Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP GRC 019 09/18/2012 2010-2012 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS DATE: September 18, 2012 Re: Comm. No. 786/Res. No. 279-12 PLACE: West Hawai`i Civic Center Kailua-Kona, Hawai`i TIME 3:50 p.m. Council Chair and Members Hawai`i County Council Hilo, Hawai`i 96720 Your Committee on Governmental Relations, to which was referred Resolution No. 279-12, reports as follows: Resolution No 279-12, transmitted by Council Member Pete Hoffmann via Communication 786, dated July 12, 2012,amends Rule No. 13, Public Statements and Testimony, by adding provisions regarding the submission of video testimony from any member of the public. Mr. Hoffmann explained that he brought this forward after a member of the public asked if video testimony would be accepted for a Planning Committee item. Mr. Hoffmann consulted with the Office of Information Practices (OW) and found that video testimony is allowable under the Sunshine Law. Video testimony would allow the public one more avenue for participating in meetings. Mr. Hoffman stated that he brought this measure forward to determine if the council is in favor of it and added that it would be limited to pre-recorded testimony of up to five individuals and would not include video-streaming type testimony. He added that it would begin in September and continue to the end of the term in December, and then allow the new council to decide if it should continue. Ms. Smart asked if video testimony would be treated like written testimony and suggested that our Information Technology(IT) Department be consulted as to the best way to store the video testimony to maintain the public record. Ms. Ford expressed concern that if five individuals were allowed to testify on one video submission that it would be inconsistent with the rule regarding oral testimony, which does not allow a person to testify on behalf of five people. She asked Mr. Hoffmann to contact OIP on that issue. Mr. Hoffmann agreed with the concerns expressed by Ms. Ford and will contact OIP. He explained that he brought the measure forward to see if councilmembers want to look at video testimony as an option and that the language can be refined. Mr. Yagong stated that any time we can expand the opportunity for the public to provide testimony is good, but added he has heard concerns from the public that it may expand the length of meetings if we do allow videos to be played during meetings. He suggested that video testimony could be considered, but it would be treated just like an email, or written testimony, and not played at the meetings. GRC Rept.No.: 19 GRC-19 Page 2 September 18, 2012 Mr. Yoshimoto agreed with Ms. Ford and Mr. Yagong and stated that video testimony should be incorporated into our rules and should be treated like written testimony. Mr. Hoffmann agreed that it doesn't have to be viewed at the meetings and he will work on the rule change to allow video testimony to be treated like written testimony for councilmembers to review before meetings. At the July 31, 2012 meeting, Mr. Hoffmann moved to postpone Comm. 786/Res. No. 279-12 to the August 14, 2012 Governmental Relations Committee meeting. Due to technical difficulties at the August 14, 2012 meeting, all Committee items were postponed to the September 5, 2012 Governmental Relations Committee meeting. At the September 5, 2012 meeting, Mr. Hoffmann moved to amend Resolution 279-12 with the contents of Communication 786.1; seconded by Ms. Smart. Mr. Hoffmann stated that the amendment incorporates comments made by councilmembers. Ms. Ford stated that it is not clear that the video testimony would not be played at the committee or council meetings and that video testimony should say"pre-recorded"to clarify that it is not live streaming video. Mr. Hoffmann explained that he believed that was implied and did not need to be stated. Mr. Hoffmann believes it is clear that it would be pre recorded as it would be submitted just as is written testimony. Ms. Ford will.consider an amendment. Ms. Smart brought up the issue of server capabilities and suggested funding might be required to enable the County server to hold the video testimony which would take up memory space. Mr. Yoshimoto asked Mr. Hoffmann to explain the rationale behind having one person being able to submit testimony for up to five people. Mr. Hoffmann wanted to limit it to five people so as not to be too cumbersome.. Mr. Yoshimoto agreed with Ms. Ford that it should be made very clear that videos will not be played during meetings and recommended that each video be submitted by one individual,similar to written testimony and not allow up to five people on one video submission. Mr. Yoshimoto also expressed concerns that councilmembers may not have time to watch all the video testimony and that there is a chance that pre-recorded video testimony can be altered and hard to authenticate. While this is an extreme case, it is a possibility. Chair Pilago expressed concern that if up to five people can submit one video testimony would up to five people then be able to submit one written testimony as well? Would the rule regarding written testimony also have to be changed to be consistent? He also asked if there were some structural changes that would occur for Council Services to handle the video submission and stated that the measure has been brought forward prematurely. Ms. Ford agreed with Chair Pilago and would like to limit the submission to one person per video. GRC-19 Page 3 September 18, 2012 Ms. Smart suggested that Mark Ow, technician, from the department of Information Technology (IT) come before the council to explain some of the technologies available for receiving video testimony. The motion to amend Resolution 279-12 with the contents of Comm. 786.1 passed. Mr. Hoffmann stated that he brought this measure forward to see if the council believes it would be a good idea to allow for video testimony and did not intend to go into specific details or an extensive conversation on how to implement it; that can be left to the technical experts. The idea is to try it for a short time, to the end of the council term, and then allow the next council to determine if they wish to continue based on the results. Mr. Yagong stated that it is a good thing to open up the avenues for public participation,but to be aware that it may lead to more costs or the need for additional staff and the details of these things should be worked out before passing this resolution at full council. Mr. Yoshimoto agreed with Ms. Ford that some of the county computers are not able to open up video files. Upgrades might be necessary for viewing the pre-recorded videos. Mr. Ikeda stated that he supports the intent of the resolution, but does not agree to more than one person on each video. If that is changed, he will support the rule change Ms. Smart brought up the question of whether or not these videos would have to be transcribed for the public record and will check with Corporation Counsel. Kathy Garson, Deputy Corporation Counsel stated that if posted on the County website, there would be certain requirements regarding ADA compliance; however, if stored on some other web site these requirements may not apply. Ms Ford suggested postponing this item until more information can be brought forward from IT and Corporation Counsel. Mr. Hoffmann moved to postpone the Resolution, as amended, to the. September 18,2012 meeting; seconded by Mr. Yagong. The motion was carried unanimously. At the September 18, 2012 meeting Mark Ow, technician with the IT Department addressed councilmembers. He stated that initially there was a concern about storage and archiving, as a three minute video could require too much storage space on the server. He explained that this can be resolved by posting the video testimony to "YouTube"or some other public sites. The video could then be reviewed for appropriateness before becoming public. Mr. Hoffmann moved to amend Resolution 279-12, Draft 2, with the contents of Comm.786.3. The amendment changes the implementation date to November 8, 2012 and November 9, 2012 respectively. It also amends Exhibit A to add"prerecorded video" and eliminates the ability for up to five people to provide testimony on one video. Ms. Ford thanked Mr. Hoffmann for the amendments which help clear up some of the concerns councilmembers had.