E2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager, Jim Antonen
FROM: Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager /Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Gladstone — Phase 1; Update and Discussion on Development and Public
Improvement Options
DATE: June 3, 2009
INTRODUCTION
The City Council has been notified that a potential developer is interested in the Tourist Cabins
property and implementing The Shores development concept approved by the City Council in 2007.
That developer has not finalized purchase of the property and development rights at the time of the
writing of this memorandum. The developer's identity has not been revealed on a public basis due to
the on -going purchase negotiations.
This item has been placed on the agenda for further discussions by the City Council on the overall
concepts for possible City support to the public improvements associated with the development, along
with a request from the potential developer for consideration of TIF financing. No action will be
requested of the Council, although guidance from the Council on financial support issues may be
necessary to meet the Livable Communities Grant deadlines and the requested schedule of the
potential developer. There is a possibility that the developer is unable to reach a purchase agreement
for the property and the development, in which case, this item will be cancelled.
DISCUSSION
The Gladstone — Phase I improvements were approved without City involvement in the project. In
2007, the City Council reviewed a request from Bart Montaneri for TIF funding and Mr. Montaneri paid
for a Springsted analysis of his project. Springsted provided an analysis of the internal rate of return
for potential investors on that 2007 project and the City Council determined that TIF funds would not
be provided for that project and that developer. The developer [Mr. Montaneri] was unable to secure
financing with that plan and the developer has been foreclosed on his purchase.
At the May 28 Council Meeting the Council was provided a letter from the Metropolitan Council that
indicates that our grant is tied to a potential development and that if we cannot secure that
development such that our grants funds can be expended by the end of 2009, Maplewood will need to
forfeit those grant funds of $1.8 million. Under one possible scenario [a full TIF analysis will need to
be evaluated], the developer would receive City support through the use of TIF funds, in exchange for
the developer agreeing to assessments. This would allow assistance from the project with the
developer receiving pay -as- you -go TIF to pay assessments and an additional $1.0 million to make the
project viable.
This scenario would provide that the developer would be assessed for $1.5 million of public
improvements necessary for the Gladstone Phase I project. The developer could receive up to the
entire $1.5 million in pay -as- you -go TIF reimbursement for these assessments. These funds would
help the City to achieve it's goals to start the Gladstone redevelopment. In exchange for this
agreement, under this scenario, the developer would receive an additional $1.0 million to use for land
improvements for the development project. It may also be possible for the Council to expand some of
the TIF district to allow some of the funds [potentially up to 20 %] to be used for other City initiatives.
The staff continues to discuss this proposal with the potential developer, although without Council
support for considering TIF, it is staff's opinion that we will be unsuccessful in getting our grant
extended. Council direction on this item is requested.
Packet Page Number 17 of 21
Agenda Item E1
GLADSTONE — PHASE 1
PAGE TWO
• f1 •
It is recommended that the City Council discuss the Gladstone — Phase 1 project and possible
scenarios for development support. Additional information will be provided on the potential
development and timelines as part of the meeting. Council should also consider their interest in
optional financing alternatives for the Gladstone — Phase I project to enhance development options to
protect the Metropolitan Council Livable Communities grant.
Attachments:
1. Metropolitan Council Letter on Livable Communities Grant
2. The Shores Alternative Financing Plan
Packet Page Number 18 of 21
Agenda Item El
1" Metropolitan Council
'A
I" ---- -
May 13, 2009
Ms. Shann Finwall, AICP
Environmental Planner
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
Re: Gladstone LCDA Grant (SG006-168)
Ms. Finwall:
We have recently been in communication with you regarding the status of the Gladstone Neighborhood
Redevelopment grant, number SG006-168. From the information you have provided, it appears the
Project will not be completed by the time the grant expires on December 31, 2009. This grant has
already received a one-year administrative extension.
Given these circumstances, you may not expend any funds from this grant until the City demonstrates
that the Project, consisting of the grant-funded activities and the senior housing development, will be
completed within the timeline of the current grant agreement. The potential for any further grant
agreement extension is unlikely.
The grant agreement includes both the grant-funded activities and the residential component described
in the grant application. The information you have provided has indicated the owner/developer has
lost site control of the project site, and the senior housing development envisioned for the site appears
to be in question.
To confirm the status of the Gladstone Project, could you please provide the Metropolitan Council with
the following information:
1) Previous correspondence indicated that the public improvements, with the exception of some
landscaping, could be completed by the current grant expiration date. Does this include all proposed
grant-funded activities, the roundabout, reconstruction and improvements of Frost Avenue and the
stormwater treatment pond?
2) Describe any significant progress made since your last correspondence with Livable Communities
staff in regaining site control and obtaining a new developer to complete the senior housing
development within the current term of the grant.
Although some of the information requested above may have been previously submitted, a complete
response is needed to confirm the status of the grant. Again, no costs may be incurred under the grant
agreement until confirmation of this information.
www.metrocouncii.org
390 Robert Street North • St. Paul, MN 55101-1805 • (651) 602 -1900 • Fax (651) 602-1550 * TTY (651) 291-0904
An Equal Opportunity Employer Packet Page Number 19 of 21
Ms. Shann Finwall
May 13, 2009
Page 2
We look forward to your response.
S 1h e 1v
erel.,
Paul Bums, AICP
Manager, Livable Communities Program
Cc: Deb Jensen
Joanne Barron
Agenda Item El
Packet Page Number 20 of 21
Agenda Item E1
The Shores Financing
April 30, 2009
Current Planned Assessments:
• Roundabout - $100,000
• Frost Ave Improvements - $150,000
• Storm Water Improvements - $175,000
• Overhead Utility Burial - $125,000
• Sanitary Sewer /Water Main - $ 75,000
• Total $625,000
• No TIF Support for these
Possible Items [for May Council Discussion]
• TIF Pay -as- you -go $2,500,000
Proposed Assessments
[Assmt term and TIF term are the same]
• Savanna Improvements
$500,000
• Roundabout -
$100,000
• Frost Ave Improvements -
$150,000
• Storm Water Improvements -
$175,000
• Overhead Utility Burial -
$500,000
• Sanitary Sewer /Water Main -
$ 75,000
• Total Assessment
$1,500,000
Packet Page Number 21 of 21