No Streaming at the ‘Ledge’
UPDATED 2/18/11 10:10 a.m.
Hawaii’s Legislature has made great strides with its website. But when it comes to letting the public sit in on hearings online, it’s lagging behind the pack.
At least 25 states around the nation stream their proceedings live onto the web.
Streaming online makes a lot of sense for Hawaii given its population is spread across an archipelago. Alaska has been streaming all of its proceedings online for 10 years.
The Hawaii Senate has said it would like to start live streaming its meetings from every committee room and its chamber. The House has cameras and microphones in all of its committee rooms, but hasn’t looked seriously into the issue.
Right now, legislators can watch and listen to hearings on an internal TV network within the Capitol. That feed could be streamed on the web, but isn’t.
The Senate estimates it would cost about $50,000 to stream its proceedings online. The move would go a long way toward improving public access, especially for neighbor island residents.
Most Legislatures Stream Online
A comparison of other legislatures around the nation shows that Hawaii is behind the curve in online streaming. Most states stream audio or video 鈥 in some cases both.
But most systems have kinks. Some stream online but do not archive. Some stream audio but not video. Like Hawaii, many legislatures’ two chambers move online at different times, usually because of funding issues.
New Mexico’s Legislature, like Hawaii’s, lacks complete coverage, but is expanding its services. Right now, New Mexico streams audio from House committee rooms and airs audio and video of Senate chamber proceedings.
They began live streaming in 2008 partly because the public wanted it. Its Senate chamber has an audio and video system, but its committee rooms do not. By comparison, the House chamber and three House committee rooms are equipped with audio.
Brad Schroeder, the systems analyst there, said the Legislature hopes to eventually install cameras in all of its committee rooms.
鈥淎udio only was extremely cheap (to install),” Schroeder said. “With video, the issue was getting the appropriation to purchase it.”
Schroeder said residents appreciate the service. But because the Legislature doesn’t broadcast any of its proceedings on public access television where it can be easily recorded, the public wants the stream to be archived.
Alaska Streaming for Last Decade
Alaska has been streaming its proceedings online since January 2001. There’s audio and video from each legislative chamber and audio from every committee room.
The meetings are taped and aired by Alaska Legislature TV, and Gavel Alaska, a statewide television service which also streams it onto the web. The City and Borough of Juneau, along with private businesses and organizations, pays for the service.
Gavel Alaska operates on a $600,000 budget, which covers salaries and operating costs including satellite distribution. The amount also covers eight Gavel Alaska staffers and about 10 part-time hires that assist with preparation and wrap-up work for the session.
In Hawaii, House Clerk Pat Mau-Shimizu has cited server space as a reason for not live-streaming House proceedings. But, James Mahan, the TV Manager of Gavel Alaska, said it is not a significant issue.
鈥淚t鈥檚 getting cheaper all the time, really. We used to worry about server space but that鈥檚 getting cheaper every day. We now have enough server space for the next 12 years,鈥 he said.
Both Schroeder and Mahan said buying cameras and equipment can be a big expense in the beginning. But maintaining the live stream afterward doesn’t cost much.
The Colorado General Assembly has a relatively new system 鈥 and it’s extremely user-friendly. The House and Senate stream live video and audio using Granicus, which specializes in webcasting. It’s the same service Olelo uses to post its television coverage online.
The Colorado General Assembly has cameras mounted in the House and Senate chambers but no cameras in the committee rooms.
Similar to Hawaii, the House and Senate came on board for live streaming at different times. The video1 from House meetings went online in January 2008. The Senate didn’t do the same until two years later.
Archiving Costs Extra, but Start-Up is Cheap
Colorado House Clerk Scott Nachtrieb confirms that audio streaming is 鈥渞elatively cheap鈥 with amplifiers in the rooms that feed to an encoder and stream onto the web.
Nachtrieb said video production is 鈥渕uch more costly.鈥 The cost to air video from the House chambers the first year, including staff, quality cameras that could focus, and installation of a remote control system from a control room, cost $200,000. Included in the amount is the Granicus start-up fee of $30,000.
It cost about $170,000 to install the same set-up in the Senate chambers. In addition, it costs $2,024 a month for the indexed archiving service by Granicus. The archiving service allows the public to search and track video that pertains to a certain bill.
But in Hawaii, lawmakers don’t plan on archiving 鈥 or hiring extra staff to operate its online stream. The House and Senate have already installed stationary cameras in all of the Capitol’s conference rooms.
