CC 04-26-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - APRIL 26, 1999 4 Mayor Probst asked Mr. Stewart to further explain the statement in the summary report that some of the proposed changes will reduce the quality of the images, Mr. Stewart explained that most of the areas of quality being cut would affect the operators in the control room and their ability to do their job seamlessly. Other quality cuts were in the camera systems. The brand of cameras was switched and there is a minor difference in quality, which would only be seen when comparing the two cameras side-by-side. Mr. Stewart stated that there had been a choice between three-chip cameras versus one-chip cameras, The cameras being proposed are three-chip cameras and he would not recommend the use of one-chip as this would result in much lower quality, Mayor Probst stated that his fundamental concern was that the system provide a good quality sound system. He wants to be confident that the sound system will be high quality, not only at the dais, but also for the audience to hear and be heard. Mr. Stewart concurred and indicated that there would be very littlc budget cutting in the sound system. What is being proposed would be the minimum system for the amount of space it will be located in and the system will be high quality_ Mayor Probst noted that the audio/visual program will be paid for out of the Cable Fund and asked staff ifthis fund would be able to cover the estimated $120,000 project cost. Mr. Fritsinger stated that it would. Councilmember Larson asked, if the City were to not purchase the $8,000 overhead camera at this time, could the housing be installed and the camera purchased at a later date, Mr. Stewart stated that this is possible. He noted that this would reduce thc presentation system to making presentations off of a videotape or computer. Councilmember Larson pointed out that presentations could be made as they are currently, without the high-tech equipment. There could be an easel up front and a screen to project onto. Mr. Stewart stated that a front screen is not currently included in the project, however, one could be installed, One draw back to a screen is that it is very difficult for the viewers at home to see the image. The proposed overhead camera would eliminate this difficulty as the image can be placed on the lectern and be broadcast to the rear view screen as well to the television. Couneilmember Larson asked if there would be any place in the Council chambers to utilize an overhead projector. Mr. Stewart stated that there is a location in iront of the rear screen where a pull down screen could be added. He recommended that, if the overhead camera is cut from the budget, a screen should be added. Councilmember Malone expressed his concern that the $120,000 project cost seems incredible and there is nothing to judge these numbers against. The letter received from Mr. Stewart did not help the Council to understand what exactly was being cut and this made him skeptical. It was his belief that $120,000 for an audio/visual program is too much and he had been concerned about tbe cost of the project from the beginning, He noted that, even though the money is available in the Cable Fund, the City must be certain of the real value ofthe project.