A divided Akron City Council will air its public meetings as they unfold.
With dissenting voices, City Council passed legislation Monday that amends a contract with WhiteSpace Creative, the Akron firm that manages the city’s official website and records council meetings, then uploads them the next day. The legislation requires WhiteSpace to livestream the meetings instead, a process that gives anyone with an internet connection access in real time.
Proponents of the move say it opens up government to the voters, residents and taxpayers. Even those on the council who admittedly reject social media or lack technological skills have taken note that the public expects convenient access. It’s time to get with the times, they argue.
“The fact is, people aren’t going to come down here to” City Hall to see meetings, said at-large Councilwoman Veronica Sims. “But when you have 200, 400, 1,800 people looking through livestreaming, I don’t really know how much longer we can drag our feet.”
Sims supported the measure, which was first offered weeks ago by Councilwoman Tara Mosley-Samples.
Livestream views
Mosley-Samples livestreams every Monday meeting, including afternoon committee discussion when many Akron residents are at work.
She started a couple months ago to engage constituents and to prove that with an electronic tablet or smartphone, the meetings could be captured with or without wireless internet at little to no cost.
Since she began livestreaming, WhiteSpace started recording the afternoon sessions. Last week’s videos, which WhiteSpace uploaded to Vimeo, a video hosting website, have garnered 116 views.
The Beacon Journal, like Mosley-Samples, has been using Facebook to livestream recent meetings. Monday’s videos, which were posted by a reporter and shared by the Beacon Journal’s Facebook account, netted nearly 5,000 views before Whitespace had the videos uploaded.
The livestream legislation passed Monday states that it will be done and that WhiteSpace must do it. It does not specify whether wireless or cable internet will be used or where the feed will be available for the public to view.
No votes explained
Despite the apparent interest, President Marilyn Keith of Ward 8, President Pro Tem Donnie Kammer of Ward 7, Bob Hoch of Ward 6 and Mike Freeman of Ward 9 voted against the livestream bill.
None said they want to keep the meetings hidden. To the contrary, each voiced support of open and accessible government that works for the people. But for various reasons, they objected to the livestream plan.
Keith sided with Bob Zajac, president of WhiteSpace, and city information technology workers who say council chambers must be hard-wired to ensure the livestream isn’t interrupted by a less reliable wireless network. Zajac said videos that will forever be part of the permanent public record must be protected from potential blackouts. WhiteSpace receives $57,000 annually from the city and a $100,000 allowance for equipment, from which Zajac said at least $10,000 is needed to run internet cables to secure the connection.
This will be done with or without the livestream bill, Keith said Monday before voting no. That makes Mosley-Samples’s legislation moot, Hoch said.
Kammer questioned a couple weeks ago whether WhiteSpace would need to livestream if someone else already is doing it. At the time, that was — and continues to be — Mosley-Samples, though the Beacon Journal has started livestreaming some meetings as well. Third-party broadcasting does not absolve WhiteSpace of its contractual duties, Kammer was told. To be sure, Council Vice President Margo Sommerville amended the livestream plan to make certain that WhiteSpace, not another vendor, would be doing the work.
Like Keith, though, Kammer had other reservations, including how the council would be depicted in an unedited feed. The legislative process can get messy. Monday afternoon, as the council debated and amended the livestream proposal, they tripped over whether an amendment to the original bill could then be amended and, if so, how should they vote them in proper order. The assistant law director had to come upstairs and help them out of the predicament they created.
For this and the unpredictably of open-door meetings, Kammer worried about the council becoming a “laughing stock.”
“This is a public meeting with public access, for God’s sake,” Mosley-Samples responded. “If anyone here is doing something unprofessional, anyone can come down and record that. We need to be mindful that this is open government.”
The last dissenter, Freeman, tried to amend the plan so that the livestream feed would be hosted “solely and strictly on our council website” as a way to drive internet traffic to a responsible, civic space that council can control while providing resources and information for the public. With other council members not willing to forfeit the engaging power of Facebook, YouTube, Twitter or other social media platforms, Freeman’s amendment was rejected.
Viewer participation
Each week, hundreds of Mosley-Samples’ 1,102 Facebook followers watch her livestreams. The Beacon Journal, with 42,828 followers, boosts a reporter’s live feed to reach thousands of viewers, some which may be double counted by Facebook.
Comments on the videos are mostly constructive and positive. Sometimes viewers engage one another. Often, they show gratitude for the immediate access.
“So glad you are sharing this for those that can’t make it there after work,” commented Marla Lloyd, who follows Mosley-Samples.
“Still in D.C. Homesick and grateful for your live feed,” Denny Wilson wrote to his councilwoman on April 24.
“Thank you for allowing us to be part of the process. Knowledge is power,” commented Traci Lewis, who tuned in March 27 to hear about a new anti-discrimination law sponsored by Rich Swirsky and Mayor Dan Horrigan.
Others ask questions during afternoon meetings that are public but difficult to attend for those who work. Even if they could make it, the public is only welcome to comment during the 7 p.m. meeting, unless there is a special public hearing. When the inquiries come across Mosley-Samples’s iPad, she raises a hand and the council member in charge at the time permits her to ask the question, not knowing it came directly from the public.
“Why are they calling it Soul Train?” Romona Mingo Robinson asked of a proposal on April 3 to house traveling artists in shipping containers near downtown.
“It’s being built under a railroad station,” Mosley-Samples replied, able to answer the question without assistance from the people presenting it before her.
Some just want to stay informed.
“Any way to keep up to date when the meetings that pertain to [medical marijuana] go on?” asked follower Rex Max. Mosley-Samples responded minutes later with the date and time the issue next would be discussed.
Doug Livingston can be reached at 330-996-3792 or dlivingston@thebeaconjournal.com. Follow on Twitter: @ABJDoug .