Northampton County To Start Webcasts in January

With only Lamont McClure opposed, Northampton County Council last night approved a $16,000 webcasting system for meetings, starting next January. In addition to the livestream, viewers will be able to view portions of a meeting, using the agenda as an index.

IT Director Al Jordan describes the system: "What it's going to entail is two cameras; one camera will focus on the speaker, the other camera will focus on the Council members in general, showing everyone at once. The person that's speaking shall be pictured in a small frame inside the overall picture. ...

"The package also includes all the bells and whistles that we talked about, which includes posting minutes and agendas and those things online, and using the agenda as an index to the video. So if someone just wants to see a portion of the meeting in reference to a certain topic, they can just go ahead and skip to that portion.

"We will be able to stream the meeting live and also maintain an archive of previous meetings."

Is this popular? Will people want to view the webcasts? Council member Michael Dowd, a proponent of webcasting, mentioned the experience of Easton School District. "I can't give you a number, but The Express Times or Morning Call reported on that, and the initial number was kind of startling, far exceeding what I thought it would be." Council member John Cusick, another webcasting advocate, spoke with two counties - Chester and Allegheny - that already produce webcasts. "From their experience, how many people watch it depends on what's on the agenda."

The Northampton County Bulldog, Ron Angle, volunteered to find a few sponsors for the webcast to help pay the bill. "I am convinced I will raise the $16,000."

Lamont McClure, insisting "I'm not camera shy and it's because I'm so pretty," is nevertheless opposed to webcasts because the $19,000 outlay depletes Council's contingency fund. That has been used to support food banks, pre-school at a YMCA and Nazareth's skate park. "We're going to reduce the contingency fund by $16,000, and in a way that doesn't help people."

Cusick disagreed with McClure. "It's not our money. It's taxpayers' money, and I think what we're doing is spending it to give the citizens an opportunity to see their government at work."

Sometime in January, I'll be able to put my flipcam to bed.

Blogger's Note: Sarah Cassi's Express Times report is here.

Charlie Dent: Let the Sun Shine, 72 Hour Notice of Proposed Bills

LV Congressman Charlie Dent has joined the effort to require all proposed House actions be posted on the Internet at least 72 hours prior to consideration on the House floor. He's just signed a bipartisan discharge petition that would force a vote on the measure.

If a majority of House members join in this discharge petition, it will force the House to vote on a bipartisan resolution amending House rules to require that legislation and conference reports be posted on the Internet for at least 72 hours before they receive a vote on the House floor. So far, 115 House members support this requirement.

“Democracy only works when the public is informed, and too often Congress has rushed legislation that Members barely have time to review, let alone the American public,” Congressman Dent said. “This is not a partisan issue – this has occurred both under Republican and Democrat leadership. However, this ‘midnight legislation’ problem has accelerated this past year as we considered huge, transformational legislation without proper time to review the completed bill – and this process has completely left out the American public. A 72-hour public notice requirement will bring sunshine to the process, and perhaps help restore the public’s confidence in a Congress that too often works in the shadows.”