The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-02-26 Community Cable Needs Assessment ReportCOMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT COMMUNITY CABLE - RELATED NEEDS AND INTERESTS FOR THE TOWN OF LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS VOLUME I Ascertainment FEBRUARY 26, 2004 Prepared by RIKA WELSH 616 GREEN STREET CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139 617.661.2610 rikaqui @aol.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................... ............................... 1 -1 I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .............................................. ...........................1 -10 11. COMMUNITY CABLE NEEDS AND INTERESTS ........................ ...........................1 -13 A. OVERVIEW AND METHODOLOGY ..................................... ...........................1 -13 B. COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP WORKSHOPS .................... ...........................1 -15 C. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS AND BRAINSTORMING DURING .................1 -54 COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS D. ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION GATHERED THROUGH THE REVIEW ......... 1 -68 OF STRATEGIC PLANS AND OTHER MATERIALS E. SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS ....................................... ...........................1 -80 APPENDICES 1. Community Needs & Interests Questionnaire .................. ............................A -1 2. Notes from Focus Group Brainstorming Sessions ......................................... A -12 iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. INTRODUCTION Rika Welsh was retained by the Communications Advisory Committee (CAC) of the Town of Lexington to conduct a community needs assessment as a part of their cable franchise renewal process. This needs assessment was conducted to identify current and future community cable - related needs and interests. As a matter of federal law, the Town's cable - related needs and interests are protected in part through the franchising process. During renewal proceedings, the Town may identify basic requirements for cable system capacity, functionality, and customer service, and require the cable operator to provide facilities, equipment and channels for community use. To identify cable - related needs and interests in Lexington, the consultant: • Convened a Task Force of approximately 24 community leaders, representing numerous Town Departments and local civic and nonprofit organizations, to assist in outreach to the community. • Conducted a series of nine community leader focus group workshops, attended by 103 people affiliated with 72 area groups, organizations and institutions. • At each focus group, led "brainstorming" sessions based on four key questions to encourage attendees to discuss cable - related needs and interests of the Town and themselves. • At each focus group, distributed a `community needs and interest questionnaires' for completion by focus group participants. • Reviewed strategic plans and other materials and documents submitted by representatives of local government, educational institutions, and other groups. • Analyzed all data gathered and prepared this report. 1 -1 It is wise to use a variety of informational - gathering tools when conducting a needs assessment in any subject area. However, it is critical to use such a variety of tools when dealing with an arena driven by future - oriented technology, such as cable communications. The major findings and primary recommendations that arose from the research and analysis activities conducted by the consultant are provided in the following sections of this Executive Summary. A more detailed presentation of the analysis and recommendations is contained in the full Community Needs Assessment report. The Town of Lexington has previously awarded cable television franchises to two companies that provide cable service within the town limits: Comcast and RCN- BecoCom, L.L.C. (RCN). Almost all residents of the Town are offered service by both of these companies so most households can choose between them. Approximately 8,400 households in Lexington currently subscribe to one of the cable service providers. About 4,500 of the cable subscribers in Lexington are served by the Comcast system, with 3,900 are served by RCN. This represents a market penetration rate (the number of basic subscribers divided by the number of homes passed by the cable company) of about 41 % for Comcast and about 36% for RCN, with a total penetration of 77% for the Town as a whole, which is over the national average is 70 %. Specific recommendations for the Town's negotiations with Comcast on the renewal of their cable television license, based on the findings of the Ascertainment process, are presented in Volume II of this report. II. SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS General conclusions from responses to a questionnaire returned by focus group workshop participants: • The focus group cable subscribers were asked to rate their cable companies' performance in several areas of service, technical quality and overall value. The highest scores were given in the areas of customer service assistance and the ida reliability of the cable system. The lowest ratings were given to dissemination of information about the Comcast Studio, program schedule and information about local programs and coverage of events about Lexington. • When asked about the value /cost of their basic cable service, forty -one percent (41%) were satisfied, while fifty -nine percent (59 %) rated the service between fair to very poor. When asked to identify programming types they would like to see more readily available on the basic channels, local news, activities and events, were most often indicated and twenty percent (20 %) provided specific suggestions. Over two - thirds (77 %) indicated "Yes" or "Maybe" when asked if they would pay extra for these programs. • Eighty -eight percent (88 %) of the focus group questionnaire respondents said that they have a home computer, which they use to access the Internet. Sixty —two percent (62 %) of these respondents either telecommute or work out of their homes. Twenty -five percent (25 %) of these respondents had used it to create a personal or business "Web site ". • When provided a list of services which could be received through their TV or home computer, the following percentages of focus group survey respondents indicated that obtaining these services was "Important" or "Very Important" to them: * 94% - Access to government information (meeting agendas, reports, etc.) * 91 % - Access to public safety information (e.g., from police /fire departments) * 87% - Access to Library resources (card catalog, magazine articles, etc.) • The focus group cable subscribers answered that it was important to have local channels. • Nearly all (93 %) of the focus group respondents who subscribe to the Comcast cable service said they had watched local origination programs on the local channels. Of this group, 61% said they had watched these channels between one and five times during the previous month, the Lexington Town Selectmen's meetings were cited most often. • Of the focus group respondents who subscribe to the RCN cable service eighty -six percent (86 %) said they had watched PEG Access cable channel 3, and 65% said 1 -3 they had watched this channel between one and five times during the previous month. The Lexington Town Selectmen's meetings were cited most often. • Local programming topics that focus group respondents who subscribe to either the Comcast or RCN cable TV service most often selected as ones they were "Very Interested" or "Interested" in seeing included: Town government meetings (92 %) Programs about issues facing the Town (92 %) Information regarding public emergencies (89 %) • When the Comcast and RCN subscriber - respondents were asked to indicate what part of their monthly cable bill should be set aside to support the development of local programming, the average of all responses was $2.25. Almost two-thirds of them (61 %) said two to three dollars per month. • Eighty percent (80 %) of the focus group respondents indicated that the six channels currently allocated in the expiring contract should continue to be allocated to the Town in the new contract with Comcast. • Nearly all (97 %) of the focus group participants said that the organizations that they are involved with could be interested in using the resources of a Community Media Center to create programs about their services and activities to appear on the local cable TV channels. • Eighty percent (80 %) of the focus group participants indicated an interest in learning how to make a program to show on a local cable TV channel, using equipment provided free of charge. • Ninety five percent (95 %) said it was either "Very Important" (62 %) or "Important" (33 %) to have an organization whose responsibility it is to see that programming is scheduled and shown simultaneously on both cable systems • Finally, when asked if the Town should create a non - profit Community Media Center, only three percent (3 %) said "No ", and seventy -two percent (72 %) said "Yes ". The remaining twenty -five percent (25 %) were undecided and indicated "Maybe ". 1 -4 During the brainstorming portion of the focus group sessions, participants identified the following community needs, interests, and concerns: • When asked to identify the key issues facing Lexington, most often mentioned were concerns relating to: Town Issues and Concerns (budget, governance, civic participation, image, communications, growth and development, aging population, land use) Technology/ Communications (delivery of information to community, connectivity, effective uses of technology, public discourse, and better communications) * Growth / Economic Development/ Cost of Living (land use, affordable housing — real estate costs, business development, tourism, "mansionization') Education and Services for Youth / Seniors (teen issues, youth programs, aging population in need of services, senior and youth centers I • When asked about the key challenges faced by public sector agencies, community organizations, and schools when communicating with their constituencies, the leading areas identified were: lack of equipment, infrastructure and centralized management of resources; need for better oversight and planning needed for effective use of media; and lack of time, attention, knowledge, and collaboration • When asked how their organizations or agencies could use cable or PEG Access to communicate, dozens of program types and concepts were identified. Most often cited were after school programs, youth and recreation information, and community forums on local issues. • When asked what would make it easier for their organization or agency to use PEG Access or the cable system to communicate, the top categories of need were: 1 -5 PEG Access Equipment, Facilities and Channels (e.g., better PEG Access equipment, a community media center, studio, PEG Access channels, a mobile production van) PEG Access Staffing, Policies & Procedures, and Funding (e.g., a responsive nonprofit PEG Access management entity with visionary leadership and adequate funding to support PEG Access services to the community) * Bandwidth, infrastructure & system design (e.g., I -Net to connect local institutions and both cable providers for PEG Access channel programming, ability to transmit "live" programming from various locations in Town) Training (e.g., media literacy training, state of the art curriculum for production, web development, improve quality and content of local programming) Findings based upon review of strategic plans and other materials: • Documents provided by the Town of Lexington included the following items of particular relevance to the Community Needs Assessment: Lexington 2020 Vision - objective of the process was to identify key areas of concern affecting the town and clarify goals and activities in support of desired solutions. The report conclude that "If the actions recommended in this Lexington 2020 Vision Report are to be successful, processes for encouraging and formalizing communications — both within the town and outside — must be developed." Lexington Town Meeting — 2002 Warrant Report provides information about the specific and timely needs and interests of the Town and its residents. The detailed case studies for each of the articles to be presented at Town Meetin provide invaluable background and could be used as a guide for the production of further information for the community. The Lexington Public Schools Four -year Technology Plan (2001 -2005) identifies five essential conditions to be addressed each year: access, equity, educator proficiency, effective teaching and learning, and system leadership. The plan calls for the development of curriculum units in which technology plays a natural and powerful role to support student learning. The Lexington Public Schools have established four core values: addressing individuality, supporting diversity, building continuous improvement and realizing shared responsibility They recognizes that technology is a valuable partner to each of these values. The system has committed considerable thinking, funding and professional time to technology. Developing technological competence among the entire faculty is viewed as a necessary prerequisite to moving the more important goal of cultivating classrooms in which technology is clearly linked to the curriculum and the enlarged learning capacity of students. The Technology Plan clearly envisions technology as a strand integrated into and throughout the curriculum at every grade level and in every subject, as both a tool for learning, and at appropriate times, as a focus of instruction in its own right. Other Documents Hancock United Church of Christ through Lexington Inter -Faith Television (LIFT) has been in the unique position of operating the religious access channel provided by the cable contract with Cablevision, now Comcast, since 1981. The production facility for the channel is located in the church, funded by it, and the programming originated from this location is overseen by their Cable Television Committee. This is one of very few religious access channels operating in the country. * Lexington Historical Society has a commitment to education and provides programs for schools such as all -day field trips for students from outside Lexington. Lectures, continuing education programs, music and arts are all a part of the wealth the Historical Society provides the resident and visitor to the Town of Lexington. 1 -7 I -Net Background and Significant Events -- In 1981, the contract with Adams- Russell Cable Service, Inc. included provisions for the construction and maintenance of a forty- one channel institutional network on the cable- system in addition to the subscriber network infrastructure. This I -net connected twenty -seven locations in the town with fifteen upstream channels and twenty - six downstream channels providing over 550 drop - locations. Some of the ways this I -Net was used included: — Access Origination points throughout the Town — Distribution of SCOLA, a foreign language news channel on the subscriber system, — Video distribution — 3 modulators and VCR's at the Lexington High School allowed videos to be broadcast for classroom use. — Low speed data — school system installed hardware to provide 9600 bits /sec serial line capabilities from the Lexington High School computer center to remote locations. Police Department — a police educational channel was delivered from the head -end via the I -net for use with the community of safety issues and inter - departmental communications of the Town. In 1989, CAC conducted a compliance review addressing the issue of the cable system, data capabilities on the I -Net, system build -out in commercial areas and signal quality. After some serious negotiation they reached an agreement in 1992, which included a $100K payment over 4 years by Cablevision specifically for the support of data capabilities on the I -Net. These funds were used to set up a town data network using cable modem technology. In 1998, RCN applied for a license. The contract agreement signed in May 1999 with RCN provides: — Two strands of single mode fiber from the RCN headend to be connected to each town and school building, as designated by the Town — Rack space at the RCN headend for Lexington to use — Free high speed Internet access for official Lexington use — This I -Net capacity has provided the foundation for a new gigabit Ethernet network. It is important to note that this I -Net capacity is embedded in the RCN cable- subscriber network and therefore not a free -- standing system, independent of the cable- system's management and overall maintenance responsibilities. RMD COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT COMMUNITY CABLE - RELATED NEEDS AND INTERESTS FOR THE TOWN OF LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW Rika Welsh was retained by the Communications Advisory Committee (CAC) of the Town of Lexington to conduct a community needs assessment as a part of the cable franchise renewal process. She was authorized to conduct research in order to identify current and future community cable - related needs and interests. The Town of Lexington has previously awarded cable television franchises to two companies that provide cable service within the Town limits, AT &T- Comcast (now Comcast) and RCN BecoCom, L.L.C. (RCN). Lexington residents are served by both cable operators and therefore the companies have head -to -head competition. Most Lexington households have a choice between the services offered by both companies. Approximately 8,400 households in Lexington currently subscribe to one of these two cable service providers. Just over a half of the cable subscribers in Lexington (roughly 4,600 households) are served by the Comcast system, while the just under a half (about 3,500 households) are served by RCN. The combined subscriber base represents a market penetration rate (the number of basic subscribers divided by the number of homes passed by the cable companies) of about 77 %, which is over the current national average of 70 %. As a matter of federal law, a community's cable - related needs and interests are protected in part through the franchising process. During renewal proceedings, a community is permitted to establish basic requirements for cable system capacity, functionality, and customer service, and to require operators to provide -- among other things -- facilities and equipment and channels for Public, Educational, and Government (PEG) Access. As stated in the legislative history to the Cable Act: 1 -10 The ability of a local government entity to require particular cable facilities (and to enforce requirements in the franchise to provide those facilities) is essential if cable systems are to be tailored to the needs of each community [and the legislation] explicitly grants this power to the franchising authority. The Board of Selectmen, as the franchising authority, is responsible for protecting the interests of cable subscribers and the general public through the franchising process and has appointed the Communications Advisory Committee (CAC) as its agent to identify cable- related needs and interests and translate those interests into Franchise requirements. Information was gathered from the following groups of Lexington residents. • Cable subscribers • Non - subscribers • Government agencies and representatives • Schools and educational institutions • Arts, cultural and heritage organizations • Civic and community organizations • Sports and recreation organizations • Businesses, business organizations and non - profit organizations • Environmental organizations • Members of the general public Ms Welsh gathered information using a number of research methods, including nine community focus group sessions (where brainstorming and completion of standardized questionnaires was done by the participants), a number of interviews with community leaders and the analysis of strategic plans and other relevant documents. Following is a brief description of the tasks performed by Ms Welsh in an effort to identify community cable - related needs and interests in the Town of Lexington: • Convened a Task Force of approximately 24 community leaders to assist in outreach to the community • Conducted a series of nine community focus group workshops - attended by representatives of Lexington community groups, organizations, educational 1 -11 institutions, government agencies and citizens - to help identify current and future cable - related needs and ascertain attitudes about existing cable services and programming. • Distributed questionnaires to the focus group participants that were designed to identify community cable - related needs and interests regarding cable television matters, assess whether current local cable TV services and resources are adequate and appropriate, and help to identify changes that might be made to meet future cable - related community needs and interests in Lexington. • Reviewed strategic plans and other materials submitted by representatives of local government, educational institutions, business interests, and community organizations. • Analyzed all data gathered and prepared this report for the Town of Lexington. Mlle II. COMMUNITY CABLE NEEDS AND INTERESTS A. OVERVIEW AND METHODOLOGY In order to develop a basic understanding of the current and future cable - related needs and interests for Lexington, public input was critical. Support for this effort was provided by a Sub - committee of the Communications Advisory Committee to help identify persons and organizations to be invited to participate in the focus group workshops, and to assist in the logistics and implementation of these activities. In an effort to involve as many leaders of the Lexington community in this process as possible, a Task Force of approximately 24 members, representing the following Town Departments and local civic and nonprofit organizations, assisted in outreach to the community: • Bikeway and Tree Committee • Council for the Arts • Council on Aging • Fair Housing and Human Relations Committee • Hancock United Church of Christ • League of Women Voters • Lexington Board of Selectmen • Lexington Community Education • Lexington Police Department • METCO • Newton Public Television, producer • Office of Economic Development • Open Space • Planning Board \Environmental Sub - Committee • Recreation Department • The Cary Library • The Lexington Field and Garden Club • Town Manager's Office 1 -13 • Transportation Advisory Committee • Vision 20/20 The Task Force met numerous times between November 6, 2002 and February 15, 2003 to develop the schedule and identify locations for the focus group workshops. They assisted with the creation of an outreach brochure and provided mailing lists with over 600 contacts. Each member made personal contacts assure the participation of as many colleagues, co- workers and residents of Lexington in the focus group workshop sessions. During the week preceding the sessions, follow up calls were also made to confirm participation by those who had indicated interest in the focus group workshops. Ms Welsh used a number of methods to gather information and give local residents an opportunity to provide input. Those methods included: • A series of nine focus group workshops; • Discussion and brainstorming by the workshop participants; • Distribution of questionnaires to persons who participated at these workshops; and • A review of strategic plans and other written materials from representatives of local government, educational institutions, business interests, and community organizations. 1 -14 B. COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP WORKSHOPS In February 2003, Rika Welsh facilitated a series of nine focus group workshops. The workshop constituencies were: • Educational Institutions - Schools and Libraries • Religious and Community /Human Service Organizations • Local Governmental Departments and Agencies • Community Residents and Neighborhood Groups • Businesses, Business Organizations • Arts, Cultural and History and Tourism Organizations • Technology, Science and Medicine • Seniors and Human Services • Sports and Recreation Organizations The focus group workshops provided the following information: (1) an overview of the cable franchise renewal process; (2) an explanation of how the current cable system works; and (3) an exploration of how individuals, community groups, government agencies, businesses and schools can benefit from or use the cable communication system. Special emphasis was placed on providing an opportunity for discussion and brainstorming by the participants. A packet of informative materials, including the questionnaire described earlier, was also distributed to focus group participants. A total of 103 people attended the focus group workshops. A list of the 72 organizational and institutional affiliations indicated by the workshop attendees is provided on the following pages. (Many participants did not indicate an organizational or institutional affiliation, while others were affiliated with more than one.) 1 -15 Organizational Affiliations of Participants in Focus Groups • Artist &Performers for Lexington • Baha'i • Battle Green Inn • Beverley Community Access Media (Resident) • Bicycle Advisory Committee • Board of Selectmen • Cary Memorial Librarians • Chamber of Commerce Chair • Chase Skating Facility - Hayden Recreation Center • Citizens for Lexington Conservation • Communications Advisory Committee • Community Education Director • Conservation Administrator • Conservation Commission • Council on Aging • Countryside Bible Church • Depot Square Gallery • Economic Development Officer • Electric Utility Committee • Elementary teacher • Fair Housing and Human Relations Committee • First Baptist Church • First Church of Christ • Follen Church • Hancock Church /Cable Ministry • High School students • High School teachers • Jonas Gammell Legacy Trustee • League of Women Voters 1 -16 • Lexington 2020 Vision LexFest (multi - cultural community celebration) • Organizational Affiliations of Participants in Focus Groups (continued • Lexington Babe Ruth League • Lexington Clergy Association • Lexington Historical Society • Lexington Housing Authority • Lexington Independent Soccer Club • Lexington Inter -Faith Television • Lexington Little League • Lexington Oral History Projects • Lexington Players • Lexington Public Access show host • Lexington Sinfonetta • Lexington Town Clerk • Lexington United Methodist Church • Lexington Youth Lacrosse • Lexington - Bedford Youth Hockey • Lions Club of Lexington • Long Term Care Ombudsmen • Monroe Center for the Arts • National Heritage Museum • National Organization for Women, Women's History Project • Newton Public TV (Lexington resident) • No Place for Hate • Public Schools Staff and Administration • Public Schools Town -wide Technology Steering Committee • Public Works Department • Recreation Committee • Recreation Department • Sacred Heart Parish 1 -17 • School Committee • School Librarians • Organizational Affiliations of Participants in Focus Groups (continued) • School Superintendent • Senior Center Board and Volunteers • ShhAir (Safeguarding the Historic Hanscom Area's Irreplaceable Heritage) President • Skateboard /Inline Park Committee • State Rep Jay Kaufman (represented by his Administrative Assistant) • The Lexington List (email distribution list for Lexington discussions) • Town Meeting members • Transportation Advisory Committee • Trinity Covenant Church • N Producers • Vinny -T's Restaurant • WAND (Women's Action for New Directions) 1 -18 A total of 97 "Community Needs & Interests" questionnaires were returned from persons who attended one of the focus group workshops. A copy of the questionnaire is provided as Appendix 1 to this report. The following is an analysis of the responses to the questionnaire: Sixty -six percent (66 %) of all focus group questionnaire respondents said that they subscribe to a cable TV service in Lexington. Of those participants, forty -one percent (41 %) subscribe to Comcast and fifty -nine percent (59 %) to RCN, as illustrated by the chart below: RCN 59% AT &T Comcast 41% Note: RCN customers, who do not get PEG Access, may have been more motivated to find out what is going on with the cable franchise renewal process. 1 -19 The subscriber - respondents were asked to rate their cable companies' performance in several areas of service, technical quality and overall value. Their responses are shown on the charts below and on the following pages: Customer service assistance Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Responsiveness to billing problems Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Signal quality on cable- system Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 50% 60% 1-20 Telephone response time 39% Timely response to technical problems Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 46% Reliability of cable system Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 46% Subscriber - respondents' rating of cable companies' performance, cont. Value /Cost of basic service Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 46% Availability of info about Lexington Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Information about local programming Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 47% 46% Value /Cost of Internet access (broadband) Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 42% Coverage of events about Lexington Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 44% Schedule for airtime of local programs Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 55% 1-21 Subscriber - respondents' rating of cable companies' performance, cont. Info on how to use "The Studio" Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 1% 46% When subscriber - respondents were asked to indicate the types of programming that they believe should be more readily available on the cable company's channel line- up (from a list provided to them), they made the following recommendations, listed in order of appeal: Local News, activities, events, etc. Educational Arts /Cultural Documentaries News & Information Music Religious Sports Classic Movies Recent Movies Comedy 77% W% Twenty percent (20 %) of the respondents also gave other suggestions as to what should be included on the cable company's channel line up. These responses were as follows: • Activities of various non - profits, town boards, anything that builds community • Foreign Language • History • International news • NASA -TV • National policy "statistical" analysis • Sal Vella Show • Technical /computer hardware and software • Town history and historical sites information, calendar of events • Undisturbed music Respondents who had indicated an interest in any of the types of programming on the previous question were asked if they would be willing to pay extra to receive additional channels devoted to those types of programs. Over three - fourths (77 %) of them answered "Maybe" (469 or "Yes" (31%), as illustrated below. Maybe 46u " Yes 31% No 23% 1-23 The subscriber - respondents were asked to indicate how important it was for them to receive certain special services via the cable system. As shown on the charts below, "telephone service" and "video teleconferencing (including two -way video)" were the most favored, with 55% of the respondents saying that it was either "Very Important" or "Important" for them to receive these services. "Movies on demand," "interactive shopping" and "interactive video games" received much less support, with very large majorities indicating that these services were either "Not Very Important" or "Not Important at All. " Telephone service Video teleconferencing (2 -way video) Interactive shopping Interactive video games Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important At All 51% 4% 1-24 The respondents who indicated that it would be "very important" or "important" to receive any of the above special services were asked if they would be willing to pay an additional fee to obtain them. More than three - fourths (77 %) indicated either "Yes" (429 or "Maybe" (359 No 23% Maybe 35% All of the focus group questionnaire respondents were asked if they currently subscribe to a satellite TV service in Lexington. As shown in the chart below, only six percent of the respondents replied "Yes" to this question. No 94% Yes 6% 1-25 Those respondents who said that they did subscribe to a satellite TV service in Lexington were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with their satellite TV service on a scale from "1" (lowest) to "10" (highest). As shown by the chart below, all the responses to this question ranged between 7" and "9, " with half of the respondents rating their level of satisfaction with their satellite TV service as an "8" out of 10. 9 8 7 50% All of the focus group questionnaire respondents were asked a series of questions about new services that could be offered in the future by the cable company. In order to ascertain their current usage of modern communications technology, they were asked if they use a computer system in their home to access the Internet. As shown in the chart below, a very large percentage (88 %) of the respondents said "Yes. " Ye: $$ No 2% 1-26 When asked to indicate how many hours their home computer was used to access the Internet during an average week, the respondents provided the following responses: Under 5 hours 5 - 15 hours Over 15 hours 47% Respondents with online capability from home were also asked if a personal or business "Web site" had been created with their home computer. As shown below, this advanced activity had been undertaken by twenty -five percent (25%) of these respondents. Yes 25% No 75% 1-27 The respondents were asked if they used their computer and Internet access to telecommute and /or to work out of the home. A majority of sixty -two percent (62 %) of the respondents replied "Yes" to this question, as illustrated by the chart below: Yes 62% No 38% All respondents were provided a list of services that could be received by their TV or computer via a high -speed connection to the Internet provided by the cable system. The series of charts that begins below and continues on the next page shows the level of importance that respondents associated with these services. Each of the services was rated as "Very Important" or "Important" by at least 78% of the respondents. Access to government information (City government meeting agendas, a listing of City services and how to obtain them, government reports, etc_1 Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important At All Access to public safety information (e.g., from police and fire departments) 57% Very Important 53% Important Not Very Important Not Important At All 1-28 Respondents' rating of services that could be received through cable TV or Internet service, cont. Access to Library resources (card catalog, magazine articles, encyclopedias, etc.) Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important At All Ability to send and receive e-mail and information to and from teachers, school administrators, and School Committee members 50% Very Important Important Ability to vote, renew driver's license or obtain govern mentpermits from home Not Important At All V 6% Not Very Important Not Important At All 52% YO Ability to participate in interactive distance learning classes from your home Very Important Important 45% Not Very Important Not Important At All 1-29 Respondents who subscibe to Comcast were asked a series of questions specific to the Comcast cable system. These respondents were first asked if they were aware of cable Channel 8 (run by Comcast at "The Studio "), with programs produced by staff and members of the community including high school sports, coverage of Selectmen's Meetings and Town Meeting sessions, and programming from the Hancock Church. A substantial majority of the respondents (73 %) answered "Yes. Yes 73% No 27% Next, these subscribers were asked if they were aware of cable Channel 9 — the Community Bulletin Board. As shown in the chart below, a majority of these respondents (69%') were aware of this channel. Yes 69% D 1-30 Next, these subscribers were asked if they were aware of cable Channels 63, 64 and 98, featuring other local programs including religious programming produced through the Hancock Church studio. As shown in the chart below, a small majority of the Comcast subscribers (549 were aware of these channels. No 46% 54'70 These subscribers were then asked if they had ever watched a program on these channels. Most of the respondents (93 %) replied "Yes," as shown in the chart below. Ye: 930 No 7% 1 -31 Comcast subscribers were then asked how often they had watched programs on these channels during the past month. As the chart below illustrates, sixty -one percent (61%') of the respondents said they watched programs on these channels between 1 and 5 times, and twenty -three percent (23 %) had watched programs on these channels more than 10 times during the previous month. More than 10 Times 6 -10 Times 1 - 5 Times Never 61% The respondents who had watched programs on cable Channels 8, 9, 63, 64 and /or 98 were asked if the signal channel quality for programs on these channels is equal to the signal quality for programs on other channels of the cable system. As illustrated by the chart below, all of the respondents replied "No" to this question. Don't Know 0% Yes 0% No 100% 1-32 The respondents who had watched programming on these channels were asked to describe or provide the names of the programs they had watched on that channel. The responses to this prompt were as follows: • Hancock UCC Church Services (4) • Board of Selectmen (3) • Kaufman show (2) • Sal Vella (2) • School Committee (2) • Town Meeting (2) • Trinity church (2) • Back Country Journal • Bulletin board • Church service • Hanscom Field Hearing • Lexington sports • Lysistrada: Women Peace Activists in the 20th Century • Patriot's Day parade • Program guide • Religious programs • Scott Ritter -Why War in Iraq is Wrong • William Grant Television 1-33 The next series of questions was addressed to subscribers of the RCN cable TV service. These subscribers were first asked if they were aware of cable channel 8 — the Bulletin Board with customer information. A majority (62 %) of this group answered "Yes," as shown in the chart below. No Ye: 62° These RCN subscribers were then asked if they were aware of Channels 15 and 16, featuring local programs including Selectmen's meetings and Town meeting sessions and religious programming produced though the Hancock Church studio. As illustrated below, awareness of these channels was high, with eighty - percent (80 %) of the respondents answering "Yes" to this question. Yes 80% No 20% 1-34 These subscribers were then asked if they had ever watched a program on these channels. A large majority of the respondents (86 %) replied "Yes," as shown in the chart below. Yes 86% No 14% RCN subscribers were then asked how often they had watched programs on these channels during the past month. As the chart below illustrates, sixty -five percent (65%') of the respondents said they watched programs on these channels between 1 and 5 times, and twelve percent (12 %) had watched programs on these channels between 6 and 10 times during the previous month. More than 10 Times 6 -10 Times 1 - 5 Times Never 65% 1-35 These subscribers were next asked if the signal quality for programs on channels 8, 15 and 16 is equal to the signal quality for programs on the other channels of the cable system. More than two - thirds (69 %) of the respondents replied "No," as shown below. Yes 23% No 69% in't _ow 8% The RCN subscribers who had watched programming on these channels were asked to describe or provide the names of the programs they had watched on that channel. The respondents provided the following program names and descriptions: • Board of Selectmen (17) • Town Meeting (8) • Hancock UCC Church Services (4) • Martin Luther King service (3) • Bulletin board • Government meetings • Religious programming • School committee • School functions • Trinity services 1-36 All of the questionnaire respondents were asked if, prior to the focus group workshop, they were aware that community organizations could have programs about their services and activities appear on the local Lexington channels on both cable TV services. As shown by the chart below, the respondents had a fairly high prior awareness of this service, with more than three - quarters (76 %) of the respondents saying "Yes" to this question. No ?4% Yes 76% The respondents who indicated prior awareness of the ability to have programs about community organizations appear on the local Lexington cable channels were asked if they and /or their colleagues had ever thought about using the cable system to improve outreach, disseminate information or improve the understanding of an issue that relates to their organizations' work in the Town of Lexington. The chart below shows that sixty -five percent (659 of these respondents replied "Yes" to this question. LI n Yes 65°/ 1-37 The respondents who replied "Yes" to the previous question were asked to describe their ideas for using the cable system in such a manner. Their responses are listed below: • "Open House with Rep. Jay Kaufman" is produced in cooperation with AT &T but is available only to that company's subscribers. There is a lack of cross - programming cooperation. • Be able to post cancellations, delays, etc. Have all Town boards televised. • Candidate's Night — League of Women Voters • Coverage of lectures, concerts, educational programs, tours of galleries. • Create a mini C -SPAN covering lecture series, senior center program, Minute Man national park programs visitor's center, National Heritage Museum programs. • Filmed lectures on Islam; thinking of filming church services. • 1 have helped others with their productions • 1 run LIFT. • In the past, Lexington Community Education has put notices "ads" about coming adult classes on local access television • Informational interviews on organizations' efforts and events. • Informing town of project to develop an archive on the Great Arrest: Democracy and Dissent on the Lexington Battle Green - about the March of the Vietnam Veterans against the war in 1971. • Just recently - cable company taped our meeting. • League of Women Voters; Selectmen's race; Candidate's Forum. • Lecture series to inform about what we offer. • Lectures given and videotaped. • Lexington democratic town committee considered having meetings covered. After I took a series of training sessions in taping and production, we dropped the idea. • More coverage of school events. • Outreach to new people, shut -ins and elderly. 1-38 Respondents' production ideas, continued • Participated in filmed debate re: condom issues/ health, AIDS education, school committee meetings. Want community media web -site for school and community information, registration on community education, school home pages. • Possibly broadcast special events like music concerts. • Present recommendations of the Electric Utility committee. • Presentations regarding long -term care issues from the perspective of the Lexington T.C. Ombudsman program. • Programming about studio artists and Munroe Center, arts educators at Munroe in music, visual arts, ceramics, dance and martial arts. • Programs on environmental issues and public transportation. • Public affairs programming. • Religious programming improvement on Access. • Schools actively show programs on air. • Senior center activities. • Sharing our work: raising people's consciousness about issues confronting the town - racial bias, prejudice. • Sinfonietta performances and other arts programs. • Talks, demonstrations, and other events. • Taped lectures on Islam after 9/11 for community broadcast. Lectures were local and interactive, i.e. Q &A. • The National Heritage Museum has discussed at length broadcasting its public programs, gallery talks, festivals, music programs and information about its library and three dimensional collection to the Lexington /regional area. • Virtual tours of historical sites, neighborhood history programs and historical society lectures. • We broadcast religious programming from Hancock. • We may broadcast some religious programming, and may seek to do this in a variety of ways. • We used cable to promote Lexfest! Connecting our Cultures programs and events. • Weekly one hour news program. 1-39 The respondents who had previously thought about using the cable system to make programming for their organization were then asked if they had ever done so. As illustrated by the chart below, thirty -four percent (34 %) of these respondents had produced programming before. No 66% Yes 34% The respondents who had thought about using the cable system to create programming about their organizations were also asked if they tried to produce a program but were unable to do so. Ten percent (10 %) of these respondents indicated that they had not been able to produce a program, although they had tried to do so, as shown in the chart below. Nc 90 1 , 1 C1 1 . 1 10 10% 1-40 The respondents who had tried, but had not been able, to produce programming about their organizations were asked to describe the obstacles they encountered in their endeavor. Their remarks are listed below: • Equipment, e.g. camera, lighting. • Lack of personnel to run equipment and non - response to phone messages, re: events. • Video taped event but had no one to edit it. • Technical is the biggest. • Time to do it. All of the respondents who had been previously aware of the ability to have programs about their organizations air on the cable system were asked if they had ever appeared or participated in the production of a program to show on one of Lexington's local cable channels. Slightly more than half (55 %) of the respondents replied "Yes" to this question, as illustrated by the chart below. No 45% 1 -41 The respondents who indicated that they had been involved in the production of a program that aired on a local cable channel were asked how many such programs they had appeared on or participated in the production of during the past two years. As the chart below illustrates, the majority (61%) of the respondents had participated in 1 — 5 programs, although more than a quarter (27 %) of the respondents had participated in more than 10 programs during the past two years. More than 10 Programs 6 - 10 Programs 1 - 5 Programs None 61% The respondents who had participated in the production of a program that aired on a local cable channel were asked to rate a variety of services provided by the Comcast production staff. Their responses are shown in the charts below and on the following page: Efforts to outreach to residents about "the studio" facilities, services and programming Excellent 6% Good . 25% Fair 25% Poor 31% Very Poor 13% Fair 000009 18% Poor 38% Very Poor 1 13% 1-42 Respondents' rating of service provided by cable company's production staff, cont. Training services to teach program production skills Production of program(s) on which you have appeared /for which you have participated in the production Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Promotion of the program(s) on which you have appeared /for which you have participated in the production Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Maintenance of the production equipment to keep it in good working condition Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor 38% 38% Playback of programs on local 43% vvvM Fair Poor Very Poor 37% 1-43 All of the respondents, including subscribers of both systems and non - subscribers, were then asked how important they feel it is to have local cable TV channels that feature programs about the Town of Lexington, its residents, its organizations, its local events, its schools and its Town government. As shown in the chart below, this service was rated as either "Very important" or "Important" by ninety -eight percent (98 %) of the respondents. Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important at All 73% All of the questionnaire respondents were asked to indicate their level of interest in seeing certain types of local programs on their cable TV service. They chose from a list and could check as many types as they wanted. The following series of charts that begins below and continues on the following pages presents their responses, in order of 2. Programs on issues facing the Town Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 57% 1-44 Levels of interest in specified types of local programs, cont. 3. Information regarding public emergencies Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 4. Board of Selectmen meetings 55% Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 51% 0 5. Events /activities sponsored by the Town Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 7. Programs about Lexington arts, history, culture and tourism Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 6. Programs on Town government services 8. Community festivals, local events 47% Very Interested B% Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 1% 46% 1-45 Levels of interest in specified types of local programs, cont. 9. School committee meetings Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 10. Senior citizen activities and concerns 12. Ethnic and cultural programs Not Interested at All 4% 13. Special events and activities from area colleges and universities Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 47% 14. Local health and wellness programs Very Interested 49 % Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 54% 1-46 Levels of interest in specified types of local programs, cont. 15. Environmental awareness programs Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 17. Courses from colleges and universities Not Interested at All 40/6 19. Programs about activities and concerns of persons with disabilities Very Interested 19% ...:............................ ............................... Interested 4 3% Ex Not Very Interested 32% Not Interested at All 6% 16. Local business news and information 50% Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 51% 18. Board of Appeals meetings Not Interested at All 3 % 20. Consumer protection programs Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 49% 1-47 Levels of interest in specified types of local programs, cont. 21. Local sports and recreational activities (Little league baseball, hiking, etc.) 22. Programs about K -12 school activities 23. K -12 music /drama productions 24. Religious prgramming w /local churches Very Interested 29% Very Interested 43% Interested Interested ....... ......... ......... 29% Not Very Interested 35% Not Interested at All 7% 22. Programs about K -12 school activities 23. K -12 music /drama productions 24. Religious prgramming w /local churches Very Interested 16% 25% 43% Interested 24% Not Very Interested 29% Interested Not Interested at All Interested 22% ° 30 /° 25. Foreign language programs 26. K -12 instructional courses Very Interested 16% 15% Very Interested Interested 30% Interested ° 30 /° Not Very Interested 38% Not Very Interested 37% Not Interested at All 16% Not Interested at All 18% 1-48 Levels of interest in specified types of local programs, cont. 27. High school equivalency courses Very Interested Interested Not Very Interested Not Interested at All 48% The respondents also wrote in the following other types of local programs that they would like to see: • Candidate's night • Cooking in local restaurants • Coverage of League of Women Voters programs, speakers (i.e. 1st Fridays) • Cultural events by area • Ethnic cooking, low -fat cooking, cooking with kids. • Exercise show • Exploration of issues that divide the town, with ground rules, content -based discussion • Hearings i.e. Hanscom Field discussion • Home improvement show with local contractors - landscaping /garden shows • Lexington Field and Garden club, monthly program at National Heritage Museum • Library programming. • Local analysis of National Issues • Planning board meetings • Special, newsworthy events, like demonstrations, emergencies • Student produced programming. • Student - produced productions. School plays and concerts. 1-49 The respondents were then asked, "How much of each cable TV subscriber's monthly bill should go towards providing the type of programs and services listed on the previous two pages ?" As shown in the chart below, support for three dollars per month was the highest, at thirty -five percent (35 %), two dollars was supported by twenty -six percent (26 %) and one dollar by twenty -four percent (24 %). The "other" amounts ranged from "Nothing" to "Five Dollars" and the average amount indicated was $2.25. Three Dollars Two Dollars One Dollar Other 35% 0 All respondents were told that the current contracts with the cable companies require that six channels be set aside (free of cost) for use by the Town and its residents to provide non - commercial, local communications. They were then asked to indicate if all six (6) channels should continue to be set aside (free of cost) for use by the Town and its residents in the new contracts with the cable companies. As the chart below illustrates, a very large majority of the respondents (80%) indicated that the current number of cable channels set aside for local use should be retained under the new contract. No Maybe 7 0 / IAA/ Yes 80% 1-50 Those respondents who indicated that they did not think that the current number of channels should be retained for local use under the new contract were asked how many channels, between 0 and 5, should be set aside for this purpose instead. As shown in the chart below, sixty -seven percent (675 of these respondents said that three (3) channels should be set aside, and the remaining thirty -three percent (335 of the respondents said that four (4) channels should be set aside. Four Channe' 33% Three Channels 67% All respondents were then asked the following question: "How important do you feel it is to have a non - profit organization (a "Community Media Center ") whose responsibility it is to see that programming is scheduled and shown simultaneously on both cable systems in the Town of Lexington ?" Nearly all (955 responded either "Important" (335 or "Very Important" (625 4 o), as illustrated below. Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important At All 62% 1 -51 All of the focus groups questionnaire respondents were asked next if they felt that the Town of Lexington should create a non - profit Community Media Center to assist local organizations and residents with access to training, production equipment, distribution and technical expertise to improve understanding of local issues and general communications in the Town of Lexington. As the chart below indicates, only three (3 %) of the respondents said "No ". A majority (729 replied "Yes" with a quarter (259 indicated being undecided by responding "Maybe" to this question. Maybe 25 5 /n N 3 ' Yes 72% Next, the respondents were asked if such a Community Media Center were to be created in Lexington, would they and /or their organizations use its services and resources. Again, only 3% indicated "No', with a majority of the respondents (701o) answering "Yes, " and a little over a quarter (27 %) undecided, as illustrated below. Maybe 27% N( 3 0 ) Yes 70% 1-52 Finally, all of the focus group questionnaire respondents were asked, "Would you be interested in learning how to make programs for presentation on a local cable TV channel, using equipment provided free of charge ?" With eighty percent (80 %) of the respondents expressing some interest, nearly half (48 %) of them answered "Yes, " and thirty - two percent (32 %) answered "Maybe," as illustrated by the chart below. No 20% DS 1% 1-53 Maybe 1190/. C. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS AND BRAINSTORMING DURING COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS. As mentioned earlier in this report, a portion of each of the nine focus group sessions was set aside to allow participants to engage in a brainstorming process. During this time, participants were presented a series of questions for discussion. Those questions included: • What ar the key issues facing the Town of Lexington? • What are key challenges or barriers faced by public sector agencies, community organizations, and schools in communicating with their constituencies? • What are some of the ways in which you (or your "organization') could use cable or PEG Access to communicate? • What would make it easier to use PEG Access or the cable system? The information presented below is an analysis and synthesis of the information gathered through the brainstorming process. It is the result of a detailed review of the responses to each brainstorming question discussed during each community focus group meeting. Consequently, the consultant was able to identify common community needs, interests, and concerns. The areas of agreement and groupings of responses to each question are presented in the analysis that follows. A list of the notes, compiled from all of the sessions, for each of these questions is included as Appendix 2 to this report. It is important to note that neither the consultant nor the Town generated the recommendations and thoughts that evolved from these brainstorming sessions. These thoughts and suggestions were developed by members of the community, from diverse areas of interest, throughout the Town of Lexington. 1-54 Those respondents who indicated that they did not think that the current number of channels should be retained for local use under the new contract were asked how many channels, between 0 and 5, should be set aside for this purpose instead. As shown in the chart below, sixty -seven percent (675 of these respondents said that three (3) channels should be set aside, and the remaining thirty -three percent (335 of the respondents said that four (4) channels should be set aside. Four Channe' 33% Three Channels 67% All respondents were then asked the following question: "How important do you feel it is to have a non - profit organization (a "Community Media Center ") whose responsibility it is to see that programming is scheduled and shown simultaneously on both cable systems in the Town of Lexington ?" Nearly all (955 responded either "Important" (335 or "Very Important" (625 4 o), as illustrated below. Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important At All 62% 1 -51 All of the focus groups questionnaire respondents were asked next if they felt that the Town of Lexington should create a non - profit Community Media Center to assist local organizations and residents with access to training, production equipment, distribution and technical expertise to improve understanding of local issues and general communications in the Town of Lexington. As the chart below indicates, only three (3 %) of the respondents said "No ". A majority (729 replied "Yes" with a quarter (259 indicated being undecided by responding "Maybe" to this question. Maybe 25 5 /n N 3 ' Yes 72% Next, the respondents were asked if such a Community Media Center were to be created in Lexington, would they and /or their organizations use its services and resources. Again, only 3% indicated "No', with a majority of the respondents (701o) answering "Yes, " and a little over a quarter (27 %) undecided, as illustrated below. Maybe 27% N( 3 0 ) Yes 70% 1-52 Finally, all of the focus group questionnaire respondents were asked, "Would you be interested in learning how to make programs for presentation on a local cable TV channel, using equipment provided free of charge ?" With eighty percent (80 %) of the respondents expressing some interest, nearly half (48 %) of them answered "Yes, " and thirty - two percent (32 %) answered "Maybe," as illustrated by the chart below. No 20% DS 1% 1-53 Maybe 1190/. C. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS AND BRAINSTORMING DURING COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS. As mentioned earlier in this report, a portion of each of the nine focus group sessions was set aside to allow participants to engage in a brainstorming process. During this time, participants were presented a series of questions for discussion. Those questions included: • What ar the key issues facing the Town of Lexington? • What are key challenges or barriers faced by public sector agencies, community organizations, and schools in communicating with their constituencies? • What are some of the ways in which you (or your "organization') could use cable or PEG Access to communicate? • What would make it easier to use PEG Access or the cable system? The information presented below is an analysis and synthesis of the information gathered through the brainstorming process. It is the result of a detailed review of the responses to each brainstorming question discussed during each community focus group meeting. Consequently, the consultant was able to identify common community needs, interests, and concerns. The areas of agreement and groupings of responses to each question are presented in the analysis that follows. A list of the notes, compiled from all of the sessions, for each of these questions is included as Appendix 2 to this report. It is important to note that neither the consultant nor the Town generated the recommendations and thoughts that evolved from these brainstorming sessions. These thoughts and suggestions were developed by members of the community, from diverse areas of interest, throughout the Town of Lexington. 1-54 Input Gathered During Focus Group Workshop Brainstorming Sessions Question #1: What are the key Issues facing the Town of Lexington? Primary Issues Identified • Town Issues and Concerns (budget, governance, civic participation, image, communications, growth and development, aging population, land use) • Technology / Communications (delivery of information to community, connectivity, effective uses of technology, public discourse, and better communications) • Growth / Economic Development / Cost of Living (land use, affordable housing — real estate costs, business development, tourism, mansionization) • Education and Services for Youth / Seniors (teen issues, youth programs, aging population in need of services, senior and youth centers) • Health & Health Services (spiraling medical costs, services for elderly, youth programs and family support services, health issues) • Environment (land use and open space protection, recreation facilities development, recycling and trash disposal, noise from 128, Town aesthetics) • Infrastructure / Traffic / Transportation (Hanscom Air Field expansion, traffic, parking, public transportation, road maintenance management,) • Demographic Changes / Civic unity (aging population, diversity, economic stratification, real or perceived income gap, polarization of different groups) The participants in the focus group sessions identified the areas listed above in bold print as the key issues facing the Town of Lexington. The issues are listed in the order of frequency in which related topics were mentioned. The wording in parentheses represents a sampling of their comments and concerns that fall within each area. The lists of brainstorming comments, prior to being summarized, for each of these categories are presented in Appendix 2 of this report. 1-55 Question #2: What are the Key Challenges or Barriers Faced by Public Sector Agencies, Community Organizations, and Schools in Communicating with their Constituencies? An analysis of the input received through the focus group discussions resulted in the identification of seven primary areas of difficulty for public sector agencies, community organizations and schools. Concerns that fell within four of these primary areas were the most frequently mentioned by the participants: (1) lack of equipment, infrastructure and centralized management of resources; (2 better oversight and planning needed for effective use of media; and (3) lack of time, attention, knowledge, and collaboration (4) lack of effective media outlets. Other challenges that were brought up related to affordability and costs, training and education, current programming and related problems. The most commonly stated concerns (shown in the order of how often a similar concern was mentioned by the focus group participants) that fall within each of these primary areas of difficulty are provided below and on the following pages. ❑ Key Challenge #1: Lack of equipment, infrastructure and centralized management of resources 1. Lack of equipment 2. Lack of centralized management of resources 3. Lack of quality signal on local channels 4. Lack of I -Net connectivity for all to use 5. Lack of coordination between RCN and A T& T 6. Lack of live capacity at Town Hall and other places in town 7. Lack of training, coordination and assistance ❑ Key Challenge #2: Better Oversight and Planning Needed for Effective Use of Media 1. Lack of leadership 2. Lack of staffing support — need assistance to use media 3. Lack of training on all levels of media use 1-56 4. Need for centralized management of resources 5. Lack of awareness of existing resources ❑ Key Challenge #3 Lack of time, attention, knowledge, and collaboration 1. Lack of time — busy schedules 2. Lack of knowledge about how to create and a get message out 3. Lack of volunteers 4. Lack of collaboration among organizations 5. Competition for people's attention 6. Lack of interest — information overload ❑ Key Challenge #4 Lack of effective media outlets 1. Lack of centralized information and expertise on media outlets 2. Lack of Community Media Center and equipment 3. Lack of effective coordination of existing resources 4. Newspapers do meet community needs 5. Lack of Information about existing outlets and list serves 6. Lack of Bandwidth, channels and media distribution 7. Lack of perceived value of local programming ❑ Key Challenge #5 Problems with Existing Programming 1. Lack of coverage of important town activities /events 2. Lack of good production values and signal quality 3. Lack of information /schedules 4. Lack of information coordination from community organizations 5. Two cable systems, problem in delivery of local programming on both 6. Lack of capacity for LIVE programming from locations throughout Town 1-57 7. Lack of information /schedule / no local programming on RCN ❑ Key Challenge #6 Training and education 1. Lack of production training for producers 2. Lack of outreach and community involvement 3. Lack of effective integration of media with community objectives 4. Lack of training for volunteers 5. Lack of after school or summer programs for youth involvement 6. Mentoring /volunteer coordinators ❑ Key Challenge #7 Affordability and costs 1. Lack of money/ Financial limitation of agencies 2. High cost to create message 3. High cost to distribute message 1-58 Question #3: What are Some of the Ways in Which You (or your "organization'g Could Use Cable or PEG Access to Communicate? The diverse participants in the nine focus group workshop sessions identified a very large number of programming ideas and communication applications. The responses to this question fell into two categories of uses: 1) programming ideas, and 2) ways to use cable system and /or the PEG Access channels for general communications applications. The following are lists of each of those categories. The list of responses in the order they were given in each of the focus group sessions is provided in Appendix 2 of this Report. 1) Programming Ideas • "How to Use" PEG Access • All kinds of music • All major town committee meetings covered • Art — high school students dance performance • Art summer programs/ Show & Tell • Art talks • Art talks by artist • Artists in studio • Arts programming for all ages • Awards recognition • Basket ball, hockey coverage • Cable book club • Cable cooking • Cable programs for youth • Capacity for environmental video with fixed camera on town • Celebrating arts and cultures • Celebrating diversity • Community Bulletin Board which reflects programming, events and coverage of events • Coverage of "older men's teams" 1-59 • Coverage of activities at senior center — health, exercise program, social and political forums, information on daycare and home care • Coverage of more town meetings, specific agendas and posting of scheduled meetings • Cultural /information programs • Disabled programs on resources • Diversity explored through programming • Education about facilities and services in town • Elder issues programs • Exercise programs for aging population • Explanation of resources • Exposure for performing arts, local programs and schedules • Find ways to market image of Lexington • Fitness show • Game of the week — hockey and all other sports — youth sports, high school, elder exercise /sports • Government information packaged /produced so that viewers will watch, listen and learn • Groups of local businesses, forums • Historical — on demand programming on Lexington history • History of Lexington • History programs • How to run for office • How to use system • In home learning — arts and crafts • Information about town services and resources • Information and programs on resources for disabled • Information for newcomers to town about resources • Information on studies /discussion of works like Lexington 2020 Vision — forums on town planning initiatives .O • Interactive information on application for programs on channels an on Town web • Language capability for multilingual communities • Leadership programs and Town meetings on TV • Lexington Garden Club — wildflowers, trees of Lexington • Lexington historical society, coverage of activities • Live coverage of local meetings (Planning, Selectmen, Board of Education, etc.) • Live coverage of Selectmen's, sports, town meetings • Live coverage of sports • Live town meetings over both systems (RCN and AT &T) • Local analysis of national issues • Local events (i.e. Bicentennial Band) • Local programs put onto both systems (RCN and AT &T) • Long term care — profiles and issues • Lots of repeats to reach people with easy schedules • Media literacy • More cultural programs, religious activities and services • More foreign language programming • Museum exhibitions, programs to include, for example, ballet, music, exhibits coverage • Music, local bands • Nationally produced programs for disabled • News, local forums and discussions • Outreach, coverage about Town services • Parades and town events (I -Net drops in Town) • Patriot's day parade • Planning board live • Profile new businesses and technology in town 1-61 • Profiles from other towns on what a senior center could be (what works and what does not) • Profiles of human service organizations and social service resources • Profiles of recreation "hidden gems" — bike paths, etc. • Programs at a "youth park" skate boarding coverage and competitions to engage youth • Programs for shut -ins • Promotion — preview of "Great Meadows, i.e. cross country skiing on golf course — and other seasonal uses of public spaces • Promotion of Lexington special events — parking planning, etc., for participants • Public affairs programming — teens, seniors, cross population, multiple cu Itu res • Raising awareness about traffic and street issues, and other things that people may not know about • Recreational possibilities for local business employees -- what's local for people who commute (to Lexington to) work • Reenactment/historical events • Reenactments of Battle of Lexington • Road races in town coverage • School band -type events at community media center • School committee live • School events • School events live and taped • School events /activities • Selectmen /School Education Board /Planning meetings — good quality signal, live coverage • Senior programs • Show community — faces and programs of artists • Sporting events live • Sports listing 1-62 • Sports youth • Student, "kid" programs in other languages • Taping of meetings with interactivity by technology, across distance participation, and customized experience • Tourism and Lexington highlights need special visibility • Tourism in Lexington • Track meets, etc. are not so easy to cover because the need for special production equipment • Training and production with resources in new senior center • Visuals of Lexington on channels • Who's who at Town Hall • Wireless contact to information center for sports schedules and cancellations 2) Communications Applications • Access to town information • Accommodations for the deaf • Advertising of "try out" schedules to expand access for others to information about programs with limited enrollment space; (now, those who know get in, those who are new to town or kids just coming of age don't get information to compete for enrollments) • Build good community relations between school and local media entities • Capability of I -Net drop • Capacity for environmental video with fixed camera on town (buildings, views of town) • Centralized calendar of town activities and events • Collaborations with school music at community media center • Committee and meeting schedules • Communication for seniors 1-63 • Community Bulletin Board which reflects programming, events and coverage of events • Community calendar /bulletin board • Coordinated communication to provide information to all residents in the same manner • Database retrieval • Education about facilities and services in town • Emails on programs for feedback • Explanation of resources • Government information packaged so that viewers will watch, listen and learn • Information about town services and resources • Information and programs on resources for disabled • Information for newcomers to town about resources • Interactive information re application for programs on channels on Town web • Language capability for multilingual communities • Last minute choices and opportunities for cancellation • Local telephone numbers • Phone banks for taking and understanding community feedback • Public comment through email and calls • Publicity needed that reaches youth (specifically) • Schedule that directs viewers to local programming • Sports listing • Taping of meetings with interactivity by technology, across distance participation, and customized experience • Visuals of Lexington on channels • Who's who at Town Hall • Wireless contact to information center for sports schedules and cancellations 1-64 Question #4: What Would Make It Easier to Use PEG Access or the Cable System? Hundreds of suggestions were made of were made by the focus group participants with respect to improvements and ways to make it easier to use PEG Access or the cable system. They fall into seven primary categories of concern, which are: (1) PEG Access Equipment, Facilities and Channels; (2) PEG Access Staffing, Policies &Procedures, and Funding; (3) Bandwidth, Infrastructure &System Design; (4) Training; (5) Customer and Community Relations; (6) Regulatory Issues; and (7) Outreach and Promotion. These categories, with the suggestions that fall within them, are listed below and on the following pages. The most commonly stated concerns (shown in the order of how often a similar concern was mentioned by the focus group participants) that fall within each of these seven primary categories of concern are provided below and on the following pages. The full listings of concerns for each category, before being summarized, are provided in Appendix #2 of this Report. Category #1 PEG Access Equipment, Facilities and Channels 1. Better PEG Access equipment 2. Community Media Center 3. PEG Access channel/ Spectrum set aside 4. Replacement fund for equipment for life of contract 5. Mobile production van 6. LIVE capacity throughout Town 7. Web casting capability (Bandwidth) 8. Video library /archive Category # 2 PEG Access Staffing, Policies &Procedures 1. Adequate funding for PEG Access support (e.g. 5% of gross revenues, PEG Access funds as externalized cost added to subscriber bills for modest monthly cost, Town support of a local programming center) 1-65 D. ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION GATHERED THROUGH THE REVIEW OF STRATEGIC PLANS AND OTHER MATERIALS The following strategic plans and other materials were gathered from Task Force members, focus group workshop participants and through special community leader meetings and have been reviewed by the consultant to provided information with regard to community needs and interests: Town of Lexington General Planning Documents: 1. Lexington 2020 Vision -- Janua 2001 2. Lexington Planning Board — Comprehensive Plan -- January 2002 3. Lexington Town Meeting — 2002 Warrant Report 4. Lexington 2001 Annual Report 5. Lexington Public Schools — Four -Year Technology Plan (2001 -2005) Other Documents: 6. Hancock United Church of Christ — LIFT materials 7. Lexington Historical Society materials 8. I -Net Background and Significant Events A significant amount of valuable information was obtained from these documents. The following summaries highlight key information obtained from their analysis. These findings are also summarized in Section E, Major Findings (below), and in support of the Recommendations in Volume II of this Community Needs Assessment Report. .. Town of Lexington general planning documents: Lexington 2020 Vision -- January 2001 The Town of Lexington has been involved in a visioning and strategic planning process since 1998. Lexington 2020 Vision began its work through the Initiating Committee, which developed a methodology and detailed step -by -step planning process, and then continued through the committee's evolution into the Steering Committee which was sanctioned by the Board of Selectmen and in consultation with the School Committee in 1999. The Steering Committee envisioned a strategic planning process that on an ongoing basis would engage a wide spectrum of the community in an organized series of discussions to create and implement a vision of the town's future. The stated objective of the process was to identify key areas of concern affecting the town and clarify goals and activities in support of desired solutions. Open dialogue was fostered through a series of four public workshops where important areas of concern were identified. Then a Town Forum was held to get feedback on specific, focused topics that came out of the four workshops. Out of this proceeding, composed of Lexington residents who volunteered their time, six Working Groups and a Core Participants Group were formed to explore each of the following areas: • Fostering a Sense of Community • Educational Excellence • Managing Growth: Development and Open Space • Ensuring Productive Connections Between Citizens and Town Government • Transportation • Managing Fiscal Stability As part of their Mission, each of these Working Groups developed a Vision for their specific topic area, as well as Goals and Actions which were intended to serve as a guide for .• the Town as it develops an approach to implementing decisions for the future. The Core Participants Group created a Town -Wide Vision. All of the materials gathered were presented in a Report called the Lexington 2020 Vision submitted to the Town in January 2001, in which the recommendations of each of the working groups were summarized into five Themes. The document begins with the Town -Wide Vision. Three of the salient points of that Vision are: 1) that residents of Lexington "... place a high value on learning at all ages "; 2) that Lexington will stay committed to "preserving and maintaining a sense of community life which includes its historic tradition, its public and private open spaces, and its public support for civic life." And, 3) it concludes with the statement: "An open and structured process of community conversation and long -term planning (will) help the town remain forward- looking." Following are the five Themes, presented with a sampling of their Goals and recommended Actions items. Theme 1. Promote and Strengthen Community Character, with goals to advance many of the aspects of Lexington's variety of characteristics: its place in history; its charm and sense of pride; reputation of its schools and public services; its strong residential character and its value for civic involvement. Theme 2. Foster Educational Excellence with goals such as — Ensure that all citizens are aware of and have access to life -long education and learning opportunities; Continuously update and modify the programming, grounds and facilities, materials and equipment of all learning facilities; Develop a consumer - friendly clearing house for all community life -long education and learning opportunities; Publicize all education and learning opportunities through multiple media; Teach skills in areas of up -to -date technology; Provide sufficient funding for educational and learning opportunities; Develop and implement a committee to ensure curriculum alignment with life -long learning objectives; and finally 1-70 Develop and implement a town run partnership program to promote the concept of community partnerships with all educational and learning facilities. Theme 3. Sustain and Enhance Physical Character, and the Larger Environment Lexington has a strong sense of tradition, historic preservation, and land conservation and the town takes pride in having maintained these qualities while addressing environmental concerns. A couple of the recommended actions to be undertaken for example are: Conduct community programs to encourage conservation and heighten awareness of the use of synthetics and chemicals; and promote the use of public transportation. Theme 4. Reinforce Connections Between Residents, Civic Organizations, and Town Government Lexington's pride in its place in history is a thread throughout these themes, which re- emphasizes the responsibility of ensuring that the democratic ideal of citizen participation in local affairs is fostered, as well as upheld. The goals within this theme explore providing opportunities for community involvement in the civic life of the Town. Several of the specific goals are: Expanding information dissemination options for civic activities; Provide approaches to inspire the uninvolved of all ages to become involved; Increase accessibility; Support a community- endorsed plan for Senior Center requirements, and promote the use of volunteers and connecting them with those needing services. Some of the actions recommended include: 1) modernize and update town's information technology systems, 2) expand and make more readily accessible the town Web site, including establishing aperson -in- charge; 3) post meeting calendar with agendas and opportunities for interaction; 4) establish multi -media information Kiosks 5) disseminate information about school and community activities; and 6) use and enhance local newspaper coverage of local news and information to ensure an informed citizenry. Finally, Theme 5, Establish Open and Accessible Process for Town -Wide Decision Making, Planning, and Conflict Resolution, has been characterized by its identification of the need for increased and focused communication and conversation about a wide range of issues. Several of the goals identified to establish this `open and accessible process' include: 1 -71 Strengthen and support existing democratic processes for town decision - making; Conducting long -range studies, policies and regulations in the areas of fiscal, transportation, technology and environmental planning; Initiate and /or participate in regional groups to resolve common problems, address common needs, capitalize on common strengths and share services and resources. Several of the actions to be undertaken to accomplish these goals include: 1) Support the installation of communications technology infrastructure (High Speed connectivity) to encourage "telecommuting" and home businesses; 2) Encourage existing organizations to discuss town issues and provide feedback to appropriate entity; and 3) Assure that public hearing and public notices are widely used to provide information and solicit input from residents, and that all town decisions are publicly disclosed and explained. It is the conclusion of the report that "If the Themes identified and the actions recommended in this Lexington 2020 Vision Report are to be successful, processes for encouraging and formalizing communications — both within the town and outside — must be developed." Lexington Planning Board — Comprehensive Plan -- Janua . 2002 The Comprehensive Plan: The Lexington We Want approved by the Planning Board in January of 2002, provides a broad statement of collective intentions about the kind of Town that those involved want Lexington to be. It both frames overarching policy and outlines specific actions for implementation. The work builds upon a strong planning legacy that extends from the Town's progressive planning and zoning in the early 20 century to the contemporary community planning process incorporated in the Lexington 2020 Vision This Plan presents the work that has been carried out under the direction of the Planning Board, assisted by a Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CPAC) created by the Board, and supported by staff and consultants. The Lexington `which people want' has been identified in several ways including a variety of public activities ranging from small focus group meetings 1-72 to larger evening forums. A healthy diversity of views are presented and incorporated in the findings. The four elements of community planning that are analyzed in the Comprehensive Plan are Land Use, Natural and Cultural Resources, Housing and Economic Development. Each begins with a discussion of background information, then describes goals and objectives, and concludes with a plan for actions to be taken. Lexington Town Meeting — 2002 Warrant Report A review of the Lexington Town Meeting — 2002 Warrant Report provides a wealth of information about the specific and timely needs and interests of the Town and its residents. The content of the Report constitutes a dated document, serving more as a tool for the process than as a documentation of outcomes. However, when one looks at each of the Articles, of which in the year 2002 there were 30, one finds great background and historical detail in the presentation of the proposed action. This Report, with its summary of Parliamentary Procedures, its inclusion of the by -laws of the Town Meeting Members Association and the detailed case studies for each article, provides invaluable background and could be used as a guide for the production of further information for the community. Lexington 2001 Annual Report Many cities and towns across the country publish an annual report on the civic activities of the year, the standing of community endeavors and the fiscal status of the municipality, which serves its residents. The scope of these reports vary greatly, from being the simple fulfillment of the Law for financial disclosure to being great tools upon which the community of residents can build a strong base of civic pride and comfort. The Lexin 2001 Annual Report is very much the latter. The document is well laid out and the information is extremely clearly presented. The report provides valuable background on Town Government and all of the services provided to the residents of Lexington, Public Safety, Education, Land Use, Culture and Leisure as well as the presentation of the Towns Budget and fiscal officers. The "Lexington 2001 Factual Summary" provides interesting 1-73 information that might be difficult to otherwise find. All residents surely know that the Town was settled in 1642 and incorporated as the Town of Lexington in 1713, but where might they find the current town credit rating, or the tax rate they pay, or the assessed value of the Town's property as a whole? This annual report provides a complete examination of the Town's governance structure and identifies the people involved in the work of the Town's many Commissions and Committees. It presents the accomplishments of those involved with the delivery of important services as well as identifying new resources available to the citizenry of Lexington in great detail. Lexington Public Schools — Four -Year Technology Plan (2001 -2005 The Lexington Public Schools serve six thousand students who attend one of the six elementary schools, two middle schools or one high school. The school system has a long history of planning for and using technology in the classroom, beginning with the use of the PET computers in the 1970s. In 1983, with capital provided by a town warrant, a wide area coaxial cable network connecting the schools and town offices was established. In November 2001, a new wide -area fiber network was installed to replace the 1983 network. In June 2001, the school system completed the last year of its Five -year Technology Plan (1996- 2001). The first and second years had been dedicated to building the technology infrastructure and providing training to enable all staff to develop proficiency in a core set of skills. The last three years of that plan were devoted to curriculum integration through continued and expanded professional development activities that were implemented across the school system at all levels. The Lexington Public Schools Technology Plan is ambitious and forward thinking. It takes as a conceptual model the enGauge Framework of Six Essential Conditions for Effective Technology Use, developed by the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL). The Lexington plan consists of three components, which are -- the alignment of Lexington's technology standards with those of the Massachusetts Department of Education, action plans and establishing student technology benchmarks. The plan also identifies five essential conditions which it will address each year. They are access, equity, educator proficiency, effective teaching and learning, and system leadership. In order to implement 1-74 the plan effectively, core skills that students must have at each grade level are being identified. Simultaneously the plan calls for the development of curriculum units in which technology plays a natural and powerful role to support student learning. To focus on and meet the challenges of implementing this extensive technology initiative, action plans at the elementary, middle and secondary levels of the School System have been identified. The Lexington Public Schools have established the core values addressing individuality and diversity, continuous improvement and shared responsibility. They recognize that technology is a partner to these values. To ensure that all students have equitable opportunities to benefit from the diverse learning that technology can facilitate, the system has committed considerable thinking, funding and professional time to technology. Developing technological competence among the entire faculty is viewed as a necessary prerequisite to moving the more important goal of cultivating classrooms in which technology is clearly linked to the curriculum and the enlarged learning capacity of students. The current Technology Plan clearly envisions technology as a strand integrated into and throughout the curriculum at every grade level and in every subject, as both a tool for learning, and at appropriate times, as a focus of instruction in its own right. Other Documents: Hancock United Church of Christ — LIFT materials The Hancock United Church of Christ has been in the unique position of operating the religious access channel provided by the cable contract with Cablevision, now Comcast, since 1981. The channel, known as LIFT (Lexington Inter -Faith Television) functions under the auspices of the Lexington Clergy Association. The facilities for the channel are physically located in this church and are funded by it. The church's Cable Television Committee oversees the programming. This is one of very few religious access channels operating in the country. One of the exciting benefits of the entire television operation has been the enthusiastic participation of young people in this endeavor. With the many challenges that teenagers face these days, the members of this church want to build on and encourage what 1-75 has already proven to be an attraction for youth to become dynamic participants in church and community activities. Over the years, there have been many productions such as the weekly program produced by members of the High School youth group called HYG TV, which presented entertainment and information about the life of young people in Lexington. Segments included a stereotype- breaking chef, sports news, "slightly slanted" views of the world, and coverage of special events around Town. The main role of the channel has been to provide coverage of services and programs from the religious community of Lexington. The goal has been to provide service to those who cannot attend their church in person and to create a solid feeling of community for shut -ins. LIFT has submitted many grants for new equipment over the years and for the replacement of equipment as it is needed. The materials provided to support this Community Needs Assessment attest to their ongoing commitment to the management of the religious access channel for the Town of Lexington. It is their expressed hope that this channel capacity will continue to be provided in the new contract with Comcast and that interconnectivity through an I -Net will allow them to provide programming services on both of the cable systems providing cable programming to Lexington residents. Lexington Historical Society materials The Lexington Historical Society was founded in 1886 for the purpose of "the preservation of such Knowledge and of such relics as illustrate the history of Lexington." The Society owns the Hancock - Clarke House, the Monroe Tavern, the Buckingham Tavern and has recently, 1999, purchased the Lexington Depot, one of the few remaining shed depots in New England. A capital campaign is currently underway to raise the necessary funds to restore the building's exterior and provide renovations to the interior for expended exhibits and programming. Rich in possessions, the Lexington Historical Society is fully mindful of its obligation to preserve these historic buildings and to keep then open on behalf of the public and as a resource to tourism for the Town. The society has a commitment to education and provides programs for schools such as all -day field trips for student from outside Lexington with pre -visit materials and interactive programming using primary source documents. A 1-76 collaboration with Boston public schools is under development that will provide inner -city students with field experiences in Lexington and offers training workshops to Boston teachers on the use of the Society's resources in teaching American History. Lectures, continuing education programs, music and arts are all a part of the wealth the Historical Society provides the resident and visitor to the Town of Lexington. I -Net Background and Significant Events In 1981, the Town of Lexington signed a fifteen -year contract with Adams - Russell Cable Service, Inc., which included provisions for the construction and maintenance of a forty- one channel institutional network on the cable- system in addition to the subscriber network infrastructure. This I -net connected twenty -seven locations in the town and in school buildings with fifteen upstream channels and twenty -six downstream channels. To link all of these Town and Public School System's buildings, over 550 drop locations with both I -Net and subscriber - service access were installed. Adams - Russell Cable Services, Inc. also provided TV's, VCR's and other equipment necessary to implement the use of this valuable resource to the Town. Some of the ways this I -Net was used include • Access Origination — Cary Library, Lexington High School and Hancock church were set up with modulators to provide for access programming origination. The signals for each access channel were then switched to the appropriate subscriber network channel at the head -end. • SCOLA, a foreign language news channel, which was provided by MCET for school use, was used as the default educational access programming. • Video distribution — 3 modulators and VCR's were installed at the Lexington High School professional library to allow videos to be broadcast on the I -Net for classroom use. • Low speed data — The school system installed hardware to provide 9600 bits /sec serial line capabilities from the Lexington High School computer center to remote locations. 1-77 Those respondents who indicated that they did not think that the current number of channels should be retained for local use under the new contract were asked how many channels, between 0 and 5, should be set aside for this purpose instead. As shown in the chart below, sixty -seven percent (675 of these respondents said that three (3) channels should be set aside, and the remaining thirty -three percent (335 of the respondents said that four (4) channels should be set aside. Four Channe' 33% Three Channels 67% All respondents were then asked the following question: "How important do you feel it is to have a non - profit organization (a "Community Media Center ") whose responsibility it is to see that programming is scheduled and shown simultaneously on both cable systems in the Town of Lexington ?" Nearly all (955 responded either "Important" (335 or "Very Important" (625 4 o), as illustrated below. Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important At All 62% 1 -51 All of the focus groups questionnaire respondents were asked next if they felt that the Town of Lexington should create a non - profit Community Media Center to assist local organizations and residents with access to training, production equipment, distribution and technical expertise to improve understanding of local issues and general communications in the Town of Lexington. As the chart below indicates, only three (3 %) of the respondents said "No ". A majority (729 replied "Yes" with a quarter (259 indicated being undecided by responding "Maybe" to this question. Maybe 25 5 /n N 3 ' Yes 72% Next, the respondents were asked if such a Community Media Center were to be created in Lexington, would they and /or their organizations use its services and resources. Again, only 3% indicated "No', with a majority of the respondents (701o) answering "Yes, " and a little over a quarter (27 %) undecided, as illustrated below. Maybe 27% N( 3 0 ) Yes 70% 1-52 Finally, all of the focus group questionnaire respondents were asked, "Would you be interested in learning how to make programs for presentation on a local cable TV channel, using equipment provided free of charge ?" With eighty percent (80 %) of the respondents expressing some interest, nearly half (48 %) of them answered "Yes, " and thirty - two percent (32 %) answered "Maybe," as illustrated by the chart below. No 20% DS 1% 1-53 Maybe 1190/. C. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS AND BRAINSTORMING DURING COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS. As mentioned earlier in this report, a portion of each of the nine focus group sessions was set aside to allow participants to engage in a brainstorming process. During this time, participants were presented a series of questions for discussion. Those questions included: • What ar the key issues facing the Town of Lexington? • What are key challenges or barriers faced by public sector agencies, community organizations, and schools in communicating with their constituencies? • What are some of the ways in which you (or your "organization') could use cable or PEG Access to communicate? • What would make it easier to use PEG Access or the cable system? The information presented below is an analysis and synthesis of the information gathered through the brainstorming process. It is the result of a detailed review of the responses to each brainstorming question discussed during each community focus group meeting. Consequently, the consultant was able to identify common community needs, interests, and concerns. The areas of agreement and groupings of responses to each question are presented in the analysis that follows. A list of the notes, compiled from all of the sessions, for each of these questions is included as Appendix 2 to this report. It is important to note that neither the consultant nor the Town generated the recommendations and thoughts that evolved from these brainstorming sessions. These thoughts and suggestions were developed by members of the community, from diverse areas of interest, throughout the Town of Lexington. 1-54 Input Gathered During Focus Group Workshop Brainstorming Sessions Question #1: What are the key Issues facing the Town of Lexington? Primary Issues Identified • Town Issues and Concerns (budget, governance, civic participation, image, communications, growth and development, aging population, land use) • Technology / Communications (delivery of information to community, connectivity, effective uses of technology, public discourse, and better communications) • Growth / Economic Development / Cost of Living (land use, affordable housing — real estate costs, business development, tourism, mansionization) • Education and Services for Youth / Seniors (teen issues, youth programs, aging population in need of services, senior and youth centers) • Health & Health Services (spiraling medical costs, services for elderly, youth programs and family support services, health issues) • Environment (land use and open space protection, recreation facilities development, recycling and trash disposal, noise from 128, Town aesthetics) • Infrastructure / Traffic / Transportation (Hanscom Air Field expansion, traffic, parking, public transportation, road maintenance management,) • Demographic Changes / Civic unity (aging population, diversity, economic stratification, real or perceived income gap, polarization of different groups) The participants in the focus group sessions identified the areas listed above in bold print as the key issues facing the Town of Lexington. The issues are listed in the order of frequency in which related topics were mentioned. The wording in parentheses represents a sampling of their comments and concerns that fall within each area. The lists of brainstorming comments, prior to being summarized, for each of these categories are presented in Appendix 2 of this report. 1-55 Question #2: What are the Key Challenges or Barriers Faced by Public Sector Agencies, Community Organizations, and Schools in Communicating with their Constituencies? An analysis of the input received through the focus group discussions resulted in the identification of seven primary areas of difficulty for public sector agencies, community organizations and schools. Concerns that fell within four of these primary areas were the most frequently mentioned by the participants: (1) lack of equipment, infrastructure and centralized management of resources; (2 better oversight and planning needed for effective use of media; and (3) lack of time, attention, knowledge, and collaboration (4) lack of effective media outlets. Other challenges that were brought up related to affordability and costs, training and education, current programming and related problems. The most commonly stated concerns (shown in the order of how often a similar concern was mentioned by the focus group participants) that fall within each of these primary areas of difficulty are provided below and on the following pages. ❑ Key Challenge #1: Lack of equipment, infrastructure and centralized management of resources 1. Lack of equipment 2. Lack of centralized management of resources 3. Lack of quality signal on local channels 4. Lack of I -Net connectivity for all to use 5. Lack of coordination between RCN and A T& T 6. Lack of live capacity at Town Hall and other places in town 7. Lack of training, coordination and assistance ❑ Key Challenge #2: Better Oversight and Planning Needed for Effective Use of Media 1. Lack of leadership 2. Lack of staffing support — need assistance to use media 3. Lack of training on all levels of media use 1-56 4. Need for centralized management of resources 5. Lack of awareness of existing resources ❑ Key Challenge #3 Lack of time, attention, knowledge, and collaboration 1. Lack of time — busy schedules 2. Lack of knowledge about how to create and a get message out 3. Lack of volunteers 4. Lack of collaboration among organizations 5. Competition for people's attention 6. Lack of interest — information overload ❑ Key Challenge #4 Lack of effective media outlets 1. Lack of centralized information and expertise on media outlets 2. Lack of Community Media Center and equipment 3. Lack of effective coordination of existing resources 4. Newspapers do meet community needs 5. Lack of Information about existing outlets and list serves 6. Lack of Bandwidth, channels and media distribution 7. Lack of perceived value of local programming ❑ Key Challenge #5 Problems with Existing Programming 1. Lack of coverage of important town activities /events 2. Lack of good production values and signal quality 3. Lack of information /schedules 4. Lack of information coordination from community organizations 5. Two cable systems, problem in delivery of local programming on both 6. Lack of capacity for LIVE programming from locations throughout Town 1-57 7. Lack of information /schedule / no local programming on RCN ❑ Key Challenge #6 Training and education 1. Lack of production training for producers 2. Lack of outreach and community involvement 3. Lack of effective integration of media with community objectives 4. Lack of training for volunteers 5. Lack of after school or summer programs for youth involvement 6. Mentoring /volunteer coordinators ❑ Key Challenge #7 Affordability and costs 1. Lack of money/ Financial limitation of agencies 2. High cost to create message 3. High cost to distribute message 1-58 Question #3: What are Some of the Ways in Which You (or your "organization'g Could Use Cable or PEG Access to Communicate? The diverse participants in the nine focus group workshop sessions identified a very large number of programming ideas and communication applications. The responses to this question fell into two categories of uses: 1) programming ideas, and 2) ways to use cable system and /or the PEG Access channels for general communications applications. The following are lists of each of those categories. The list of responses in the order they were given in each of the focus group sessions is provided in Appendix 2 of this Report. 1) Programming Ideas • "How to Use" PEG Access • All kinds of music • All major town committee meetings covered • Art — high school students dance performance • Art summer programs/ Show & Tell • Art talks • Art talks by artist • Artists in studio • Arts programming for all ages • Awards recognition • Basket ball, hockey coverage • Cable book club • Cable cooking • Cable programs for youth • Capacity for environmental video with fixed camera on town • Celebrating arts and cultures • Celebrating diversity • Community Bulletin Board which reflects programming, events and coverage of events • Coverage of "older men's teams" 1-59 • Coverage of activities at senior center — health, exercise program, social and political forums, information on daycare and home care • Coverage of more town meetings, specific agendas and posting of scheduled meetings • Cultural /information programs • Disabled programs on resources • Diversity explored through programming • Education about facilities and services in town • Elder issues programs • Exercise programs for aging population • Explanation of resources • Exposure for performing arts, local programs and schedules • Find ways to market image of Lexington • Fitness show • Game of the week — hockey and all other sports — youth sports, high school, elder exercise /sports • Government information packaged /produced so that viewers will watch, listen and learn • Groups of local businesses, forums • Historical — on demand programming on Lexington history • History of Lexington • History programs • How to run for office • How to use system • In home learning — arts and crafts • Information about town services and resources • Information and programs on resources for disabled • Information for newcomers to town about resources • Information on studies /discussion of works like Lexington 2020 Vision — forums on town planning initiatives .O • Interactive information on application for programs on channels an on Town web • Language capability for multilingual communities • Leadership programs and Town meetings on TV • Lexington Garden Club — wildflowers, trees of Lexington • Lexington historical society, coverage of activities • Live coverage of local meetings (Planning, Selectmen, Board of Education, etc.) • Live coverage of Selectmen's, sports, town meetings • Live coverage of sports • Live town meetings over both systems (RCN and AT &T) • Local analysis of national issues • Local events (i.e. Bicentennial Band) • Local programs put onto both systems (RCN and AT &T) • Long term care — profiles and issues • Lots of repeats to reach people with easy schedules • Media literacy • More cultural programs, religious activities and services • More foreign language programming • Museum exhibitions, programs to include, for example, ballet, music, exhibits coverage • Music, local bands • Nationally produced programs for disabled • News, local forums and discussions • Outreach, coverage about Town services • Parades and town events (I -Net drops in Town) • Patriot's day parade • Planning board live • Profile new businesses and technology in town 1-61 • Profiles from other towns on what a senior center could be (what works and what does not) • Profiles of human service organizations and social service resources • Profiles of recreation "hidden gems" — bike paths, etc. • Programs at a "youth park" skate boarding coverage and competitions to engage youth • Programs for shut -ins • Promotion — preview of "Great Meadows, i.e. cross country skiing on golf course — and other seasonal uses of public spaces • Promotion of Lexington special events — parking planning, etc., for participants • Public affairs programming — teens, seniors, cross population, multiple cu Itu res • Raising awareness about traffic and street issues, and other things that people may not know about • Recreational possibilities for local business employees -- what's local for people who commute (to Lexington to) work • Reenactment/historical events • Reenactments of Battle of Lexington • Road races in town coverage • School band -type events at community media center • School committee live • School events • School events live and taped • School events /activities • Selectmen /School Education Board /Planning meetings — good quality signal, live coverage • Senior programs • Show community — faces and programs of artists • Sporting events live • Sports listing 1-62 • Sports youth • Student, "kid" programs in other languages • Taping of meetings with interactivity by technology, across distance participation, and customized experience • Tourism and Lexington highlights need special visibility • Tourism in Lexington • Track meets, etc. are not so easy to cover because the need for special production equipment • Training and production with resources in new senior center • Visuals of Lexington on channels • Who's who at Town Hall • Wireless contact to information center for sports schedules and cancellations 2) Communications Applications • Access to town information • Accommodations for the deaf • Advertising of "try out" schedules to expand access for others to information about programs with limited enrollment space; (now, those who know get in, those who are new to town or kids just coming of age don't get information to compete for enrollments) • Build good community relations between school and local media entities • Capability of I -Net drop • Capacity for environmental video with fixed camera on town (buildings, views of town) • Centralized calendar of town activities and events • Collaborations with school music at community media center • Committee and meeting schedules • Communication for seniors 1-63 • Community Bulletin Board which reflects programming, events and coverage of events • Community calendar /bulletin board • Coordinated communication to provide information to all residents in the same manner • Database retrieval • Education about facilities and services in town • Emails on programs for feedback • Explanation of resources • Government information packaged so that viewers will watch, listen and learn • Information about town services and resources • Information and programs on resources for disabled • Information for newcomers to town about resources • Interactive information re application for programs on channels on Town web • Language capability for multilingual communities • Last minute choices and opportunities for cancellation • Local telephone numbers • Phone banks for taking and understanding community feedback • Public comment through email and calls • Publicity needed that reaches youth (specifically) • Schedule that directs viewers to local programming • Sports listing • Taping of meetings with interactivity by technology, across distance participation, and customized experience • Visuals of Lexington on channels • Who's who at Town Hall • Wireless contact to information center for sports schedules and cancellations 1-64 Question #4: What Would Make It Easier to Use PEG Access or the Cable System? Hundreds of suggestions were made of were made by the focus group participants with respect to improvements and ways to make it easier to use PEG Access or the cable system. They fall into seven primary categories of concern, which are: (1) PEG Access Equipment, Facilities and Channels; (2) PEG Access Staffing, Policies &Procedures, and Funding; (3) Bandwidth, Infrastructure &System Design; (4) Training; (5) Customer and Community Relations; (6) Regulatory Issues; and (7) Outreach and Promotion. These categories, with the suggestions that fall within them, are listed below and on the following pages. The most commonly stated concerns (shown in the order of how often a similar concern was mentioned by the focus group participants) that fall within each of these seven primary categories of concern are provided below and on the following pages. The full listings of concerns for each category, before being summarized, are provided in Appendix #2 of this Report. Category #1 PEG Access Equipment, Facilities and Channels 1. Better PEG Access equipment 2. Community Media Center 3. PEG Access channel/ Spectrum set aside 4. Replacement fund for equipment for life of contract 5. Mobile production van 6. LIVE capacity throughout Town 7. Web casting capability (Bandwidth) 8. Video library /archive Category # 2 PEG Access Staffing, Policies &Procedures 1. Adequate funding for PEG Access support (e.g. 5% of gross revenues, PEG Access funds as externalized cost added to subscriber bills for modest monthly cost, Town support of a local programming center) 1-65 APPENDIX 1 Community Needs &Interests Questionnaire A -1 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS QUESTIONNAIRE This questionnaire is designed to gather information about community needs and interests related to cable communications, and to determine your knowledge and /or use of the Public, Educational and Government (PEG) Access resources that are available to Lexington residents. The information gathered will be used to assess whether current services and resources are adequate and appropriate, and help to identify changes, if any, that might be made to meet future cable - related needs and interests. 1. Do you currently subscribe to a cable TV service in Lexington? Yes No If "No," o to Question 6 2. Which company provides your cable TV service? AT &T Comcast RCN 3. Please rate your cable company's performance in the following areas: VERY EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR POOR a. Customer service assistance b. Telephone response time c. Responsiveness to billing problems d. Timely response to technical problems e. Signal quality on cable- system f. Reliability of cable system g. Value /Cost of basic service h. Value /Cost of Internet access (broadband) i. Availability of info about Lexington j. Coverage of events about Lexington k. Information about local programming I. Schedule for airtime of local programs m. Info on how to use "The Studio" 4.a. What types of programming would you like to have more readily available on your cable company's channel line -up? F C - heck all that apply. Arts /Cultural Local news, activities, events, etc. News & Info. Children's Documentaries Sports Classic Movies Educational programming Religious Comedy Music Recent Movies Other types of programs? 4.b. If you checked any of the above, would you pay more to receive additional channels devoted to those types of programming in your basic package? Yes No Maybe A -2 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS QUESTIONNAIRE 5. Please indicate how important you think it is for you to receive the following special services from your cable company, if such services are offered in the future: VERY NOT NOT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT NEEDED a. Telephone service b. Movies on demand c. Interactive shopping d. Interactive video games e. Video teleconferencing (2 -way video) f. If you indicated "Very Important" or "Important" regarding any of the above special services, would you be willing to pay an additional fee to obtain them? Yes No Maybe 6.a. Do you currently subscribe to a satellite TV service in Lexington? Yes No If 'No, " go to Question 7 6.b. Using a scale of "1" (lowest) to "10" (highest), indicate your level of satisfaction with your satellite TV service: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7. a. Do you or your family use a computer in your home to access the Internet? Yes No If 'No, " go to Question 8 b. In an average week how long is your home computer used to access the Internet? Under 5 hours 5 - 15 hours Over 15 hours C. Has a personal or business "Web site" been created with your home computer? Yes No d. Do you use your computer and Internet access to telecommute and /or to work out of your home? Yes No A -3 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS Q 8. Certain improved services could be received through your television or home computer by using ahigh -speed connection to the Internet provided by the cable system. Please indicate how important you think it is to receive the services described below through your TV or home computer. Not VERY NOT VERY IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT AT ALL a. Access to Library resources (card catalog magazine articles, encyclopedias, etc.) b. Ability to vote, renew your driver's license or obtain government permits from home c. Ability to send and receive e-mail and information to and from teachers, school administrators, and School Committee members d. Access to government information (Town government meeting agendas, a listing of Town services and how to obtain them, government reports, etc.) e. Access to public safety information (e.g., from police and fire departments) f. Ability to participate in interactive distance learning classes from your home AT &T COMCAST SUBSCRIBERS: PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 9 - 13 RCN SUBSCRIBERS: PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 14 - 18 IF NOT A CABLE TV SUBSCRIBER: PLEASE GO TO QUESTION 19 A -4 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS Q 9. Are you aware of any of the following cable channels on the AT &T Comcast cable TV service: a. Channel 8 (run by AT &T Comcast at "The Studio "), with programs produced by staff and members of the community including high school sports, coverage of Selectmen's Meetings and Town Meeting sessions, and programming from the Hancock Church. Yes No b. Channel 9 -- Community Bulletin Board. Yes No C. Channels 63, 64, and 98, featuring other local programs including religious programming produced through the Hancock Church studio. Yes No If 'No" to all Questions 9a -c, go to Question 19 10. Have you ever watched a program on these channels? Yes No If "No, " go to Question 19 11. How often did you watch programs on these channels during the past month? More than 10 times 6 - 10 times 1 - 5 times Never 12. Is the signal quality for programs on these channels equal to the signal quality for programs on the other channels of the cable system? Yes No Don't Know 13. Please describe or provide the names of programs that you have watched on these channels: AT &T COMCAST SUBSCRIBERS: PLEASE GO TO QUESTION 19 RCN SUBSCRIBERS: PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 14 — 18 IF NOT A CABLE TV SUBSCRIBER: PLEASE GO TO QUESTION 19 A - s COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS Q 14. Are you aware of any of the following cable channels on the RCN cable TV service: a. Channel 8 -- Bulletin Board with customer information. Yes No b. Channels 15 and 16, featuring local programs including Selectmen's meetings and Town Meeting sessions and religious programming produced through the Hancock Church studio. Yes No If 'No" to both Questions 14a and 14b, go to Question 19 15. Have you ever watched a program on these channels? Yes No If "No," o to Question 19 16. How often did you watch programs on these channels during the past month? More than 10 times 6 - 10 times 1 - 5 times Never 17. Is the signal quality for programs on these channels equal to the signal quality for programs on the other channels of the cable system? Yes No Don't Know 18. Please describe or provide the names of programs that you have watched on these channels: ALL QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONDENTS: PLEASE GO TO QUESTION 19 A -6 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS QUESTIONNAIRE 19. Prior to this focus group workshop, were you aware that community organizations could have programs about their services and activities appear on the local Lexington channels on both cable TV services? Yes No If "No, " go to Question 24 20. a. Have you and /or your colleagues ever thought about using the cable system to improve outreach, disseminate information or improve the understanding of an issue that relates to your organization's work in the Town of Lexington? Yes No If "No," go to Question 24 b. If "Yes ", please describe your idea: c. Did you produce a program? Yes No d. Did you try to produce a program but were unable to do so? Yes No If "No," go to Question 21 e. Please describe the obstacle(s) that you encountered: 21. Have you ever appeared on or participated in the production of a program to show on Lexington's local cable channels? Yes No If "No," go to Question 24 22. How many programs have you appeared on or participated in the production of during the past two years? More than 10 6-10 1 -5 None A -7 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS QUESTIONNAIRE 23. Please rate the quality of the following services provided by the AT &T Comcast staff: VERY EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR POOR a. Efforts to outreach to residents about "the studio" facilities, services, and programming b. Orientations about "the studio" facilities and how the public can use the services and resources c. Training services to teach program production skills d. Assistance in planning the creation of the program(s) on which you have appeared or for which you have participated in the production e. Production of program(s) on which you have appeared or for which you have participated in the production f. Maintenance of the production equipment to keep it in good working condition g. Promotion of the program(s) on which you have appeared or for which you have participated in the production, keeping the community well informed about it h. Playback of programs on local cable channels on time as scheduled, and assuring good signal quality 24. How important do you think it is to have local cable TV channels that feature programs about the Town of Lexington, its residents, its organizations, its local events, its schools, and its Town government? Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important at All A- 8 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS Q 25. Please indicate your level of interest in seeing each of the following types of programs that are now or could be provided on local cable TV channels in the future. No VERY NOT VERY INTEREST INTERESTED INTERESTED INTERESTED AT ALL a. Town Meeting b. Board of Selectmen Meetings c. Community festivals, local events d. Consumer protection programs e. Courses from colleges and universities f. Environmental awareness programs g. Ethnic and cultural programs h. Events /activities sponsored by the Town i. Foreign language programs j. High School equivalency courses k. Informational programs about services, activities of local organizations /clubs I. Information regarding public emergencies m. K through 12 instructional courses n. K through 12 music /drama productions o. Local business news and information p. Local health and wellness programs q. Local sports and recreational activities (Little league baseball, hiking, etc.) r. Programs about activities and concerns for persons with disabilities s. Programs on Town government services t. Programs on issues facing the Town u. Programs about K -12 school activities v. Programs about Lexington arts, history, culture and tourism w. Religious programming w /local churches x. School Committee Meetings y. Board of Appeals Meetings z. Senior citizen activities and concerns ii. Special events and activities from area colleges and universities iii. Indicate any other types of local programs that you would like to see: A -9 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS QUESTIONNAIRE 26. How much of each cable TV subscriber's monthly bill do you think should go towards providing the types of programs and services listed on the previous two pages? one dollar two dollars three dollars this amount: $ 27. The current contracts with the cable companies require that six channels be set aside (free of cost) for use by the Town and its residents to provide non - commercial, local communications. a. Should all six (6) of these channels continue to be set aside (free of cost) for use by the Town and its residents in the new contracts with the cable companies? Yes No Maybe b. If "No ", how many channels should be set aside for this purpose? none 1 2 3 4 5 28. How important do you feel it is to have a non - profit organization (a "Community Media Center ") whose responsibility it is to see that programming is scheduled and shown simultaneously on both cable systems in the Town of Lexington? Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important at All 29. Should the Town of Lexington create a non - profit Community Media Center to assist local organizations and residents with access to training, production equipment, distribution and technical expertise to improve understanding of local issues and general communications in the Town of Lexington? Yes No Maybe 30. If such a Community Media Center were created in Lexington, would you and /or your organization use its services and resources? Yes No Maybe 31. Would you be interested in learning how to make a program to show on a local cable TV channel, using equipment provided free of charge? Yes No Maybe A- 10 COMMUNITY NEEDS & INTERESTS QUESTIONNAIRE Thank you very much for your assistance. You are invited, but not required, to provide any of the following information about yourself and /or the organization you are associated with: Name: Organization: _ Address: Telephone Number: E -mail Please comment on this Focus Group Workshop if you wish: A -11 APPENDIX 2 Notes from Focus Group Brainstorming Sessions A -12 LEXINGTON FOCUS GROUP WORKSHOP BRAINSTORMING NOTES Ms. Welsh posed four questions at each Workshop session to draw comments from the attendees: • What are the key issues facing the Town of Lexington? • What are key challenges or barriers faced by public sector agencies, community organizations, and schools in communicating with their constituencies? • What are some of the ways in which you (or your "organization') could use cable or PEG Access to communicate? • What would make it easier to use PEG Access or the cable system? The responses to these questions are documented in this Appendix, and analyzed in a three -step process. For each question: 1. Raw attendee comments are listed in the order expressed within each session (horizontal lines separate the responses from different sessions) 2. The comments are sorted into what emerged as major groups appropriate to the question (issues, challenges, categories) for Questions 1, 2 and 4. Some comments appear more than once because the groups often overlap I Comments within each major group are summarized and presented in the body of the report. Question #1: What are the Key Issues Facing the Town of Lexington? a) Raw brainstorming responses to Question 1 from each session: No broadband service (AT &T) Budget cuts /town finances Aging equipment at schools More resources and training at Lexington High School on media literacy and production Lexington is information "hungry," community needs information and more resources to produce information back to the community Difficulty in getting information out and sharing it Aging population Highly educated, very sophisticated population Lack of services for youth Growth change in Lexington demographics Polarization of different groups Housing /affordability Housing costs because of rising real estate prices Condos Stress level of students in Lexington from school — they have no free time because of college prep priorities A -13 Resume - driven involvement Budget Affordable housing, real estate costs Mansionization Hanscom Field expansion Educational excellence, matching school quality with budget cuts Diversity of population Spiraling medical costs Site for a Senior Center Historical society funding Tourism in Lexington Increased tax base Disposition of DPW site Bedford Street Recycling /trash disposal Town unity vs. divisive attitudes Disposition of new guidelines for civic discourse Teen (issues) Drugs Youth activities — lacking programs for youth Family concerns for families on the edge Lack of funds — domestic violence, lack of teen center and after school programs Aging population needs services General aesthetics of town Tax base, finances Quality of schools Historic district, important part of aesthetics and preservation for Town's historical image Open space vs. development Recycling and waste removal Trash disposal Traffic Tourism Hanscom Air Field Expansion (no commercial travel to be permitted at field) Aging population —need for services Communication and importance of issues for seniors and shut -in residents Civility of public discourse Open space protection Affordability of real estate Communication of local information Live coverage of municipal meetings Coverage of local events Aging population, need for communication resources Need for serving the community in a time efficient manner - taping, replay time Need for inactivity among town groups A -14 Town scheduling information for viewers Population of shut -ins Hanscom Field expansion Need live coverage capability Two cable systems creates divide of viewership of local programs (problem with AT &T and RCN distribution) Priorities in Town, try to meet needs with limited resources for seniors and parents of youth Quality of signal a problem (unwatchable) Media literacy needed Community building Newspaper no longer meets coverage needs of town Traffic Road management Anxiety and growing paranoia about what is happening in meetings, Selectmen's, school, etc., when one is not able to view them live Diversity of community Age stratification — tax issues misunderstood Senior population, youth population and school services are a pull on service monies Maintain vitality of the Lexington center Diminishing financial resources Loss of funding to services /organizations Need more visibility of resources such as Heritage Museum Lack of civility between groups who have different attitudes about town management Busy people — lack of time to participate in civic discourse Need for gathering, working together of community Need public space in which to meet Need for distribution for small businesses Visibility of small businesses Need to assure participation in local business through awareness of local resources Parking Snow removal is a problem in Lexington Lack of vision for Lexington future image Lack of planning for future type of town that Lexington is becoming Need for discussion of vision and image for Lexington Need to share Lexington 2020 Vision study outcomes with the community Perception that Town is run by a small group Need to open governance process Business community hard to get involved Structure of town committees is difficult Poor leadership Poor management, specifically of citizen participation Local programming quality, both signal and production quality Diversity Hayden Recreation Center awards not covered Lack of coverage of nonprofit organizations — need to look to positives, why people live here Financial /budget cuts — especially to non - profits A- 15 Support ongoing financing to non - profits — need to protect the reasons people live in Lexington Recognition of non - profits and their services and cultural contribution Coverage by AT &T only — problems in local program distribution: RCN and AT &T schedule agreement needed Image of Lexington Informed electorate /political process needs to be expanded to disenfranchised Acrimony: lack of civility in public discussion Need for ground rules for public discourse Programming on history not available Tech efficient private sector, but deficient as a town, need more tech savvy at Town Hall Sharing of information is difficult — no learning from the past, studies sit on shelves, need forums on study findings Communications — there is a lack of centralized communication Selectmen meeting taped live Local programming issues (lack of coordination) with RCN and AT &T Lack of debate for citizen participation in civic issues Communication void Newspaper lacking in coverage of full community and nonprofit organizations Importance of access to town records not given enough attention Lack of resources in Town government Financial crisis Issue of funding to community media center No coverage of school committee, planning board meetings Level of animosity in public discourse Diversity —need voices of different points of view Need for better town communications More information will help inform and have better debate Communication between town residents and decision makers Taxes /budget Financial constraints of town Affordable housing Expansion of Hanscom Airbase Need voice to disenfranchised citizens Infrastructure for town Aging population Limitation on services to seniors Noise from 128 Transportation (poor public transportation) Need for senior center (x 5!) Land use /protection Real or perceived income gap Demographics of town Participation in town government Mansionization Poor local television, inadequate resources A -16 Problems between RCN and AT &T for local programming distribution Poor local media, including newspaper Town committee work difficult to follow in participation by residents is often difficult because of poor communications Budget — financial constraints of the Town Economy Stratification of the community Individual interests in competition are creating negativity and a lack of civility Religious issues Managing growth and development Affordable housing with the cost of real estate out of control Land use issues Teen issues Lack of youth programs Teen expression apathetic, not engaged Teen center needed badly Some disenfranchised teens (but not all) need services Stagnant or declining central business district Lack of adequate field /ICE building space for recreation programs Lack of communication between all organizations in town Centralized sharing of ideas is needed People work independently without collaboration because of poor communication Duplication of efforts because of poor communication Group isolation because of poor communication Need recreation and sports representation on program advisor committee A -17 b) Brainstorming Responses from Question 1 sorted into Key Issues: Key Issue #1 Town Issues and Concerns Budget cuts /town finances Lexington is information "hungry," community needs information and more resources to produce information back to the community Aging population Budget Historical society funding Increased tax base Disposition of DPW site Bedford Street Recycling /trash disposal Town unity vs. divisive attitudes Youth activities — lacking programs for youth Lack of funds — domestic violence, lack of teen center and after school programs Aging population needs services General aesthetics of town Tax base, finances Quality of schools Recycling and waste removal Trash disposal Open space protection Need for inactivity among town groups Priorities in town, try to meet needs with limited resources for seniors and parents of youth Community building Road management Anxiety and growing paranoia about what is happening in meetings, Selectmen's, school, etc., when one is not able to view them live Diminishing financial resources Loss of funding to services /organizations Lack of civility between groups who have different attitudes about town management Need for gathering, working together of community Need public space in which to meet Visibility of small businesses Snow removal is a problem in Lexington Lack of vision for Lexington future image Lack of planning for future type of town that Lexington is becoming Need for discussion of vision and image for Lexington Need to share Lexington 2020 Vision study outcomes with the community Perception that town is run by a small group Need to open governance process Structure of town committees is difficult Poor leadership Poor management, specifically of citizen participation Financial /budget cuts — especially to non - profits Support ongoing financing to non - profits — need to protect reasons people live in Lexington Image of Lexington Need for ground rules for public discourse Tech efficient private sector, but deficient as a town, need more tech savvy at Town Hall A -18 Communications —there is a lack of centralized communication Selectmen meeting taped live Local programming issues (lack of coordination) with RCN and AT &T Communication void Importance of access to town records not given enough attention Lack of resources in Town government Financial crisis Issue of funding to community media center No coverage of school committee, planning board meetings Level of animosity in public discourse Communication between town residents and decision makers Taxes /budget Financial constraints of town Infrastructure for town Land use /protection Real or perceived income gap Town committee work difficult to follow in participation by residents is often difficult because of poor communications Budget — financial constraints of the Town Economy Managing growth and development Land use issues Lack of youth programs Teen center needed badly Stagnant or declining central business district Need recreation and sports representation on program advisor committee A -19 Key Issue #2 Technology / Communications No broadband service (AT &T) Aging equipment at schools Lexington is information "hungry," community needs information and more resources to produce information back to the community Difficulty in getting information out and sharing it Disposition of new guidelines for civic discourse Communication and importance of issues for seniors and shut -in residents Civility of public discourse Communication of local information Live coverage of municipal meetings Coverage of local events Aging population, need for communication resources Need for serving the community in a time efficient manner - taping, replay time Need for inactivity among town groups Town scheduling information for viewers Need live coverage capability Two cable systems creates divide of viewership of local programs (problem with AT &T and RCN distribution) Quality of signal a problem (unwatchable) Media literacy needed Newspaper no longer meets coverage needs of town Need more visibility of resources such as Heritage Museum Lack of civility between groups who have different attitudes about town management Need for gathering, working together of community Need public space in which to meet Local programming quality, both signal and production quality Need to share Lexington 2020 Vision study outcomes with the community Need for discussion of vision and image for Lexington Lack of coverage of nonprofit organizations — need to look to positives, why people live here Coverage by AT &T only — problems in local program distribution: RCN and AT &T schedule agreement needed Informed electorate /political process needs to be expanded to disenfranchised Tech efficient private sector, but deficient as a town, we need more tech savvy at Town Hall Sharing of information is difficult — no learning from the past, studies sit on shelves, need forums on study findings Communications — there is a lack of centralized communication Selectmen meeting taped live Local programming issues (lack of coordination) with RCN and AT &T Lack of debate for citizen participation in civic issues Communication void Newspaper lacking in coverage of full community and nonprofit organizations Issue of funding to community media center No coverage of school committee, planning board meetings Level of animosity in public discourse Need for better town communications More information will help inform and have better debate Communication between town residents and decision makers Need voice to disenfranchised citizens A -2o Infrastructure for town Poor local television, inadequate resources Problems between RCN and AT &T for local programming distribution Poor local media, including newspaper Town committee work difficult to follow in participation by residents is often difficult because of poor communications Individual interests in competition are creating negativity and a lack of civility Lack of communication between all organizations in town Centralized sharing of ideas is needed People work independently without collaboration because of poor communication Duplication of efforts because of poor communication Group isolation because of poor communication A -21 Key Issue #3 Growth / Economic Development / Cost of Living Growth change in Lexington demographics Housing /affordability Housing costs because of rising real estate prices Condos Affordable housing, real estate costs Diversity of population Spiraling medical costs Historical society funding Tourism in Lexington Increased tax base Traffic Tourism Hanscom Air Field Expansion (no commercial travel to be permitted at field) Affordability of real estate Population of shut -ins Hanscom Field expansion Traffic Senior population, youth population and school services are a pull on service monies Maintain vitality of the Lexington center Diminishing financial resources Loss of funding to services /organizations Visibility of small businesses Need to assure participation in local business through awareness of local resources Lack of vision for Lexington future image Lack of planning for future type of town that Lexington is becoming Need for discussion of vision and image for Lexington Need to share Lexington 2020 Vision study outcomes with the community Business community hard to get involved Support ongoing financing to non - profits —need to protect reasons people live in Lexington Recognition of non - profits and their services and cultural contribution Image of Lexington Lack of resources in Town government Financial crisis Financial constraints of town Affordable housing Expansion of Hanscom Airbase Infrastructure for town Transportation (poor public transportation) Land use /protection Budget — financial constraints of the Town Economy Managing growth and development Affordable housing with the cost of real estate out of control Land use issues Stagnant or declining central business district Key Issue #4 Education and Services for Youth / Seniors More resources and training at Lexington High School on media literacy and production A -22 Lack of services for youth Stress level of students in Lexington from school —they have no free time because of college prep priorities Resume - driven involvement Educational excellence, matching school quality with budget cuts Site for a Senior Center Teen (issues) Drugs Youth activities — lacking programs for youth Family concerns for families on the edge Lack of funds — domestic violence, Lack of teen center and after school programs Aging population needs services Communication and importance of issues for seniors and shut -in residents Aging population, need for communication resources Population of shut -ins Priorities in town, try to meet needs with limited resources for seniors and parents of youth Media literacy needed Senior population, youth population and school services are a pull on service monies Loss of funding to services /organizations Hayden Recreation Center awards not covered Limitation on services to seniors Need for senior center (x 5!) Teen issues Lack of youth programs Teen expression apathetic, not engaged Teen center needed badly Some disenfranchised teens (but not all) need services Lack of adequate field /ICE building space for recreation programs Need recreation and sports representation on program advisor committee A -23 Key Issue #5 Health &Health Services Aging population Lack of services for youth Stress level of students in Lexington from school —they have no free time because of college prep priorities Spiraling medical costs Site for a Senior Center Teen (issues) Drugs Youth activities — lacking programs for youth Family concerns for families on the edge Lack of funds — domestic violence, lack of teen center and after school programs Aging population needs services Aging population, need for communication resources Population of shut -ins Priorities in town, try to meet needs with limited resources for seniors and parents of youth Senior population, youth population and school services are a pull on service monies Loss of funding to services /organizations Communications —there is a lack of centralized communication Aging population Limitation on services to seniors Need for senior center (x 5!) Teen issues Lack of youth programs Teen center needed badly Some disenfranchised teens (but not all) need services A -24 Key Issue #6 Infrastructure / Traffic / Transportation Hanscom Field expansion Disposition of DPW site Bedford Street Traffic Hanscom Air Field Expansion (no commercial travel to be permitted at field) Hanscom Field expansion Traffic Road management Need public space in which to meet Parking Expansion of Hanscom Airbase Infrastructure for town Transportation (poor public transportation) Key Issue #7 Demographic Changes / Civil Unity Aging population Highly educated, very sophisticated population Growth change in Lexington demographics Diversity of population Town unity vs. divisive attitudes Aging population needs services Aging population — need for services Aging population, need for communication resources Population of shut -ins Diversity of community Age stratification — tax issues misunderstood Diversity Diversity — need voices of different points of view Aging population Real or perceived income gap Demographics of town Stratification of the community Religious issues Teen expression apathetic, not engaged A -2s Question #2: What are the Key Challenges /Barriers to Communicating Now? a) Raw brainstorming responses to Question 2 from each session: Aging equipment at AT &T studio in schools Not enough equipment No digital equipment Not state -of- the -art resources at Lexington High School for web based technology Need coordination of information Changing "volunteer " - based staff Lack of centralized management of resources Different systems do not carry local programs (RCN and AT &T problem) Lack of crossover in local programs on both systems Lack of I -Net connectivity for all to use Lack of production capabilities at school system Older computers Program incompatibility on computers No staffing support for community bulletin boards and Town web site Older citizens not computer savvy Lack of information about "studio" in town Condos having SMATVsystems and no access channels Lack of awareness of AT &T studio resources Lack of after school and summer programs for youth Lack of public space for people to meet Lack of information of programs Lack of quality Town dialogue Old money vs. new money Seniors lack communication capability No coverage of Town meeting No live coverage of Selectmen's, school committee, town meeting and other meetings Lack of support of multicultural programming A -26 Lack of cross programming on both cable systems (RCN and AT &T) Lack of resources to provide the local programming over the web Lack of video on demand capacity Lack of newspaper responsiveness and coverage —staff size /distribution numbers Lack of quality in coverage of meetings Noisy signal on local channel Lack of coordination of information onto local channels /bulletin board channel Lack of training for volunteers Lack of appropriate equipment for volunteers to use Reaching audience /knowing that there is and having feedback as to who has watched your program Lack of effective outreach to develop volunteer base (PEG studio) Lack of community involvement Lack of adult participation in production at PEG studio, especially evenings Lack of effective management of community bulletin board Lack of effective management of local programming Live capacity at Town Hall and other places in town Lack of coverage of other town meetings and how to get involved in town governance Need more focus on performance and delivery Inferior technical equipment, not compatible with Sony VCR, remote, etc. Poor picture quality Frequent outages Poor inferior service by senior telephone service, busy signal inability to get response Failure to deliver promises (refunds promised for outages time system down were never delivered) Lack of civility among groups with different needs Lack of time Lack of communication between committees and work being done Lack of system for pooling resources to work together Overlap of committee work Lack of clear reporting of committee activities to keep community informed Lack of effective leadership to clearly mobilize Lack of integrated technology with community ideas and challenges Vital resources, such as museum and library, under - utilized A -27 Two cable system, problem of delivery of local programming Double effort for less service, no live capacity on RCN Lack of schedule for local programming Lack of quality signal on local channels makes programs unwatchable Lack of programs on RCN channels Poor production values Poor equipment Poor training for content development Lack of outreach to many organizations — coverage of their efforts Lack of diversity on local programming Two cable system distribution problem, lack of coordination between CAN and AT &T Controversy avoided because of acrimony, no local dialogue opportunities Lack of equipment available to public for local coverage — local debate Lack of training for productions Lack of coverage of Arts/Cultural, Town events Need to get information out on museum programs available to Lexington residents Need increased awareness Antiquated organizations Lack funds for goal coordination of local information Lack of people to help Lack training on new technologies Mentoring /volunteer coordinators No unified place for postings or to see our community Lack leadership to local programming resources Lack of newspaper coverage Lack of central source for media Lack of access to database in public review (note: this concern is NOT held by all participants, who feel that some public information should be accessed only with sensitivity to individual right to privacy) Lack of coordination between RCN and AT &T Lack of money to manage web site Lack of perceived value of forming local programming entity A -28 Lack of local coverage by town newspaper Lack of information about what is on cable No information on RCN Financial limitation of agencies List serves that are partial Lack of access to list serves and coordination of information Lack of local coordinator in town to organize and get information on activities, meetings, events, to public Need print mainly for people who don't have computers (not everyone has email) Lack of equipment for local TV coverage and events Lack of assistance for local TV coverage and events Town web site difficult to use Need for update of Town web Lack of coordination for public input and participation in committees of the town Cost of mailings Cost of print Who to help with marketing efforts Need to understand how to use technology Help to do things — training new ways to do things Lack of communication between organizations and community groups Duplication of efforts because of lack of coordination Lack of venue for sports information Problem inherent to volunteer organizations that rely on help from unpaid staff Over committed volunteers, hard to get communication out re: projects /needs Conflicts of busy people Website does not solve problems of telephone calls List serve grouping does not necessarily reach everyone or get them to meet deadlines Getting volunteers and having them follow through so it doesn't fall back on few active workers A -29 b) Brainstorming responses from Question 2 sorted into Key Challenges and Barriers: Key Challenge #1 Lack of Equipment, Infrastructure and Centralized Management of Resources Aging equipment at AT &T studio in schools Not enough equipment No digital equipment Not state -of- the -art resources at Lexington High School for web based technology Lack of centralized management of resources Different systems do not carry local programs (RCN and AT &T problem) Lack of crossover in local programs on both systems Lack of I -Net connectivity for all to use Lack of production capabilities at school system Older computers Program incompatibility on computers Lack of public space for people to meet Lack of cross programming on both cable systems (RCN and AT &T) Lack of resources to provide the local programming over the web Lack of video on demand capacity Noisy signal on local channel Lack of coordination of information onto local channels /bulletin board channel Lack of appropriate equipment for volunteers to use Live capacity at Town Hall and other places in town Inferior technical equipment, not compatible with Sony VCR, remote, etc. Poor picture quality Frequent outages Two cable system, problem of delivery of local programming Lack of quality signal on local channels makes programs unwatchable Lack of programs on RCN channels Poor production values Poor equipment Poor training for content development Two cable system distribution problem, lack of coordination between CAN and AT &T Lack of equipment available to public for local coverage — local debate Lack of central source for media Lack of coordination between RCN and AT &T Lack of equipment for local TV coverage and events A-30 Key Challenge #2 Better Oversight and Planning for Effective Uses of Media Lack of centralized management of resources No staffing support for community bulletin boards and Town web site Lack of information about "studio" in town Lack of awareness of AT &T studio resources Lack of after school and summer programs for youth Lack of support of multicultural programming Reaching audience /knowing that there is and having feedback as to who has watched your program Lack of adult participation in production at PEG studio, especially evenings Lack of effective management of community bulletin board Lack of effective management of local programming Need more focus on performance and delivery Lack of system for pooling resources to work together Lack of effective leadership to clearly mobilize Lack of people to help Lack training on new technologies Mentoring /volunteer coordinators Lack leadership to local programming resources Lack of perceived value of forming local programming entity Lack of assistance for local TV coverage and events Lack of coordination for public input and participation in committees of the town Who to help with marketing efforts Need to understand how to use technology Help to do things — training new ways to do things Lack of communication between organizations and community groups Key Challenge #3 Lack of Time, Attention, Knowledge and Collaboration Changing "volunteer " - based staff Older citizens not computer savvy Seniors lack communication capability Lack of coordination of information onto local channels /bulletin board channel Lack of training for volunteers Lack of effective outreach to develop volunteer base (PEG studio) Lack of community involvement Lack of adult participation in production at PEG studio, especially evenings Lack of civility among groups with different needs Lack of time Lack of communication between committees and work being done Lack of system for pooling resources to work together Need increased awareness Need to understand how to use technology Help to do things — training new ways to do things Lack of communication between organizations and community groups Duplication of efforts because of lack of coordination Problem inherent to volunteer organizations that rely on help from unpaid staff Over committed volunteers, hard to get communication out re: projects /needs Conflicts of busy people A -31 Getting volunteers and having them follow through so it doesn't fall back on few active workers Key Challenge #4 Lack of Effective Media Outlets Lack of information about "studio" in town Lack of awareness of AT &T studio resources Lack of newspaper responsiveness and coverage — staff size /distribution numbers Lack of effective management of local programming Lack of programs on RCN channels Two cable system distribution problem, lack of coordination between RCN and AT &T Lack funds for goal coordination of local information No unified place for postings or to see our community Lack of newspaper coverage Lack of central source for media Lack of access to database in public review (note: this concern is NOT held by all participants, who feel that some public information should be accessed only with sensitivity to individual right to privacy) Lack of money to manage web site Lack of perceived value of forming local programming entity Lack of local coverage by town newspaper List serves that are partial Lack of access to list serves and coordination of information Need print mainly for people who don't have computers (not everyone has email) Need for update of Town web Lack of venue for sports information Website does not solve problems of telephone calls List serve grouping does not necessarily reach everyone or get them to meet deadlines Key Challenge #5 Problems with Existing Programming Lack of information of programs Lack of quality Town dialogue No coverage of Town meeting No live coverage of Selectmen's, school committee, town meeting and other meetings Lack of support of multicultural programming Lack of cross programming on both cable systems (RCN and AT &T) Lack of video on demand capacity Lack of quality in coverage of meetings Noisy signal on local channel Lack of coordination of information onto local channels /bulletin board channel Reaching audience /having feedback as to who has watched your program Lack of coverage of other town meetings and how to get involved in town governance Need more focus on performance and delivery Poor picture quality Frequent outages Two cable system, problem of delivery of local programming Double effort for less service, no live capacity on RCN Lack of schedule for local programming Lack of quality signal on local channels makes programs unwatchable Lack of programs on RCN channels Poor production values A-32 Poor training for content development Lack of outreach to many organizations — coverage of their efforts Lack of diversity on local programming Two cable system distribution problem, lack of coordination between RCN and AT &T Controversy avoided because of acrimony, no local dialogue opportunities Lack of equipment available to public for local coverage — local debate Lack of coverage of Arts/Cultural, Town events Need to get information out on museum programs available to Lexington residents No unified place for postings or to see our community Lack leadership to local programming resources Lack of coordination between RCN and AT &T Lack of information about what is on cable No information on RCN Lack of venue for sports information Key Challenge #6 Training and Education Lack of after school and summer programs for youth Lack of training for volunteers Lack of community involvement Lack of adult participation in production at PEG studio, especially evenings Lack of effective leadership to clearly mobilize Lack of integrated technology with community ideas and challenges Poor production values Poor training for content development Lack of outreach to many organizations — coverage of their efforts Lack of training for productions Need increased awareness Lack training on new technologies Mentoring /volunteer coordinators Key Challenge #7 Affordability and Costs Lack funds for goal coordination of local information Lack of money to manage web site Financial limitation of agencies Cost of mailings Cost of print A-33 Question #3: How could you use PEG Access or the Cable System? a) Raw brainstorming responses to Question 3 from each session: Coordinated communication to provide information to all residents in the same manner Centralized calendar of town activities and events Cable book club Cable programs for youth Build good community relations between school and local media entities Publicity needed that reaches youth (specifically) School band -type events at community media center Collaborations with school music at community media center More foreign language programming Student, "kid" programs in other languages Senior programs Exercise programs for aging population Information and programs on resources for disabled Schedule that directs viewers to local programming School events Communication for seniors Live coverage of Selectmen's, sports, town meetings More cultural programs, religious activities and services Disabled programs on resources Accommodations for the deaf Nationally produced programs for disabled Live coverage of local meetings (Planning, Selectmen, Board of Education, etc.) Emails on programs for feedback Phone banks for taking and understanding community feedback Live town meetings over both systems (RCN and AT &T) Sporting events live Capability of I -Net drop School events live and taped Parades and town events (I -Net drops in town) Reenactment/historical events covered Community calendar /bulletin board Outreach, coverage about Town services Information about town services and resources Who's who at Town Hall Local analysis of national issues Committee and meeting schedules How to use system A-34 Taping of meetings with interactivity by technology, across distance participation, and customized experience Language capability for multilingual communities Government information packaged /produced so that viewers will watch, listen and learn Raising awareness about traffic and street issues, and other things that people may not know about Diversity explored through programming Cable cooking Fitness Show School events /activities Cultural /information programs Groups of local businesses, forums Museum exhibitions, programs to include, for example, ballet, music exhibits coverage Exposure for performing arts, local programs and schedules Recreational possibilities for local business employees (what's local for people who commute to work ?) Promotion of Lexington special events — parking planning, etc., for participants Tourism and Lexington highlights need special visibility Historical — on demand programming on Lexington history Lexington Garden Club — wildflowers, trees of Lexington Lexington Historical Society, coverage of activities Selectmen /School Education Board /Planning meetings — good quality signal, live coverage Sports youth Awards recognition Find ways to market image of Lexington History of Lexington Tourism in Lexington Visuals of Lexington on channels Information on studies /discussion of works like Lexington 2020 Vision — forums on town planning initiatives Leadership programs and Town meetings on TV How to run for office Interactive information on application for programs on channels an on Town web Explanation of resources "How to Use" PEG Access Community Bulletin Board that reflects programming, events and coverage of events Artists in studio Arts programming for all ages Art talks by artist Art summer programs /Show & Tell Art — high school students dance performance Art talks All kinds of music A-35 Show community — faces and programs of artists In home learning — arts and crafts Access to town information Database retrieval Profile new businesses and technology in town Profiles of human service organizations and social service resources Local events (i.e., Bicentennial Band) Capacity for environmental video with fixed camera on town (buildings, views of town) All major town committee meetings covered Planning board live School committee live Coverage of more town meetings, specific agendas and posting of scheduled meetings Public comment through email and calls Elder issues programs Long term care — profiles and issues Lots of repeats to reach people with easy schedules Public affairs programming — teens, seniors, cross population, multiple cultures Training and production with resources in new senior center Music, local bands Celebrating arts and cultures Celebrating diversity Coverage of activities at senior center — health, exercise program, social /political forums, information on daycare and home care Programs for shut -ins Local programs put onto both systems (RCN and AT &T) Profiles from other towns on what a senior center could be (what works and what does not) News, local forums and discussions Game of the week — hockey and all other sports — youth sports, high school, elder exercise /sports Coverage of "older men's teams" Education about facilities and services in town Promotion — preview of "Great Meadows, i.e., cross country skiing on golf course — and other seasonal uses of public spaces Advertising of "try out" schedules to expand access for others to information about programs with limited enrollment space; now, those who know get in, those who are new to town or kids just coming of age don't get information to compete for enrollments Sports listing Local telephone numbers Information for newcomers to town about resources Last minute choices and opportunities for cancellation Wireless contact to information center for sports schedules and cancellations History programs Profiles of recreation "hidden gems" — bike paths, etc. Recreation and open space A-36 Live coverage of sports Basketball, hockey coverage Track meets, etc. are not so easy to cover because the need for special production equipment Programs at a "youth park" skate boarding coverage and competitions to engage youth Road races in town Patriot's day parade Reenactments of Battle of Lexington Media literacy b) Comments from space provided in participant questionnaire for further input: Broad range of arts /cultural events that take place on a regular basis — enhanced cable access would be the logical vehicle to provide access to and awareness of these performances and cultural events Lexington hasn't even begun to capitalize on its unique historical significance as a means for self - promotion and tourism (thus economic development); enhanced cable access could provide a level of programming that addresses this untapped opportunity Film the Lexington Field and Garden club /Lexington Historical Society's "Holiday Open House" every year, early in December Lexington Field and Garden Club's "Arts -in- Bloom" at the Lexington Arts and Crafts every year in the spring Lexington Field and Garden Club's competition at the New England Flower Show and also at the MFA's competition at the "Arts -in- Bloom" Hayden Recreation Center precision ice skating — three teams in town, out of town and internationally Enhanced cable access could serve as a business attraction for smaller (i.e. start -ups and home - based) technology and science companies (thus adding to commercial desirability of Lexington) Broadcast of community (scientific) events such as the high school's annual science fair (including judging and winners) Science as R &D companies that educate the community on the latest innovations Announcement of web site for Recreation Center's information on membership, class registration, class and activity description, downloading class registration and membership forms, summer day camp Recreation Center activities, such as Halloween party, swim team meets, basketball tourney, Joe Burns (March tourney) and summer camp activities Skating facility events Direction of points of contact and web site of different sports and recreation facilities A-37 Question # 4: What Would Make It Easier to Use PEG Access or the Cable System? a) Raw brainstorming responses to Question 4 from each session: Broadband service Summer and weekend training and media projects for youth Expertise needed as town -wide resource Community media center and youth center combination Community media center near public transportation, Lexington High School, and Town Center Updated language in contract with contract "openers" to update language on new technologies Use language that is inclusive of technology development throughout contract Training funding support Web development staff Space for shared resources PEG under one roof Large space — good square footage Good audio as well as television production equipment Funds for equipment replacement throughout contract Two -way interactive capability of system (specific homes to school) I -net at all schools Community media center downlink with satellite equipment Customer service standards System maintenance by operator to include 24 -hour service for emergencies Senior discount Senior center access Production van — mobile production capability Training, hands -on with involvement for producers Internships Six channels convert into percentage of spectrum 5% to community media center Free program guide Cable to nursing homes Allocation of server space for PEG access users (broadband access set aside) More digital channels HDTV on cable system Staff to manage volunteer programs Training of youth and volunteer to produce and edit local programs State of the art curriculum for training Maintenance funding for equipment Access to all programming on both RCN and AT &T Sliding scale rate consideration for handicapped and the elderly (lifeline service) Community media center Quality of picture and sound controls on PEG Fact check all local programming before cablecasting Programming capacity over channels on digital server Equipment funding Gross revenue — 5% to community media center A -38 Web- casting equipment and server space on system Support for community media center — full 5% of gross revenue Training for staff, programming Provisions for pole positions and regulatory policy, "penalty" provisions (Enabling Ordinance update) High performance server for PEG access Local channel — specific to local residents Bill stuffers for PEG access, polling and surveys, 2 -3 times a year Staff for training community Production staff to cover events and assistance to volunteers Money for equipment Money for community media center facility Money for staff (nonprofit organizations) Educational resources /media literacy Nonprofit 501(c)3 community media center Mobile unit for production out in the town I -Net with local drops for production throughout the town (AT &T and RCN) AT &T /Comcast I -Net capability to provide back -up to RCN town commitment Drop "old" I -Net but insure I -Net for both AT &T and RCN system users Community media center to be included in town design of new facilities (senior center, youth center, new public building) Quality of signal on local channel held to compliance standards (penalties) Contract to include which meetings must be covered and by whom should operator continue to manage Government Access Standards for customer service: local responsiveness, local person on telephone; 24/7 regional technical support, 2 -3 hour window of scheduled home visits; phone answered on time; complaint review regularly, review of services annually Contract must include /emphasize better, more responsive customer service /provisions Coordinate PEG content with Town Internet sites so that non -cable subscribers can have access to PEG content (local information) Need live capacity for meeting and town events Community media center (head end for local channels) Shared channel for contiguous towns (regional channel) Shared channel line -up with one source programming Resources for program schedules Assure resources and channels at Hancock are maintained by new contract and RCN Live call -in programs Upgrade of equipment Advanced training to improve quality of programs Digitalization for archival of programs and segments Ability to subscribe to events through web Web casting equipment, server capacity to archive and program on demand Live on web Kitchen in studio Existing channel capacity or percentage of bandwidth A-39 Goodwill clause to develop a technologically savvy user Two -way capacity of cable system I -Net capacity to connect many (specific list) of town locations for two -way communications Town web -site support to make it an effective tool to provide services electronically Need connectivity to locations throughout Town Local control of management Training for use of infrastructure opportunities as well as production skills Community media center Facility /building space (big) Museum as space for location of media center 25% of spectrum Support money Equipment, funding for digital, state -of- the -art equipment Funding throughout term of contract Replacement of equipment Good signal quality Better production training Equipment for signal quality Production teams (coordinators) Schedule reliability Marketing of local programming /awareness outreach Production coordinator (staf) Space /facility financing Locations within community to house resources (collaborations) State of the art equipment Mobile production equipment Spectrum set aside Full 5% of gross revenue Nonprofit organizations spectrum Capacity of system to provide organization drops throughout Town Transition provisions with AT &T studio to Lexington non - profits Cable service to all Lexington residents Good, strong customer standards to be included in contract Fixed cameras in Selectmen meeting room for live coverage out of both systems Two -way capacity of system Use library for fundamental base of local channel management Infrastructure and equipment that makes production easy (user friendly) One -fifth connectivity to promote Town Center, interconnected to I -Net Interconnection of contiguous communities (towns /cities) Full 5% of gross revenues Negotiate 3% of gross revenue HDTV availability ASAP High speed to grow service level agreement; small number on each node to permit growth A -40 Lifeline service in all marketing materials Live capability at Town Hall Production equipment at Senior Center Centralized studio with enough capacity for the future Space for facility (access to transportation and town center) Equipment — money for equipment package with replacement funds throughout life of contract) Money /funding for new technologies Bandwidth spectrum set asides with incremental growth provisions Senior services in meeting rooms — handicap access throughout Government support of local programming Money for staff and support of channel Nonprofit organization management with 5% gross revenue Money for education programs Money for outreach Customer service standards — tech appointment window of two hours; local office for response to Lexington problems Real person on local phones Support concept of adding funding for PEG Access as externalized cost added to subscriber bills (see Monterey example), for modest cost per month, per subscriber, payment directly for PEG services /community media center Rebuild of system to maximum capacity 750 -860 MHz Address issue of management of local channels with RCN and AT &T — same programs and pooled resources for management of local resources, community media center Assure access to channel line -ups on both systems — same times, same programs, same schedules Moveable tracking equipment, which allows weight for camera angle at sports events Channels to include a recreation /sports channel Equipment — state of the art package Mobile production equipment Wireless microphone, etc. (for sports needs) Lighting equipment Training = staff to address production of sports Money for these purposes Having staff support PEG access Staff to manage resources Facility building with space for staff offices, studio, editing bays, equipment storage, computer lab and maintenance Web capacity of PEG information Set -aside bandwidth for information sharing on demand Server capacity equipment for streaming video and web casting Archive space Five percent of gross revenue — maximum funding possible Management staff to manage resources professionally Media literacy training A -41 Announcement of web site for Recreation Center's information on membership, class registration, class and activity description, downloading class registration and membership forms, summer day camp Recreation Center activities, such as Halloween party, swim team meets, basketball tourney, Joe Burns (March tourney) and summer camp activities Skating facility events Direction of points of contact and web site of different sports and recreation facilities A -42 b) Brainstorming responses from Question 4 sorted into Primary Categories of Concern: (1) PEG Access Equipment, Facilities and Channels Community media center and youth center combination Community media center near public transportation, Lexington High School, and Town Center Space for shared resources PEG under one roof Large space —good square footage Good audio as well as television production equipment Funds for equipment replacement throughout contract Community media center downlink with satellite equipment Customer service standards Production van — mobile production capability Six channels convert into percentage of spectrum Allocation of server space for PEG access users (broadband access set aside) More digital channels Staff to manage volunteer programs Maintenance funding for equipment Community media center Quality of picture and sound controls on PEG Programming capacity over channels on digital server Equipment funding Web - casting equipment and server space on system High performance server for PEG access Local channel — specific to local residents Money for equipment Money for community media center facility Mobile unit for production out in the town Community media center to be included in town design of new facilities (senior center, youth center, new public building) Quality of signal on local channel held to compliance standards (penalties) Community media center (head end for local channels) Assure resources and channels at Hancock are maintained by new contract and RCN Live call -in programs Upgrade of equipment Digitalization for archival of programs and segments Ability to subscribe to events through web Web casting equipment, server capacity to archive and program on demand Live on web Kitchen in studio Existing channel capacity or percentage of bandwidth Town web -site support to make it an effective tool to provide services electronically Facility /building space (big) Museum as space for location of media center 25% of spectrum (set aside) Equipment, funding for digital, state -of- the -art equipment Funding throughout term of contract Replacement of equipment Equipment for signal quality A -43 Space /facility financing Locations within community to house resources (collaborations) State of the art equipment Mobile production equipment Spectrum set aside Nonprofit organizations spectrum Fixed cameras in Selectmen meeting room for live coverage out of both systems Use library for fundamental base of local channel management Infrastructure and equipment that makes production easy (user friendly) Production equipment at Senior Center Centralized studio with enough capacity for the future Space for facility (access to transportation and town center) Equipment —money for equipment package with replacement funds throughout life of contract) Money /funding for new technologies Bandwidth spectrum set asides with incremental growth provisions Senior services in meeting rooms — handicap access throughout Moveable tracking equipment, which allows weight for camera angle at sports events Channels to include arecreation /sports channel Equipment —state of the art package Mobile production equipment Wireless microphone, etc. (for sports needs) Lighting equipment Money for these purposes Facility building with space for staff offices, studio, editing bays, equipment storage, computer lab and maintenance Web capacity of PEG information Set -aside bandwidth for information sharing on demand Server capacity equipment for streaming video and web casting Archive space A -44 (2) PEG Access Staffing, Policies & Procedures Web development staff 5% to community media center Fact check all local programming before cablecasting Gross revenue — 5% to community media center Support for community media center — full 5% of gross revenue Training for staff, programming Staff for training community Production staff to cover events and assistance to volunteers Money for staff (nonprofit organizations) Educational resources /media literacy Nonprofit 501(c)3 community media center Resources for program schedules Town web -site support to make it an effective tool to provide services electronically Local control of management Community media center Support money Funding throughout term of contract Replacement of equipment (fund) Production teams (coordinators) Schedule reliability Marketing of local programming /awareness outreach Production coordinator (staff) Full 5% of gross revenue Full 5% of gross revenues Negotiate 3% of gross revenue Government support of local programming Money for staff and support of channel Nonprofit organization management with 5% gross revenue Money for education programs Money for outreach Support concept of adding funding for PEG Access as externalized cost added to subscriber bills (see Monterey example), for modest cost per month, per subscriber, payment directly for PEG services /community media center Money for these purposes Having staff support PEG access Staff to manage resources Five percent of gross revenue — maximum funding possible Management staff to manage resources professionally A -45 (3) Bandwidth, Infrastructure &System Design Broadband service Two -way interactive capability of system (specific homes to school) I -net at all schools Senior center access Cable to nursing homes HDTV on cable system Access to all programming on both RCN and AT &T I -Net with local drops for production throughout the town (AT &T and RCN) AT &T /Comcast I -Net capability to provide back -up to RCN town commitment Drop "old" I -Net but insure I -Net for both AT &T and RCN system users Need live capacity for meeting and town events Community media center (head end for local channels) Shared channel for contiguous towns (regional channel) Shared channel line -up with one source programming Assure resources and channels at Hancock are maintained by new contract and RCN Live call -in programs (capacity) Two -way capacity of cable system I -Net capacity to connect many (specific list) of town locations for two -way communications Need connectivity to locations throughout Town Good signal quality Spectrum set aside Nonprofit organizations spectrum Capacity of system to provide organization drops throughout Town Cable service to all Lexington residents Two -way capacity of system Infrastructure and equipment that makes production easy (user friendly) One -fifth (spectrum) to promote Town Center, interconnected to I -Net Interconnection of contiguous communities (towns /cities) HDTV availability ASAP High speed to grow service level agreement; small number on each node to permit growth Live capability at Town Hall Rebuild of system to maximum capacity 750 -860 MHz Assure access to channel line -ups on both systems —same times, same programs, same schedules Web capacity of PEG information Set -aside bandwidth for information sharing on demand Server capacity equipment for streaming video and web casting Archive space A -46 (4) Training Summer and weekend training and media projects for youth Expertise needed as town -wide resource Training funding support Web development staff Training, hands -on with involvement for producers Internships Training of youth and volunteer to produce and edit local programs State of the art curriculum for training Training for staff, programming Staff for training community Advanced training to improve quality of programs Training for use of infrastructure opportunities as well as production skills Better production training Money for education programs Training =staff to address production of sports Media literacy training (5) Customer and Community Relations Customer service standards System maintenance by operator to include 24 -hour service for emergencies Senior discount Free program guide Standards for customer service: Local responsiveness, local person on telephone; 24/7 regional technical support, 2 -3 hour window for scheduled home visits; phone answered on time; complaint review regularly, review of services annually Contract must include /emphasize better, more responsive customer service /provisions Good, strong customer standards to be included in contract Lifeline service in all marketing materials Customer service standards — tech appointment window of two hours; local office for response to Lexington problems Real person on local phones A -47 (6) Regulatory Issues Updated language in contract with contract "openers" to update language on new technologies Use language that is inclusive of technology development throughout contract System maintenance by operator to include 24 -hour service for emergencies Sliding scale rate consideration for handicapped and the elderly (lifeline service) Provisions for pole positions and regulatory policy, "penalty" provisions (Enabling Ordinance update) Quality of signal on local channel held to compliance standards (penalties) Contract to include which meetings must be covered and by whom should operator continue to manage Government Access Goodwill clause to develop a technologically savvy user (7) Outreach and Promotion Bill stuffers for PEG access, polling and surveys, 2 -3 times a year Coordinate PEG content with Town Internet sites so that non -cable subscribers can have access to PEG content (local information) Resources for program schedules Town web -site support to make it an effective tool to provide services electronically Marketing of local programming /awareness outreach Cable service to all Lexington residents Money for outreach Assure access to channel line -ups on both systems —same times, same programs, same schedules A -48