After more than a year of meeting virtually, Marysville City Council is looking to move back to in-person meetings.
As part of that exploration, the group is returning to questions about livestreaming its meetings.
City Manager Terry Emery said he has met several times with Council President Mark Reams. He said that based on those conversations, “possibly June and if not June, July coming back in person.”
Emery said he has looked at ways to configure Council Chambers so that members and the public can be distanced.
“At the same time, it would still set up a scenario that, if we have a meeting that interested the public, it could be tight in council chambers,” Emery said.
Council member J.R. Rausch said he wants council to take action on livestreaming before the return.
“I think this is the perfect time, as we transition back, to go ahead and get it done,” Rausch said.
He explained that council has discussed the idea for several years and has allocated money to livestream meetings the last two years. For 2021, council budgeted $44,896 for a company to install livestreaming equipment as well as control the cameras and production through the meetings and then archive the meetings.
Emery said he agreed. He said livestreaming the event allows members of the public to observe and participate in “every aspect of the meeting, without the need to feel like they need to come to City Hall.”
In addition to allowing residents to watch the meetings, the company that council members want to work with, Swagit Productions, LLC, allows residents to call and participate in the meeting.
Emery said the important thing is that it is “done professionally,” noting that Swagit “is just such a proficient and professional way.”
The city manager said that while there is money available to install the equipment and begin the process, “I am not going to initiate it unless I have the support of the majority of council.”
Reams said there has been a lot of advances in online meeting platforms in the last year. He wondered if continuing to use Zoom, rather than actually producing and archiving the meetings would be appropriate.
Emery acknowledged the advances but also that “there is a number of problems if you do some of these platforms.”
At a meeting last year, someone got access to the meeting and took over the video and audio feeds briefly on several occasions, a practice that has become known as “Zoom-bombing.” Emery said there are advantages to the professional production.
He specifically mentioned that by providing closed captions, Swagit allows the city meetings to be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Reams said he would like to have the discussion in a council work session.
Rausch agreed, “As long as we make a decision,” noting that discussions have lingered for years. He said it will take some lead time to get the equipment installed if they hope to have the process ready for when meetings return in person.
Reams said he would see if there is a way to get the topic on next week’s work session agenda, though he was informed there is already several discussion topics.
Reams said the June work session may be a better option as he would like to see some information about how livestreaming impacts attendance and participation at meetings on other communities.
“We may need more than a couple days to get that wrapped up,” Reams said.
Council member Aaron Carpenter said he had been livestreaming city council meetings using a phone.
“I realize it is not the best way to do it, but I do it,” Carpenter said.
He asked if city staff could just record the meetings and post them online.
“I would be willing to help with that,” Carpenter said, noting that his constituents in Ward 1 have expressed a desire to have the meetings streamed.
Emery said that could be brought to the work session, though that option would likely mean hiring a city staff member to make it happen.
“I think in the big scheme of things, you are going to find the efficiencies are the reason these communities are going with Swagit,” Emery said.
Citizens have several times asked council to consider livestreaming the meetings.
As part of the debate council members and members of city administration have expressed concerns about the timing of the associated cost, the challenge of determining a return of investment through viewership rates and the potential for council members to use the livestream to grandstand.
Additionally, council members have debated whether it is the citizen’s responsibility to put effort into educating themselves and whether livestreaming allows citizens to not be invested in their government.