HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-01-23 SB Packet6F R
O
Town of Reading
Meeting Posting with Agenda
Jss9aINCORpfl�
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
Board of Selectmen
Date: 2018 -01 -23 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: Reading Town Hall
Address: 16 Lowell Street
Purpose: General Business
2618 JAN 18 P 3- 13 1
Location: Selectmen Meeting Room
Agenda:
Meeting Called By: Caitlin Saunders on behalf of Chairman John Arena
Notices and agendas are to be posted 48 hours in advance of the meetings excluding
Saturdays, Sundays and Legal Holidays.. Please keep in mind the Town Clerk's hours of
operation and make necessary arrangements to be sure your posting is made in an
adequate amount of time. A listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be
discussed at the meeting must be on the agenda.
All Meeting Postings must be submitted in typed format; handwritten notices will not be accepted.
Topics of Discussion:
1) Reports and Comments
a. Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments
b. Public Comment
C. Town Manager's /Assistant Town Manager's Report
2) Open Session for topics not reasonably anticipated 48
hours in advance of the meeting
3) Proclamations /Certificates of Appreciation
4) Personnel & Appointments
5) Discussion /Action Items
a. Appoint Library Trustee
b. Review RCTV Cable Community Needs Assessment
C. Housing Production Plan
d. Wayfinding Presentation
e. Discuss Downtown Parking Process
f. Overview of BOS Meeting on 1/30
6) Approval of Minutes
7) Licenses, Permits and Approvals
8) Executive Session
9) Correspondence
a. Legal Budget Document
b. Email from Joanne Senders; re: Girl Scouts Proclamation request
C. Correspondence from Xfinity; re: Contact Change
d. Correspondence from David Monaha; re: Depot Sticker Fee
e. Correspondence from National Grid; re: Yearly Operational Plan
f. Email from Etain O'Dea, re: Override
g. Email from Verizon, re: LFA Notification
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
h. Correspondence from The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, re: Open Meeting
Law Complaint
This Agenda has been prepared in advance and represents a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed
at the meeting. However the agenda does not necessarily Include all matters which may be taken up at this meeting.
Page i 1
ID1scuss & vote Override lBoard 1 7:15 1
February 7, 2018 (FINCOMBudget Meeting (Schools) Wednesday j
FI ebruary 8.`2017 IFINCOMBudget Meeting (Town) Thursday
Office Hour
Appoint Library Trustee - joint meeting with
Board of Library Trustees
Brzezenski/
Arena
7:15
Review of RCTV Cable Community Needs
Assessment
Kraunelis
7:45
Housing Production Plan
Delios
8:15
Wayfinding Presentation
Delios
8:45
Discuss Downtown Parking process
Delios
9:30
January 24, 2018
Financial Forum III
Wednesday
ID1scuss & vote Override lBoard 1 7:15 1
February 7, 2018 (FINCOMBudget Meeting (Schools) Wednesday j
FI ebruary 8.`2017 IFINCOMBudget Meeting (Town) Thursday
Office Hour
John Halsey
6:30
Birch Meadow Recreation Subcommittee
LeLacheur
7:20
Discuss BOS Policies: Article 1 General
Operating Procedures
Board
8:00
Selectmen Goals - update
LeLacheur
9:00
Preview Warrant for April Town Meeting
LeLacheur
9:15
February 14, 2017
FINCOM Budget Meeting (Misc.)
Wednesday
February 15 2017
FINCOM Budget Meeting - Vote Budget
Thursday
Town Accountant Quaterly Review Angstrom 7:15
Close Warrant for April Town Meeting LeLacheur 7:45
Discuss BOS Policies: Article 2 Volunteers,
Boards and Committees Board 8:00
To discuss strategy with respect to Collective
Executive Session Bargaining LeLacheur 9:15
March 7,2018 FINCOM- Vote Annual TM Warran t A rticles Wednesday
Office Hour I Dan Ensminger 1 1 6:30
Approve Water /Sewer /Storm Water Rates for
HEARING FY19 LeLacheur 7:30
Approve BOS Policies: Article 1 General
HEARING Operating Procedures LeLacheur 8:15
Approve BOS Policies: Article 2 Volunteers,
HEARING Boards and Committees LeLacheur 9:00
Office Hour Barry Berman 1 1 6:30
April 23, 2018
Annual Town Meeting I
Monday
April 26, 2018
Annual Town Meeting II
Thursday
April 30, 2018
Annual Town Meeting III
Monday
May 1, 2018
Tuesday
Office Hour
Andrew Friedmann
6:30
May 3, 2018
Annual Town Meeting IV
Thursday
May 7, 2018
Annual Town Meeting V
Monday
Approve FY19 Non Union Classification and
Hearing Compensation Plans Perkins 7:15
Town Accountant Ouaterly Review Angstrom 7:20
Future Agendas
Discuss Cell Tower project
Percival
Discuss Oakland Road land public process
LeLacheur
Discuss Liquor License policy
LeLacheur
Percy Avenue: improvements on a private way
LeLacheur
Downtown Parking
Segalla
Recurring Items
Close Warrant: Nov 117 TM by 9/26
Close Warrant: Apr'18 TM by 2/27
Review BOS /TM Goals
Dec & June
Semi -ann
Appointments of Boards & Committees
June
Annual
Hearing
Approve Classification & Compensation
June
Annual
Hearing
Tax Classification
October
Annual
Approve licenses
December
Annual
Reports to BOS
Town Accountant Report
Qtrly
Economic Development Director
Tri -ann
RCTV members Report
Semi -ann
CAB (RMLD) member Report
Semi -ann
MAPC member Report
Annual
Reading Housing Authority Report
Annual
Reading Ice Arena Report
Annual
BOS Appointed Boards & Committees
Annual
Town of Reading
Meeting Minutes
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
Board of Selectmen
Date: 2013 -12 -17
Building: Reading Town Hall
Address: 16 Lowell Street
Purpose: General Business
Attendees: Members - Present:
Time: 7 :00 PM
Location: Selectmen Meeting Room
Chairman James Bonazoli, Vice Chairman John Arena, Secretary Ben Tafoya,
Selectmen Daniel Ensminger and Marsie West
Members - Not Present:
Others Present:
Town Manager Bob LeLacheur, Nancy Dockser, John Halsey, Tom O'Connor,
Kevin Brown, Dave Talbot
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Secretary Ben Tafoya
Topics of Discussion:
Reports and Comments
Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments — Marsie West noted there was no attendance at the
office hour.
Ben Tafoya announced he will not be running for re- election in the Spring. James Bonazoli
thanked him for his years of service.
Town Manager's /Assistant Town Manager's Report — The Town Manager noted that the State
has announced that the primary to replace Senator Clark is Tuesday, March 4, 2014 and the
general election is Tuesday, April 1. He is requesting to combine the elections on April 1, 2014
for the community's convenience. All three towns around us are combining.
A motion by Ensminger seconded by West to move the 2014 Local Election to April 1. 2014
was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0.
Personnel & Appointments
Library Trustee — David Hutchinson called the Library Board to order. John Brzezenski was
interviewed by the Board of Selectmen and Library Board of Trustees.
Daniel Ensminger asked how he would foster good relations with the Board of Selectmen and
Mr. Brzezenski indicated that communication is the key.
Tafoya moved and Ensminger seconded that the Board of Selectmen and Library Board of
Trustees place the following name into nomination for one position on the Library Board
of Trustees with a term expiring April 1. 2014: John E. BrzezenskL Mr. Brzezensli
received 10 votes and was appointed.
Page 1 1 \
Board of Selectmen Meeting— December 17, 2013 —page 2
Housing; Authority Council on Aging Recreation Committee — John Arena noted that the
Volunteer Appointment Subcommittee met and interviewed applicants.
Ensmineer moved and Arena seconded that the Board of Selectmen the Volunteer
Appointment Subcommittee's recommendations to the Board of Selectmen for the
appointment of the following members to various Boards, Committees, and Commissions
for terms beginning December 17, 2013 as listed below:
• _Madeline Hodgdon to the Housing Authority with a term expiring June 30,
2017;
• Donavin Bentley to the Council on Aging with a term expiring June 30, 2016;
• John Bernie Winne to the Recreation Committee as an Associate with a term
expiring June 30 2014.
Each candidate received five votes and was appointed.
Discussion/Action Items
Continued Hearing — Washington Park Final Design - Recreation Administrator John Feudo
reviewed the plan. He noted the field is being moved over slightly so the tennis courts had to
come out. There is a new entranceway, a new tennis court, a new basketball court, a refurbished
sport court area, a new water fountain, a newly set monument, and paved walkways.
James Bonazoli asked if people can play tennis at the same time a baseball game is going on and
John Feudo indicated yes.
A motion by Tafova seconded by Ensminger to close the hearing on the Washington Park
Final Design was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0.
A motion by Tafova seconded by West to approve the Washington Park Final Design as
shown on the plan entitled "Washington Park Improvements" dated July 20, 2013 was
approved by a vote of 5 -0-0.
The Board then discussed the process for making changes to the Birch Meadow Master Plan. It
was decided to continue the process in place whereby the Recreation Committee will hold the
hearings, and if it is approved, send it along to the Board of Selectmen for their final approval.
CAB (RMLD) Report - RMLD General Manager Colleen O'Brien, Jane Parentu and Bob
Fournier were present. Ms. O'Brien noted she was there on behalf of CAB member Tony
Capobianco to provide an update on a rate increase that is being discussed at RMLD. She noted
that in looking at the FY13 and FY14 budgets, and planning the FY15 budget, she found an
absence of a six year plan. She asked staff to put together data. There is a trend of kilowatt
hours being flat. The base revenues will not cover all commitments. They are looking at a 9%
rate increase for six months to cover the commitments. Without the 9% increase they are
looking at a net income of $380,000. The CAB wants to delay the increase until February. The
9% increase gets them back to 5.71 % on net of return with an income of $2 million. The RMLD
should have had a rate increase two years ago in smaller increments. The FYI budget has a
3.5% increase. A 9% increase for a typical family is approximately $3 per family. She also
noted that delaying doesn't make it go away. In addition she wants to look at the impact with the
auditors and our credit rating.
Page 12 tNa
MONETTE VERRIER
TOWN CLERK
READING, MASS.
30 Kurchian Lane Reading 1 781 - 439 -5288 1 Monette.verrier @gmail.com
HIS JAN -8 P 12: 511
January 8, 2018
Ms. Laura A. Gemme
Town Clerk
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867
Dear Ms. Gemme,
I respectfully submit my application for the vacancy on the Library Board of Trustees. I feel I
am an ideal candidate for this position as I have been a longtime Reading Public Library
supporter since moving to town in 1996. Over the course of my 21 years in Reading, I have
been a constant patron and have raised my children on story times, sing -a- longs, library
events, the teen room, on -line tutoring services, museum passes, etc. We have utilized NOBLE
when material we want is unavailable in our library, we have checked out books, magazines,
games, movies, audiobooks and play aways. In addition to being an active user of the RPL, I
am a member of the Friends of Reading Public Library and a supporter of the Reading Public
Library Foundation. I was also very involved in both Debt Exclusion campaigns (2013 and
2014) in support of the magnificent library renovation.
My enthusiasm for the Reading Public Library comes from a strong belief in public libraries. I
believe that libraries are much more than the books on the shelves. Libraries are the hub of a
community. They provide a welcoming environment for all regardless of age, race or gender.
They provide free educational services in a time where everything has a price tag. They
provide valuable workspace for telecommuters and students alike. I believe so strongly that
libraries are the hub of a community that, as I do college tours with my oldest daughter, we
make it a point to visit the library on each campus, and consider this an important factor in
the upcoming decision.
As previously mentioned, I have been a Reading resident for 21 years, moving to town in
1996. 1 have been married to my husband, Peter, for 21 years and we have two daughters
ages 17 and 13. Professionally, I am a Human Resources Manager for a Health Policy
Consulting Firm.
I am excited for and ready to take on the position and associated responsibilities of a Library
Board Trustee. I have the time, energy and initiative you are looking for to support the library
staff through current budget discussions and future planning. I am committed to supporting
the Mission, Vision and Core Values of the Reading Public Library. I look forward to hearing
from you.
Sincerely,
'4KJAi�'
Monette Verrler
2
5c�
Patrick T. Egan
8 Oak Ridge Road
Reading, MA 01867
January 5, 2018
Via email and hand delivery
Laura Gemme, Town Clerk
16 Lowell St.
Reading, MA 01867
Re: Board of Library Trustees Vacancy
Dear Ms. Gemme:
I am writing to be considered for the current vacancy on the Board of Library Trustees.
I have been a resident of Reading since 2001. From the outset, my family and I have been active
members of the library, taking advantage of its many services. From children's reading programs, to touch -
a -truck days, to historic house tours, to using the library as my home base when "working from home," we
have all benefited from the library's many services, programs and events. I am at a point where I would like
to become more active and engaged in the community and I think this is an opportunity to support a
wonderful institution.
While my family and I know that the library is a tremendous resource, I do sense that it is under-
utilized and under- appreciated. I am constantly amazed by the number of people I encounter who do not
take advantage of its many offerings. I would welcome the chance to get involved .in not only
overseeing administrative and financial issues, but also by serving as an ambassador for the library. The
newly. renovated library is a point of pride for Reading. At a time when people are increasingly worried
about town finances and school performance, the library can and should serve as a focal point to
provide much needed programs to encourage learning and curiosity for the community.
By way of background, 1 am a lawyer at a firm based in Boston, Berman Tabacco. During the past
18 years, my practice has focused largely on complex securities litigation representing principally public
pension funds, as well as representing whistleblowers before the Securities and Exchange Commission and
other federal and state agencies. In my work, I deal closely with several public entities and unions, including
state, county and municipal pension funds. As such, I am familiar with the workings and responsibilities of
boards and trustees. Further, I have a range of experience in management and executing complex projects,
promoting causes and managing teams. I would be happy to apply those skills, coupled with an open mind
and inquisitive nature, to help serve the library.
I am happy to provide any additional information you. many require, and I thank you for your
consideration.
Very truly yours,
atrick T. Eg
(781) 254 -5938
ptegan5 @gmail.com
0
Saunders, Caitlin
From: LeLacheur, Bob
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 3:23 PM
To: Saunders, Caitlin
Subject: FW: [Reading MA] Override in April (Sent by Michelle Lugus, mwli0208 @gmail.com)
BOS packet
Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. CFA
Town Manager, Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street, Reading, MA 01867
townmanager @ci.reading.ma.us
(P) 781 - 942 -9043;
(F) 781 - 942 -9037
www.readingma.gov
Town Hall Hours:
Monday, Wednesday and Thursday: 7:30 a.m - 5:30 p.m.;Tuesday: 7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.; Friday: CLOSED
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: vtsdmailer @vt -s.net [mailto:vtsdmailer @vt- s.net]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 2:30 PM
To: Reading - Selectmen
Subject: [Reading MA] Override in April (Sent by Michelle Lugus, mwli0208 @gmail.com)
Hello Board of Selectmen,
Michelle Lugus (mwli0208 @gmail.com) has sent you a message via your contact form
(https: / /www.readingma.gov /user /475 /contact) at Reading MA.
If you don't want to receive such e- mails, you can change your settings at https: / /www.readingma.gov /user /475 /edit.
Message:
Hello- I'm writing to express my concerns about the school budget cuts that could arise if there is no override in April.
My husband & I moved to Reading as a young, married professional couple with a baby. Our hope was to make our
home in Reading our "forever home" and raise our children here.
Five and a half years later, our daughter is in the wonderful Barrows Elementary school. Our son will be joining her in
1.5 years. We moved to Reading for its affordability, commutability, the wonderful small community and lastly, for the
schools. By not holding this override vote in April (or however long it takes for the tax increase to pass), we are directly
hurting the community. Schools will begin to deteriorate and unable to compete with the surrounding communities.
This in turn will directly affect every single person's real estate value. I'd much rather invest in our town and the schools
before it is too late. I know we will end up paying more in property taxes but in the long run, it is the best thing we can
do for our town.
Please do what you can to make this happen. Reading is thriving right now.
S,
More and more couples with kids want to buy in Reading. Give them a good reason to buy. Don't give them a reason to
pass up on living here OR give people a reason to leave.
Thank you for reading.
Michelle
5a�
COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT
COMMUNITY CABLE - RELATED NEEDS AND INTERESTS
READING COMMUNITY TELEVISION
READING, MASSACHUSETTS
December 8, 2017
Prepared by
THE BUSKE GROUP
4808 T STREET
SACRAMENTO, CA 95819
(916) 441 -6277
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paqe
1. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ............................................... ..............................1
11. COMMUNITY CABLE NEEDS AND INTERESTS ........................ ............................... 2
A.
OVERVIEW AND METHODOLOGY ..................................... ...............................
2
B.
COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP WORKSHOPS AND ON -LINE SURVEY ...........
3
C.
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS AND BRAINSTORMING DURING ...................
19
COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS
D.
PEG ACCESS OPERATIONS, FACILITIES, AND EQUIPMENT .......................
26
E.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS ..................................... ...............................
34
III. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING COMMUNITY CABLE - RELATED ................. 41
NEEDS AND INTERESTS
A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................. ............................... 41
B. CABLE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ....................................... ............................... 41
C. SUBSCRIBER SERVICES AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ........................ 45
D. PEG ACCESS ..................................................................... ............................... 47
APPENDICES
1. Community Needs & Interests Questionnaire
2. Responses to the Community Needs and Interests Questionnaire
2a. Questionnaire Open -Ended Responses: Comments about Comcast
2b. Questionnaire Open -Ended Responses: Comments about RCTV
3. Notes from Focus Group Brainstorming Sessions
4. RCTV Local Programming Operations Questionnaire
5. RCTV Video Facility Inventory
6. Suggested RCTV Equipment Replacement/Upgrade Packages
5b�
IDENTIFICATION OF CURRENT AND FUTURE COMMUNITY
CABLE - RELATED NEEDS AND INTERESTS
READING COMMUNITY TELEVISION
I. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
The Buske Group was retained by Reading Community Television ( "RCTV "), to conduct
an assessment of community cable - related needs and interests, for use during license
renewal negotiations with Comcast. The Buske Group was authorized to conduct research in
order to identify current and future community cable - related needs and interests.
The existing Comcast cable license, awarded by the Town of Reading in 2008, expires
in November of 2018. Comcast reportedly serves about 4,100 subscribers in Reading.
(Verizon also has a license to provide cable service in the Town, which expires in January of
2021. Verizon reportedly serves about 4,700 subscribers in Reading.)
As a matter of federal law, the cable - related needs and interests of residents are
protected in part through the License renewal process. As part of the License renewal
process, the Town is responsible for identifying cable - related needs and interest, and
translating those interests into License requirements. During renewal proceedings, the Town
may identify basic requirements for cable system capacity, functionality, and customer
service, and require a cable operator 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:
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.
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 a technology arena that is rapidly evolving, such as cable communications.
�jb�
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 the Town of Reading license area, public input was critical. Following
is a brief description of the tasks performed by The Buske Group in an effort to identify
community cable - related needs and interests in the Town of Reading:
• Reviewed the Comcast and Verizon franchise agreements and related documents.
• Conducted Franchise Renewal Leadership team meeting 'in January 2017 to brief
key stakeholders on the needs assessment process and solicit input and
involvement in assisting with public outreach.
• Conducted a series of three community focus group workshops on June 7 -8, 2017,
attended by representatives of area community organizations, educational
institutions and government agencies, as well as unaffiliated local residents - to
help identify current and future cable - related needs and ascertain attitudes about
existing cable services and programming.
• Distributed questionnaires to focus group participants that were designed to identify
community cable - related needs and interests, 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 community cable - related needs and interests.
• Prepared and conducted an on -line survey that included the same questions as those
in the focus group questionnaire (thereby permitting residents and representatives of
Reading area organizations and institutions who were unable to participate in the
focus groups to provide input to this Community Needs Assessment).
• Prepared and distributed questionnaires regarding the existing PEG Access facilities,
equipment, programming and services for completion by the RCTV staff members
that oversee these activities in Reading.
• Met with RCTV staff and observed the PEG Access equipment packages at the
RCTV facility, Reading Town Hall, and in the Reading Public Library.
Information was gathered from representatives of the following groups:
• Comcast and Verizon cable subscribers and non - subscribers
• Arts, culture, media and heritage organizations
• Community, non - profit, and civic groups and organizations
• Faith -based organizations
• Local government administrators, department heads, staff, and elected officials
• Local schools
• Members of the general public
5ba
B. COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUP WORKSHOPS AND ON -LINE SURVEY
On June 7 =8, 2017, The Buske Group led a series of three focus group workshops
in Reading. All interested community members were invited to participate.
The focus group workshops provided the following information: (1) an overview of
the cable license renewal process; (2) an explanation of how the current cable system works;
and (3) an exploration of how individuals, community groups, government agencies,
businesses, schools, and other organizations 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 a "Community Needs & Interests
Questionnaire" that was designed to identify community cable - related needs and interests,
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 community cable - related
needs and interests) was also distributed to focus group participants.
A total of 77 different people attended the focus group workshops. These
individuals were invited to fill out the aforementioned questionnaire, or complete an on -line
version of the questionnaire. A total of 240 questionnaires were completed by people who
either attended a focus group workshop or completed the questionnaire on -line. (A copy of the
paper questionnaire is provided as Appendix 1 to this report; Appendix 2 displays the responses
to each survey question.) A list of the 42 organizational and institutional affiliations indicated by
these participants is provided below, continuing on the following page. (Many participants did not
indicate an organizational or institutional affiliation, and some of the organizations listed were
indicated by more than one participant.)
• Arts Reading
• Boy Scouts
• Celebration Trust
• Colonial Chorus Players
• Colonial Manor Realty
• Creative Arts
• Freemason
• Highway Twenty Eight
3 505
Organizational Affiliations of Focus Group /On -Line Survey Participants
• Historic District Commission
• Human Relations Advisory Committee
• Mystic Runners
• Old South United Methodist Church
• Reading Antiquarian Society
• Reading Art Association
• Reading Board of Selectmen
• Reading Community Singers
• Reading Community Television
• Reading Cooperative Bank
• Reading Finance Committee
• Reading Girl Scouts
• Reading Knights of Columbus
• Reading Neighbors Network
• Reading Post
• Reading Public Library
• Reading Rotary
• Reading Fall Street Faire
• RIV Club
• Reading Memorial High School (RMHS)
• RMHS Drama
• RMHS Interact
• RMHS PTO
• RMHS Robotics
• School Committee
• Sports Zone 101
• Town Meeting
• Town of Reading
• Troop 702
• Unitarian Universalist Church of Reading
• Valvoline Instant Oil Change
• Walkable Reading
• Yes for Reading
• YMCA
4
Over 80% of the focus group and on -line survey questionnaire respondents (198
individuals) said that they subscribe to a cable TV service in Reading, and slightly more than
half (51.5 %) of these subscribers are Comcast customers, as illustrated below.
Of the 102 Comcast subscribers who responded to the survey, about three - fourths
of them (74.594o) said they have been Comcast customers for over five years.
How long have you subscribed to the Comcast cable TV service in Reading?
trs try„t F95 ° <,
ftc 5Yna�s 19.Gi'k
6 to l0 Vean 11.91%
OrabY ut f $980%
Oudt itrczw nr 295 °a,
thsr.'t ue,rc.;nsp�+
40, ,Ins 66'b 701 8— 9M. ioU'
5
hb�
Of the Comcast cable TV subscribers, 87% indicated that they pay extra to receive
high definition ( "HU) channels (of this group, almost half — 47.2% -- said that they rarely or
never watch channels that are not delivered in HD).
Of Comcast's cable TV subscribers, 67.7% subscribe to Comcast's internet and
telephone service, and 26.5% subscribe to Comcast's internet service (but not telephone service).
The Comcast subscribers were asked to indicate which one source they used most
often to find information about programming on their cable TV channels. The most frequently
indicated source (71.6%) was Comcast's on- screen program guide, as shown - below.
Which one source of information do you use most often to find
information about programming on cable TV channels?
PLEASE CHECK ONE OF THESE:
TV Section of 1.86
Newspaper
"TV Guide" 0 9f3��
Magazine
The Internet ; 3.92%
Comcast's on- Screen
Program Guide
"Channel
Surfing, 8182%
71.67%
30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 80% 100%
6 5b%
About two- thirds (65.7 %) of the Comcast subscribers said they use Comcast's on-
screen program guide "frequently" or "always" to decide what to watch.
The Comcast subscribers were also asked to indicate their level of satisfaction
with Comcast's service in nine different areas. The following chart displays their responses.
The items rated "Very Good" or "Good" by at least three - fourths of the respondents were the
quality of the picture and sound (89.1 %), the reliability of the Comcast cable TV service
(78.2°/x), and the number and variety of channels offered (76 %). The only item rated "Very
Poor" or "Poor" by more than one -fifth of the respondents was the rates charged by Comcast
for cable TV service (47.5 %).
Please indicate your level of satisfaction with Comcast's cable TV
service (NOT telephone or
Internet service)
in
the following
areas.
(If the item is not applicable to you, indicate that
by checking
"N /A. ")
VERY
GOOD
FAIR
POOR
VERY
DON'T NIA
GOOD
POOR
KNOW
Oualityof the picture and sound
38.61%
50.50%
8,91 %
0.99 °id
0.0076
0.00% 0.99`,'
39
51
9
P
0
0 1
Reliability of Comeast's cable TV service
34.65%
43.56%
M83%
4.95 %,
0.00%
0.00% 0.00%
35
44
17
5
0
0 0
Number and variety of channels offered
34,00%
42,00%
21.00%
0.00"/
:3.00 i1c,
0,00c. 0.00 %,
34
42
21
0
3
0 0
Helpfulness of Comcast's cuslorner service
21.78.
31.68%
26.73`x"
s 94'XI
4.95%
3.96% 4.95 %,
representatives
22
32
27
6
5
4 5
The rates charged by Comcast for cable TV service
:3.96%
6.931,%
35:64%
27.72/0
19.80'
594% 0.00%
4
7
36
28
20
6 0
Ease of getting services installed or changed by
15.L4`X,
32.67 °i,,
23.76`7.,
10.89`%a
1.9811il.,
5.94`1% 8.91 "X:
Corricast
16
33
24
11
2
6 9
Erase of getting problems repaired car resolved by
13.86%
29.70%
29,70%
8.91%
5.94°x"
8.91% 2.97%
Comcast
14
30
30
9
6
9 3
Abshty to quickly spew to a customer service
13.861%
32.67"10
2217%
&91%
8.91 ;
About two- thirds of the Comcast subscriber - respondents said that they had tried to
contact Comcast by telephone during the past year. Of these respondents, 91.2% indicated
that their issue was not resolved using the Comcast automated telephone response system,
without talking to a person. When these individuals were asked how long they would estimate
that they waited to speak to a customer service representative, 69.4% indicated that they had
to wait one minute or longer, or were never connected. 61% of the Comcast subscriber-
respondents who were connected to a customer service representative by telephone
indicated that the CSR was able to resolve their issue.
Nearly one -third (32 %) of the Comcast subscriber - respondents indicated that they
had gone to a Comcast office during the past year. Of that group, 87.5% said that the
Comcast office staff was able to solve their problem. 63% of the Comcast subscriber -
respondents said that having an office near their home is "Very Important' or "Important' to
them, while 33% said this was "Not Very Important' or "Not Important at All."
The Comcast subscriber - respondents could provide any comments about the
Comcast cable TV service. All 66 comments are provided in Appendix 2a to this report.
Negative comments outnumbered positive /neutral comments, 54 to 12. The most common
criticisms were about the high cost, inability to only choose desired channels, and Comcast's
customer service.
The focus group and on -line questionnaire respondents who do not subscribe (or
have never subscribed) to Comcast's cable TV service in Reading were asked to indicate
(from a list provided to them) all of the reasons why they do not subscribe. Of those who
previously subscribed, the most frequently indicated reasons were: (1) " Comcast's cable TV
service is too expensive;" (2) "1 switched to Verizon or a satellite TV service (e.g., DirecTV,
DISH Network);" (3) " Comcast's customer service was poor," and (4) 1 subscribe to a program
service(s) delivered through the Internet (e.g., Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, Vudu)."
Of those who had never subscribed to Comcast's cable TV service in Reading, the
most frequently indicated reasons were: (1) "Comcast has a poor reputation;" (2) "1 subscribe
to a program service(s) delivered through the Internet (e.g., Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon
Prime, Vudu);" and (3) " Comcast's cable TV service is too expensive."
8 56,\o
Next, all respondents (including Comcast and Verizon subscribers and non -
subscribers) were asked if they were aware of the Reading Public, Education and
Government (PEG) Access channels. A very large majority (83.691o) answered "Yes ". Of
those who were aware of these channels, 38.9% said they watched the Public Access channel
at least once per month, as illustrated below:
How often do you watch the Reading Public Access channel?
Daily
1.01%
At least once
/ week
14.14%
DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
1- 3 times !
Provides programs that deal with local
month
23.74 1h
Less than once
`
/month
39.39%
Respondents who had watched the Public Access channel were asked to indicate
their opinion of five statements about this channel. Substantial majorities of them (56.1 % to
87.991o) said they "strongly agree" or "agree" with each of these statements.
Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading Public Access channel:
STRONGLY AGREE
AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DON'T KNOW
Provides programs that deal with local
36.94%
50.96%
1.27%
0.64%
10.19%
issues
58
80
2
1
16
Provides programs that publicize local
28.85%
48.08%
3.85%
1.28%
17.95%
services
45
75
6
2
28
Provides programs with diverse points of
14.01%
42.04%
8.92%
1.91%
33.12%
view
22
66
14
3
52
Provides valuable information
26.75%
56.05%
3.82%
0.64%
12.74%
42
88
6
1
20
Provides programs that are interesting to
16.03%
56.41%
10.90%
3.21%
13.46%
watch
25
88
17
5
21
9 5b \\
Of the respondents who were aware of the Reading PEG Access channels, 28.4%
said they watched the Education Access channel at least once per month, as illustrated below:
How often do you watch the Reading Education Access channel?
Daily 1 0.51%
At least once 9.14%
/ week
1- 3 times/
month 18.78%
Less than
57.48%
month
c 3 c 34.01%
73
9
Provides valuable information 22.66%
57.03%
4.69%
29
Don't Know
3.05%
Never
MEN= 24.87%
Not Applicable g,64% IN To Me
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% - 80% 90% 100%
Respondents who had watched the Education Access channel were asked to
indicate their opinion of three statements about this channel. At least two- thirds of them
(66.4% to 79.791o) said they "strongly agree" or "agree" with each of these statements.
Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading Educational Access channel:
STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE
Provides worthwhile educational 14.17%
57.48%
7.09%
programming 18
73
9
Provides valuable information 22.66%
57.03%
4.69%
29
73
6
Provides programs that are interesting to
watch
10.16% 56.25% 14.06%
13 72 18
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DON'T KNOW
2.36%
18.90%
3
24
1.56%
14.06%
2
18
2.34%
17.19%
3
22
Of the respondents who were aware of the Reading PEG Access channels, 36.6%
said they watched the RCTV Government Access channel at least once per month, as
illustrated below:
How often do you watch the Reading Government Access channel?
Daily
1.03%
At least once
/ week
12.37%
DON'T KNOW
Provides worthwhile local government
1- 3 times /
23.20%
month
0.00%
Less than once
yam' r 31.96%
/ month
�' �
Don't Know
4.12%
Never
= 17.53%
Not Applicable
IN 9.79%
To Me
0.00%
12.06%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Respondents who had watched the Government Access channel were also asked
to indicate their opinion of three statements about this channel. About three - fourths or more
of them (73.6% to 87.99,6) said they "strongly agree" or "agree" with each of these statements.
Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading Government Access channel:
11
5b��
STRONGLY AGREE
AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DON'T KNOW
Provides worthwhile local government
41.84%
46.10%
0.00%
0.00%
12.06%
programming
59
65
0
0
17
Provides valuable information
42.55%
43.26%
2.13%
0.00%
12.06%
60
61
3
0
17
Provides programs that are interesting to
23.57%
50.00%
11.43%
0.00%
15.00%
watch
33
70
16
0
21
11
5b��
The survey respondents who were aware of the Reading PEG Access channels
were then asked how they found out about the programming on these channels. As illustrated
below, the most frequent method was "channel surfing," followed by "RCTV's website."
Respondents who had watched one of these channels were asked, disregarding the
content of programs, to rate the picture and sound quality of these channels, as compared to
other channels they watch. As illustrated below, nearly half of them answered "lower quality ".
12
qO�a
About one - fourth (26.391o) of the respondents who were aware of the Reading PEG
Access channels said they had watched programs on RCTV's website (RCTV.org), and an
identical number of respondents said they did not know they could watch programs at
RCTV's website.
Respondents who were aware of the Reading PEG Access channels were provided
a list of programs shown on these channels and were asked to indicate how often they had
watched. Below is a chart that displays their responses. Most often mentioned as being
watched at least once per month were:
• Board of Selectmen Meetings (27.6 %)
• School Committee Meetings (19.9 %)
• Town Meeting (14.1 %)
• "K9 Tails" (12.5 %)
• "Delicious Simplicity" (11.8 %)
Please indicate if you have watched any of the following programs that are shown
on the Reading Public, Educational, and
Government Access channels
-- or RCTV's
website -- and how
regularly you have watched them.
(If this item is not applicable
to you, indicate that by checking
"NIA. ")
NEVER
LESS THAN
1 - 3 TIMES
AT LEAST
DON'T
N/A
MONTHLY
PER MONTH
WEEKLY
KNOW
Board of Selectmen
1823%
43 7
23.96%
3.65%
1, r�,�.�
9 95'i
meetings
35
84
46
7
3
17
School Committee meetings
28227'x,
42
17.60%
2.09%
10511
54
82
34
„
2
15
Town Meeting
2: 51 11,111
4e, 17'.;,
12.04%
2.09%
4.19 %,
109911",
43
92
2:3
4
€3
21
con�wvcii, n C( xlrrlissivo
51.32`5
26 9e+',,
tr 88""..
1 591,1111
2.0511
11 11 "S.
rnPOing"
97
1 3
?
ra
21
Zoo i ig G ,nrd of App-,P;
5;3 414.
25 401;,
6 35"k
6%
2 F351%
i 1 11
mr. =.s =t nt1 W
101
411
12
2
5
21
Planning Commission
56.38`1
2.47'1:,
4 79%
1 066 to
3, =J'=rr,
meetings
1061
43
9
2
6
22
E�hAI_
(36 49 <,
15 681./,
3 24`%
0 0011
2 '7 t`,>
11.89%
123
29
6
0
5
22
"K9 Tails"
"i.
18 469`i'o
10.87%
1.63%
1 091 f .'a
13 F34ax
101
34
20
3
2
24
'Delicious Simplicity"
52 4396.
22 46' a
10.70%
1.07%
1 07'.�,
12
98
X12
20
2
2
23
Community Conversation
49 20 ".>
28.341/,,
8.021 1
1.07%
2.1411':
1111 23"1
92
53
15
2
4
21
Stufy T =me w €1ir'Winny and
72 2811.,1
11) 311/,
4 26 `s..
0 54'z.
0 54'f
13 04 "`
Nan"
1333
19
(i
1
1
24
'Highway Tww+ ty -E ight'
68 1 11 ",t
1 1 891 1
3 78 n
1 01,,",
2 161,1
12 9'7`11,
126
22
7
2
4
2.3
13 5b�5
All survey respondents were asked how important they think it is to have cable TV
channels that feature programs produced by or about local residents, organizations, schools,
and government, or about issues of interest to Reading. A very large majority of them
(88.691o) said these local channels are "Very Important" (55.5%) or `Important' (33916).
Next, all survey respondents were asked two Yes /No questions. Following are those
questions and the percentage of respondents who answered "Yes ".
• Do you know that you, or the organizations you are involved with, can produce
programs to show on an RCTV channel and the RCTV.org website?
"Yes" = 66.1% (150 of 227 respondents to this question)
• Have you ever provided or participated in the production of a program, or appeared
as a guest on a program shown on an RCTV channel and the RCTV. org website?
"Yes" = 38.2% (87 of 228 respondents to this question)
The following series of questions were asked of the 87 survey respondents who said
that they had provided or participated in the production of a program, or appeared as a guest on a
program shown on an RCTV channel and RCTV's website. First, when asked how many
RCTV programs they had been involved with during the past two years, 1-5" was the largest
response grouping (52.9 %), followed by "more than 10" (14.9 %), as illustrated below.
These survey respondents were asked about the "impact" of their programs on
viewers. The most common impacts indicated by these respondents were "Participants who
appeared on my /our program were recognized in public by viewers" (35.7 %) and "Viewers
and supporters said they attended an event that was promoted in my /our program" (23.8 %).
When these survey respondents were asked to indicate how readily available the
RCTV production facilities and equipment were when they wanted to participate in the
production of a program (or material for a program), the most common responses were
"Usually' (40.2) and "Always" (36.8 %). Very large majorities of them (91.4 %) said the typical
condition of the RCTV facilities and equipment was "Excellent' (64.3 %) or "Good" (27.1 %).
Next, these survey respondents were asked if the quantity and technical capability
of the production equipment met their current needs. Nearly all (61 of 64 respondents to this
question, excluding those who said it was not applicable to them) answered "Yes ".
15
When these 87 survey respondents (who said that they had provided or participated
in the production of a program or appeared as a guest on a program shown on a RCTV channel)
were asked to indicate how important it is for the Reading Public, Education and Government
access channels to have the ability to transmit video programming live from locations
throughout Reading, 97% of them answered "Very Important' or "Important'.
These respondents were then asked to rate several services provided by the RCTV
staff. As shown in the table below, each service was rated "excellent" or "good" by more than
60% of the respondents, led by efforts to inform residents about RCTV's equipment, services
and programming (81.7 %) and production and other training services (75.6 %).
Please rate the quality of the following services provided by the RCTV staff:
EXCELLENT
GOOD
FAIR
POOR
VERY
NOT
POOR
APPLICABLE
Efforts to inform residents about RCTV's equipment,
35.37%
46.34%
7,32%
4.88%
0.00%
6.10%
services and programming
29
38
6
4
0
5
Production and other training services
51.22%
24.39%
7.32%
3.66%
0.00%
114101
42
20
6
3
0
11
Assistance in planning the creation of your program(s)
33.33%
32.10`i0
9:88 %
0.00%
0.00%
24.69%
27
26
8
0
0
20
Assistance in reserving production equipment
44.44%
25.93%
2.47%
0.00%
0.00%
27.16%
36
21
2
0
0
22
Assistance in the production of your program(s)
44.44%
25.93%
3.70%
0.00%
0.00`/«
25.93%
36
21
3
0
0
21
Maintenance of production equipment
38.27%
30.86%
3.70%
1.23%
0.00%
25.93%
31
25
3
1
0
21
Advice to help you improve your programs)
34.57%
28.40%
3.70%
0.00%
0.00%
33.33%
28
23
3
0
0
27
Assistance to help you promote your program(s)
25.93%
30.86%
8.64010
2.47%
0.00010
32.10%
21
25
7
2
0
26
Playback of your programs on cable TV
34.570/
33.33%
2.47%
0.00%
1.23%
28.400%
28
27
2
0
1
23
All survey respondents were invited to provide any other comments about the
programming and services offered by RCTV. All 72 comments are provided in Appendix 2b
to this report. Positive /neutral comments and suggestions outnumbered negative comments
by nearly 10 to 1 (65 to 7).
ip
5b��
All survey respondents were then provided a list of several types of local programs
or services, and were asked to indicate their level of interest in them. The table provided
below (and continuing on the following page) displays their responses. The items for which
two- thirds or more of the respondents indicated "very interested" or "interested" were:
• Local news and information (84.691o)
• Informational programs about services and activities of Reading organizations and
clubs (819/6)
• Program schedules for the Reading Public, Educational and Government Access
channels displayed on your cable company's on- screen program guide (75.391o)
• Live coverage of local events (sports, concerts, etc.) (75.191o)
• Community festivals, neighborhood events (72.2%)
• Government/public agency meetings (71.9%)
How interested are you in the following types of local cable TV programs or services:
VERY
INTERESTED
NEUTRAL
NOT VERY
NOT AT ALL
INTERESTED
INTERESTED
INTERESTED
Community festivals, neighborhood events
26.03%
46.12%
18.72%
5.94%
3.20%
57
101
41
13
7
Local programming channels in high definition
29.82%
29.82%
28.44%
8.26%
3.67%
65
65
62
18
8
Local programs on your cable company's
23.39%
34.86%
23.39%
11.93%
6.42%
video -on- demand service
51
76
51
26
14
Program schedules for the Reading Public,
41.55%
33.79%
19.18%
3.65%
1.83%
Educational and Government Access
91
74
42
8
4
channels displayed on your cable company's
on- screen program guide
Educational/instructional programs from local
22.48%
43.12%
24.31%
7.80%
2.29%
schools
49
94
53
17
5
Environmental programs
20.37%
41.20%
27.78%
6.48%
4.17%
44
89
60
14
9
Ethnic and cultural programs
18.98%
3133%
36.57%
5.09%
6.02%
41
72
79
11
13
Government/public agency meetings
28.57%
43.32%
21.66%
4.15%
2.30%
62
94
47
9
5
Government informational programs
25.23%
43.12%
21.10%
7.34%
3.21%
55
94
46
16
7
Health and fitness programs
13.55%
37.38%
35.05%
8.41%
5.61%
29
80
75
18
12
Informational programs about services and
25.93%
55.09%
15.28°1
1.85%
1.85%
activities of Reading organizations and clubs
56
119
33
4
4
Inspirational /personal development and
11.63%
32.56%
40.47%
7.91%
7.44%
learning programs
25
70
87
17
16
Live coverage of local events (sports,
38.25%
36.87%
19.82%
2.76%
2.30%
concerts, etc.)
83
80
43
6
5
Local church services and spiritual programs
11.11%
25.00%
32.87%
16.67%
14.35%
24
54
71
36
31
Levels of Interest in Specified Types of Local Cable TV Programs or Services (continued)
Local news and information
36.92%
47.66%
10.75%
3.27%
1.40%
79
102
23
7
3
Local sports and recreational activities
22.79%
41.40%
27.44%
4.19%
4.19%
49
89
59
9
9
Programs about Reading's history, arts and
28.11%
43.32%
19.35%
5.07%
4.15%
artists
61
94
42
11
9
Senior citizen activities and concerns
14.22%
28.90%
38.53%
11.47%
6.88%
31
63
84
25
15
Youth - produced programs
15.81%
33.49%
35.81%
8.84%
6.05%
34
72
77
19
13
Programs in languages other than English
5.07%
10.60%
37.79%
18.43%
28.11%
11
23
82
40
61
Programs produced in other communities
7.87%
27.78%
40.74%
12.96%
10.65%
near Reading
17
60
88
28
23
All survey respondents were provided a list of information sources, and were asked
to indicate how often they use each one to find out about the services available and activities
that occur in Reading. The sources with the most "frequently" and "always" indications were:
• Social media e.g., Facebook, Twitter, text messages, email] (51.8%)
• Websites of local organizations (44.994o)
• On -line news sites [e.g., boston.com] (36.2%)
Finally, all survey respondents were provided a list of media - related resources and
services and were asked if they would like to use or participate in any of them if offered by
RCTV in the future. They indicated their highest levels of interest (answering "Yes" or
"Maybe ") for:
• Training in the use of computers and software (60.9 %)
• Advanced media production training e.g., documentary production, advanced
lighting techniques, how to upload your videos to YouTube, etc.] (60.6 %)
• Free access to computers and the internet (51.4 %)
18 5bao
C. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS AND BRAINSTORMING DURING COMMUNITY
FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS
As mentioned earlier in this report, a portion of each of the focus group sessions
was set aside to allow participants to engage in a brainstorming process. During this time,
the participants were asked to consider and discuss a series of questions, including:
• What are the Key Local Issues Facing You, Reading Community
Organizations, Town Government, and Schools in the Next Ten Years?
• What Makes it Difficult for Community Organizations, Town Government
Departments, or Schools to Effectively Communicate Information to Their
Constituencies and the Residents of Reading?
• How Would You Like to Use the Community Access Channels, RCTV, and
the Cable System to Educate, Inform, and Entertain Reading residents?
• What Would Make It Easier for You (or Your Organization, Town Government
Department, or School) to Use the Community Access Channels, RCTV, or
the Cable System?
The information presented on the following pages 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 the brainstorming questions discussed during each focus group
meeting. Consequently, The Buske Group was able to identify frequently- mentioned
community needs, interests, and concerns. The areas of agreement and groupings of
responses to each question are presented in the analysis that follows. A copy of the notes
from each brainstorming session is included as Appendix 3 to this report.
It is important to note that the recommendations and thoughts generated during
these brainstorming sessions were independently developed by the focus group workshop
attendees, from diverse areas of interest throughout Reading.
Input Gathered During Focus Group Workshop Brainstorming Sessions
Question #1: What are the Key Local Issues Facing You, Reading Community
Organizations, Town Government, and Schools in the Next Ten Years?
The participants in the focus group sessions identified nearly 40 topics of concern
in the four areas listed below as key local issues. The areas are listed in the order of
frequency in which related topics were mentioned. The wording in parentheses represents a
sampling of focus group participants' comments and concerns in each area.
Primary Issues Identified
1. Communication - Related Issues (e.g., accuracy of information being distributed;
age- differentiated use of media to communicate with each other; getting
emergency information out to the public; lack of coordinated communication
between groups in Town; wide variety of ways that information is distributed)
2. Cost of Living /Funding Concerns (e.g., fear of loss of desired educational
programs and services due to budget cuts; funding and space for schools;
funding needed for public safety and administration; income /expenditure
imbalance; lack of affordable and appropriate performance space; taxes)
3. Technology, Telecommunications and Media (e.g., bandwidth issues; lack of
hotspots throughout Reading; millennials are cord - cutting; struggling
newspapers; transition of TV to the internet; wireless in schools)
4. Demographics - Related Issues (e.g., aging population; increasing intolerance of .
diversity; changing demographics; larger population of hearing- impaired
people; services for elderly are decreasing)
Question #2: What Makes it Difficult for Community Organizations, Town Government
Departments, or Schools to Effectively Communicate Information to Their
Constituencies and the Residents of Reading?
An analysis of the responses to this question resulted in the identification of four
primary areas of difficulty, in order of the frequency of comments related to each concern:
(1) lack of knowledge, awareness, interest, resources, skills, collaboration; (2) demographic,
legal, and other barriers; (3) audience - related difficulties; and (4) cable company - related
issues. Examples of the stated concerns that fall within these four areas of difficulty are
provided below.
Challenge #1: Lack of Knowledge, Awareness, Interest, Resources, Skills, Collaboration
• Access to hardware
• Lack of awareness of available RCTV services
• Lack of closed captions
• Lack of funds
• Lack of skills
• Lack of time
• Many Reading residents don't know about RCTV and it services
• More resources, funding, staff needed for RCTV
• Need more people with production /technical skills
• Not enough equipment and people to produce all the programs that might be
done
• Trained personnel are needed to make programs
• Training is needed for use of new technologies
Challenge #2: Demographic, Legal, and Other Barriers
• Aging population
• Copyright - related and other legal concerns
• Most media sources reject outside input
• Information "clutter"
• Seniors don't have necessary equipment to get information
21 5��
Challenge #3: Audience - Related Difficulties
• Don't have RCTV viewership info
• Fracturing of our society (people only want to hear what they agree with)
• Many ways that people get information
• RCTV programs are not readily available to the public
Challenge #4: Cable Company- Related Issues
• No information on EPG for RCTV
• RCTV not in HD
Question #3: How Would You Like to Use the Community Access Channels, RCTV, and the
Cable System to Educate, Inform, and Entertain Reading residents?
Over 60 suggestions of program content and technology applications were offered
by the participants in the focus group workshop sessions. They include the following:
Program Content:
• Behind the scenes look at schools
• Children's programming, with Library involvement
• Community calendar
• Concert coverage
• Coverage of all appointed and elected board meetings
• Coverage of presentations by prominent visitors speaking in Reading
• Coverage of weather - related events, local fires, elections, school events
• Debate coverage
• Emergency information on RCTV, as it is happening
• High school sports — all sports
• High school theatrical performance coverage
• Local news (daily or other regular news)
• Profiles of local businesses
5
Ways to Use Community Channels, RCTV, & Cable System to Communicate (continued)
Program Content (continued):
• Pet care
• Programs about how to use technologies
• PSAs about local issues
• School Council and PTO meetings
• School events and activities
• Special election coverage
• Sports talk show
Technology- Related Applications:
• Connectivity to nonprofit group facilities, in addition to public locations
• Continue existing RCTV facilities throughout Reading (and improve them)
• HD (advanced formats) available for PEG
• Interactive video conferencing
• On -line classes and certification in video production
• Production truck for live event coverage
• RCTV equipment located in schools
• RCTV programming available online and via other platforms (live, too)
• RCTV to conduct interactive surveys
• Use of an app to crowd - source content
23
5ba5
Question #4: What Would Make It Easier for You (or Your Organization, Town Government
Department, or School) to Use the Community Access Channels, RCTV, or
the Cable System?
Three primary categories of concern regarding improvements to make it easier to
use the Community Access Channels, RCTV or the cable system were identified by the focus
group participants. Those categories include, in order of the frequency of comments related to
each category of concern: (1) RCTV Staff, Assistance, Policies, Funding, Services, Promotion
and Training; (2) Cable Company Infrastructure, System Design, Services, Policies, etc.; and
(3) Facilities & Equipment. These categories, with a sampling of the suggestions that fall
within them, are listed below and on the next page
Category #1: RCTV Staff, Assistance, Policies, Funding, Services, Promotion & Training
• Ability to share content with other communities
• Adequate funding
• Announcements in high school about RCTV and opportunities for students
• Better audio on RCTV programs
• Classes at RCTV that are designed for adults (18 +)
• Continue to have receptive staff
• Creation of a "video public square " /portal
• "Help Desk" to assist producers and public
• Larger budget
• More parking at RCTV
• More training on social media
• On -line reservation system for equipment and training
• Readily available, trained people to help make programs
• Regularly scheduled training
• Training in use of new technologies
• Training on use of smartphones and similar tools to make programs for RCTV
• Up to date information on the RCTV community calendar
• Use of RCTV by local businesses
24
Category #2: Cable Company Infrastructure, System Design, Services Policies etc.
• Additional locations to pay bill, drop off equipment, etc.
• Better information regarding changes in the channel lineups
• Easier to use telephone contact system
• Funding "escalator" for RCTV support
• Having viewership information available
• Nearby full service customer service location
• Need RCTV in HD
• Less door -to -door solicitations
• RCTV available via cable company's on- demand service
• RCTV channels on EPG
• RCTV community event information displayed on music channels
• Senior discounts
• Set top box that can handle all remote sources of programming (at no extra
charge)
• Verizon offers local programs from many locations in the area, but Comcast
doesn't
Category #3: Facilities & Equipment
• Ability to include viewer interaction with live programs
• Closed- caption capability
• Live capability (sports, local events)
• Production truck (multi- camera)
• RCTV production spaces at other locations, too
• Simple to use equipment
25 r\n
'U
D. PEG ACCESS OPERATIONS, FACILITIES, AND EQUIPMENT
1. Brief Introduction to "PEG Access"
In 1984, Congress adopted the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as
amended (the "Cable Act "), which affirmed that local governments have the right to require
cable operators to set aside "channel capacity for public, educational or governmental use."
PEG Access channels, Congress explained, "provide groups and individuals who generally
have not had access to the electronic media with the opportunity to become sources of
information in the electronic marketplace." Therefore, it is the program producer, not the
cable operator, who determines (and is legally responsible for) the content of a PEG access
program. A request for a license (or renewal of an existing license) can be denied if a cable
operator fails to provide adequate PEG Access "channel capacity, facilities or financial
support." As a result, PEG access requirements have become a staple of cable
licenses /franchises during the past forty years, and an important source of localism.
However, just as the cable industry has evolved from the delivery of TV
services to a provider of video, voice, data services and many other ancillary services, PEG
access has also evolved. Equipment, business, and management techniques that might
have been appropriate forty years ago for the cable industry may not be appropriate today,
and the same goes for PEG Access.
Communities have had many years of experience to determine what helps
make PEG Access channels an asset for the entire community, and what inhibits their
effective use. Two broad access management models have developed during this time.
Under the first model, a minimal level of equipment, facilities and services are
provided, but it is up to the community to either use what is provided or not. Little effort is
made to promote use, or to make it easy to use the equipment that is provided by offering
training, assistance, ongoing encouragement, or sufficient hours of operation.
.Under the second model, equipment, facilities and services are also provided,
but a much more active role in the development of PEG Access related activities occurs.
PEG Access channels are promoted to a much greater degree, staff reaches out to the
community to encourage the use of the facilities and channels, a variety of training classes
26 5ba�
are offered, equipment is updated regularly, and a user - friendly environment is provided
where participants can perform the technical tasks required to create high - quality
programming that adequately conveys their message.
It has been widely recognized in the PEG access field that the very passive
approach of the first model generates little community interest or involvement. The second
model has worked very well in many small, medium and large communities throughout the
U.S., from Eureka, California to the boroughs of New York City; from Salem, Oregon to
Chicago; and from Olympia, Washington to Cambridge, Massachusetts. This model also
requires, at a minimum, adequate initial channel space, facilities, equipment and operational
support, plus ongoing and stable funding that permits expansion and replacement of
equipment over time. It is under this second model that the term "Community Media Center"
has evolved to acknowledge the importance of serving an area's community media needs.
When an assessment of current and future community cable - related needs
and interests is conducted, it is important to examine the resources presently available for
PEG Access. However, before proceeding further with this discussion, it may be useful to
present the following widely accepted definitions for the terms "Access," "Public Access,"
"Educational Access," "Government Access," and "PEG Access ":
"Access" generally means the availability of the cable system (i.e.,
channel capacity) for use by various agencies, institutions,
organizations, groups and individuals to acquire, create, edit and
distribute video programming. The cable company does not have
editorial control of the content of Access programming.
"Public Access" -- Organizations, non - profit groups, or individual
members of the general public, on a non - discriminatory, first -come, first -
served basis, are the primary or designated programmers or users.
"Educational Access" -- Schools, colleges and universities are the
primary or designated programmers or users.
"Governmental Access" -- Governmental institutions, departments,
agencies or their designees are the primary or designated programmers
or users.
"PEG Access" -- Public Access, Educational Access, and Governmental
Access, collectively.
WA
5P\ ba
2. Current PEG Access Environment in Reading
As part of a review of the PEG Access resources and services in Reading,
The Buske Group prepared a "Local Programming Operations Questionnaire," which was
completed by the RCTV staff (see Appendix 4). Their responses provided information about
RCTV's activities, including the community media services offered in Reading, staffing,
funding levels and sources, expenditures by category, and original programming figures.
RCTV staff also completed a "Community Media Facility Inventory" (see
Appendix 5, with attached inventory sheets that include items color -coded as follows: items
highlighted in pink have been retired, sold, traded in, disbursed, or labeled as "junk;" items
highlighted in yellow are described as in "Fair" or "Poor" condition; and items highlighted in
blue were purchased in 2010 or earlier). The Community Media Facility Inventory also
includes information about the RCTV production facility space, its hours of operation, portable
field production equipment packages, editing systems, studio equipment, the master
control /playback system, and production equipment in the Reading Town Hall Council
Chambers and the Reading Public Library.
RCTV manages the production and playback of programming on the three PEG
Access channels on the Comcast and Verizon cable systems that serve Reading:
• Public Access Channel 9 (Verizon channel 31), featuring a variety of local
programs and video content produced or sponsored by Reading residents and
local organizations.
• Education Access Channel 99 (Verizon channel 32), featuring local programs
that educate citizens about Reading school programs, events, goals and
issues, and coverage of School Committee meetings.
• Government Access Channel 22 (Verizon channel 33), which provides
coverage of Town Meetings, Board of Selectmen meetings, and several other
government meetings; and other programming to promote awareness and
understanding of government issues.
On June 7 -8, 2017, The Buske Group inspected the facilities and equipment used for
the development of PEG programming by RCTV staff and members of the public.
RCTV's production, editing and playback/master control facility (with about 5,000
square feet of interior space) is located at 557 Main Street in Reading. The facility is open from
3:00 to 8:OOpm on Monday, 10:OOam to 8:OOpm on Tuesday through Thursday, 10:OOam to
6:OOpm on Friday, and 10:00am to noon on Saturday, for a total of 45 hours per week.
28
5b3�
Over 95% of RCTV's funding is provided through allocations by the Town of
Reading from the license fees paid by Comcast and Verizon. Unrestricted funding from the
cable companies has grown in recent years, from $535,752 in 2014 to $556,702 in 2015 and
$574,427 in 2016. RCTV raised small amounts of other revenue from contributions, training
fees, and membership fees.
From 2014 to 2016, about 41% of RCTV's total expenditures were for
personnel costs — a percentage that is less than the typical amount -- approximately two -
thirds -- for community media centers in the U.S. RCTV has a total of five full -time equivalent
staff. During this three -year period, RCTV invested a significant amount in equipment
upgrades -- almost $300,000 in capital expenditures.
The RCTV website (www.RCTV.org) provides information about the facility's
location and operating hours; staff email addresses; a list of the RCTV Board members;
program listings for the Public, Educational and Government Access Channels; training class
descriptions, costs and schedules; community bulletin board information (including how to
submit material for posting on it); links to RCTV's Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube accounts;
and a link to facilitate online donations to RCTV.
A total 1,000 hours of first -run programming was reported by RCTV staff for
the Public, Educational and Government Access Channels in 2016 (programming information
was not available for previous years, due to a change in playback systems). 600 hours of the
first -run programming was presented on the Government Access channel, 250 hours on the
Public Access channel, and 150 hours on the Educational Access channel. Programs are
repeated frequently on each channel to fill the available time.
About half of the RCTV production equipment inventory that is still in use
today (including cameras, editing systems, studio lights, TriCaster switchers, etc., in the
RCTV facility, Reading Town Hall, Reading Memorial High School, and the Reading Public
Library) was purchased after 2010, is in good to new condition, and is HD- ready. (However,
since Comcast and Verizon do not allocate HD channels for PEG Access, programming must
be transmitted to the cable systems in standard definition.) Inventory items that are older and
in fair or poor condition will need to be replaced /upgraded sooner than the others.
The Buske Group took photos of video production equipment items in the
RCTV facility, the Council Chambers and a conference room in Reading Town Hall, and a
Reading Public Library meeting room. The photos are provided on the following pages.
29 5��
Photo 1: RCTV facility, 557 Main Street
Photo 3: RCTV Field Equipment Storage
Photo 5: RCTV Field Camera (Canon XF205)
30
Photo 7: RCTV Video Editing Station
Photo 8: RCTV Studio A
Photo 11: RCTV Studio Control Room
31
Photo 12: RCTV Screening Room
Photo 13: RCTV Master Control Room
Photo 17: Council Chambers
Photo 14: RCTV Props /Sets Storage
1 Chambers Camera*
Photo 18: Council Chambers Control Room Equipment*
* NOTE: Council Chambers cameras and control room switcher were updated after these June 2017 photos.
32 5b3a
Photo 19: Council Chambers Conference Room
Photo 20: Library Meeting Room
Photo 21: Library Meeting Room Camera
Photo 22: Library Meeting Room Control Equipment
33 5b�5
E. SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
The information gathered through this needs assessment process has helped to
identify many significant cable- related needs and interests for the Town of Reading. Concerns
that are considered to be primary in nature are listed on the following pages. Definite needs and
interests have been identified through the information collected via:
• responses on a total of 240 questionnaires completed by persons who answered them
on -line or at a focus group (these respondents indicated that they were affiliated with
42 different organizations and institutions in the Reading area);
• brainstorming by people who attended one of the three focus group workshops; and
• a review of existing local programming equipment, facilities and activities.
It is important to note that these are current needs and interests. We believe one can
reasonably assume that the communications needs of residents, institutions, and organizations
in Reading will evolve in the future as communications technologies advance.
General conclusions from 240 responses to the focus group /on -line survey:
• Over 80% of the focus group /on -line survey respondents said that they subscribe
to cable TV in Reading, and slightly more (51.5 %) of these subscribers are
Comcast customers. Of the Comcast subscribers:
* 87% pay extra to receive high definition (HD) channels (of the HD subscribers,
47% said that they rarely or never watch channels that are not delivered in HD);
* 68% subscribe to Comcast's internet and telephone service.
• When Comcast subscribers were asked to indicate the one source they used most
often to find information about programming on their cable TV channels, the most
frequently indicated source (72 %) was Comcast's on- screen program guide, eight
times as often as "channel surfing" (9 %), the next most popular response.
• When the Comcast subscriber - respondents were asked to indicate their "overall"
level of satisfaction with Comcast, 80% indicated that they were "Very Satisfied" or
"Somewhat Satisfied," as compared to 9% who said they were "Very Dissatisfied"
or " "Somewhat Dissatisfied."
34 �e3�
• Large majorities of respondents who subscribe to Comcast's cable TV service
answered either "Very Good" or "Good" when asked to indicate their level of
satisfaction with the quality of the picture and sound (89 %), the reliability of the
Comcast cable TV service (78 %), and the number and variety of channels offered
(76 %). The only item rated "Poor" or "Very Poor" by more than one -third of the
respondents was the rates charged by Comcast for cable TV service (47.5 %).
• About two- thirds of the Comcast subscriber - respondents said that they had tried to
contact Comcast by telephone during the past year. When asked to estimate how
long they waited to speak to a customer service representative, 69% indicated that
they had to wait one minute or longer, or were never connected. 61 % of those who
were eventually connected to a customer service representative by telephone
indicated that the CSR was able to resolve their issue.
• Nearly two - thirds (63 %) of the Comcast subscriber - respondents said that having
an office in Reading is "Very Important' or "Important' to them, while 33% said this
was "Not Very Important' or "Not Important at All."
• When subscribers were invited to provide any comments about their Comcast
cable TV service, negative comments outnumbered positive /neutral comments, 54
to 12. The most common criticisms were about the high cost, inability to only
choose desired channels, and Comcast's customer service.
• Of the focus group /on -line survey respondents who previously subscribed to
Comcast in Reading, their most frequently indicated reasons for no longer
subscribing were " Comcast's cable TV service is too expensive," followed by "I
switched to Verizon or a satellite TV service (e.g., DirecTV, DISH Network)" and
" Comcast's customer service was poor."
• 84% of all respondents (including Comcast and Verizon subscribers and non -
subscribers) said they were aware of Reading's Public, Education and Government
(PEG) Access channels. Of those who were aware of these channels:
* 39% said they watched the Public Access channel at least once per month.
* Very large majorities said they "strongly agree" or "agree" that the Public
Access channel "provides programs that deal with local issues" (87 %),
"provides valuable information" (83 %) and "provides programs that publicize
local services" (77 %).
* 28% said they watched the Education Access channel at least once per month.
* Very large majorities said they "strongly agree" or "agree" that the Education
Access channel "provides valuable information" (80 %), and "provides
worthwhile local educational programming" (72 %).
* 37% said they watched the Reading Government Access channel at least once
per month.
* Very large majorities said they "strongly agree" or "agree" that the Government
Access channel "provides worthwhile local government programming" (88 %),
and "provides valuable information" (86 %).
* Their most frequent method used to find out about the programming on the
Reading PEG Access channels was "channel surfing" (51%), followed by
"RCTV's website" (41 %).
* Disregarding the content of programs, 48% said the picture and sound quality
of the Reading PEG Access channels, as compared to the other channels that
they watch, was "lower quality'.
* About one - fourth (26.391o) of those who were aware of the PEG Access channels
said they had watched them on RCTV's website.
* The most frequently mentioned programs that these respondents said they had
watched at least once per month on the Reading PEG Access channels were
Board of Selectmen Meetings (27.6 %), School Committee Meetings (19.9 %),
Town Meeting (14.1 %), W9 Tails" (12.5 %), and "Delicious Simplicity" (11.8 %).
• When all of the focus group /on -line survey respondents were asked to indicate how
important they think it is to have cable TV channels that feature programs produced
by or about Reading residents, organizations, schools, and government, or about
issues of interest to Reading, a very large majority of them said these local
channels are "Very Important" (55.591o) or `Important" (33 %).
• 66% of all focus group /on -line survey respondents knew that they, or the
organizations thay are involved with, can produce programs to show on an RCTV
channel and the RCTV website.
• 38% (87 of 228 respondents to this question) said that they had provided, helped
to produce, or appeared as a guest on a program shown on a RCTV channel and
RCTV's website. Of those 87 respondents:
* when asked to indicate how many RCTV programs they had been involved with
during the past two years, 1-5" was the largest response grouping (53 %),
followed by "more than 10" (15 %);
* when asked to indicate the "impact" of their programs, the most common impacts
(each indicated by these respondents were "participants who appeared on
my /our program were recognized in public by viewers" (36 %) and "viewers and
supporters said they attended an event that was promoted in my /our program"
(27 %).
* when asked to indicate how readily available the RCTV production facilities and
equipment were when they wanted to participate in the production of a program
(or material for a program), the most common responses were "Usually' (40 %)
and "Always" (37 %);
* Nearly all of these respondents said the typical condition of the RCTV facilities
and equipment items was "Excellent' (64 %), or "Good" (27 %);
* nearly all of these respondents (other than those who said this question was not
applicable to them) said that the quantity and technical capability of the
production equipment met their current needs;
* 97% of these respondents said it was "Very Important' or "Important' for PEG
access channels to have the ability to transmit video programming live from
locations throughout Reading; and
* when asked to rate the quality of services provided by the RCTV staff, each
service was rated "excellent" or "good" by more than 60% of the respondents, led
by efforts to inform residents about RCTV's equipment, services and
programming (81.7 %) and production and other training services (75.6 %).
• When all survey respondents were invited to provide any other comments about
the programming and services offered by the RCTV, positive /neutral comments
outnumbered negative comments, 65 to 7.
• When all survey respondents were asked about their interest in several types of
local programs or services, the items with the most "Interested" or "Very Interested"
responses were "local news and information" (85 %), "informational programs about
services & activities of Reading organizations and clubs" (81 %), "program
schedules for the Reading Public, Education and Government Access channels
displayed on your cable company's on- screen program guide" (75.39'o'), "live
coverage of local events (sports, concerts, etc.)" (75.1 %), "community festivals,
neighborhood events" (72.2 %), and GovernmenYpublic agency meetings (71.99,6).
• When all survey respondents were provided a list of several types of information
sources, and were asked how often they use each of them to find out about the
services available and activities that occur in Reading, the sources with the most
"frequently" and "always" indications were "social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, text
messages, email]" (52 %) and "websites of local organizations (45916).
• When all of the survey respondents were provided a list of several media - related
resources and were asked if they would like to use or participate in any of them, if
offered by RCTV in the future, most of them answered "Yes" or "Maybe" to "training
in the use of computers and software" (60.9 %) "advanced media production
training" (60.6 %), and "free access to computers and the internet' (51.4 %).
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 them, community organizations, Town
government, and schools in the next ten years, most often mentioned were
concerns relating to:
• Communication - Related Issues (e.g., accuracy of information being distributed;
age- differentiated use of media to communicate with each other; getting
emergency information out to the public; lack of coordinated communication
between groups in Town; wide variety of ways that information is distributed)
• Cost of Living /Funding Concerns (e.g., fear of loss of desired educational
programs and services due to budget cuts; funding and space for schools;
funding needed for public safety and administration; income /expenditure
imbalance; lack of affordable and appropriate performance space; taxes)
• Technology, Telecommunications and Media (e.g., bandwidth issues; lack of
hotspots throughout Reading; millennials are cord- cutting; struggling
newspapers; transition of TV to the internet; wireless in schools)
• Demographics- Related Issues (e.g., aging population; increasing intolerance of
diversity; changing demographics; larger population of hearing- impaired people;
services for elderly are decreasing)
• When asked what makes it difficult for community organizations, Town government
departments, or schools to effectively communicate with their constituencies and
the residents of Reading, the leading areas identified were:
Lack of knowledge, awareness, interest, resources, skills, collaboration
• Demographic, legal, and other barriers
• Audience - related difficulties
• Cable company - related issues
• When asked how they could use the access channels, RCTV and the cable system,
many suggestions of program content and technology applications were identified.
Included among them were: children's programming; community calendar; coverage
of all appointed and elected board meetings; presentations by prominent visitors
speaking in Reading; debate coverage; high school sports — all sports; high school
theatrical performance coverage; local news (daily or other regular news); PSAs
about local issues; School Council and PTO meetings; special election coverage;
HD (advanced formats) available for PEG; production truck for live event coverage;
RCTV programming available online and via other platforms (live, too).
38 bap
�J
• When asked what would make it easier for their organization to use cable or PEG
Access channels and a community media center, the top categories of need were:
• RCTV Staff, Assistance, Policies, Funding Services Promotion & Training (e.g.,
ability to share content with other communities; adequate funding; better audio
on RCTV programs; larger budget; more parking at RCTV; on -line reservation
system for equipment and training; regularly scheduled training; up to date
information on the RCTV community calendar)
• Cable Company Infrastructure, System Design Services Policies etc (e.g.,
.additional locations to pay bill, drop off equipment, etc.; having viewership
information available; need RCTV in HD; RCTV available via cable company's
on- demand service; RCTV channels on EPG; senior discounts; set top box that
can handle all remote sources of programming (at no extra charge); easier to
use telephone contact system; less door -to -door solicitations)
• Facilities & Equipment (e.g., ability to include viewer interaction with live
programs; closed- caption capability; live capability (sports, local events);
production truck (multi- camera); simple to use equipment)
Primary findings regarding PEG Access operations, facilities and equipment:
• Reading Access Television (RCTV) manages a 5,000 square -foot facility, from
which it oversees the production and playback of programming on the three PEG
Access channels on the Comcast and Verizon systems that serve Reading: a
Public Access channel, an Education Access channel, and a Government Access
channel.
• RCTV has five full -time equivalent PEG Access staff. From 2014 to 2016, about
41% of RCTV's reported total expenditures were for personnel costs — a
percentage that is significantly less than the typical amount for community media
centers in the U.S.
• During the 2014 -2016 period, RCTV invested a significant amount in equipment
upgrades -- almost $300,000 in capital expenditures.
• Over 95% of RCTV's annual funding is provided by Comcast and Verizon, through
allocations. by the Town of Reading from the license fees paid by the cable
companies. RCTV raised small amounts of other revenue from contributions,
training fees, and membership fees.
39 5ba\
• 1,000 hours of first -run programming was presented on the three Reading PEG
Access channels during 2016.
• About half of the RCTV production equipment inventory that is still in use today and
located in the RCTV facility, Reading Town Hall, Reading Memorial High School,
and the Reading Public Library was purchased after 2010, is in good to new
condition, and is HD- ready.
• Since Comcast and Verizon have not allocated HD locations for the RCTV PEG
Access channels, all transmissions to the cable systems and their subscribers must
be in standard definition at this time.
40 5ba�
Ill. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING COMMUNITY CABLE - RELATED NEEDS AND
INTERESTS
A. INTRODUCTION
The community needs assessment process conducted by The Buske Group revealed
important information regarding the current and future community cable - related needs and
interests in Reading. The community focus group sessions and questionnaire responses; on -line
survey responses; and our review of the PEG Access facilities, equipment and activities indicate
significant needs and support for a modern cable system. Such a system can help to meet
cable - related needs and interests of area residents as they confront the challenges and
opportunities of life in the 21 st century.
Based upon the information and findings presented in this report, The Buske Group
has identified a list of community cable - related needs and interests, and developed
recommendations as to how those needs and interests could be satisfied. This information
should be very useful to the Town of Reading as it engages in the license renewal process,
negotiates a new license with Comcast or deals with other cable service providers. The
findings and recommendations address the following concerns: (1) Cable Distribution System;
(2) Subscriber Services and Customer Satisfaction, and (3) PEG Access. As suggested
above, the findings and recommendations related to needs and interests should apply to all
companies that may operate a cable system within the Town, although some may be unique to
Comcast.
B. CABLE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
The following recommendations regarding the technical design and capabilities of
the cable system to be specified in any new License Agreements are based upon the
information and materials gathered during the community needs assessment, and current
best practices within the cable industry nationwide.
1. Any cable system serving the Reading cable license area should include
features typically found in state -of- the -art systems. Any License should include
reasonable standards for upgrades during the License term, as technological changes occur.
2. There is a need and interest in ensuring that the signal quality and
functionality of the Reading PEG Access channels is equivalent to that of the highest
quality channel offered on the cable system.
Concerns about the signal quality and functionality of the Reading PEG Access
channels were indicated by Comcast subscribers who responded to the focus group and on-
line questionnaire -- disregarding the content of programs, 48% of them said the picture and
sound quality of the Reading PEG Access channels, as compared to the other channels that
they watch, was "lower quality'.
Therefore, any new license awarded by the Town should require that all
Licensees ensure that RCTV can independently monitor the signal quality and functionality of
the PEG Access channels as transmitted by the Licensee within the Reading license area. In
addition, the Licensee should be required to regularly test PEG channel signal quality on its
system, and report the results to the Town.
Any Licensee should deliver all Reading PEG Access channels to subscribers
without additional charges, and via channels whose quality, accessibility, functionality, and
placement is equivalent to that of the highest quality commercial channel carried on the cable
system throughout the entire term of any renewed license agreement. In addition, in order to
meet these needs and interests, any Licensee should ensure that there are high - quality, well -
maintained, and regularly monitored bi- directional fiber optic links between the RCTV master
control /playback facility, each remote origination site, and the Licensee's headend.
3. There is a need and interest in having the ability to easily transmit live
programming from locations throughout the Reading license area (e.g., sporting event
sites, parade routes, school gymnasiums, performing arts venues, etc.).
Responses to the focus group /on -line survey and comments during the
brainstorming portion of the focus groups indicated a high level of interest in live
programming on the Reading PEG Access channels. 97% of respondents who had provided,
helped to produce, or appeared as a guest on a program shown on a RCTV channel said it
was "Very Important" or "Important' for PEG access channels to have the ability to transmit
video programming live from locations throughout Reading. When all survey respondents
were asked about their level of interest in several types of local programs or services, "live
coverage of local events (sports, concerts, etc.)" was one of the leading items with the most
"Interested" or "Very Interested" responses (75 %). Focus group brainstorming participants
also expressed a desire for live programming by RCTV. Live coverage of local sports and
other events could be accomplished if the Licensee is required to provide live origination
5
drops at specified locations, or provide sufficient resources (e.g. funding for special
equipment) to enable live transmissions to occur from any location in the Reading area.
4. In addition to maintaining a minimum of the current allocation of
bandwidth for three (3) PEG Access channels and programming in the Reading license
area, there is a need and interest in ensuring that any Licensee provides sufficient
capacity and other accommodations to enable: (a) the delivery of the Reading PEG
Access channels to cable subscribers in the same formats that are used by the highest
quality commercial channel carried on the system, including HDs (or 4K or a more
advanced format, if it is prevalent during the term of any renewed license agreement);
(b) on- demand viewing of PEG Access programming [including selected PEG Access
programs to be available in HD to cable subscribers via their cable service provider's
on- demand service] 7; and (c) the transmission of closed captions, stereo audio and SAP
content for PEG Access programs that are delivered with such content.
Making accommodations to enable HD and on- demand viewing of PEG Access
programming is supported by the interest expressed by many participants during the
brainstorming portion of the focus group meetings. 60% of all focus group /on -line survey
respondents indicated that they were "Very Interested" or "Interested" in having the local
programming channels in HD, and 58% indicated that they were "Very Interested" or
"Interested" in having local programs on their cable company's video -on- demand service.
87% of the Comcast subscriber - respondents to the focus group /on -line survey
said that they pay extra to receive channels in HD. 47% of the HD subscribers said that they
rarely or never watch channels that are not delivered in HD. Since equipment manufacturers
have discontinued the production of standard definition ( "SD ") televisions and other hardware,
HD -only channel line -ups could become typical on cable systems during the next decade, just as
analog programming tiers gave way to all- digital cable systems. HD is now the dominant viewing
format in Reading, but it might be surpassed by 4K or another advanced format during the next
license term. Therefore, PEG Access programming should not be relegated to SD, which has
become an antiquated and substandard transmission method.
6 Several recent Comcast renewal franchises require the delivery of PEG Access channels in HD, (e.g.,
Longmeadow, MA; Gresham and Portland, OR; Philadelphia; St. Paul; Tacoma and Vancouver, WA). Several
RCN licenses in Massachusetts (e.g., Newton, Lexington, Stoneham, Framingham, Weston, and Brookline)
have such requirements, as do a number of other franchise areas that are served by Cox, Charter, and Verizon.
Many of the above - referenced renewal franchises also require storage space reserved on the cable company's
VOID server for PEG Access programs.
43 ba5
5
When participants in the focus groups brainstorming were asked what would
make it easier for their organization to use cable, having RCTV available via cable company's
on- demand service was mentioned. While on- demand capacity is not a general substitute for
PEG Access channels (since, for example, it is not available to all subscribers, and cannot
provide live programming), it can be exceptionally useful for programming desired by users at
particular times. Programs about community resources could be stored and called up on-
demand; videos could be organized around topics or community issues so that a person
interested in an issue could obtain a variety of information at once. Many of the desired
programming areas identified by the focus group participants could take advantage of video -on-
demand technology, which could deliver programs to residents when they seek such information
(e.g., fire safety information; how to detect scams; sports coverage; programs about local
historic buildings; programs about what to do in the Reading area; youth programs; etc.).
Given the interest in taking advantage of the capabilities of the cable system, any new License
Agreement should ensure that the Reading PEG Access channels can take advantage of
changes in technology and capabilities over the term of any renewal license.
5. There is a need and interest in ensuring that any Licensee includes full
program listings for PEG Access programs on its on- screen program guide.
72% of the Comcast subscribers who responded to the focus group /on -line
survey indicated that Comcast's on- screen program guide was the one source they used most
often to find information about programming on their cable TV channels -- eight times as often as
any other source. 75% of all focus group /on -line survey respondents indicated that they were
"Very Interested" or "Interested" in having program schedules for the Reading PEG Access
channels on the on- screen program guide. Participants in the focus groups brainstorming also
stressed the need for program listings of the local cable channels on the on- screen program
guide. This would make it possible to plan their viewing as they do for other channels, and use
the interactive program guide to record PEG Access programs on their DVR. Such capability
is provided for PEG access channels on many other small town cable systems in the United
States (e.g., Blaine, Bloomington, Coon Rapids, and Cottage Grove, Minnesota; Shrewsbury,
Massachusetts; Santa Maria and Cerritos, California; Gresham, Oregon; Pasco and Richland,
Washington; State College, Pennsylvania). Given the high level of importance placed on local
information by respondents to the focus group /on -line survey, and the fact that subscribers
most often indicated that they use the Comcast on- screen program guide as their primary way
of identifying programming to view, it is essential that all PEG programming be included (both
by title and description) on any Licensee's on- screen interactive programming guide.
44 5balo
C. SUBSCRIBER SERVICES AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
The focus group /on -line survey respondents were asked several questions about
their level of satisfaction with their current cable TV service. For the most part, the
participants who subscribe Comcast for cable TV expressed satisfaction with Comcast's
service. Based on some of their other responses, the following recommendations are offered:
1. There is a need and interest in having Comcast offer other lower -cost
packages of cable TV programming. Comcast should be strongly encouraged to offer
alternative, less expensive programming packages for Reading residents. When the focus
group /on -line survey respondents were asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with a variety
of customer service issues, the rates charged by Comcast for cable TV service were rated
"Poor" or "Very Poor" by nearly half (47.5 %) of the respondents. When asked to comment
about their Comcast cable TV service, the most common criticisms were about the high cost
of the service, inability to only choose desired channels, and Comcast's customer service.
During the brainstorming portion of the focus group, when participants were asked what
would make it easier for their organization to use cable, senior discounts was mentioned.
It should be noted that while the most frequently recorded complaint with
regard to cable service was subscriber concern about the high cost of cable service, the
Town recognizes that it does not have authority over rates. However, it is important to
document subscriber concerns regarding this matter in this report. When the focus group /on-
line survey respondents who previously subscribed to Comcast's cable TV service in Reading
were asked to indicate why they no longer subscribe, the most frequently indicated reason
was, once again, " Comcast's cable TV service is too expensive."
2. There is a need and interest to require Comcast to meet or exceed the
FCC's customer service obligations. Comcast should be required to prove that it is in
compliance, and should take immediate steps to bring itself into compliance if it is not.
Based upon responses to the focus group /on -line survey, special attention should be
given to the ability to quickly contact a Comcast customer service representative.
About two- thirds of the Comcast subscriber - respondents to the focus
group /on -line survey said they had tried to contact Comcast by telephone during the past
year. 69% of them said that they had to wait one minute or longer to speak to a customer
45 �0
1�6
service representative, or were never connected. The FCC's customer service standards
state: "Under normal operating conditions, telephone answer time by a customer
representative, including wait time, shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds when the connection
is made. If the call needs to be transferred, transfer time shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds.
These standards shall be met no less than ninety (90) percent of the time under normal
operating conditions, measured on a quarterly basis."
3. There is a need and interest in requiring Comcast to maintain an office
in Reading. Nearly two - thirds (63 %) of the focus group /on -line survey respondents who
subscribe to Comcast's cable TV service said that having an office in Reading is "Very
Important" or "Important" to them.
4. Adequate PEG Access bandwidth should be made available on the
subscriber network (with such channels grouped together on the lowest cost tier of
services). Additional bandwidth /capacity should be made available to enable on- demand
and HD capability for PEG Access programming, and for future PEG Access purposes. PEG
Access HD channels should also be grouped together within the HD channel lineup. All PEG
Access bandwidth /capacity should be provided free of charge. (See Section D.2., later in this
report, for more specific recommendations regarding PEG Access bandwidth /capacity.)
Having local cable channels featuring programs produced by or about
Reading residents, organizations, schools, and government, or about issues of interest to
Reading was ranked as either "Very Important" or "Important" by 88.5% of the focus
group /online survey respondents. Many of them expressed an interest in having the PEG
Access channels with HD (60 %) and on- demand (58 %) capability.
D. PEG ACCESS
1. Overview
The findings of this ascertainment process indicate a very high level of support
for the inclusion of significant PEG Access bandwidth /capacity and resources and an
appreciation of the importance of PEG Access services. As stated previously in this report,
88.5% of the focus group /on -line survey respondents said it is "Very Important" or "Important" to
have local cable TV channels that feature programs produced by or about Reading residents,
organizations, schools, and government, or about issues of interest to Reading.
PEG Access channels are unique in their ability to deliver regularly - scheduled
local programming, guided by professional staff that offer outreach, training, production
assistance, playback, and promotional services. Local broadcast stations stopped providing
such a range of local programming years ago, and are now content to rely primarily on non -
local network and syndicated programs. While videos distributed on the internet (via YouTube
and other sites) offer another alternative to broadcast and satellite - delivered stations, audience
measurement companies report that the number of people who watch programs online are still
very small, in comparison to those who watch on cable TV. In addition, YouTube and the other
online outlets do not provide community -based outreach, training, production assistance, and
promotional services available at PEG Access centers throughout the United States, to help
local producers create video programming with good production values that do not detract from
the effort to get their messages out to the public.
A very large majority, (84 %) of all respondents to the focus group /on -line survey
(including Comcast and Verizon subscribers and non - subscribers) said they were aware of
Reading's Public, Educational and Government Access channels. Significant percentages of
the survey respondents said they watched these channels at least once per month (Public
Access channel: 39 %; Government Access channel: 37 %; Education Access channel: 28 %).
Very large majorities of them said that each of these channels provide programming that deals
with local issues, are worthwhile, and provide valuable information.
During the "brainstorming" segment of the focus group workshops, participants
offered many suggestions of program content and technology applications. When asked what
would make it easier to use the PEG Access channels and a community media center to
communicate, their primary categories of need included:
47 baq
a. RCTV Staff, Assistance, Policies, Funding, Services, Promotion &
Training (e.g., ability to share content with other communities; adequate funding; better audio
on RCTV programs; larger budget; more parking at RCTV; on -line reservation system for
equipment and training; regularly scheduled training; up to date information on the RCTV
community calendar);
b. Cable Company Infrastructure, System Design, Services, Policies, etc.
(e.g., additional locations to pay bill, drop off equipment, etc.;, having viewership information
available; need RCTV in HD; RCTV available via cable company's on- demand service; RCTV
channels on EPG; senior discounts; set top box that can handle all remote sources of
programming (at no extra charge); easier to use telephone contact system; less door -to -door
solicitations); and
c. Facilities & Equipment (e.g., ability to include viewer interaction with live
programs; closed- caption capability; live capability (sports, local events); production truck
(multi- camera); simple to use equipment).
RCTV manages a 5,000 square -foot production, editing and playback/master
control facility; production systems in the Reading Town Hall and the Reading Public Library;
and oversees public use of production equipment and playback of completed programming
on Reading's three PEG Access channels. Over 95% of RCTV's annual funding is provided
by Comcast and Verizon, through allocations by the Town of Reading from license fees paid
by the cable companies. From 2014 to 2016, about 41% of RCTV's total expenditures were
for personnel, lower than the typical amount (approximately two- thirds) for community media
centers in the U.S. During this three -year period, RCTV invested a significant amount in
equipment upgrades -- almost $300,000 in capital expenditures.
RCTV reported that 1,000 hours of first -run programming was presented the
Public, Educational and Government Access channels in Reading in 2016.
About half of the RCTV production equipment was purchased after 2010, is in
good to new condition, and is HD- ready. However, since Comcast and Verizon do not
allocate HD channels for the RCTV PEG Access channels -- all transmissions to the cable
systems must be in standard definition at this time.
More details about these findings — and recommendations to address these
needs -- are provided later in this report.
48 �b�
Based upon these findings, we have considered PEG Access needs and
interests for the Reading license area in light of:
• the current amount of local programming activity;
• the age and condition of the equipment;
• the significant level of interest and community participation in PEG Access;
• the size and unique nature of Reading; and
• the cost of providing PEG Access services, facilities and equipment.
Consequently, there is a need and interest in ensuring that any future
License Agreement includes provisions that:
a. require each Licensee to allocate sufficient bandwidth /capacity for
PEG Access purposes, including the conversion of the Reading PEG Access channels
to HD; and
b. require each Licensee to provide adequate capital and operations
funding and in -kind resources and support for PEG Access that would: (1) maintain and
expand the existing PEG Access services and resources; and (2) enable RCTV to meet the
needs and interests expressed by Reading area residents and representatives of local
organizations through the focus group brainstorming sessions and responses to the focus
group /on -line survey. PEG Access services and resources must be available to: (1) all
residents, government agencies, institutions and organizations within the Reading license
area; and (2) households that subscribe to 2ny cable or other multi - channel programming
service provider in Reading.
49 5b��
2. PEG Access Bandwidth /Capacity
Detailed information relating to programming on the Reading PEG Access
channels was gathered during the needs assessment activities conducted by The Buske
Group. The following recommendations are based upon the information gathered, as well as
widely recognized best practices in the PEG Access field:
a. Initially, there is a need and interest in ensuring that any Licensee
maintains the current allocation of bandwidth to deliver the three (3) channels for PEG
Access programming that are now provided to cable subscribers in Reading. As
discussed previously in this report, we anticipate that the SD format will be phased out in the
near future, as the penetration of HD televisions in U.S. households continues its very rapid
growth. During this transition period, as the Reading PEG Access channels are converted to
HD format (either gradually or all at once), they should be transmitted in both SD and HD
formats — as is the case for local broadcast and many of the satellite - delivered channels — for
the convenience of all cable TV subscribers, including those who do not yet subscribe to the
HD package of programming services. The simultaneous transmission of the Reading PEG
Access channels in SD and HD formats should continue as long as there are SD channels in
the lowest cost tier of service.
b. Based on the high level of importance indicated for local
programming by respondents to the focus group /on -line survey, there is a need and
interest in ensuring that any Licensee has additional bandwidth /capacity available for
future PEG Access purposes, to be activated in accordance with a pre- determined
programming -based formula, when programming amounts put a strain on the existing
PEG Access bandwidth /capacity. Below is a recommended PEG Access channel activation
formula:
An additional PEG Access channel may be requested when the level of
programming on one of the existing Reading PEG Access channels meets or exceeds the
following conditions
i. During sixteen (16) consecutive weeks, an existing channel
designated for the same purpose as the channel requested (public or educational or
governmental access) cablecasts at least forty (40) hours per week of "qualified"
programming.
50 5�5a
ii. "Qualified programming" includes any locally produced material
carried on the Reading PEG Access channels, except for "bulletin board" material where the
same text (or video and text) screen is sent simultaneously to all Subscribers. "Locally
produced" programming is defined as:
(1). Programming produced within Reading; or
(2). Programming produced or provided by any resident of Reading
(or any local public or private agency which provides services to residents located within
Reading), regardless of where the programming is physically produced.
c. There is a need and interest in ensuring that all Reading PEG
Access channels are located on the lowest cost tier of service and in a consecutive or
near consecutive group of channels throughout the term of any new License. As long
as there are SD channels in the lowest cost tier of service, PEG Access SD channels should
be grouped together within that tier. In addition, PEG Access HD channels should be grouped
together within the lowest cost HD tier. The inclusion of Reading PEG Access channels in the
lowest cost tier of service and the grouping of similar types of channels are standard practices in
the cable industry, in keeping with the spirit of the Cable Act's expressed support for PEG Access
and for the convenience of subscribers.
d. There is a need and interest in ensuring that each PEG Access
programming service is given the same channel location on the system of any cable
operator serving Reading.
This recommendation is based on the fact that in Reading, which is served
by more than one cable service provider, Comcast and Verizon have assigned each of the PEG
Access channels to different numerical locations (Comcast's apparently haphazard placement of
these channels is especially noteworthy). Verizon locates Public Access on channel 36, while
Comcast places it on channel 99; Verizon has Educational Access on channel 37, while Comcast
puts it on channel 8; and Verizon locates Government Access on channel 41, while Comcast has
it on channel 22. This situation may confuse cable subscribers regarding how to find these
channels (especially if they switch from one company to the other), and makes it more difficult for
RCTV to clearly promote the PEG Access channels and programming.
51 5b53
e. There is a need and interest in ensuring that the Reading PEG Access
channel locations (both SD and /or HD) may only be changed if a Licensee must do so to
comply with FCC requirements or for documented technical reasons, and with the approval
of the Town.
All costs related to channel relocations must be paid by the Licensee,
including but not limited to: (1) PEG Access staff time; (2) equipment; (3) creation of electronic and
print versions of station ID's and logos; (4) replacement of materials such as letterhead, business
cards, etc.; and (5) any other items which include the channel number. In addition, the Licensee
should provide free print and electronic advertising and announcements to inform subscribers
about the relocations.
Participants in the focus groups indicated several concerns about issues
related to the Reading PEG Access channels, including the need of an easy way to access
the schedule of upcoming RCTV programming (i.e., the on- screen program guide to include
PEG Access programs, which is also needed to facilitate DVR recording), and a need for
more promotion of PEG Access programming. Promotional activities would be enhanced if
PEG Access channel locations are stable over time, and are shifted only if absolutely
necessary, as described above. If and when a Reading PEG Access channel location must
be changed, subscribers must obtain information in advance about the changes through a
variety of methods.
The inclusion of PEG Access programming information on a Licensee's
interactive electronic programming guide is a major need, especially since Comcast's on-
screen program guide was by far the most frequently indicated source of programming
information (72% -- more than five times as often as any other source) by the focus group /on-
line survey respondents.
52 5b5a
f. There is a need and interest in ensuring that the Reading PEG Access
channels have the same functionality and capacity as the highest quality over - the -air
broadcast television channels delivered by each Licensee on its cable system, including
HD. Depending upon the introduction of new technologies, consumer use of them, and
transmission such formats by Licensees, this may include 4K or a more advanced
format, if it is prevalent during the term of any renewed license agreement. The Reading
PEG Access channels must be transmitted by all Licensees to their customers in any format
(including SD, HD, or any other format being transmitted by a Licensee), and must be transmitted
with any other information also being delivered by RCTV (including closed captions, secondary
audio, text, digital information, etc.). Any Licensee should also be required to maintain the same
technical standards for the transmission of the Reading PEG Access channels (in all
transmission formats) as it must for local broadcast channels on its cable system.
g. Each Licensee should also provide sufficient storage space,
encoding, and other accommodations to enable free on demand viewing of PEG Access
programs.
As stated previously in this report, HD and on- demand viewing of PEG
Access programming is supported by: (1) the fact that HD is now the dominant viewing format in
Reading; (2) the high level of interest expressed by participants during the brainstorming portion
of the focus group meetings; (3) responses to the focus group /on -line survey; and (4) the nature
of the content that focus group participants desired to receive and /or distribute via RCTV.
Free VOD capacity for selected PEG Access programs is now being
provided by many cable systems in the United States. While on- demand capacity is not a
general substitute for PEG Access channels, it can deliver programs desired at a particular
time. Examples of VOD applications for PEG Access operations include: (1) a student could
watch a recorded lecture that had been shown on an educational access channel earlier in
the school year by calling it up on- demand, to review it on the night before a test; (2) a
sporting event telecast live by a public access crew could be called up at any time later for
review and analysis by the members and coach of a participating team; and (3) after close of
business, a local merchant could call up a VOD copy of that day's Town Council meeting to
review the discussion and decision regarding an issue that would directly affect her business.
53
5b55
A significant portion of the programming identified by the focus groups
could take advantage of video -on- demand technology, which could deliver desired programs
to residents when they seek such information (e.g., fire safety information; how to detect
scams; sports coverage; programs about local historic buildings; programs about what to do
in the Reading area; youth programs; etc.).
Given the expressed interest in using the capabilities of the cable
system, language in any renewed License should ensure that the PEG Access channels can
take advantage of changes in technology and capabilities over the term of the renewal
License. Items like on- demand and HD capacity for PEG Access programming are matters
of major interest today, but the language in any renewed license should be sufficiently flexible
and forward- thinking to accommodate PEG Access use of new technologies that might
become standard applications for cable channels in the near future (e.g., 4K).
h. There is a need and interest in ensuring that any Licensee
continues to provide all PEG Access bandwidth /capacity (including PEG Access SD
channels currently, and HD or more advanced format channels in the future) free of
charge to the Town, RCTV, Reading schools and PEG Access community producers.
This recommendation is based on the fact that the provision of PEG
Access channels free of charge has been the norm in the cable industry for nearly 50 years,
including all of the time that cable service has been provided in Reading. The Town, RCTV,
Reading schools and PEG Access producers have limited resources, and their services
would be adversely affected if they had to pay extra for allocated bandwidth /capacity.
Furthermore, cable operators do not charge other program providers to be included on their
channel line -ups, and are known to pay over $6.00 per subscriber per month to carry a single
non - premium programming service (i.e., ESPN).
3. PEG Access Facilities and Equipment
The following recommendations are based upon the current age, condition and
capabilities of production equipment packages in the RCTV facility, the Reading Town Hall
Council Chambers, Reading Public _Library, and Reading High School, information gathered
during focus group sessions and responses to the on -line survey, the consultant's inspection of
the PEG Access resources in Reading, and the consultant's experience and knowledge of PEG
Access facilities, equipment, services, operations, and management in many other communities.
Based upon the consultant's inspection of the facilities and equipment in
Reading, review of the inventory forms, discussions with RCTV staff, comments by focus
group brainstorming participants, and respondents to the on -line survey, there is a need
and interest in ensuring that both Comcast and Verizon, upon signing any new License
Agreement, should provide initial equipment grant funding. These funds would be used to
replace and upgrade some of the RCTV field production equipment. In addition, any new
License Agreement should include a provision that requires Comcast and Verizon to
provide ongoing replacement capital equipment grants, to periodically replace and upgrade
equipment for the RCTV studio, editing, field production, and master control /playback
systems; Town Council Chambers; Reading Public Library; and Reading High School.
These amounts should be in addition to any amount paid as a License fee to the Town.
When this needs assessment was conducted, RCTV's production equipment
appeared to function as needed. However, replacement/upgrade of each package will be
necessary throughout the renewal license term. Some camcorder /field production packages
and portable video editing systems are over five years old (therefore, initial equipment grant
funding could be used to replace /upgrade these older packages).
During the early years of the renewal license term, ongoing equipment grants
could be used to replace /upgrade some of the camcorder /field production packages, RCTV's
facility -based and portable video editing systems, and portions of RCTV's distribution and
archiving equipment. During the middle years of the renewal license term, ongoing
equipment grants could be used to replace /upgrade the the RCTV studio equipment, some of
the RCTV camcorder /field production packages, two of the RCTV portable video editing
systems; and portions of RCTV's playback/master control and distribution equipment. During
the later years of the renewal license term, ongoing equipment grants could be used to
replace /upgrade the Reading Public Library equipment package, Reading Town Hall
Chambers equipment package, the Reading Memorial High School TV studio equipment,
some of the RCTV camcorder /field production packages and video editing systems; and
portions of RCTV's distribution and archiving equipment.
55
5b5�
The above recommendations and cost estimates are detailed in the suggested
equipment replacement/upgrade schedule provided in Appendix 6 to this report. (PLEASE
NOTE: Due to the fact that media equipment is evolving very rapidly, items described in
Appendix 6 could currently satisfy the identified equipment needs, and are not intended to be
specific recommendations of items to be purchased.)
In addition to the replacement/upgrade of equipment described above, capital
funding will also be needed to address connectivity between the RCTV media center and
Town Hall, the high school, and other locations that may be used as venues for live
community events such as election forums, concerts, sporting events, and other activities.
The cost of terminal equipment for the interconnections may vary greatly depending on the
nature of the connectivity provided. If RCTV is afforded multiple dark fiber paths per location,
the cost of equipment will be significantly lower than if a single strand or IP connection is
made available. This is due to the higher cost of multiplexing /demuxing gear and IP
encoder /decoders, as compared to dedicated video communication links.
As stated above, the capital equipment replacement/upgrade recommendations
are based upon the current condition and shortcomings of the RCTV media center, Reading
Town Hall Council Chambers, Reading Public Library, and Reading Memorial High School
TV equipment packages; information gathered during focus group sessions and responses to the
on -line survey; the consultant's inspection of the PEG Access facilities and equipment in
Reading; and the consultant's experience and knowledge of PEG Access facilities, equipment,
services, operations, and management in numerous other communities. We also point out the
following observations that influenced our major recommendations:
a. RCTV has made significant equipment updates during recent years,
moving to solid state and file -based media that significantly improve quality and performance,
while reducing maintenance and related costs. Our review of RCTV's equipment and
infrastructure indicates that the organization has taken several steps to incorporate HD
technologies throughout its operations. RCTV has migrated to a tapeless workflow with HD
camcorders in the field and disk -based recording systems for studio and edited productions.
To enable RCTV to efficiently manage the delivery of content from production /post - production
locations and on to the appropriate PEG Access channel and the internet, we recommend
that a high capacity distribution network and storage ecosystem be designed and
implemented.
56
c3b4
b. As shown in the "Community Media Facility Inventory" completed by
RCTV staff (see Appendix 5, especially the attached inventory sheets that include the color -
coded items), the RCTV production studio equipment package was updated primarily during
the early part of this decade. Therefore, the suggested replacement/upgrade packages in
Appendix 6 include an allocation for the RCTV studio during years 4 -6 of the renewal License
Agreement term. Since the production equipment packages in the Reading Town Hall
Council Chambers, Reading Public Library, and Reading Memorial High School were
updated in the past year, the suggested replacement/upgrade packages for those locations are
recommended to occur during years 7 -9.
c. RCTV currently provides several field production kits for community use
in video production. These kits include a variety of HD camcorders (and DSLR cameras with
HD video recording capability) that were purchased between 2008 and 2014. This type of
gear will likely have a life expectancy of 5 -6 years, so we recommend the replacement/
upgrade of these packages as follows: (1) four camcorders and two DSLR cameras initially;
(2) two camcorders and, two DSLR cameras during the first three years of the renewal
License Agreement term; (3) two camcorders during years 4 -6; and (4) two camcorders and
two DSLR cameras during years 7 -9. The replacement/upgrade of these items should
include associated accessories (e.g., tripods, light kits, microphones, etc.) as they wear out..
d. RCTV also provides several HD- capable video editing systems for its
staff and community producers, including iMac desktop systems in the RCTV facility and
MacBook Pro laptop computers for producers to check out to edit their videos at home.
Based on the current age and condition of these editing systems, we recommend the
replacement/upgrade of three iMac desktop systems in years 1 -3 and years 7 -9. The
MacBook Pro editing laptop computers will likely wear out more quickly (since they are in
transit regularly), so we recommend the replacement/upgrade of two of these laptops initially,
another two in years 1 -3, two in years 4 -6, and two in years 7 -9.
�bm
4. PEG Access Services
An analysis of the information gathered reveals a need and interest in
continuing, enhancing and expanding PEG Access services in the Reading license area.
As frequently noted in this report, the assessment of community cable - related
needs and interests showed that Reading residents support the delivery of PEG Access
programming and services. When all of the focus group /on -line survey respondents were
asked to indicate how important they think it is to have cable TV channels that feature programs
produced by or about Reading residents, organizations, schools, and government, or about .
issues of interest to Reading, a very large majority of them (88.59,o) said these local channels
are "Very Important" (55.5%) or "Important" (33916). These responses indicate a very positive
attitude about these local channels and services.
Focus group participants mentioned a number of other desired services during
the brainstorming sessions, including several PEG Access program content ideas, HD
(advanced formats) for the PEG Access channels, identification of local programming on the
electronic program guide (EPG), local programming available via their cable company's on-
demand service, live programming capability for RCTV, and much more.
If PEG Access services and programming efforts are to continue, and
more fully meet the needs and interests identified by the public during the needs
assessment process in Reading, the current levels of capital and operations funding
and in -kind support must be maintained and enhanced during the term of the next
License Agreement. The quantity and quality of PEG Access services in the future will be
dictated to a large degree by the funding available from the Town and the cable operators that
provide service to its residents. Pursuant to the Comcast license agreement, Comcast
currently pays a franchise fee of 5% of gross annual revenues (maximum percentage permitted
by federal law). However, the definition of gross annual revenues included in the current
license agreement does not include a number of sources of revenue typically included in such
definitions. As a result, the Town is not currently receiving the maximum amount of franchise
fees that could be provided. An updated definition of gross annual revenues could yield some
of the recommended enhanced funding identified as necessary to meet community cable
related needs and interests. In addition, RCTV will need to expand its efforts to obtain funding
and in -kind support from other sources.
58
,S,3�90
To help meet the expressed community cable - related needs and
interests described throughout this report, any new License Agreement adopted by
the Town should include provisions to ensure that initial and ongoing PEG Access
support grants are provided by the Licensee, to supplement any allocations provided
by the Town to support PEG Access activities.
These revenue sources would be critical elements of the PEG Access funding
package.. PEG Access resources and services could not continue without such core funding,
and the desired expansion of these resources and services would not be possible. With such
funding, RCTV and the Town would be able to develop the programs and services suggested by
the participants in the many community needs assessment activities that were conducted.
To help address a need and interest to promote the Reading PEG
Access channels, programming and services to area residents and cable subscribers
more effectively, any renewal License Agreement adopted by the Town should include
provisions to ensure that Licensees provide the following:
a. Courtesy promotion of the Reading PEG Access channels -- including
full program listings and capsule descriptions of all PEG Access programs scheduled for
presentation on each PEG Access channel -- on the electronic program guides provided by
the Licensees for their subscribers.
b. Free insertion of promotional spots for the Reading PEG Access
channels, programs and services on each Licensee's cable satellite services that make times
available for local advertising insertions.
59 5b�\
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1
Community Needs & Interests Questionnaire
These questions are intended to obtain information about community needs and interests related to cable TV. The information
gathered will help to determine if existing local cable TV services and resources are adequate and appropriate, and identify
changes that might be made to meet current and future cable - related needs and interests of Reading residents.
1. Do you currently subscribe to a cable TV service in Reading?
_ Yes _ No I IF "NO," SKIP TO QUESTION 24 ON PAGE 3
2. VF "YES" TO QUESTION 11 Which cable TV service provider do you use?
_ Comcast _ Verizon (FIGS) IF "VER/ZON FIOS ," SKIP TO QUESTION 23 ON PAGE 3
3. VF "COMCAST" ON QUESTION 2 How long have you subscribed to the Comcast cable TV service in
Reading?
Less than 1 Year 1 to 5 Years 6 to 10 Years Over 10 Years Don't Know /Don't Remember
4. Do you receive Comcast's package of high definition (HD) channels?
Yes _ No / Don't Know IF "NO" OR "DON'T KNOW," SKIP TO QUESTION 6, BELOW
5. 1 IF "YES" TO QUESTION 4 How often do you watch Comcast channels that are not delivered in HD to your TV?
_ Often _ Sometimes _ Rarely _ Never _ Don't Know
6. Which one source of information do you use most often to find information about programming on cable TV
channels? PLEASE CHECK ONE OF THESE.
_ TV Section of Newspaper _ The Internet _ "Channel Surfing"
_ "TV Guide" Magazine _ Comcast's On- Screen Program Guide _ Don't Know
Other:
7. How often do you use Comcast's on- screen program guide to decide what to watch?
_ Never _ Occasionally _ Frequently _ Always _ Don't Know
8. Do you subscribe to Comcast's internet or telephone service? PLEASE CHECK ONE OF THESE.
_ No _ Yes (Internet and Telephone) _ Yes (Internet) _ Yes (Telephone) _ Don't Know
9. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with Comcast's cable TV service -- NOT telephone or Internet
service -- in the following areas (if this item is not applicable to you, indicate that by checking "N /A "):
VERY VERY DON'T
GOOD GOOD FAIR POOR POOR KNOW NIA
a. Quality of the picture and sound .........................
b. Reliabili of Comcast's cable TV service ...............
c. Number & variety of channels offered ..................
d. Helpfulness of Comcast's customer ....................
service representatives
e. The rates charged by Comcast for ......................
cable TV service
f. Ease of getting services installed or ...................
changed by Comcast
g. Ease of getting problems repaired or ..................
resolved by Comcast
h. Ability to quickly speak to a customer ..................
service representative when you call Comcast
i. Ability of Comcast to respond to a service ..............._
call within the promised time period
5eUa
10. Have you tried to contact Comcast by telephone during the past year?
Yes No Don't Know I IF "NO" OR "DON'T KNOW', SKIP TO QUESTION 16, BELOW
11. 1 IF "YES" TO QUESTION 10 As a result of your most recent telephone call to Comcast, was your issue
resolved using the Comcast automated telephone response system, without talking to a person?
Yes Don't Know I IF "YES" OR "DON'T KNOW ", SKIP TO QUESTION 16, BELOW
No
12. IF "NO" TO QUESTION 11 During your most recent telephone call to Comcast, if you waited to speak to a
customer service representative, how long would you estimate that you were on hold (or were you never
connected)?
_ Less Than 30 Seconds _ Between 30 Seconds and 1 Minute _ Between 1 -5 Minutes
_ Between 5 -15 Minutes More Than 15 Minutes
_ Don't Know / Don't Remember _ Never Connected I IF "NEVER CONNECTED'; SKIP TO QUESTION 16, BELOW
13. Was the person you spoke with able to resolve your issue during that most recent telephone call?
Yes Don't Know IF "YES" OR "DON'T KNOW; SKIP TO QUESTION 16, BELOW
No
14. 1 IF "NO" TO QUESTION 131 Was that because a service call was necessary?
_ Yes —No _ Don't Know I IF "NO" OR "DON'T KNOW', SKIP TO QUESTION 16, BELOW
15. 1 IF "YES" TO QUESTION 14 If you scheduled a service call, was the problem resolved on the first visit by
the technician?
_ Yes _ No _ Don't Know / Don't Remember _ Not Applicable
16. Have you gone to a Comcast office during the past year?
_ Yes _ No _ Don't Know IF "NO" OR "DON'T KNOW', SKIP TO QUESTION 20, BELOW
17.
For what reason(s) did you go to the Comcast office? PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
_ Pay bill _ Return /pick up equipment _ Order /change service _ Other:
18. During your last time at the Comcast office, how long did you wait in line before a Comcast representative
could help you?
Less than 5 Minutes Between 5 - 15 Minutes Between 15 - 30 Minutes
_ More than 30 Minutes Don't Know / Don't Remember
—Left Without Being Helped I IF "LEFT WITHOUT BEING HELPED ", SKIP TO QUESTION 20, BELOW
19. During the last time you went to the Comcast office, was Comcast able to resolve your issue?
_ Yes _ No _ Don't Know / Don't Remember _ Not Applicable
20. How important is it to you that Comcast provide an office that is located near your home?
_ Very Important _ Important _ Not Very Important _ Not Important at All _ Don't Know
21. Overall, how satisfied are you with the Comcast cable TV service?
_Very Satisfied _Somewhat Satisfied _Neutral _Somewhat Dissatisfied _Very Dissatisfied
z
5b�
22. Please provide any comments about your Comcast cable TV service in the space below.
COMCAST SUBSCRIBERS; PLEASE SKIP TO QUESTION 26 ON THE NEXT PAGE.
VERIZON (FIOS) SUBSCRIBERS: CONTINUE AT QUESTION 23, BELOW
NOT A COMCAST OR VERIZON SUBSCRIBER: CONTINUE AT QUESTION 24, BELOW
23. How long have you subscribed to the Verizon (FIOS) cable TV service in Reading?
Less than 1 Year 1 to 3 Years Over 3 Years Don't Know /Don't Remember
24. If you previously subscribed to Comcast's cable TV service in Reading, but no longer do so, please indicate
the reason(s) from the list provided below.
PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
_ I have never subscribed to Comcast's cable TV service
I moved to another residence
_ Poor picture and /or sound quality from Comcast
_ I didn't watch TV enough to make it worthwhile
_ Comcast's customer service was poor
_ Comcast's cable TV service was too expensive
_ I switched to Verizon (FIOS) or a satellite TV service (e.g., DirecTV, DISH Network)
receive enough programming on over - the -air broadcast stations
_ I rent or buy programs on DVD or Blu -Ray disc to watch on my TV
_ I watch free programming that is delivered through the Internet (e.g., websites of TV shows, YouTube, Vimeo)
_ I subscribe to a program service(s) delivered through the Internet (e.g., Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu Plus, Vudu)
Don't Know
Other (PLEASE INDICATE):
25. If you have NEVER subscribed to the Comcast cable TVservice in Reading, please indicate the reason(s) from
the list provided below.
PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
_ Comcast's cable TV service is not available to my home
_ I'm not interested — I don't watch TV enough to make it worthwhile
_ Comcast has a poor reputation
_ Comcast's cable TV service is too expensive
_ I subscribe to a satellite TV service (e.g., DirecTV, DISH Network)
_ I receive enough programming on over - the -air broadcast stations
_ I rent or buy programs on DVD or Blu -Ray disc to watch on my TV
_ I watch free programming that is delivered through the Internet (e.g., websites of TV shows, YouTube, Vimeo)
_ I subscribe to a program service(s) delivered through the Internet (e.g., Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu Plus, Vudu)
_ Don't Know
_ Other (PLEASE INDICATE):
26. Reading Community Television ( "RCTV ") delivers a wide variety of local programs and video content
produced or sponsored by Reading residents and local organizations on Comcast channel 9 (Verizon
channel 31) -- the Reading "Public Access" channel.
On Comcast channel 99 (Verizon channel 32) -- the Reading "Education Access" channel -- RCTV delivers
local programs that educate citizens about Reading school programs, events, goals and issues; and
coverage of School Committee meetings.
On Comcast channel 22 (Verizon channel 33) -- the Reading "Government Access" channel -- RCTV
provides coverage of Town Meetings, Board of Selectmen meetings, and several other government
meetings, and other programming to promote awareness and understanding of government issues.
Are you aware of one or more of these channels and their programming?
_ Yes —No I IF "NO," SKIP TO QUESTION 37, NEAR THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 5
27. IF "YES" TO QUESTION 26 How often do you watch the Reading Public Access channel 9 (31)?
_ Daily _ At least once / week _ 1 - 3 times / month _ Less than once / month _ Don't Know
_ Never _ Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
IF "NEVER" OR "NOT APPLICABLE TO ME," SKIP TO QUESTION 29, BELOW
28. Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading Public Access channel:
STRONGLY STRONGLY DON'T
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE KNOW
a. Provides programs that deal with local issues
b. Provides programs that publicize local services
c. Provides programs with diverse points of view
d. Provides valuable information
e. Provides programs that are interesting to watch
29. How often do you watch the Reading Education Access channel 99 (32)?
Daily _ At least once / week _ 1 - 3 times / month _ Less than once / month _ Don't Know
_ Never _ Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
IF "NEVER" OR "NOT APPLICABLE TO ME," SKIP TO QUESTION 31, BELOW
30. Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading Education Access channel:
STRONGLY STRONGLY DON'T
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE KNOW
a. Provides worthwhile local educational programming.......
b. Provides valuable information .......... ...............................
c. Provides programs that are interesting to watch .............
31. How often do you watch the Reading Government Access channel 22 (33)?
_ Daily _ At least once / week _ 1 - 3 times / month _ Less than once / month _ Don't Know
_ Never _ Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
IF "NEVER" OR "NOT APPLICABLE TO ME," SKIP TO QUESTION 33 ON PAGE 5
32. Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading Government Access channel:
STRONGLY STRONGLY DON'T
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE KNOW
a. Provides worthwhile local government programming ......
b. Provides valuable information .......... ...............................
c. Provides programs that are interesting to watch .............
-4-
�b
33. How do you find out about programs that you want to watch the Reading Public, Education, and
Government Access channels? (PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY.)
_ RCTV's website _ Flyers _ At events _ Newspaper _ "Channel Surfing" _ Friends _ Don't Know
_ Other: _ Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
IF "NOT APPLICABLE TO ME," SKIP TO QUESTION 35, BELOW
34. Disregarding the content of the programs, how would you rate the picture and sound quality of the Reading
Public, Educational, and Government Access channels, as compared to other channels that you watch?
_ Better quality _ Lower quality _ About the same _ Don't Know
_ Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
35. Do you ever watch Reading Public, Education, and Government Access programs at RCTV's website
(RCTV.org)?
_ Yes —No _ I did not know I could watch programs at the RCTV website
36. Please indicate if you have watched any of the following programs that are shown on the Reading Public,
Education, and Government Access channels -- or the RCTV.org website -- and how regularly you have
watched them. (If this item is not applicable to you, indicate that by checking "N /A. ")
LESS THAN 1 — 3 TIMES AT LEAST DON'T
NEVER MONTHLY PER MONTH WEEKLY KNOW N/A
a. Board of Selectmen meetings .......................
b. School Committee meetings .........................
c. Town Meeting ................. ...............................
d. Conservation Commission meetings.............
e. Zoning Board of Appeals meetings ...............
f. Planning Commission meetings ....................
g" RMLD............................................................
h. "K9 Tails" ........................ ...............................
i. "Delicious Simplicity" ...... ...............................
j. "Community Conversation .. ............................
k. "Story Time with Winny and Nan " ..................
I. "Highway Twenty- Eight" . ...............................
37. How important do you think it is to have cable TV channels that feature programs produced by or about
local residents, organizations, schools, and government, or about issues of interest to Reading?
—Very Important _ Important _ Not Very Important _ Not Important at All _ Don't Know
38. Do you know that you, or the organizations you are involved with, can produce programs to show on an
RCTV channel and the RCTV.org website?
_ Yes _ No
39. Have you ever provided or participated in the production of a program, or appeared as a guest on a program shown
on an RCTV channel and the RCTV.org website?
_ Yes —No _ Don't Know IF "NO" OR "DON'T KNOW," SKIP TO QUESTION 47 AT BOTTOM OF PAGE 6
40. How many Reading Public Access (and/or Education & Government Access) programs have you provided,
participated in the production of, or appeared on as a guest during the past two years?
More than 10 6-10 1 - 5 None
5 6 e�$
41. What was the impact of your program(s) on your organization, collaborators, supporters, and the viewing
audience? PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
_ I/We got calls from viewers and supporters for more information
—Viewers and supporters got involved in the issue(s) piesenled in my /uur piuyiarri
_ Viewers and supporters said they attended an event that was promoted in my /our program
_ Participants who appeared on my /our program were recognized in public by viewers
_ No impact that I know of
_ Other (describe):
42. How readily available were the RCTV production facilities and equipment when you wanted to. participate in
the production of a program (or material for a program)?
_ Always _ Usually _ Sometimes —Rarely _Not Applicable I IF "NOT APPLICABLE," SKIP TO QUESTION 45
43
44.
How would you describe the typical condition of the RCTV production facilities and equipment items when
you have used them?
Excellent _ Good _ Fair _ Poor _ Very Poor _ Not Applicable
Did the quantity and technical quality of the RCTV production equipment meet your needs?
Yes _ Not Applicable
—No ( IF "NO," PLEASE INDICATE YOUR EQUIPMENT NEEDS BELOW. CHECK ALL THAT APPLY.
_ Camcorders that are easier to use _ Camcorders with more advanced capability
_ High definition equipment _ More video editing systems
_ Laptop computers for video editing (that I can check out from the RCTV facility)
_ Portable, multiple- camera systems (that I can check out from the RCTV facility)
_ Other (describe):
45. How important do you feel it is for the Reading Public, Education, and Government Access channels to
have the ability to transmit video programming live from locations throughout Reading, including places
like a community center, library, school, performance hall, stadium, or sports field?
_ Very Important _ Important _ Not Very Important _ Not Important at All _ Don't Know
46. Please rate the quality of the following services provided by the RCTV staff:
VERY NOT
EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR POOR APPLICABLE
a. Efforts to inform residents about RCN's equipment, .....
services and programming
b. Production and other training services ............................
c. Assistance in planning the creation of your program(s) .....
d. Assistance in reserving production equipment ................
e. Assistance in the production of your program(s) ...............
f. Maintenance of production equipment ..............................
g. Advice to help you improve your program(s) ...................
h. Assistance to help you promote your program(s) ...........
i. Playback of your programs on cable TV .........................
47. Please use the space below to provide any comments about the programming and services offered by
RCTV, and your suggestions to improve those services.
5�W
48. How interested are you in the following types of local cable TV programs or services:
VERY NOTVERY NOTATALL
INTERESTED INTERESTED NEUTRAL INTERESTED INTERESTED
a. Community festivals, neighborhood events ....................
b. Local programming channels in high definition ...................
c. Local programs on your cable company's video-on - ...........
demand service
d. Program schedules for the Reading Public, Education...
and Government Access channels on your cable
company's on- screen program guide
e. Educational /instructional programs from local schools ...
f. Environmental programs .................. ...............................
g. Ethnic and cultural programs ........... ...............................
h. Government/public agency meetings .............................
i. Government informational programs ..............................
j. Health and fitness programs ........... ...............................
k. Informational programs about services and activities .....
of Reading organizations and clubs
I. Inspirational /personal development and learning............
programs
m. Live coverage of local events (sports, concerts, etc.) .....
n. Local church services and spiritual programs .................
o. Local news and information ............. ...............................
p. Local sports and recreational activities ...........................
q. Programs about Reading's history, arts and artists ........
r. Senior citizen activities and concerns .............................
s. Youth - produced programs ............... ...............................
t. Programs in languages other than English .....................
u. Programs produced in other communities near ..............
Reading
v. Other (describe):
49. How often do you use the following information sources to find out about the services available and
activities that occur in Reading:
NEVER OCCASIONALLY FREQUENTLY ALWAYS
a. Social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, text messages, email) ...........
b. On -line news sites (e.g., boston. com) .......... ...............................
c. Websites of local organizations .................... ...............................
d. Reading's Public, Education & Government Access channels.........
e. Flyers and posters placed on bulletin boards, etc .......................
f. Local newspaper articles and advertisements ............................
g. Local radio station stories and advertisements ...........................
h. Local broadcast TV station stories and advertisements ..............
i. Newsletters and other materials via US Mail . ...............................
-7-
�b1�
50. Would you like to use or participate in any of the following types of media - related resources or services, if
they were offered by RCTV in the future?
YES NO MAYBE
a. Free access to computers and the Internet ........................... ...............................
b. Training in the use of computers and software ..................... ...............................
c. Training in the use of social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Linkedln, etc.) .......
d. Advanced media production training (e.g., documentary production . ..................
advanced lighting techniques, how to upload your videos to YouTube, etc.)
e. Citizen journalism (training and involvement in collecting, analyzing and .............
reporting local news and information)
f. Other (describe):
51. Finally, we would appreciate it if you would indicate the following information about yourself, for statistical
purposes:
a. Please indicate the grouping that includes your age:
Under 25? 25 to 34? 35 to 44? 45 to 54? 55 to 64? 65 or Older?
b. Please indicate your gender:
_ Male _ Female
c. Please indicate your household's annual income before taxes:
_ Under $25,000 _ $25,000 to $39,999 _ $40,000 to $59,999
_ $60,000 to $99,999 _ $100,000 or more
52. Thank you very much for your assistance. You are invited (but not required) to voluntarily provide any of
the following information about yourself and the organization(s) with which you are associated.
[PLEASE NOTE: IF YOU INCLUDE YOUR NAME AND CONTACT INFORMATION BELOW, your name will be
included in a drawing for a chance to win a DJI Phantom 3 Advanced Quadcopter (value: $699) and a 2 -Hour
Flight Training Class! The drawing will be held after this online survey closes on Monday, July 31 at
midnight. The winner will be notified by email or telephone. You must be 18 years of age or older to
participate in the drawing.]
Name:
Organization(s):
Address:
Telephone:
Email:
Responses to the Community Needs and Interests Questionnaire
MO,
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q1 Do you currently subscribe to a cable TV service in Reading?
Answered: 240 Skipped:0
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 82.50% 198
No 17.50% 42
TOTAL 240
„ss �b�3
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q2 Which cable TV service provider do you use?
Answered: 198 Skipped: 42
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Comcast 51.52% 102
Verizon (FIGS) 48.48% 96
TOTAL 198
z,ss Sb��V
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q3 How long have you subscribed to the Comcast cable TV service in
Reading?
Answered: 102 Skipped: 138
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Less than 1 Year
2.94%
3
1 to 5 Years
19.61%
20
6 to 10 Years
14.71%
15
Over 10 Years
59.80%
61
Don't Know or Don't Remember
2.94%
3
TOTAL
102
3,� 5b�5
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q4 Do you receive Comcast's package of high definition (HD) channels?
Answered: 102 Skipped: 138
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 87.25 % 89
No 12.75% 13
Don't Know 0.00% 0
TOTAL 102
4/56 U
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q5 How often do you watch Comcast channels that are not delivered in
HD to your TV?
Answered: 89 Skipped: 151
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Often
16.85%
15
Sometimes
29.21%
26
Rarely
35.96%
32
Never
11.24%
10
Don't Know
6.74%
6
TOTAL
89
5/56 `
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q6 Which one source of information do you use most often to find
information about programming on cable TV channels? PLEASE CHECK
ONE OF THESE:
Answered: 102 Skipped: '138
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
TV Section of Newspaper
1.96%
2
"TV Guide" Magazine
0.98%
1
The Internet
3.92%
4
Comcast's On- Screen Program Guide
71.57%
73
"Channel Surfing"
8.82%
9
Don't Know
2.94%
3
Other (please specify):
9.80%
10
TOTAL
102
s,sa 5b��
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q7 How often do you use Comcast's on- screen program guide to decide
what to watch?
Answered: '102 Skipped: '138
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Never
7.84%
8
Occasionally
25.49%
26
Frequently
46.08%
47
Always
19.61%
20
Don't Know
0.98%
1
TOTAL
102
7/56 �n��
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q8 Do you subscribe to Comcast's internet or telephone service?
PLEASE CHECK ONE OF THESE:
Answered: 102 Skipped: 138
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
No
3.92%
4
Yes (Internet and Telephone)
67.65%
69
Yes (Internet)
26.47%
27
Yes (Telephone)
0.00%
0
Don't Know
1.96%
2
TOTAL
102
8 / 56 �ol�
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q9 Please indicate your level of satisfaction with Comcast's cable TV
service (NOT telephone or Internet service) in the following areas. (If the
item is not applicable to you, indicate that by checking "N /A. ")
Answered: 101 Skipped: 139
VERY
GOOD
Quality of the picture and sound 38.61%
39
Reliability of Comcast's cable TV service 34.65%
35
Number and variety of channels offered 34.00%
34
Helpfulness of Comcast's customer service 21.78%
representatives 22
The rates charged by Comcast for cable TV service 3.96%
4
Ease of getting services installed or changed by 15.84%
Comcast 16
Ease of getting problems repaired or resolved by 13.86%
Comcast 14
Ability to quickly speak to a customer service 13.86%
representative when you call Comcast 14
Ability of Comcast to respond to a service call within 14.85%
the promised time period 15
GOOD
50.50%
51
43.56%
44
42.00%
42
31.68%
32
6.93%
7
32.67%
33
29.70%
30
32.67%
33
41.58%
42
9/56
FAIR
8.91%
9
16.83%
17
21.00%
21
26.73%
27
35.64%
36
23.76%
24
29.70%
30
22.77%
23
17.82%
18
POOR VERY
POOR
0.99% 0.00%
1 0
4.95% 0.00%
5 0
0.00% 3.00%
0 1 3
5.94% 4.95%
6 5
27.72% 19.80%
28 20
10.89% 1.98%
11 2
8.91% 5.94%
9 6
8.91% 8.91%
9 9
3.96% 4.95%
4 5
DON'T
KNOW
0.00%
0
0.00%
0
0.00%
0
3.96%
4
5.94%
6
5.94%
6
8.91%
9
8.91%
9
11.88%
12
N/A TOTAL
0.99%
1 101
0.00%
0 101
0.00%
0 100
4.95%
5 101
0.00%
0 101
8.91%
9 101
2.97%
3 101
3.96%
4 101
4.95%
5 101
ISO
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q10 Have you tried to contact Comcast by telephone during the past
year?
Answered: 101 Skipped: 139
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 67.33%
No 26.73%
Don't Know 5.94%
TOTAL
10/56
68
27
6
101
5�
5ba
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q11 As a result of your most recent telephone call to Comcast, was your
issue resolved using the Comcast automated telephone response
system, without talking to a person?
Answered: 68 Skipped: 172
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 5.88% 4
No 91.18% 62
Don't Know 2.94% 2
TOTAL 68
11 /56 %5 's
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q12 During your most recent telephone call to Comcast, if you waited to
speak to a customer service representative, how long would you estimate
that you were on hold (or were you never connected)?
Answered: 62 Skipped: 178
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Less Than 30 Seconds
1.61%
1
Between 30 Seconds and 1 Minute
22.58%
14
Between 1 - 5 Minutes
30.65%
19
Between 5 - 15 Minutes
30.65%
19
More Than 15 Minutes
8.06%
5
Don't Know or Don't Remember
3.23%
2
Never Connected
3.23%
2
TOTAL
62
12/56 \ ^��
�l
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q13 Was the person you spoke with able to resolve your issue during that
most recent telephone call?
Answered: 59 Skipped: 101
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 61.02% 36
No 38.98% 23
Don't Know 0.00% 0
TOTAL 59
13/56 015
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q14 Was that because a service call was necessary?
Answered: 23 Skipped: 217
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 52.17%
No 43.48%
Don't Know 4.35%
TOTAL
14/56
12
10
1
23
•
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q15 If you scheduled a service call, was the problem resolved on the first
visit by the technician?
Answered. 12 Skipped: 228
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 66.67% 8
No 33.33% 4
Don't Know or Don't Remember 0.00% 0
Not Applicable 0.00% 0
TOTAL 12
15/56 ��OV
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q16 Have you gone to a Comcast office during the past year?
Answered: 100 Skipped: 140
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Yes
32.00%
32
No
66.00%
66
Don't Know
2.00%
2
TOTAL
100
16/56 S, %s
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q17 For what reason(s) did you go to the Comcast office? PLEASE
CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
Answered: 32 Skipped. 208
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Pay bill
9.38%
Return /pick up equipment
90.63%
Order /change service
21.88%
Other (please specify):
3.13%
Total Respondents: 32
17/56
3
29
i
1
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q18 During your last time at the Comcast office, how long did you wait in
line before a Comcast representative could help you?
Answered: 32 Skipped. 208
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Less than 5 Minutes
65.63%
21
Between 5 - 15 Minutes
28.13%
9
Between 15 - 30 Minutes
3.13%
1
More than 30 Minutes
0.00%
0
Don't Know or Don't Remember
3.13%
1
Left Without Being Helped
0.00%
0
TOTAL
32
18/56 ��
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q19 During the last time you went to the Comcast office, was Comcast
able to resolve your issue?
Answered: 32 Skipped: 208
ANSWER CHOICES
Yes
No
Don't Know or Don't Remember
Not Applicable
TOTAL
RESPONSES
87.50% 28
3.13% 1
0.00% 0
9.38% 3
32
19/56 w \�
66
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q20 How important is it to you that Comcast provides an office that is
located near your home?
Answeied.100 Skipped. 140
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Very Important
28.00%
28
Important
35.00%
35
Not Very Important
26.00%
26
Not Important at All
7.00%
7
Don't Know
4.00%
4
TOTAL
100
20/56
5bga
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q21 Overall, how satisfied are you with the Comcast cable TV service?
Answered: 100 Skipped: 140
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Very Satisfied
28.00%
28
Somewhat Satisfied
52.00%
52
Neutral /No Opinion
11.00%
11
Somewhat Dissatisfied
7.00%
7
Very Dissatisfied
2.00%
2
TOTAL
100
21/56 �;e 5
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q22 Please provide any comments about your Comcast cable TV service
in the space below.
Answered: 62 Skipped: 178
(Responses are provided in Appendix 2a.)
22/56
to�
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q23 How long have you subscribed to the Verizon (FIOS) cable TV
service in Reading?
Answered: 96 Skipped: 144
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Less than 1 Year
6.25%
6
1 to 3 Years
13.54%
13
Over 3 Years
79.17%
76
Don't Know /Don't Remember
1.04%
1
TOTAL
96
23/56
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q24 If you previously subscribed to Comcast's cable TV service in
Reading, but no longer do so, please indicate the reason(s) from the list
provided below. PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
Answered: '138 Skipped: '102
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
I have never subscribed to Comcast's cable TV service
29.71%
41
1 moved to another residence
6.52%
9
Poor picture and /or sound quality from Comcast
3.62%
5
1 didn't watch TV enough to make it worthwhile
2.17%
3
Comcast's customer service was poor
19.57%
27
Comcast's cable TV service was too expensive
23.91%
33
I switched to Verizon (FIOS) or a satellite TV service (e.g., DirecTV, DISH Network)
23.19%
32
I receive enough programming on over - the -air broadcast stations
5.07%
7
1 rent or buy programs on DVD or Blu -Ray disc to watch on my TV
4.35%
6
1 watch free programming that is delivered through the Internet (e.g., websites of TV shows, YouTube, Vimeo)
725%
10
1 subscribe to a program service(s) delivered through the Internet (e.g., Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, Vudu)
18.12%
25
Don't Know
8.70%
12
Other reason(s):
8.70%
12
Total Respondents: 138
24 / 56 ` p\(D
t�o
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q25 If you have NEVER subscribed to the Comcast cable TV service in
Reading, please indicate the reason(s) from the list provided below.
PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY:
Answered. 41 Skipped. 199
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Comcast's cable TV service is not available to my home
0.00%
0
I'm not interested — I don't watch TV enough to make it worthwhile
14.63%
6
Comcast has a poor reputation
48.78%
20
Comcast's cable TV service is too expensive
26.83%
11
1 subscribe to a satellite TV service (e.g., DirecTV, DISH Network)
2.44%
1
1 receive enough programming on over- the -air broadcast stations
17.07%
7
1 rent or buy programs on DVD or Blu -Ray disc to watch on my TV
0.00%
0
1 watch free programming that is delivered through the Internet (e.g., websites of TV shows, YouTube, Vimeo)
19.51%
8
1 subscribe to a program service(s) delivered through the Internet (e.g., Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, Vudu)
31.71%
13
Don't know
7.32%
3
Other reason(s):
31.71%
13
Total Respondents: 41
25/56 \d ,APO
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q26 Reading Community Television ( "RCTV ") delivers a wide variety of
local programs and video content produced or sponsored by Reading
residents and local organizations on Comcast channel 9 (Verizon channel
31) -- the Reading "Public Access" channel. On Comcast channel 99
(Verizon channel 32) -- the Reading "Education Access" channel -- RCTV
delivers local programs that educate citizens about Reading school
programs, events, goals and issues; and coverage of School Committee
meetings.On Comcast channel 22 (Verizon channel 33) -- the Reading
"Government Access" channel -- RCTV provides coverage of Town
Meetings, Board of Selectmen meetings, and several other government
meetings, and other programming to promote awareness and
understanding of government issues. Are you aware of one or more of
these channels and their programming?
ANSWER CHOICES
Yes
No
TOTAL
Answered: 238 Skipped:2
RESPONSES
83.61%
16.39%
199
39
238
26/56
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q27 How often do you watch the Reading Public Access channel 9 (31)?
Answered: 198 Skipped: 42
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Daily
1.01%
2
At least once / week
14.14%
28
1 - 3 times / month
23.74%
47
Less than once / month
39.39%
78
Don't Know
1.52%
3
Never
10.61%
21
Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
9.60%
19
TOTAL
198
27/56 0�
31
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q28 Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading Public
Access channel:
Answered: 157 Skipped: 83
Provides programs that deal with local
issues
Provides programs that publicize local
services
Provides programs with diverse points of
view
Provides valuable information
Provides programs that are interesting to
watch
STRONGLY
AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
DON'T
TOTAL
AGREE
DISAGREE
KNOW
36.94%
50.96%
1.27%
0.64% .
10.19%
58
80
2
1
16
157
28.85%
48.08%
3.85%
1.28%
17.95%
45
75
6
2
28
156
14.01%
42.04%
8.92%
1.91%
33.12%
22
66
14
3
52
157
26.75%
56.05%
3.82%
0.64%
12.74%
42
88
6
1
20
157
16.03%
56.41%
10:90%
3.21%
13.46%
25
88
17
5
21
156
28/56 `C)�.✓
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q29 How often do you watch the Reading Education Access channel 99
(32)?
Answered: 197 Skipped: 43
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Daily
0.51%
1
At least once / week
9.14%
18
1 - 3 times / month
18.78%
37
Less than once / month
34.01%
67
Don't Know
3.05%
6
Never
24.87%
49
Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
9.64%
19
TOTAL
197
29/56 `b\
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q30 Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading
Educational Access channel:
Answered: 128 Skipped: 112
30/56 \
STRONGLY
AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
DON'T
TOTAL
AGREE
DISAGREE
KNOW
Provides worthwhile educational
14.17%
57.48%
7.09%
2.36%
18.90%
programming
18
73
9
3
24
127
Provide valuable information
22.66%
57.03%
4.69%
1.56%
14.06%
29
73
6
2
18
128
Provide programs that are interesting to
10.16%
56.25%
14.06%
2.34%
17.19%
watch
13
72
18
3
22
128
30/56 \
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q31 How often do you watch the Reading Government Access channel
22 (33)?
Answered: 194 Skipped: 46
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Daily
1.03%
2
At least once / week
12.37%
24
1 - 3 times / month
23.20%
45
Less than once / month
31.96%
62
Don't Know
4.12%
8
Never
17.53%
34
Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
9.79%
19
TOTAL
194
31/56 \ v
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q32 Indicate your opinion of these statements about the Reading
Government Access channel:
Answered: 141 Skipped: 99
32/56 dA
V�
STRONGLY
AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
DON'T
TOTAL
AGREE
DISAGREE
KNOW
Provides worthwhile local government
41.84%
46.10%
0.00%
0.00%
12.06%
programming
59
65
0
0
17
141
Provide valuable information
42.55%
43.26%
2.13%
0.00%
12.06%
60
61
3
0
17
141
Provide programs that are interesting to
23.57%
50.00%
11.43%
0.00%
15.00%
watch
33
70
16
0
21
140
32/56 dA
V�
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q33 How do you find out about programs that you want to watch on the
Reading Public, Educational, and Government Access channels?
(PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY.)
Answered: 194 Skipped: 46
ANSWER CHOICES
RCTV's website
Flyers
Channel 21 listings
At events
Newspaper
"Channel Surfing"
Friends
Facebook
Twitter
Don't Know
Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
Other (please specify)
Total Respondents: 194
33/56
RESPONSES
40.72%
79
6.70%
13
0.00%
0
14.95%
29
12.37%
24
51.03%
99
28.87%
56
0.00%
0
0.00%
0
4.12%
8
7.22%
14
17.53%
34
5b�o5
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q34 Disregarding the content of the programs, how would you rate the
picture and sound quality of the Reading Public, Educational, and
Government Access channels, as compared to the other cable channels
that you watch?
Answered: 179 Skipped: 61
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Better quality
8.38%
15
Lower quality
48.04%
86
About the same
30.17%
54
Don't Know
11.17%
20
Not Applicable To Me / I am not a Comcast or Verizon subscriber in Reading
2.23%
4
TOTAL
179
34/56 CU
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q35 Do you ever watch Reading Public, Educational, and Government
Access programs at RCTV's website (RCTV.org)?
Answered: 190 Skipped: 50
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Yes
26.32% 50
No
47.37% 90
1 did not know I could watch Reading Public, Educational, and Government Access programs at RCTV's website
26.32% 50
TOTAL
190
35/56
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q36 Please indicate if you have watched any of the following programs
that are shown on the Reading Public, Educational, and Government
Access channels -- or RCTV's website -- and how regularly you have
watched them. (If this item is not applicable to you, indicate that by
checking "N /A. ")
Answered: 192 Skipped: 48
3s „6 6"�Cg
NEVER
LESS THAN
1 - 3 TIMES PER
AT LEAST
DON'T
N/A
TOTAL
MONTHLY
MONTH
WEEKLY
KNOW
Board of Selectmen
18.23%
43.75%
23.96%
3.65%
1.56 %
8.85 %
meetings
35
84
46
7
3
17
192
School Committee meetings
28.27%
42.93%
17.80%
2.09%
1.05%
7.85%
54
82
34
4
2
15
191
Town Meeting
22.51%
48.17%
12.04%
2.09%
4.19%
10.99%
43
92
23
4
8
21
191
Conservation Commission
51.32%
26.46%
6.88%
1.59%
2.65%
11.11%
meetings
97
50
13
3
5
21
189
Zoning Board of Appeals
53.44%
25.40%
6.35%
1.06%
2.65%
11.11%
meetings
101
48
12
2
5
21
189
Planning Commission
56.38%
22.87%
4.79%
1.06%
3.19%
11.70%
meetings
106
43
9
2
6
22
188
"RMLD"
66.49%
15.68%
3.24%
0.00%
2.70%
11.89%
123
29
6
0
5
22
185
"K9 Tails"
54.89%
18.48%
10.87%
1.63%
1.09%
13.04%
101
34
20
3
2
24
184
"Delicious Simplicity"
52.41%
22.46%
10.70%
1.07%
1.07%
12.30%
98
42
20
2
2
23
187
"Community Conversation"
49.20%
28.34%
8.02%
1.07%
2.14%
11.23%
92
53
15
2
4
21
187
"Story Time with Winny and
72.28%
10.33%
3.26%
0.54%
0.54%
13.04%
Nan"
133
19
6
1
1
24
184
"Highway Twenty- Eight"
68.11%
11.89%
3.78%
1.08%
2.16%
12.97%
126
22
7
2
4
24
185
3s „6 6"�Cg
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q37 How important do you think it is to have cable TV channels that
feature programs produced by or about local residents, organizations,
schools, and government, or about issues of interest to Reading?
Answered: 227 Skipped: 13
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Very Important
55.51%
126
Important
33.04%
75
Not Very Important
8.81%
20
Not Important at All
1.32%
3
Don't Know
1.32%
3
TOTAL
227
a,,sa 5b�oq
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q38 Do you know that you, or the organizations you are involved with,
can produce programs to show on an RCTV channel and the RCTV.org
website?
ANSWER CHOICES
Yes
No
TOTAL
Answered: 227 Skipped: 13
RESPONSES
66.08%
33.92%
150
77
227
38,=6 5b��o
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q39 Have you ever provided or participated in the production of a
program, or appeared as a guest on a program shown on an RCTV
channel and the RCTV.org website?
Answered: 228 Skipped: 12
ANSWER CHOICES
Yes
M
Don't Know
TOTAL
RESPONSES
38.16%
59.65%
2.19%
87
136
5
228
39/56 5 b\\\
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q40 How many Reading Public Access (and /or Educational &
Government Access) programs have you provided, participated in the
production of, or appeared on as a guest during the past two years?
Answered: 87 Skipped: 153
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
More than 10
14.94%
13
6-10
10.34%
9
1 - 5
52.87%
46
None
21.84%
19
TOTAL
87
40/56 5b��a
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q41 What was the impact of your program(s) on your organization,
collaborators, supporters, and the viewing audience? PLEASE CHECK
ALL THAT APPLY:
Answered: 84 Skipped: 156
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
I/We got requests from viewers and supporters for more information
17.86%
15
Viewers and supporters got involved in the issue(s) presented in my /our program
19.05%
16
Viewers and supporters said they attended an event that was promoted in my /our program
23.81%
20
Participants who appeared on my /our program were recognized in public by viewers
35.71%
30
No impact that I know of
40.48%
34
Other (please describe):
8.33%
7
Total Respondents: 84
41 / 56
5\&3
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q42 How readily available were the RCTV production facilities and
equipment when you wanted to participate in the production of a program
(or material for a program)?
Answered: 87 Skipped: 153
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Always
36.78%
32
Usually
40.23%
35
Sometimes
2.30%
2
Rarely
0.00%
0
Not Applicable
20.69%
18
TOTAL
87
42/56 \ ^�"
�J\
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q43 How would you describe the typical condition of the RCTV
production facilities and equipment items when you have used them?
Answered: 70 Skipped: 170
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Excellent
64.29%
45
Good
27.14%
19
Fair
2.86%
2
Poor
0.00%
0
Very Poor
0.00%
0
Not Applicable
5.71%
4
TOTAL
70
43/56 `\6
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q44 Did the quantity and technical quality of the RCTV production
equipment meet your needs?
Answered: 70 Skipped: 170
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 87.14% 61
No 4.29% 3
Not Applicable 8.57% 6
TOTAL 70
44/56 `0�
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q45 Please indicate your equipment needs below. (Please check ALL
that apply.)
Answered:3 Skipped: 237
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Camcorders that are easier to use
33.33% 1
Camcorders with more advanced capability
33.33% 1
High definition equipment
66.67% 2
More video editing systems
0.00% 0
Laptop computers for video editing (that I can check out from the RCTV facility)
33.33 % 1
Portable, multiple- camera systems (that I can check out from the RCTV facility)
0.00% 0
Multiple- camera production vehicle
0.00% 0
Other:
0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 3
45/56 `����
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q46 How important do you feel it is for the Reading Public, Education,
and Government Access channels to have the ability to transmit video
programming live from locations throughout Reading, including places like
a community center, library, school, performance hall, stadium, or sports
field?
Answered: 87 Skipped: 153
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Very Important
71.26%
62
Important
25.29%
22
Not Very Important
3.45%
3
Not Important At All
0.00%
0
Don't Know
0.00%
0
TOTAL
87
46/56 b\\�
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q47 Please rate the quality of the following services provided by the
RCTV staff:
Answered: 83 Skipped: 157
EIMIM
�b��q
EXCELLENT
GOOD
FAIR
POOR
VERY
NOT
TOTAL
POOR
APPLICABLE
Efforts to inform residents about RCTV's equipment;
35.37%
46.34%
7.32%
4.88%
0.00%
6.10%
services and programming
29
38
6
4
0
5
82
Production and other training services
51.22%
24.39%
7,32%
3.66%
0:00%
13.41%
42
20
6
3
0
11
82
Assistance in planning the creation of your program(s)
33.33%
32.10%
9.88%
0.00%
0.00%
24.69%
27
26
8
0
0
20
81
Assistance in reserving production equipment
44.44%
25.93%
2.47%
0.00%
0.00%
27.16%
36
21
2
0
0
22
81
Assistance in the production of your program(s)
44.44%
25.93%
3.70%
0.00%
0.00%
25.93%
36
21
3
0
0
21
81
Maintenance of production equipment
38.27%
30.86%
3.70%
1.23%
0.00%
25.93%
31
25
3
1
0
21
81
Advice to help you improve your program(s)
34.57%
28.40%
3.70%
0.00%
0.00%
33.33%
28
23
3
0
0
27
81
Assistance to help you promote your program(s)
25.93%
30.86%
8.64%
2.47%
0.00%
32.10%
21
25
7
2
0
26
81
Playback of your programs on cable TV
34.57%
33.33%
2.47%
0.00%
1.23%
28.40%
28
27
2
0
1
23
81
EIMIM
�b��q
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q48 Please use the space below to provide any comments about the
programming and other services offered by RCTV, and your suggestions
to improve those services.
Answered: 81 Skipped: 159
(Responses are provided in Appendix 2b.)
48/56
�b
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q49 How interested are you in the following types of local cable TV
programs or services:
Answered: 221 Skipped: 19
VERY INTERESTED NEUTRAL NOT VERY. NOT AT ALL TOTAL
INTERESTED INTERESTED INTERESTED
Community festivals, neighborhood events 26.03% 46.12% 18.72% 5.94% 3.20%
57 101 41 13 7 219
Local programming channels in high definition 29.82% 29.82% 28.44% 8.26% 3.67%
65 65 62 18 8 218
Local programs on your cable company's 23.39% 34.86% 23.39% 11.93% 6.42%
video -on- demand service 51 76 51 26 14 218
Program schedules for the Reading Public, 41.55% 33.79% 19.18% 3.65% 1.83%
Educational and Government Access 91 74 42 8 4 219
channels displayed on your cable company's
on- screen program guide
Educational /instructional programs from local 22.48% 43.12% 24.31% 7.80% 2.29%
schools 49 94 53 17 5 218
Environmental programs 20.37% 41.20% 27.78% 6.48% 4.17%
44 89 60 14 9 216
Ethnic and cultural programs 18.98% 33.33% 36.57% 5.09% 6.02%
41 72 79 11 13 216
Government/public agency meetings 28.57% 43.32% 21.66% 4.15% 2.30%
62 94 47 9 5 217
Government informational programs 25.23% 43.12% 21.10% 7.34% 3.21%
55 94 46 16 7 218
Health and fitness programs 13.55% 37.38% 35.05% 8.41% 5.61%
29 80 75 18 12 214
Informational programs about services and 25.93% 55.09% 15.28% 1.85% 1.85%
activities of Reading organizations and clubs 56 119 33 4 4 216
Inspirational /personal development and 11.63% 32.56% 40.47% 7.91% 7.44%
learning programs 25 70 87 17 16 215
Live coverage of local events (sports, 38.25% 36.87% 19.82% 2.76% 2.30 %
concerts, etc.) 83 80 43 6 5 217
Local church services and spiritual programs 11.11% 25.00% 32.87% 16.67% 14.35%
24 54 71 36 31 216
Local news and information 36.92% 47.66% 10.75% 3.27% 1.40%
79 102 23 7 3 214
Local sports and recreational activities 22.79% 41.40% 27.44% 4.19% 4.19%
49 89 59 9 9 215
Programs about Reading's history, arts and 28.11% 43.32% 19.35% 5.07% 4.15%
artists 61 94 42 11 9 217
Senior citizen activities and concerns 14.22% 28.90% 38.53% 11.47% 6.88%
31 63 84 25 15 218
Youth - produced programs 15.81% 33.49% 35.81% 8.84% 6.05%
34 72 77 19 13 215
Programs in languages other than English 5.07% 10.60% 37.79% 18.43% 28.11%
11 23 82 40 61 217
49/56
�U
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Programs produced in other communities 7.87% 27.78% 40.74%
near Reading 17 60 88
50/56
12.96% 10.65%
28 23 216
5b�aa
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q50 How often do you use the following information sources to find out
about the services available and activities that occur in Reading:
Answered: 219 Skipped: 21
Social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, text messages, email)
On -line news sites (e.g., boston.com)
Websites of local organizations
Reading's Public, Education & Government Access channels
Flyers and posters placed on bulletin boards, etc.
Local newspaper articles and advertisements
Local radio station stories and advertisements
Local broadcast TV station stories and advertisements
Newsletters and other materials via US Mail
NEVER
OCCASIONALLY
FREQUENTLY
ALWAYS
TOTAL
16.06%
32.11%
29.82%
22.02%
35
70
65
48
218
21.56%
42.20%
26.15%
10.09%
47
92
57
22
218
11.21%
43.93%
35.98%
8.88%
24
94
77
19
214
35.19%
48,61%
14.35%
1.85%
76
105
31
4
216
26.51%
53.95%
16.74%
2.79%
57
116
36
6
215
25.70%
42.06%
27.10%
5.14%
55
90
58
11
214
54.88%
35.35%
6.98%
2.79%
118
76
15
6
215
40.00%
40.93%
16.28%
2.79%
86
88
35
6
215
28.37%
53.95%
14.88%
2.79%
61
116
32
6
215
51/56
5\,O\a3
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q51 Would you like to use or participate in any of the following types of
media - related resources or services, if they were offered by RCTV in the
future?
Answered: 216 Skipped: 24
YES
Free access to computers and the Internet 26.17%
56
Training in the use of computers and software 34.42%
74
Training in the use of social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Linkedln, etc.) 22.43%
48
Advanced media production training (e.g., documentary production, advanced lighting 33.33%
techniques, how to upload your videos to YouTube, etc.) 71
Citizen journalism (training and involvement in collecting, analyzing and reporting local news and 22.54%
information) 48
52/56
NO MAYBE TOTAL
48.60% 25.23%
104 54 214
39.07% 26.51%
84 57 215
50.93% 26.64%
109 57 214
39.44% 27.23%
84 58 213
48.83% 28.64%
104 61 213
v\
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q52 Finally, we would appreciate it if you would indicate the following
information about yourself, for statistical purposes:Please indicate the
grouping that includes your age:
Answered: 213 Skipped: 27
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Under 25?
7.98%
17
25 to 34?
9.39%
20
35 to 44?
17.84%
38
45 to 54?
15.49%
33
55 to 64?
27.70%
59
65 or Older?
21.60%
46
TOTAL
213
53/56
b�
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q53 Please indicate your gender:
Answered: 210 Skipped: 30
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Male 48.10% 101
Female 51.90% 109
TOTAL 210
54/56 ^���
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q54 Please indicate your household's annual income before taxes:
Answered: 177 Skipped: 63
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Under $25,000?
3.39%
6
$25,000 to $39,999?
5.65%
10
$40,000 to $59,999?
13.56%
24
$60,000 to $99,999?
21.47%
38
$100,000 or more?
55.93%
99
TOTAL
177
ss,,s 5h�a�
Reading Community Needs and Interests Survey
Q55 Thank you very much for your assistance. You are invited (but not
required) to voluntarily provide any of the following information about
yourself and the organization(s) with which you are associated. [PLEASE
NOTE: IF YOU INCLUDE YOUR NAME AND CONTACT
INFORMATION BELOW, your name will be included in a drawing for a
chance to win a DJI Phantom 3 Advanced Quadcopter (value: $699) and
a 2 -Hour Flight Training Class! The drawing will be held after this online
survey closes on Thursday, August 31 at midnight. The winner will be
notified by email or telephone. You must be 18 years of age or older to
participate in the drawing.]
Answered: 103 Skipped: 137
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Your Name:
97.09%
100
Organization(s):
33.01%
34
Address:
92.23%
95
Address2:
0.00%
0
City:
96.12%
99
State:
0.00%
0
Zip Code:
96.12%
99
Country:
0.00%
0
Email Address:
95.15%
98
Phone Number:
86.41%
89
56/56 5b�a�
j0AILDIKOW
Questionnaire Open -Ended Responses: Comments about Comcast
5b�a�
OPEN -ENDED ANSWERS TO SURVEY QUESTION:
"Please provide any comments about your Comcast cable TV service in the space below."
NEGATIVE COMMENTS:
1. Automated phone menu is a horrible customer service experience.
2. Cable TV is way over priced... Comcast charges a lot for very little
3. Cannot select preferred channels without having to pay for a "bundle" we do not use ... do not
need most of the channels in the bundle I am forced to subscribe just to view favorites.
4. Comcast TV is too expensive. The bundling of channels, instead of letting you choose what
channels you want (and pay for just those), makes it much too expensive.
5. Cost of Comcast service is incredibly expense - with no relief in sight. Looking for alternatives.
6. Expensive. Packaged service bloated with unwanted stations.
7. Frequently we get short time interruptions in video and /or audio for unknown reasons.
8. 1 do not have an HD TV, I would like to just watch channels as I did before, without being
slammed onto HD as if I wanted them, when I did not request them.' Comcast's new on screen
TV guide is too small, the writing is not clear enough, or large enough for me to decipher it from
the screen without strain. I object to products being advertised as is they are programs. I feel it is
click -bait. The white letters on black is an OK idea, perhaps reversed would be better. I miss
programs being color coded, i.e. green for sports. I also object to not having the channel I was
watching thumbnailed into a corner of the screen.
9. I don't watch it. I would like the on demand to work but we got new boxes and I still can't watch
movies on demand, can't get to the pay per view movies either. My bf watches it but I don't.
10. 1 find your menus on the phone are the worst. I have gotten stuck in loops more than once.
11. 1 hate the lack of personal customer service robo - calling. I want to speak with a person right
away.
12. 1 have difficulty navigating On Demand menus.
13. 1 have to pay for services I do not use (like the programming guide) because I use a TiVo box.
14. 1 really don't like the reduction of features that occurred with latest "upgrade ". There are key
features that we like in the service, plus we have heard some very bad things about FIOS, so
while we are not really happy with COMCAST we feel like we are better off with the devil we
know rather the one we have heard about.
15. 1 very much want our local access channels to be in HD.
16. 1 very much want to have on- screen program guide for our local access channels.
17. 1 wish I had Turner Classic Movies.
18. I wish our local access channels were hi -def. The quality of the sound and video is often very
poor in addition to being SD. I find the menus hard to follow. I also find the channel lineup
weird- -news stations are all over the place, shopping are all over the place ...
APPENDIX 2a — PAGE 1 ` 0
NEGATIVE COMMENTS (continued):
19. 1 wish we could get a good price without getting bundles, I don't need a home phone anymore
but am forced to in order to get a better price. It's a waste!
20. 1 wish we didn't need the ugly cable box, which is big and uses power 24 hours a day, and is a
nuisance to control (separate remote).
21. 1 would like to be able to get only what I want and not a package. Unfortunately the way it is set
up there is no cost savings by doing this.
22. 1 would like to be able to select the channels that I want. There are way too many channels that I
will never watch and don't want to pay for.
23. 1 would like to see live Selectman /school meetings. It's difficult to find the meeting when it airs at
a different time. Also when the meeting is live the audio often isn't always adequate.
24. 1 would love for you to "cluster" your channels by subject - -all the news together, the education
together, the sports together, the shopping together .. .
25. It seems that the recent upgrade in service (to X1) was a step backwards in some areas. We
sometimes experience "glitches" and other pixelated service. The guide function is less helpful
than the prior version. The platform intentionally steers you to pay per view services and in
some cases omits the options for free view services and shows.
26. It's expensive after the first year and many shows on the "On Demand" feature cost extra, even
though they are just TV shows and not movies. I feel Comcast was overrepresented to me by
the salesman.
27. It's quite expensive to obtain the few particular channels I want to watch. I have no interest in
HBO or sports (except for the Olympics) but those come with the package. When my TV froze it
took two phone calls in two days to diagnose an end -of -life cable box. I had been considering
making an upgrade and when I went to the store to exchange the box for a new one, I also
changed to an HD package. I then received two wildly different email estimates of my new rate,
neither one being what the salesman had estimated and one being truly exorbitant. Contacted
salesman, jotted down what he said it will really be. I will be checking my next bill to make sure
someone didn't mess it up. I am, however, enjoying "Fixer Upper" and similar shows.
28. It's too expensive.
29. Lack of High Def. local /community channels is EXTREMELY disappointing. Also lack of local
channel programming information in Comcast cable guide is disappointing.
30. Loses service frequently
31. Many channels that are not watched but unable to get a lesser package. Many of the shows are
repeated often.
32. My ONLY issue is we should have a la cart & pay for channels we watch!!!!!
33. Not sure how much longer we will continue with Comcast TV. The rates are very high and we
don't watch TV very often and find Netflix and Hulu can offer enough at a much lower cost.
APPENDIX 2a — PAGE 2
NEGATIVE COMMENTS (continued):
34. Only use the $19.00 per month TV service, so do not have HD nor more than 20 or so channels,
including the 3 public access stations. I am also currently testing Verizon FIOS for HD cable,
internet and 2 phones. I likely will drop Comcast at some point once I am satisfied with FIOS.
35. OVERPRICED AND UNDERPERFORMING
36. Prices are too high. They nickel and dime you for everything. Example, why should we have to
pay for HD service? They make you pay for HD service and then you have to buy an HD box.
Isn't that paying for the same service twice? Same thing with DVR service. You pay for DVR
service and then for the DVR box. Also, the fees are out of control. Does anyone know what
those fees are really for? Customer Service is terrible. Also, should be able to choose channels
that you watch. Comcast bundles their channels and you end up paying for channels you never
watch. They claim you get all these channels and they are correct, but what good is having all
those channels if you don't watch them. I would like a plan where you pay for so many channels
and you get to choose the channels that you want.
37. Pricing structures, short contracts and the. Rate hikes, convoluted billing and overall monopoly
leave us unsatisfied with the company.
38. Raise the price of their service too often for no reason
39. Rates are way too high. Make you buy packages. Should be able to buy what channels I want.
40. Reliable service, good selection, but, limited package options and high prices.
41. Service is sporadic at times w/o explanation. Had service interrupted for no reason and when
tech came out was furious about why it went out but can't say too much for fear of reprisals.
42. Service is spotty AT times w/o explanation. We lost service and was amazed at the reason why.
But don't want to say for fear of reprisal.
43. Service malfunctions far too often, but usually a reboot cures the problem. When forced to call
service the staff is very helpful. Comcast has yet to provide 4K service, having promised it
maybe 2 years ago. Disappointing, but hardly earth shattering. It would be nice to get an
accurate delivery date.
44. Sometimes we have a complete break in video and /or audio for no apparent reason.
45. Sometimes there is pixeling (NESN) on baseball games and golf matches.
46. The service is fine, the price is too expensive.
47. The way channels are bundled forces me to pay for hundreds of channels that I don't use.
48. Unhappy with how they raise the price without warning.
49. Very expensive for the basic channels that you get. Likely will just get a Roku and subscriptions
to Hulu and Netflix, which would be much more cost effective.
50. Want to choose channels individually, not in a package.
51. Why can't we have more than two providers? Competition is the best motivator for exceptional
service.
APPENDIX 2a — PAGE 3
NEGATIVE COMMENTS (continued):
52. Why do I have to pay for channels I will NEVER watch? I have no use for Spanish channels,
home - shopping channels, MTV and the like. Why can't consumers choose the channels they
wish to watch?
53. Would like more options for less money. Also, would prefer that we could get a list of what is
available only for those stations I am able to access.
54. Would like to receive HD public TV stations and see what they are broadcasting. Very rarely
watch because they are not HD and I can't easily find a listing for them!!!
APPENDIX 2a — PAGE 4
V�
POSITIVE /NEUTRAL COMMENTS:
1. All is well.
2. Comcast is reliable during winter storms. Reliable in 98% of the time. Comcast prices continue
to increase yearly.
3. Generally satisfied
4. 1 don't watch that much cable television but do enjoy whatever is randomly on the World
Channel, PBS and occasionally other channels and RCTV. There is a TV in the kitchen and I'll
have it on while I'm cooking or eating a meal. I don't have many channels on Comcast anyway,
just the basic package. Internet is far more useful and this is obviously something that Cable
companies are going to need to address in the coming years...
5. 1 have never used anyone else, I hear people say they switch back and forth with their deals, but
when deals are up they switch again. I would rather stay with whom I have.
6. 1 only subscribe to BASIC cable.
7. It is very important to have an office close by, as it reduces the miles that folks need to drive.
8. It's reliable and reasonably robust. Every now and then things go wacky - On Demand won't
work, something isn't listed On Demand that I expect, etc. But for the most part, if it weren't so
expensive, I'd be thrilled.
9. Should never have changed to Verizon, went back to Comcast
10. Switched back to Comcast from FiOS less than a year ago. Saved about $50 /mon. There were
some issues in the beginning, but it turned out to be my TV. I have been pretty satisfied since. I
hate calling them. I prefer to go to their office in Burlington. Have had good service there.
11. Very reliable. Excellent search capabilities. On demand interface improves regularly. They
should definitely provide HD channels to community station and integrate on- demand and guide
search for community channel content though. Whatever service they give to a major network,
they should give to community TV station.
12. We have been Comcast subscribers for over 15 years, and never had an issue. We had a ROS
rep come to our door and almost made us switch, but they blew off their appointment and it is
probably for the best. My parents have ROS and I find their interface to be clunky and hard to
Navigate. Comcast customers for life!
APPENDIX 2a — PAGE 5
�J�
APPENDIX 2b
Questionnaire Open -Ended Responses: Comments about RCTV
OPEN -ENDED ANSWERS TO SURVEY QUESTION:
"Please use the space below to provide any comments about the programming and other
services offered by RCTV, and your suggestions to improve those services."
POSITIVE /NEUTRAL COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS:
1. An amazingly important service.
2. Coverage of elections and governmental committees is paramount. More local and High school
sports coverage would be desirable.
3. Good org
4. Good to know about the RCTV YouTube page!
5. Government meetings at varied locations are paramount. More local sports would be good.
6. HD programming would be great.
7. How does one find the program scheduling? Might be helpful if one knew what was being
shown and when, so one could plan time to watch. My experience in the past was to
accidentally fall upon a program when surfing. Not sure of which town is being featured and
arrive in the middle of the program and have NO idea what has transpired. Program listing
would be great if added to the Patch so one could plan.
8. 1 am very pleased with RCTV as a whole..... excellent staff, programs, quality viewing.
9. 1 didn't realize much of this program existed! Maybe publicize on the Reading Facebook page! I
am sure others also have no idea.
10. 1 don't have cable. It would be interesting if RCTV could create an app that people could use on
their smart TV's or other internet streaming devices (i.e., Roku) to view the content. Programs
could be streamed that are available on the RCTV website. Not sure how cost prohibitive this is
though, so I can understand why it's not available.
11. 1 find the interviews and debates with the candidates prior to an election very helpful. I usually
watch them on YouTube because of scheduling issues. The scheduling of regular shows such
as church services could be a bit more predictable. Sometimes they show up; sometimes they
don't.
12. 1 have Verizon - I forget the Reading town stations vs the other towns on Verizon cable.
Would like to know the Reading Town and programming guide for Reading channels.
Tell me where to look up this information - Town website??? Where?
I can DVD programs.
13. 1 hope RCTV is around for a very long time and continues to improve the way it has over the
past 20( ?) years.
APPENDIX 2b — PAGE 1
t.l�
POSITIVE /NEUTRAL COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS (continued):
14. 1 know this is a cable access programming - but the way of the future is all digital content from
phones, iPads and computers. No one watches live TV and having the inability to have an over
the air station (as we ARE local) hinders those that don't want to spend $100 a month on
programming (Comcast/Cable) they don't watch.
I attend a bunch of local meetings, but am frustrated we do not have a LOCAL digital antenna
and instead relay on Comcast and Verizon to help foot the bill to post to cable, even though
MOST residents have cut the cord.
The entire model of RCTV needs to be rethought.
I am SO thankful for the staff that records these meetings so I can watch them. There is an
absolute NEED to do this so people can stay informed.
Just wish they would adopt Facebook Live or a Digital Antenna signal so people who have cut
the cord could watch live.
15. 1 miss "Ask the Town Manager ". That show I made a point of watching & CALLING IN w/
questions. Why did it stop? I got more answers to questions than watching. Lengthy meetings!!
16. 1 think it is a wonderful thing for the community. People who work there are friendly and helpful.
The set -up at the station is great and a nice atmosphere too! I am sure more helping hands and
updated equipment would enhance the already overall organization and town of Reading.
17. 1 think it is important to have local programming available.
18. 1 think it is very important to include all the groups, businesses and organizations in town.
I work at EMARC and would love to have a program produced about who we are and our
relation with the community.
19. 1 think it's important to have the services, but I don't really have the time or interest to watch. I
might watch a local sporting event or debate on an issue that directly affects me.
20. 1 think the education programs for kids are great. Keep it up! Thank you.
21. 1 was impressed with the live storm coverage not long ago -- people in the station and also out
on location.
22. 1 wish RCTV would provide a reliable listing of what programs are on the various local channels.
The RCTV website is impossible to get information about programming.
23. I'd like to be more involved but I don't watch TV enough to watch RCTV. Web based information
is easiest to get information to me and my family.
24. If money allows, offer more assistance to residents who want to produce shows. It's hard to find
your own crew and editors. - Provide more online training opportunities, through Udemy
courses or Lynda or something ... - continue to be so warm and friendly and helpful.
25. I'm interested in local TV and things happening in Reading but I don't have cable, so I thought I
couldn't access it.
If it's possible to watch from your website, more advertisement about that would be helpful.
26. Intend to look into RCTV programing/
27. Is there a YouTube channel that you can subscribe to for RCTV? Do they have a Facebook
page you can like?
APPENDIX 2b — PAGE 2
POSITIVE /NEUTRAL COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS (continued):
28. Is there an email that goes out about programs being aired? I always seem to forget with my
crazy life.
29. It would be great if RCTV could revive the Community Bulletin Board or create some equivalent
service. Also, while RCTV's responsiveness to messages has improved a lot over the years, it
could still be better.
30. It would be more widely known if the channel was advertised more. Internet streaming of the
channel would also be nice.
31. I've watched local programming from different towns in the area and I think RCTV has the best
and most professional programming if all of them.
32. Keeps me informed about what's going on in Reading.
33. Lahey health wellness lecture series.
34. Love the live shows during storms, Cooking shows and any coverage of local events like Town
day and Live Election coverage. Summer programs where kids can produce, edit and star in
their own productions is always fun to watch. RCTV should be in HD
35. More gardening or cooking shows that are upbeat and informative.
Shows that highlight each school.
36. My answers may be dated, I was using SD equipment to record Pop Warner games.
37. My biggest wish is that there was some way to get what was actually on these TV stations into
the FIOS Channel Guide. (Yes, I am aware that this isn't on you guys and that it'll never ever
happen, but, it's still my greatest wish for Local Cable TV to see a title of a show instead of the
entirely unhelpful 'local programming'.)
38. My understanding is that RCTV gets some of it it's funding from Verizon and Comcast. But,
cable is expensive, and over the air broadcasting and a decent internet connection has basically
eliminated our need for cable TV. Please continue to post on YouTube, etc.
39. Need to better advertise programing on a broader basis, maybe using email. Hard to know what
might be on.
40. Oh my, where to begin...
RCTV is a great and has developed mightily over the years, in no small part due to the efforts
and leadership of Phil Rushworth.
The channel needs more people making more original programming. It's been heartening to see
so many kids involved in 48 hour film festivals and creating things -- we need more of that. More
programming and better programming.
RCTV has some really great equipment and tools to work with. It is possible to achieve a high
level of production values even if it is exceedingly difficult for most people to complete with the
production values of shows on other cable channels. Perhaps more and more varied training
would help.
But one must keep in mind that most popular TV shows on the big cable channels are produced
for thousands, millions of dollars, professionally shot and directed and color- corrected, etc. So
it's ok. We can't make the next episode of Game of Thrones at RCTV.
APPENDIX 2b — PAGE 3
V�
POSITIVE /NEUTRAL COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS (continued):
But we CAN make other things. It's great that so much is available to people and that production
is even possible. Other cable stations are NOT necessarily like this and so open and accessible.
I'm not sure how to get more people interested in working on production but having the
equipment is an early step for sure. TV / Film production is time consuming and excellence is
hard -won. Great stories require work and dedication to tell. But the seeds are there to create
great things at RCTV and so we continue to plant them. And, in the meantime, the community
stays informed about what is going on at a local level. Local meetings are often extremely
important. Local news is important. Keep up the great work and strive to make it better and that
may be a path to greater success for the organization.
41. Overall you're doing a great job but sometimes during the live meetings there's picture and no
sound (but sound on other channels). Thanks.
42. People need to understand how in producing a program. RCTV provides the equipment and
guidance but the labor and direction comes from the public. The complexity of video and audio
equipment mas improved tremendously in the past 10 years. In the past, a show/ meeting
coverage needed two people at least for video and audio. Now with permanent robot cameras
in specific locations, the labor of setting up and taking down, along, with improvements in audio
equipment enable coverage with only one trained person. Increased classes for adults to feel
comfortable might be good. PTO parents should learn equipment if they want PTO meetings
covered.
43. Programming needs to be HD ASAP. It is painful to watch standard def on HD TVs. In the
future, programming, and broadcast capabilities need to keep up with advancing technology (4K
or whatever technology may dominate in the future). All programming should be planned and
scheduled in the guide and available on- demand so that the normal Comcast search tools, and
programming guide works, just as it would for other mainstream commercial stations. Whatever
similar search /guide /on- demand capabilities are provided to mainstream commercial networks in
the future should be extended to the RCTV content as well. Without this, programming won't be
found, or watched. If, possible, it would be nice if community stations from the immediate area
could work together and pool resources to provide higher quality programming relevant to the
area, not just the town of reading.
44. Quality of sound - Board members should be cognizant of the microphones as paper shuffling
etc. often disturbs the member or audience voice.
Often cannot hear audience questions. Should either provide a microphone or repeat the
question before answering.
45. RCTV does an excellent job with programming, training, and provide great support to public
access producers. All with a very small staff- 5 full time and 3 part time. Services could be
enhanced by: broadcast in HD, an online channel guide for the 3 channels, more volunteers for
recording shows and providing assistance to producers, and, most importantly, with more funds
for staffing and equipment and facilities.
46. RCTV has done a great service to the Reading community, and the quality of covering important
meetings like Fincom, Selectmen and School Committee rank the highest priority to those Living
in this household (3).
APPENDIX 2b — PAGE 4 �(�
POSITIVE /NEUTRAL COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS (continued):
47. RCTV has supported the volunteer projects for the community in which I have been engaged for
over 20 years. Their support has enabled my projects to reach a much larger and more diverse
audience, been a catalyst for healthy and educational conversations, and raised the pride of
Reading citizens of their students. Many of the services have improved over the years. All of
RCTV's service is appreciated! RCTV has also enabled more people to be involved in Town
Government - even if they have mobility challenges, babysitting needs, or timing conflicts. This
is a priceless service. It would be great to have RCTV's help in promoting the programs that
they have helped record. Their staff has been very receptive to my suggestions and ideas,
giving me a chance to see the recordings and make edits before they are published. This has
been very important, especially because this enabled funders to be acknowledged.
48. RCTV is "electronic democracy" in action. It provides access and visibility to Town residents,
into government and education operations, and appreciation of the many talents and
experiences of our fellow citizens.
49. RCTV is a valuable resource of information and local entertainment for Reading residents. The
programming provided is a way to stay connected to what is happening in Town. The opportunity
for Reading residents to be involved in the programming and the opportunities provided by
RCTV are invaluable!! The only suggestion - Maybe more needs to. be done to make residents
aware /promote the channels.
50. RCTV is a very valuable community resource.
51. RCTV is an important local service for Reading; and the staff at RCTV has always been attentive
to any need or request that I've made.
52. RCTV needs to request that Comcast provide HD services for all programs as well as providing
information on programming in the cable guide.
53. RCTV should publicize how someone could subscribe just to get the local programming, and not
the cable TV stuff. Since I get my internet from Comcast, I think I should be able to get the local
programming. I'm not interested in cable TV at this point in my life, just the local programming.
54. RCTV should publish the programming in the on scree guide.
55. Thanks! Great studio and location.
56. The majority of my viewing happens through the RCTV Facebook page. I love seeing the
shorter clips or shorter interviews regarding a topical issue in town. I tune in to the TV
channels primarily for meetings. Having an electronic program guide listing would make me
more likely to watch programs. But without knowing what's on, I never just "switch over" to see.
Even if the cable companies can't list programs in the electronic program guide, could they at
least list the towns on the guide? I'm always stumbling around the Reading, Wakefield and
Stoneham block on Verizon trying to remember which channel I'm seeking out.
57. The staff is most accommodating and polite and I am made to feel at ease at taping. RCTV
encourages folks to participate. I give RCTV an 8 out of 10 for the following reasons.
The turnaround time from taping to airing is sometimes lengthy.
1 of my shows could not be aired as the voices were not coordinated with the picture. It was
never resolved.
APPENDIX 2b — PAGE 5 \�(�
POSITIVE /NEUTRAL COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS (continued):
58. Town meetings shown within the week of the meeting( not 2 /3weeks after)
Show football and sports games day after if possible
59. Until taking this survey I didn't realize how many different shows /events /meetings were on
RCTV. Not sure if that's on me, or RCTV needs to do a better job of getting the word out on their
programing.
60. Update with newer subjects, businesses.
61. Variety of programming is what we'd like to see more of.
62. Wish I could get RCTV w/o cable. Provides important local programming. Also wonderful
community and kids' program beyond the broadcast content. Love the staff!
63. Would be nice to have more teen - related shows.
64. Would like to see more locally produced programs. I know that it is a lot of work to produce a
program but the community should be more involved. RCTV needs to invite community groups
to the studio to become aware of the equipment and facilities that are available. Also provide
assistance. An on -line method for reserving equipment would be wonderful, as well as a way
to report defective equipment and other problems when recording or producing programs.
65. Would like to see more of them
APPENDIX 2b — PAGE 6 e \
NEGATIVE COMMENTS:
1. Biggest problem is sound quality.
I never know what shows are on and forget about the channels because I have hi def and the
channels are not near that so when I channel surf I don't see the channels.
2. Every now and then I find that cooking show and laugh - Camille I think - is hilarious. Other than
that, whenever I land on a RCTV channel, it's either a static slide showing the elementary school
lunch for last month or a town meeting that I can't hear or see anyway.
3. 1 am a member of the Reading Community Singers and I listen to the broadcast of their concerts
on RCTV and noticed that the most recent video of the May 2017 concert had terrible audio
quality and not sure why. The picture was good but the sound was muffled and not clear and
not sure why this happened.
4. Sound quality very poor for most of the meetings, lots of cross talk during meetings, people talking
over each other.
Graphic presentations rarely are visible to the camera.
5. The "bulletin board" type announcements like some info town website is not kept up -to -date for
some reason.
6. The church services in town are supposedly part of the programming. I have given up because the
ones I want to see are *never* on at the specified time anymore. I have pretty much totally given
up on you all.
7. The picture and sound quality of meetings at town hall are poor
APPENDIX 2b — PAGE 7�
APPENDIX 3
Notes from Focus Group Brainstorming Sessions
Question 1 -- What are the Key Local Issues Facing You, Reading Community
Organizations, Town Government, and Schools in the Next Ten Years?
Focus Group 1: June T-3:00 - 5:00 p.m.
• Income /Expenditure imbalance
• Lack of affordable and appropriate performance space
• Town budget crisis
• Funding and space for schools
• Changing demographics — How do we adapt to these changes?
• Millennials are cord - cutting
• Age- differentiated use of media to communicate with each other
• Accuracy of information being distributed
• Wide variety of ways that information is distributed
• Funding needed for public safety and administration
• Need for performance space
• Increasing elderly population
• Services for elderly are decreasing
• Increasing intolerance of diversity
• Need for building bridges between peoples
• Fear of loss of desired educational programs and services due to budget cuts, which
encourages families to leave Reading
• Larger population of hearing- impaired people
Focus Group 2: June 8, 1:00 - 3:00 p.m.
• Aging population
• Fixed income makes it difficult to afford cable TV
• Taxes
• Large school population (as compared to average)
• Wireless in schools
• Lack of hotspots throughout Reading
• Struggling newspapers
• Transition of TV to the internet
• Greater ease in being a content creator
• Video public square
• Copyright - related and other legal concerns
• Privacy
Focus Group 3: June 8, 7:00 - 9:00 p.m.
• Insufficient revenues to cover needed services
• Lack of coordinated communication between groups in Town
• Strains put on families with two working parents
• Bandwidth issues
• Communicating with the general population is difficult (better ways needed)
• Getting emergency information out to the public
• Funding for RCTV and community information is based on a very old model — what will be
happening to this model between now and 2028?
• Training in use of new technologies
• If people turn to YouTube rather than RCTV on cable, the impact on funding can be a big
problem
�b�a�
Question 2 -- What Makes it Difficult for Community Organizations, Town Government
Departments, or Schools to Effectively Communicate Information to Their Constituencies
and the Residents of Reading?
Focus Group 1: June 7, 3:00 — 5:00 p.m.
• Communications between age groups
• Poor leadership in government, schools, and other institutions
• Fracturing of our society (people only want to hear what they agree with)
• Many competing sources of "news"
• Most media sources reject outside input
• RCN not in HD
• People are stretched too thin to stay informed and involved
• Don't have RCTV viewership info
• Not having RCTV on EPG
• Not enough equipment and people to produce all the programs that might be done
• Need more people with production skills
• Difficult to keep people involved
• Aging population
• Need guests for programs
• Need people with technical skills
• Poor audio on programs
• Lack of closed captions
Focus Group 2: June 8, 1:00 - 3:00 p.m.
• No information on EPG for RCTV
• RCTV programs are not readily available to the public
• Audio shortcomings on local productions
• Copyright - related and other legal concerns
• Content compatibility with all platforms
• How to monitor /control content distribution
• Access to hardware
• Information is one -way
• Seniors don't have necessary equipment to get information
• Many ways that people get information
• Many ways that groups distribute their information
• Reliance on volunteers
• Lack of funds
• Trained personnel are needed to make programs
• Lack of skills
• Lack of awareness of available RCTV services
Focus Group 3: June 8, 7:00 - 9:00 p.m.
• Lack of time
• Bandwidth issues
• RCTV is seen as a meeting coverage source; more types of programs are needed
• Lack of HD /4K on RCTV makes it look inferior
• Training is needed for use of new technologies
• Seniors need help to learn how to fully use smartphones and other electronic devices
• RCTV needs more staff to deal with issues raised by full use of its capabilities
2 \��.
• More resources, funding, staff needed for RCTV
• Can RCTV's facility be regularly updated as needed?
• Limited quality of RCTV programming
• Many Reading residents don't know about RCTV and it services
• Information "clutter"
• Very diverse sources of information — none are dominant
• Lack of money
• People I want to reach don't watch RCTV
• Don't know about audience demographics of RCN
• Many don't understand that RCTV is all of us, not "them"
• Lack of audience viewership figures
3 5b�a�
Question 3 -- How Would You Like to Use the Community Access Channels, RCTV and
the Cable System to Educate, Inform, and Entertain Reading residents?
Focus Group 1: June 7, 3:00 — 5:00 p.m.
• A centralized, thorough, up -to -date source of community information
• RCTV to conduct interactive surveys
• Coverage of all Town meetings
• High school sports — all sports
• Sports talk show
• Coverage of weather - related events, local fires, elections, school events
• Behind the scenes look at schools
• RCTV equipment located in schools
• Coverage of presentations by prominent visitors speaking in Reading
• Programs about "civil discourse"
• Interactive programs /technology about issues facing Reading
• Debate coverage
• Special election coverage
• Cooking shows
• Children's programs
• Pet care
• Local news (daily or other regular news)
• Daily /weekly look at Reading (snapshots)
• Programs about how to use technologies
• PSAs (e.g., bullying, opioid crisis)
• Profiles of local businesses
• School news
• Game shows
Focus Group 2: June 8, 1:00 - 3:00 p.m.
• Live church services
• RCTV to become primary news source
• Interactive video conferencing
• Library activities
• RCTV programming available online and via other platforms (live, too)
• Routine recording and distribution of all public meetings
• Community calendar
• Feed to all middle and grade schools
• HD (advanced formats) available for PEG
• Local sports and performing arts coverage
• On -line classes and certification in video production
• Use of an app to crowd - source content
• RCTV training for kids
• Ability to use and sign out great equipment
• Continue existing RCN facilities throughout Reading (and improve them)
• Internships and volunteer opportunities for teens
• Local event coverage
• Keep prominent location of RCTV
Focus Group 3: June 8, 7:00 - 9:00 p.m.
• School events and activities
• Community content with broad appeal
• Emergency information on RCTV, as it is happening
• RCTV as focal point of information delivered by residents to RCTV to keep everyone
informed, using multiple platforms
• Electronic community bulletin board
• Integrate use of social media with other local communication activities
• Coverage of special events, concerts, etc.
• Production truck for live event coverage
• Coverage of the activities of community groups
• Coverage of all appointed and elected board meetings
• Voice - activated RCTV channels on Xfinity X -1 service
• Concert coverage
• High school theatrical performance coverage
• Connectivity to nonprofit group facilities, in addition to public locations
• School Council and PTO meetings
• Children's programming, with Library involvement
• Regional community programming
• More PSAs about local issues
• Summer video camps /workshops
• RCTV active in schools
5 5e�a�
Question 4 -- What would make easier for You (or your Organization, Town Government
Department, or School) to Use the Community Access Channels, RCTV, or the Cable
System?
Focus Group 1: June 7, 3:00 — 5:00 p.m.
• More training on social media
• Need RCTV in HD
• Having viewership information available
• RCTV channels on EPG
• Technology /equipment that makes it possible to create more programs
• Larger budget
• More people available to produce programs
• Readily available, trained people to help make programs
• "Help Desk" to assist producers and public
• Announcements in high school about RCTV and opportunities it has for students
• Use of RCTV by local businesses
• Live capability (sports, local events)
• Ability to include viewer interaction with live programs
• Production truck (multi- camera)
• Continue to have receptive staff
• Simple to use equipment
• Production crews at each school
• Training on use of smartphones and similar tools to make programs for RCTV
• Better audio on RCTV programs
• Closed- caption capability
Focus Group 2: June 8, 1:00 - 3:00 p.m.
• Comcast subscribers should automatically be considered as members of RCTV
• RCTV channels on EPG
• Ease in sharing of RCTV programming with others
• RCTV available via cable company's on- demand service
• Free access to cable at public facilities for viewing by public
• Better educated public to be able to create media as well as consume it
• Training re copyright, etc.
• Ability to share content with other communities
• Creation of a "video public square " /portal
• Adequate funding
• Regularly scheduled training
• On -line reservation system for equipment and training
• PEG in HD or other advanced technology
• Equipment to make simultaneous coverage of several events possible
• Verizon offers local programs from many locations in the area, but Comcast doesn't
• Better information regarding changes in the channel lineups
• Set top box that can handle all remote sources of programming (at no extra charge)
• Senior discounts
• Easier to use telephone contact system
• Less door -to -door solicitations
• Additional locations to pay bill, drop off equipment, etc.
• Nearby full service customer service location
• More cable service providers
• More parking at RCTV
Focus Group 3: June 8, 7:00 - 9:00 p.m.
• People need to know when RCTV programs are on
• RCTV program listings on EPG
• Live stream of current information about emergency and other local information by RCTV on
multiple platforms
• Training in use of new technologies
• PEG programming on cable TV on- demand service
• On -call people to produce videos of things happening right now
• RCTV production spaces at other locations, too
• Revive the RCTV community bulletin board
• Up to date information on the RCTV community calendar
• More current information at RCTV
• Classes needed at RCTV that are designed for adults (18 +)
• Appearance of an "RCTV home page" when you turn on your cable TV service
• Funding "escalator" for RCTV support
• Money
• RCTV community event information displayed on music channels
• Ability to lend /borrow equipment
• RCTV in HD and future formats (state of the art)
APPENDIX 4
RCTV Local Programming Operations Questionnaire
�b�g�
LOCAL PROGRAMMING (PEG ACCESS) OPERATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE
NAME OF YOUR ORGANIZATION: Reading Community Television
MAIN FACILITY ADDRESS: 557 Main St. Reading MA 01867
1. Type(s) of Local Programming Services Provided:
(Please check all that apply: `P" = Public Access; "E" = Educational Access, "G" = Government Access)
FRIP QE FRI G
2. Number and Types of P /E /G Access Channels Programmed:
(Please indicate how many of the following types of channels are managed by your organization)
J_ P only I— E only J_ G only —Combined P/E _ Combined P/G
Combined E/G _ Combined P /E /G
Other (Please Describe)
3. Number of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff:
5 FTE (NOTE: 40+ hrs. /wk. staff member = 1.0 FTE; 20 hrs. /wk. = 0.5 FTE, 10 hrs. /wk. = 0.25 FTE; etc.)
4. Allocation of the Number of Staff (as indicated in Item #3, above) by Type of P /E /G Access Service Provided:
Public Access Educational Access Government Access
5. Funding -- Sources and Amounts for 2014, 2015 and 2016:
(Please indicate the funding amounts received from each source to support your local programming [P /E/G Access]
activities. Do not include the monetary value of "in -kind" services and materials here.)
Funding Source
2014
2015
a. Cable Company (for capital purchases only) ...............
$
$
b. Cable Company ( unrestricted) ...... ...............................
$535,752
$ 556,702
c. Government (directly from franchise /license fees) ........
$
$
d. Government (allocated from general fund) ..................
$
$
e. Educational Institution( s) ............... ...............................
$
$
f. Membership Fees ......................... ...............................
$2,758
$ 2,189
g. Training Fees ................................ ...............................
$ 7,714
$ 16,885
h. Contributions ................................. ...............................
$7,693
$ 4,571
i. Grants ........................................... ...............................
$
$
j. Interest/investment Income ......... ...............................
$ 153
$ 330
k. Production Services ...................... ...............................
$
$
I. Underwriting Fees ......................... ...............................
$
$
m. Other (Please describe each source)
2016
$ 574,427
$ 1,705
$ 19,487
$ 3,211
$ 103
$2,640 $ 4,354 $ 3,310
Total Funding --All Sources ( "a" through "m ") ............. $556,710 $ 585,031 $ 602,243
Page 1 (This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
6. Expenditures -- Amounts by Category for 2014, 2015 and 2016:
(Please indicate your expenditures by category to support local programming [P/E/G Access] activities. Do not include
the monetary value of "in- kind" services and materials here.)
Expenditures by Category 2014 2015
a. Personnel (wages, benefits, payroll taxes, etc.) ......... $ 215,548 251,804
b. Operations (supplies, promotion, travel, etc.) ............ $ 245,044 $ 273,824
c. Capital (facilities and equipment) ............................... $ 69,442 $ 87,729
Total Expenditures — (a + b + c) ........ ............................... $ 530,034 $ 613,357
Amount of above "Total Expenditures" used for
each type of local programming service managed: 2014 2015
a. Public Access .............................. ............................... $ not available $ not available
b. Educational Access ..................... ............................... $ $
c. Government Access .................... ............................... $
2016
$ 300,544
$ 284,900
$140,790
$ 726,234
2016
$ not available
$ „
7. In -Kind Services & Materials Received by Your Organization -- Sources and Value for 2014, 2015 and 2016:
(Please describe any in -kind services and materials that your organization received to support local programming
[P/E/G Access] activities, and indicate the source and value. Do not include any monetary funding amounts here.)
2014 Description of In -Kind Services & Materials
Source Value
not available
$
2015 Description of In -Kind Services & Materials
Source Value
not available
$
2016 Description of In -Kind Services & Materials
Source Value
not available
$
Page 2 (This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.) `��
(Some data not available. RCN converted to new
8. Programming Submitted for Cablecast: 2014, 2015 and 2016: playback system in late 2015.)
If you keep detailed information about the programming on your organization's channel(s), please complete this page.
If necessary, copy this page to report programming data for other channels managed by your organization.
If the same program was shown on more than one of your channels, only include data about it in the line items
regarding "first -run programs" and "first -run hours" of programming for the channel where it was shown first.
NOTE: Each "episode" within a series of programs should be counted as one rp ogram.
A. Channel Number on Cable System: 9/31
Channel Type (check one : ❑X P FIE ❑ G ❑ P/E ❑ P/G ❑ E/G ❑ P /E /G
2014 2015 2016
1. Total number of locally produced, first -run programs.... not available not available 275
2. Total number of imported, first -run programs ** ....... " " 25
3. Total number of locally produced, first -run hours ...... " " " " 250
4. Total number of imported, first -run hours ** .............. " " 20
5. Total number of hours (include replays on this ......... 8,030
line only, • do not include character - generated hours)
B. Channel Number on Cable System: 99/32
Channel Type (check one : ❑ P ME ❑ G ❑ P/E ❑ P/G ❑ E/G ❑ P /E /G
2014 2015 .2016
1. Total number of locally produced, first -run programs.... not available not available 75
2. Total number of imported, first -run programs ** ....... " " " 0
3. Total number of locally produced, first -run hours...... " " " " 150
4. Total number of imported, first -run hours * * .............. " " " " 0
5. Total number of hours (include replays on this ......... " 4.015
line only; do not include character - generated hours)
C. Channel Number on Cable System: 22/33
Channel Type (check one): [:]P ❑ E ❑X G ❑ P/E ❑ P/G ❑ E/G ❑ P /E /G
2014 2015 2016
1. Total number of locally produced, first -run programs.... not available not available 205
2. Total number of imported, first -run programs ** ....... " " " " 10
3. Total number of locally produced, first -run hours...... " 600
4. Total number of imported, first -run hours * * .............. " " " " 10
5. Total number of hours (include replays on this ......... 8,030
line only, do not include character - generated hours)
2014 2015 2016
D. Number of different "producers" who submitted:
1. Locally- produced programs ............ ............................not available not available 50
2. Imported programs ** .................. ............................... 10
Active producers fluctuate between 25 -50, depending on time of the year.
* Do not include replays in your figures for "first -run programs" and "first -run hours ".
** "Imported" programs: (1) are not produced within your cable franchise area; or (2) are not created by individuals who
reside within your cable franchise area; or (3) are not created by individuals certified to use your facilities.
Page 3 (This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.) IA
9. Equipment
Usage Level: If you keep detailed information about the use of your organization's equipment, including
the number of hours of actual use for each category of equipment, please complete the following:
A.
Studio(s) (RCN lacks software to track equipment usage.) 2014 2015
2016
Total number of studios available ...... ...............................
Total annual hours used (all studios) . ...............................
B.
Editing Systems 2014 2015
2016
Total number of editing systems available ........................
Total annual hours used (all systems) ..............................
C.
Camcorders 2014 2015
2016
Total number of camcorders available ..............................
Total annual number of check -outs (all camcorders) ........
D.
Multiple- Camera Field Production Systems 2014 2015
2016
Total number of systems available .... ...............................
Total annual number of times used (all systems) .............
10. Trainina Services Provided in 2016:
A. Does your organization provide training courses in video production, media literacy, etc.? QX Yes ❑ No
B. If "Yes," please provide the following information about the training courses your organization offered in 2016:
Please indicate the name of each training course offered in 2016, the number of hours of training provided during
each course, the number of times each course was offered in 2016, the total number of people who began the
course(s) in 2016, and the total number of people who completed the course(s) in 2016.
Total Total Total No. of Total No. of
No. of No. of People who People who
Hrs. Per Courses Began the Completed
Training Course Name Course Offered Course(s) the Course(s)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Page 4
[SEE DETAILS ON PAGE 4a1
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.) ��
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Page 4a
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)^ \�W
�V
Total
Total Total No. of
Total No. of
No. of
No. of People who
People who
Hrs. Per
Courses Began the
Completed
Training Course Name
Course
Offered Course(s)
the Course(s)
Rocket Independent Video Club
12
10
Short Films Class
15
4
Intro to TV Production Class
15
6
Screenplay Class
30
4
Two Day Music Video Workshop
18
7
Two DU Intro to TV Workshop
18
14
One Day top Motion Workshop
9
7
One Week TV Production Workshop
50
30
3 Week Screenplay Workshop
150
19
Two Day Short Film Workshop
18
4
Two Dav Intermediate Stop Motion Workshop
18
4
One Day Music Video Workshop
9
4
TV Production Class
15
7
Fall Street Faire Training
12
22
Government Election Training
10
8
Editing Class
20
12
Remote Camera Class
15
9
Studio Training Class
12
6
Boy Scout Educational Tours
10
42
Girl Scout Educational Tours
12
30
2nd Grade Educational Tours
3
80
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)^ \�W
�V
11. Operations Documents: Please provide a copy of:
A. Your organization's current operating rules and procedures.
B. Your organization's current training curriculum.
12. Participants: Membership is 346 currently. Active producers fluctuate between 25 -50, depending on time of the year.
A. Please indicate how many new people were approved to use any of your organization's facilities during 2016:
B. Please indicate the total number of people currently approved to use any of your organization's facilities:
C. If this information is available, please attach a list of the community organizations, schools, colleges and
universities, and divisions of local government that used the P /E /G Access resources and services provided by
your organization at any time during the three -year period between January 2014 and December 2016.
D. If this information is available, please indicate the number of individuals who used the P /E /G Access resources
provided by your organization in 2014, 2015 and 2016.
2014: 2015: 2016:
13. Other P /E /G Access Services:
Please describe any other P /E /G Access services provided by your organization, such as a website, a printed or
electronic newsletter, outreach and promotional activities, etc. Attach a copy of examples of such services where
appropriate (e.g., a printed newsletter, programming schedule, etc.). Attach additional pages as needed.
RCTV website: www.rctv.org
RCTV sends out a monthly newsletter. (see attached example)
RCTV sponsors many events in town: Reading Fall Street Faire, Downtown Trick or Treat, Shop the
Block, Tree Lighting Ceremony, and participates in others, including: Friends and Family Day, Festival
of Trees, and Freshman Fly Up Day at RMHS.
RCTV promotes many of its in -house events via Constant Contact: Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer
Workshops- Fuddruckers Fundraisers - Member events (e.g., Pumpkin carving, Sports viewing events,
Movie nights).
RCTV rents out its space to individuals and organizations.
RCTV offers birthday parties.
RCTV welcomes boy /girl scouts to come for tours and training (this is mentioned under the training
section).
RCTV assists many of the public schools by loaning equipment, recording events, making dvd copies.
RCTV hosts Saturday morning breakfast/coffee for members.
RCTV helps out many cultural organizations in town by recording their performances and concerts.
RCTV is a member of Reading Arts.
Name of Preparer:
Organization: _
Address:
City /State /Zip: _
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE.
Phone:
Page 5 (This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.) o �
(
lab
In This Issue
Birthday Parties
Contact Us
Calendar of Events
Special RCTV News
Crew Call
Downtown Trick or Treat
October 25th
Crew Call: 3pm
At RCTV
Greetings!
Welcome to this month's issue of the
RCTV Studios E- Newsletter.
The best place to find out what's happening at RCTV!
Calendar of Events:
Downtown Trick or Treat is on October 25th
Pumpkin Carving Party is on October 29th
— Funddruckers Fundraiser on November 2nd
RCTV Holiday Party on December 20th
Special RCTV News...
RCTV will be participating in the
Downtown Trick or Treat again!
Jams for Jake
October 29th
11am -7pm
2 -3 hour shifts needed
throughout the day
Symonds Field
}
Reading Symphony
Orchestra
October 29th
Crew Call: 2:30pm
Galvin Middle School in
Wakefield
r ;I
Hwy28
November 1st
Crew Call: 6pm
RCTV Studios
IMF
The festivities will kick off on October 25th,
at 4:00pm and end at 5:30pm.
On the 29th of October at 5pm RCTV will be
Email if you hosting a pumpkin carving party! Open to
would like to help with a members and guests. Carve a pumpkin and
crew call.
enjoy some spooky treats. There will be a prize
for the best design! To save time hollow out
Government Meeting your pumpkin at home.
Coverage Needed!
RSVP !
RCTV is looking for a team
of people who would like
to cover government
meetings.
Meetings generally run
Monday thru Thursday and
start at 7pm. You do not
need to be available for all
meetings but willing to be
put on a list for meeting
coverage. We will gladly
work with your schedule
and training will be
offered.
Meetings take place at
Town Hall, the
Superintendant's Office,
RMLD, the Senior Center,
RMHS and a few other
places around Reading.
Very competitive hourly
pay offered. You must
have a mode of
transportation.
Please contact
to discuss
further details.
Birthday Parties
Did you know you can rent out
RCTV for Birthday Parties?
• Popcorn and Soda
• Pizza from Pizza World
• A Movie of Your Choice
on the Big Screen
• Cupcakes
Contact to book your
party today!
Contact Us
On November 2nd Fuddruckers will
be hosting a fundraiser for RCTV
Dine out for a Good Cause!
Thursday, November 2nd
5to8PM
To Benefit
RCTV Studios
Please click on the above flyer, print it and
present it at Fuddruckers in order for RCTV to
receive the discount.
RCTV's Annual Holiday Party will be
Wednesday, December 20th!!
RCTV Studios, 557 Main Street, Reading, MA 01867
SafeUnsubscribeTI sue @thebuskegroup.com
Forward email I Update Profile ( About our service provider
Sent by angela @rctv.org in collaboration with
Try it free today
RCTV Video Facility Inventory
•
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
OVERVIEW -
(NOTE. UNAUTHORIZED USE OF THIS DOCUMENT IS PROHIBITED.)
FACILITY ADDRESS: 557 Main Street, Reading, MA
FACILITY IS USED FOR (check all that apply):
Fx� Public Access Educational Access Government Access
INSTRUCTIONS:
Please complete these Community Media Facility Inventory pages as thoroughly as possible.
List each piece of equipment only once, even though it may be used for multiple purposes. (For example, list an editing
system's equipment items that are located in a studio control room under the "Studio Production Equipment" heading on
the appropriate attached form.)
If an item of equipment has multiple functions, list it under the heading which most closely describes its rip mare location or
function.
If you do not have the make and model of equipment available, please fill out the remainder of each sheet.
If you do not have any item listed on an inventory page, just leave that line blank.
Make a copy of any page that does not include enough space to include all of your equipment packages (e.g., copy this
page if you operate more than one facility; copy the next page if you have more than eight camcorders; etc.).
IF AVAILABLE, PLEASE PROVIDE A COMPLETE COPY OF YOUR PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT INVENTORY.
A. Normal Hours of Operation for Facility (e.g., 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.):
Monday: 3:00 to 8:00pm Tuesday: 10:00am to 8:00pm Wednesday: 10:00am to 8:00pm
Thursday: 10:00am to 8:00pm Friday: 10:00am to 6:00pm Saturday: 10:00am to noon
C.
Sunday:
Is this facility's video production equipment used o for activities related to the creation of programs for cablecast
on an Access channel?
Yes (If "Yes, "go to Item C, below) ❑ No
If "No," how many hours are this facility's video production equipment used for any purpose other than the creation
of programs for cablecast on an Access channel?
hours /week (Describe other use:
Does your organization own or lease the facility space?
Please provide the following information about the facility.
1. Total square footage: 5,000. square feet
2. Number of administrative offices:
Own ❑x Lease
3. Number of editing rooms:
4. Estimated current replacement cost of ALL production equipment in the facility: $
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
5b���
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
CAMCORDER FIELD PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
(If you have more than eight camcorders, make enough copies of this page to include each portable system.)
System #
Format:
Make /Model
❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM /DVCPRO /8etacam ❑ Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Dnve High Definition Capability? [--]Yes ❑No
System # _
Format: ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPROBetacam ❑ Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Drive High Definition Capability? ❑Yes ❑No
System #
Format. Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO /8etacam [:]Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Drive High Definition Capability? ❑Yes ❑No
System #
Format: ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO /8etacam ❑ Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Drive High Definition Capability? ❑Yes ❑No
System # _
Format: ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM /DVCPROBetacam ❑ Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Drive High Definition Capability? ❑Yes ❑No
System # _
Format: ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAMOVCPRO /8etacam [:]Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Drive High Definition Capability? ❑Yes ❑No
System # _
Format: ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO /8etacam ❑ Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Drive High Definition Capability? ❑Yes ❑No
Quality Level* Condition ** Acie (Yrs.)
System # _
Format. ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO /8etacam ❑ Flash Memory Card
❑ Hard Disk Drive High Definition Capability? [--]Yes ❑No
Number of Portable Tripods: Condition * *: Age (years):
Number of Extra Battery Packs: Condition * *: Age (years):
Number of Portable Lighting Kits: Condition * *: Age (years):
Number of Microphones: Condition * *: Age (years):
* B = Broadcast, I = Industrial /Professional, C = Consumer
** E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
5e��a
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
VIDEO EDITING SYSTEMS (NOT IN STUDIO CONTROL ROOM)
(If you have more than two editing systems, make enough copies of this page to include each editing system.)
* B = Broadcast, I = Industrial /Professional, C = Consumer
** E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
Item
Make /Model Quality Level* Condition" Age Yrs.
System
Computer or
#
Edit Controller
(SEE ATTACHED INVENTORY) —
Editing Software
Video Recorder
_
Format:
❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPROBetacam ❑ Hard Disk Drive
❑ Flash Memory Cara ❑DVD ❑ Records directly to Server
Video Player 1
—
Format.
❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO/Betacam
❑ Hard Disk Drive ❑ DVD ❑ Flash Memory Card
Video Player 2
Format:
❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO/Betacam
❑ Haul Disk Drive ❑ DVD ❑ Flash Memory Card
Video Monitor(s)
—
Other (describe)
—
Does this video editing system have high definition canability? ❑ Yes ❑ No
System
Computer or
#
Edit Controller
—
Editing Software
—
Video Recorder
_
Format:
❑ Mini -Dv ❑ DVCAM/DVCPROBetacam ❑ Hard Disk Drive
❑ Flash Memory Card ❑ DVD []Records directly to Server
Video Player 1
—
Format
❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO/Betacam
❑ Hard Disk Drive ❑ DVD ❑ Flash Memory Card
Video Player 2
—
Format
❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPROBetacam
❑ Hard Disk Drive ❑ DVD ❑ Flash Memory Card
Video Monitor(s)
—
Other (describe)
—
Does this video editing system have high definition capability? ❑ Yes ❑ No
* B = Broadcast, I = Industrial /Professional, C = Consumer
** E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
STUDIO PRODUCTION FACILITY
(if you have more than one studio, make enough copies of this page to include each studio.)
Studio #
Studio dimensions (in feet): Length x
Studio Control Room dimensions (in feet):
M►/[:H
Length x
Is there a separate Set Storage Room?
❑ No
0 Yes - Set Storage Room dimensions (in feet):
Height
Width
Length x
Is there a lighting grid installed in the Studio Production Facility?
❑ No
El Yes - Number of Lighting Instruments: Condition *:
Distance (in feet) from studio floor to lighting grid:
Type of Lighting Control System: 0 Dimmer Controls
Width x Height
Age (range, in years): _ to _
❑ On /Off Switches
Is there a Studio Cyclorama and /or Curtain(s)? ❑ No Yes - Condition *:
Is there an Intercom System in the Studio Production Facility?
❑ No
Yes -► Condition of System *:
Are any of the Studio Cameras equipped with a teleprompter?
❑ No
Yes - Number of teleprompters: Condition *:
Can programs be cablecast live from this Studio Production Facility? Yes No
* E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.) \��
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
STUDIO PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT
(If you have more than one studio, make enough copies of this page to include each studio.)
Studio '# A Make /Model Quality Level* Condition ** A e Yrs.
Camera #1 (SEE ATTACHED INVENTORY)
Camera #2
Camera #3
Camera #4
Camera #5
Tripods (quantity: )
Other Camera Mounts
(quantity: )
(Indicate Camera Mounttype(s): []Wall ❑Ceiling []Pedestal)
Production Switcher /SEG
Computer or Edit Controller _
Video Production Software
C.G. /Video Graphics Unit
Video Recorder /Player #1 _
Video Recorder /Player #2
Video Recorder /Player #3 _
Video Recorder /Player #4
Video Format(s): ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAIVUDVCPRO/Betacam ❑Hard Disk Drive
❑ Flash Memory Card ❑ DVD []Records directly to Server
High Definition CapabiliV? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Vectorscope/Waveform Monitor
Color Monitors (quantity: )
B/W Monitors (quantity:
Audio Mixer
Hand Mics (quantity: ) _
Lapel Mics (quantity: )
Other Major Items (describe):
* B = Broadcast, I = Industrial /Professional, C = Consumer
"* E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
PORTABLE OR MOBILE MULTIPLE CAMERA FIELD PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT
Installed in a Vehicle? ❑ No ❑Yes (If Yes, Vehicle year /make /model:
Dedicated0) Camera Cables: How Many? Total Length: feet
Dedicated0) Audio Cables: How Many? Total Length: feet
Dedicated(') Items Make /Model Quality Level* Condition ** A e Yrs.
Camera #1
Camera #2
Camera #3
Camera #4
Tripods (quantity:
Production Switcher /SEG
Computer or Edit Controller _
Video Production Software
C.G. /Video Graphics Unit
Video Recorder /Player #1
Video Recorder /Player #2 _
Video Recorder /Player #3
Video Format(s): ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO/Betacam
❑ Hard Disk Drive ❑ DVD ❑ Flash Memory Card
High Definition Capability? ❑ Yes ❑ No
VectorscopeMaveform Monitor
Color Monitors (quantity: ) _
B/W Monitors (quantity:
Audio Mixer
Hand Mics (quantity:
Lapel Mics (quantity:
Other Major Items (describe):
(') "Dedicated" means that the items are used only with this multiple camera field production equipment package.
* B = Broadcast, I = Industrial /Professional, C = Consumer
** E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
MASTER CONTROL/PLAYBACK FACILITYAND EQUIPMENT
Is this a dedicated Playback Facility? (equipment is not shared with studio control room package) ......... ❑ Yes ❑ No
Master Control /Playback Facility dimensions (in feet): Length x Width
Number of cable channels controlled:
Do you have live programming capability? ❑No ❑ Yes, via: ❑ Studio ❑ Cable Return Feed ❑ Bonded Cellular
❑ Satellite ❑ Microwave ❑ Other:
Do you "stream" programming via the Internet? ......... ❑No El Yes -► ❑Live? ❑ "Video On Demand "?
Do you have high definition playback capability? ............. ❑ No ❑Yes -► ❑On Cable Channel(s)? ❑ Internet Stream?
Playback Facility Item Make /Model Quality Level* Condition ** A e Yrs.
Automated Playback Controller
Manual Switcher /SEG
Server -Based Video Storage
Video Player #1
Video Player #2
Video Player #3
Video Player #4 _
Video Player #5
Video Player #6
Video Player #7
Video Player #8
Video Player #9
Video Player #10
Video Player-Format(s): ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPROBetacam
❑ Hard Disk Drive ❑ DVD ❑ Flash Memory Card
TBC (quantity.
Color Monitors (quantity. ) _
B/W Monitors (quantity.
C.G. /Graphics Unit
Vectorscope/Waveform Monitor
Other Major Items (describe):
* B = Broadcast, I = Industrial /Professional, C = Consumer
** E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
b�14�
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
SPECIAL TRANSM/SSION/V/EW/NG /DUBBING EQUIPMENT
Do you have any of the following:
Videoconferencing equipment ? ............................ El Yes ❑No
Satellite downlink equipment ? .............................. ❑Yes ❑No
Satellite uplink equipment? ... ............................... ❑Yes ❑No
Bonded cellular (e.g., LiveU) equipment ?............ El Yes ❑No
Do you have a dedicated Viewing /Dubbing Area? (not used for any other purpose)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Do you have dedicated Viewing /Dubbing Equipment? (not used for any other purpose)
❑ Yes ❑ No (If No, go to next page)
Number of Viewing /Dubbing Stations:
Viewing /Dubbing Equipment Formats (check all that apply):
❑ Mini -DV
❑ DVCANVDVCPR018etacam
❑ DVD
❑ Hard Disk Drive
❑ USB Flash Drive
❑ Flash Memory / SD Card
❑ Other.
Does your Viewing /Dubbing Equipment have high definition capability?
❑ Yes ❑ No
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
\n0
6b
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
MAINTENANCE AND TEST EQUIPMENT
Annual budget for outside equipment maintenance: ...................... $
Annual budget for spare /replacement parts: ................................. $
Do you conduct in -house maintenance? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Is there a dedicated Maintenance Area? (not used for any other purpose) ❑ Yes ❑ No
Do you have dedicated Maintenance and Test Equipment? (not used for any other purpose) ❑ Yes
TRAINING EQUIPMENT
Is there a dedicated Training Area? not used for any other purpose) ❑ Yes ❑ No
Do you have dedicated Training Equipment? (not used for any other purpose)
❑ No
❑ Yes (If Yes, please indicate the types of dedicated Training Equipment at your facility)
❑ Camcorder field production equipment
❑ Video Editing Equipment
❑ Multiple Camera Field Production Equipment
❑ Electronic Graphics Production Equipment
❑ Other (describe):
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
■ .
Y-D
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
ELECTRONIC GRAPHICS PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT
[NOTE: A typical example of "Electronic Graphics Production Equipment' would be a computer workstation with software
and appropriate accessories needed to create titles, graphics, animation, etc., for insertion in a video production or to
create a program made entirely with such equipment.]
Do you have a dedicated Electronic Graphics Production area? (not used for any other purpose) ........... ❑ Yes 0 No
Do you have dedicated Electronic Graphics Production equipment? not used for any other purpose) ......... ❑ Yes Q No
PERSONAL COMPUTER/ INTERNET ACCESS EQUIPMENT
Do you provide personal computer equipment for use by residents of your cable franchise area?
❑ No
❑ Yes (If Yes, describe below)
If you provide personal computer equipment for use by residents, are any of these computers connected to the Internet?
❑ No
❑ Yes (If Yes, please describe these connections and the ways that residents use this equipment on- line.)
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
�b��a
COMMUNITY MEDIA FACILITY INVENTORY
REMOTE- CONTROLLED PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT (COUNCIL CHAMBERS OR MEETING ROOM
(If you have more than one of these equipment packages, make enough copies of this page to include each package.)
Do you have a Remote - Controlled Production Equipment Package ? ................... Ex Yes [:1 No
(If "Yes') Location of this equipment package: (1) Reading Town Hall Council Chambers; (2) Reading Public Library
Equipment is used for (check all that apply): E Government Access E Educational Access ❑Public Access
Item Make /Model Quality Level* Condition" Age Yrs.
Cameras (quantity: _) (SEE ATTACHED INVENTORY) _
Camera Controllers (quantity:
Camera Mounts (quantity. )
(Indicate Camera Mounttype(s): []Tripod ❑Wall ❑Ceiling ❑Pedestal)
Production Switcher /SEG
Computer or Edit Controller
Video Production Software
C.G. /Video Graphics Unit
Video Recorder /Player #1
Video Recorder /Player #2 _
Video Recorder /Player #3
Video Recorder /Player #4
Video Format(s): ❑ Mini -DV ❑ DVCAM/DVCPRO/Betacam ❑ Hard Disk Drive
❑ Flash Memory Card ❑ DVD ❑ Records directly to Server
High Definition Capability? ❑Yes ❑ No
Vectorscope/Waveform Monitor
Color Monitors (quantity:
B/W Monitors (quantity:
Audio Mixer _
Microphones (quantity: )
Other Major Items (describe):
* B = Broadcast, I = Industrial /Professional, C = Consumer
** E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor
(This form was created by The Buske Group. Unauthorized use is prohibited.)
�b��3
9
c
�
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
O
L
p
M
(.(_
M
a
Co
a
(a
LL
M
L
M
LL
(a
a
as
a
N
a
M
LL
(0
LL
O
O
p
a
Y
-i
O
o
O
0
0
0
a Q�
p. g
a rn
N N
N U'
N
YQ
vN tp
Of
rN Y
M
`
8
( z
O m
N O
C/)
0)
N
Y
0) O
m
Q
O
M
d
c L N
m c)
> (0 O
(0 d•
000QN
aiOOQ
00000
N
R
r
O
(0
0)
O
O
++N 3
0A.
r
N
e-
N
�-
N
c-
N
-a
N
-0
N
-0
N
-0
N
-0
N
C
N
C
N
—
N
N
N
N
N
N
00
a))
+o-.
a)
O
C)
O
N
0
O
N
(Q
r
J
J
J
L
-0
L
-0
Q
E C�
U
I—
U
U
U
Z
W
c
?
c
T
• c
T
W
N
N
�'
�k
N
�k
M
�
�
�
c0
�
f�
�
w
*k
� c
a)
N
� �
� N
f M
C
>+
>,
>,
>,
>,
�,
>+
>+
o
`
U
pk
Ok
pk
/Z
cn
cn
a
a
n
n
o
a
a
a
O
�- a)
a
L
F-
d o
d o
d o
'r
U
CO
U
U
U
co
U
U
O
V'. �
Y
a O.
o (Q
Y p.
O M
Y Q
O m
40
N
IT
N
L
3
L
3
L
3
L
3
L
3
L
3
L
3
L
3X
O
00
N
N
3
O J
mo
O J
mo
o f
mo
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
�•-
m
mo
NO
mo
V
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
(n
02
z
2N
N
2N
c
(D
=
c
a)
a)
m
Y
0
N
�
�
1)
O
v
v v
y
_a
N
a) o
�
X
O
U
N
N
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
U
c
O o o
O
�
Y
Y
O
i
O
i
O
i
O
V
o
L
0
L
O
L
O
i
O
N 'CC�_
Q
E
i-
N
M
N
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
,[
UO
�
G LL
p
�_
N
co
L
L
C
C
E
E
C
0
a� r
E E
f 1
co
o
ai •°
o
E
o
E
o
E
o
E
o
E
o
E
o
E
o
E
o
o
c
3 0
2�
a
t=
U
U
U
U
U
O
-2 a
a�
?
a�
M
o
0
0
Q J
Q J
U
U
U
_�
U
U
U
U
U
U
a' 6
ma
2 W
z
J
J
J
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
O
0
O
o
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
a
O
c
O
-+
O
O
V
O
O
O
O
O
a
p
p
a
p
O
O
U 1
U 10
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U I
U
U Jul
a) 1
m 1
a)
9
O
V
O
W
Y
C
W
O
V
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
(L)
O
O
O
O
O
O
�-
O
-a
3 m
m
3 �
N
N
-a
N
-o
N
N
Z
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a
a �a
0
"
a
v
00
O
O
00
00
00
co
`
N
0
i
LO
00
0
CD
0
Li
C7
C7
C�
C7
u
LL
J
d
O
V
O
W
Y
C
W
O
V
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�-
O
3
3 m
m
3 �
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a
a �a
0
"
N
N LOL
N LL
J
J
co
i
LO
o
O
a)
L
M
L Q
rn
�
C', L
•C
•C
•C
>,
J
2n
A
A
sN
(1)
`
SN
W
N
N
N
a
a
a
a
a
7rL
CL
m (0
CL Ce)
m
M
M
oa
oQ�
vQU
Y
Y
Y
0
In
w
o
w
O
V
O
W
Lo
W
O
V
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�-
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
U
J
J
co
i
LO
.0
a
co
•C
•C
•C
>,
J
2n
A
A
C
N
N
N
a
a
a
a
a
�O
CL
M
M
LO
r
o
Y
Y
Y
0
In
w
o
w
0
0
0
a
0
>
LO
Lo
m
d o
d
d^
N
N
c
c
c
o
O
O
O
O
�c a
�
a
a
a
a
a
o
o
N
CL
CL
O
m
m
m
^
'�
^
M
O
r•
N
N
N
N
N
O
0
N
m
7
coo
�o
�°
�N
��
N
N
N
N
C7
O
Q
m
m
m
m
m
U
m
O
O
N Q
C
0
0
U
0
0
w
w
fa-
-�
0-
3
v
E
:3
3
Q
�
: U
w
_o
'
VJ
o
CO
m
w
L
CL
a
a
a
a
U
V
N
N
N
M
o(D
C
L
Q
Q /�
w
Y
ice+
•F�
Q L
,i.
Q
/ 1
N
0
E
E
E
5.
°
a
0
0
0
0
0
a�i
a�
a 0
o
o
O
a� a
E
a
a
a
a
a
�
m
m
C
n
a
a-.2
o
Z��
m
a
o
0
0
C9 U
.-
m '3
o
a�
a�
a�
a�
a�
ns
m
An
cn
`�
.,
,_
.r
c
=w
m
y
==
U
Q
L
v
�
coo
m
m
m
m
m
o�
a
�-
a
� °Y'
� °Y'
Q
Q
'Q
?� �,
.a`
N u.:
�
cLo
0
i
0
CL
O
Q.
a co
N
a co
N
0
0
U
m
v L
4 o2S
U
c
0
c
c
0
c
c
0
c
c
0
c
0
c¢
0
c p
m
E
Q
Q
c
c
J
J
J
fA
fA
2
U)
W
N
U
U
U
U
U
U O
d
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
2
OL
O
OL
O
L
C
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
a
a
a
a
a
n
a
a
a
a
a
a
o
-0
U
0'
a'
U
a
CT
a'
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
a
9
�1 �
z
-0
z
z
-,
z
Y
O
Y
Y
O
1
Il-
LO
O
1-
(O
I-
r—
I`
�
I,-
r-
I-
I—
I-
�
�
�
r
r-
�
r-
tom-
I—
I-
i,-
I-
I-
I-
r
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Cl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
r
U
O
O`
N
r LO
n
0
M
a
m
0
E
a
U
O
d
a
<"
CV)
U
1.0
-2
Y
00
00
00
_
_
_
I-
N
N
N
O
Q
03
C
Ui
C
O
F-
I`
d
�
r
O
O
Cl
r
In
O
E
E
E
a
n
O
00
3
=__
x
X
X?
r
a
r
M
i
r
0
0
0
<ooDJz000100aw
wwwa`ZD
a0
XUUU
-1
LO
co
cn
co
C
o
O
J
J
J
C
co
X
E
E
E
m
N
N
A
0
3
m
X
`°
C
L"
L
=__
0)
0
o
'�
c
m
00
00
00
U
o
0
0
�°
a
rn
m
v
oo
p_
U
x
x
x
0
0
0
3
0
°'
°
�,
_
m
2
O
Y
O
r-
N
n
4
m
o
,+ �
U
M
O
0
C
m
r
E
'
N
N
N
.0
0
�
O
E
H
N
N
3
3
fl
J
Q
c
cV
-
O
a"
M
m
N
N
N
U
U
p
0
O
Z
Rf
E
co
O
Y
U
U
U
N
U
U
U
N
Q
D
N
�
N
N
N
ui N
tr
O
N
EO
p
Il
�'
O
I.I_
N
F-
O
"O
O
C
C
C
O
()
N
N
N
F-
U
N
(�
Y
O
O
O
v
o
ca
:
td
ti
.fl
o
a�i
a�i
i�
iV
m
a�
t
:5110
0
5
d
Z
cn
cn
cn
U
I�
ti
U
F-
�.
Q.
d
r
co
r
CL
S
r
U
O
O
O
O
O
p
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
p
O
O
O
O
O
O..
O
O
O
O:
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
U
U
U
U
V
U
U
U
U
U
V
U
U
U
U
V
U
U
U
0
0
0
E
E
E
E
a
.�
Q
•�
a
a
..�
a
.�
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
co
co
co
.�
N
L
t
L
.0
L
L
L
t
L
=
c
t
L
.0
�
.0
t
s
t
t
t
W
W
W
W
W
U'
2
2
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
S
S
S
N
N
`
z
z
Y
Y
p
O
d
U
J
J
Cfl
I�
O
O
O
O
O
(fl
(O
O
O
O
CO
CD
r
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�-
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
�-
N
N
Y
U
d
U-
❑
O
M
M
d
E
o
o
D
o
)
~
U-
LL
M
co
co
M
d
d
c��a
!=
Y
N
N
to
O
O
O
O
00
00
00
00
O
M
O
co
O
co
O
co
O
M
O
M
O
M
O
M
O
O
Q
J C
0
LY
>LO
O
O
N
N
U
O
C19
C�
,
U
N
N
N
N
-0
O "t
J
cn
i
>
>
>
i
>
>
>
m
m
�
O
L
L
7
O
O
N
O
U
a[
m
}
L
a ,
N
c
L O
v-
io
�
0
E
0
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
0
E
0
E
0
E
0
N
'3
Y
CO
O
O
m
o
o
n
o
X
"O
O
d
E
CD
a
O
O
�
co
.0
J
❑
(Q
�
Q
O
O
Y
to
Y
o
Y
to
Y
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
❑
❑
W
C
N
a
m
U
U
U
U
.Q
.
O
O
R
O
W
N
N
C
d
J
L
J
V
c
m
m
m
C
to
N
N
N
to
V)
V)
m
W
Q
O
LrT
O
4;
C
L
L
N
0
N
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
m
r
� 20
0
U
a
a
0
a
a
a
a
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
N
N
U_
C
a.
°
-
°
LO =
N
J
r
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
d
a.
f
M
00
d
Q
>
_
E
O
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
—
—
—
—
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
w
m
N
t0
N
cn
w
c)
co
co
co
U)
co
co
co
C
_
_
_
2
E
�
�
�_
_O
2)
�
m
O1
�
m
O
O
O
O
O
a
HE
=
2
2
2
=
2
2
2
=
=
J
J
J
J
F-
�--
I-
F
W
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
m
9
m
,C
Y
'L
m
O
O
L_
m
O
O
_ p
O
O
O
0
_
_
m
0
O
a)
Y
O
O
O
O
J
J
LL
0
LL
LL
LL
0
LL
0
0
LL
LL
LL.
LL
a
0
04
�
CN
CN
C0
c-
CO
C;)
C)
O
V
N
M
M
—
O
O
O
O
O
Cl
Co
O
O
O
t-
—
N CD
Q
0
N
Q
O
O
O
N
O
O
Cl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
00
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
y
N
(d
(0
U
U
❑
❑
U
U
N
N
M
0O
m
cu
N
C
C
0
00 N
0
00 N
Z
H
f-
N N
N U
N Lp
E
N Lp
J
1
NO
C
C
O
O
7
C:)
M
N
N
LO
LO
(0
d
U
m
m
s
U
rl-
r
OI C
m
00 C
rt m
°
0
0
O
❑
❑
~
~
tN
tN
M
Q
m Q.
a
a) a
O
Q
Q
pl.
CD
In
V)
i
i
�-
N
N
❑
�N
2N
Q
0
O)
O)
❑
❑
a
a
U
❑2
❑Z
C
O
C0
00
N
LL
d
>
>
>
C
>
C
L
M
m
7
Q
7
^
U)
N
0)
0
0
N
fn
fn
�'
L
L
O
O
L
E
U
a
2
O
0 U
a
m
N
a
O
a
N
0
Q
O
V
0)
U
A
U)
U)
C
O
N
c
N
c
O
"6
0
0
O
O
M
N
_
fn
rn
Q
m
fl
m
?'
0
.
Q
_
LL
LL
a
s3
=
=
N
O
Q
O
fl
N
O
N
a
s
,-
° L
¢
Q
CL
°°
m
m
Z
Z
m
v
?
a
a)
a�
m
m
m U
cn
L
❑
❑
4 ^
U
UQ
0
`o
o
L
U X
Q
U
Q v
o
a
E'
0
E
0
U
U
'c
U
v
U
04
m
c
m
c
❑- m
5t
rna
= m
C m
n
m
0
U m
O
0 m
NM
c
0
0
c .?
0U)
c .�
0U)
c
0
00
i
'a
CO
CO
-0
3
O
Cm
L C
U-0
U-a
LLI
N
fl
% N
N
N
C
N
C
0)
Co
V)�
C
cn
C
i!'
�+
N
N
N
U) C)
i
Qc°�
min
+�+
wa
wa
~
z
O°
+�'
O°
a
a
a.>
a>
CL
m
m
C
C
U)
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
,.t0
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y
U
Y.
U
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
.O
t
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
to
ca
co
m
O
O
-i
a
a
0.
fl I
Q
a
a
a
O.
a
Q
0-
0- 1
CL I
Q I
a I
a I
n.
vJ
"a
O
_
O
L
L
p
"a
O
_0
O
"a
O
'0
O
-O
O
-a
O
-a
O
'O
O
'a
O
'a
O
'0
O
'a
O
'a
O
'a
O
C)
C9
LL
a
LL
LL
C7
C7
CD.
U'
C7
C7
C7
C7
C7
C7
CD
(7
O 'a)
a
U Q
J
�
N
c
�1
N
x N
c
�
J
00
J Lo
-J Lo
E
fo
❑
E 000
O
M LO
O
a
LO
NO
LO
Noo
WLD
O E
O E
cc E
0 r
U c
m 0
m Co
m�
U M
U
U O
N
N
N
N
r
N
r
N
r
CD
N
r
CD
N
O r
O
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
N r
co
M
r
r
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
r
r
r
r
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
E
E
E
E o
m
m
m
co c
c
c
c
c
-ate
72 *
"it
m 0
m 0
m 0
m 0
r
N
M
Lo
00
O
r
r
Q.
Q
0)
M M
00j Q
a)
O
O
O
O
Ln
O
LO
O
Ln
O
OLO
LO
O
LO
O
LO
O
LO
O
LO
O
LO
O
LO
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
N-0
(v
N-0
(m
N-0
m
N-0
m
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
N
N
N
r
N
M
c
c
c
I- N
H O
f W
F' N
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
m
(0
(0
❑ 2
❑ 2
❑ 2
❑ 2
X
X
I X
I X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I X
U
1 U
U
N
N
N
co
O
O
O
O
CL
a
a
0.
0
m m
ca
N
(D
N
0)
r
=
2
2
U
U
U
U
E
E
E
E
c
c
c
71
c
>1
-°
>.
-°
>+
-°
m
m
m
m
m
m
L
m
L
m
L
m
L
m
L
m
L
m
L
m
m
m
m
v
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
m
U
U
V
U
U
U
U
V
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
O
O
7
O
a
O
m
O
7
O
=3
0
7
O
a
O
a
O
a
O
a
0
a
O
a
O
a
O
a
O
7
O
a
O
a
O
a
O
C
rn
c
_rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
0
c
rn
c
rn
c
a)
c
rn
c
rn
c
rn
c
N
N
U)
(0
N
N
N
0)
N
N
N
N
m
N
O
N
N
N
N
0)
N
N
N
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
O
Q-
O
d 1
O
Q 1
O
Ll I
O
C2 1
O
O
O
Cl I
0
n I
O
t1 I
O
Q 1
O
Q.
O
a
O
O.
O
0
O
fl I
O
fl I
O
a- I
O
CL I
O
CL 1
O
Q.
6�
�9
'Vj
m
z
O
L
L
L
L
L
O
0
L
L
L
L
L-
0
F
F
F
F5
.FU
O
Y
m
. m
.m
.m
.m
C�
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
a
J
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
C
LL
U
U
U
U
E
O
E
O
N
N
N
N
3z
LOO
LO
C:) CN
m
m
m
m
m
W LO
M �
U
C
C
C
C
C
LO
N
�
c r
c o
c E
O
O
O
O
O
C LO
C D
c �
L
L
L
L
L
U o
U N
U°
U
U
U
U
U
�}
m
m
00
00
00
O
M
M
d
't
�
N
N
It
LO
LO
w
LO
LO
r
O
O
O
O
O
d7
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
�
N
U
�
U
0
E
rl-
00
�
ter,
A
>,
>,
_
a
a
a
a
CL
a
a
(n
(n
(n
U)
(n
() U)
U)
U)
N
r
r
r
00
N
N
N
O
O
N O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O m
O
O
LO
X
X
X:2
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
LO
LO
LO
LO
LO
c
C
c
c
c
c
>
O
m
rn
rn
m
rn
rn
O
o
0
0
0
0
>,r
w
w
w
w
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
m
m
m
m
m
1(0.(o
m
m
CU
m
o LLOO
U
U
U
U
CU
M
m
m
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
U
U
U
U
U) LL
J
J
J
J
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
0'
a'
�
w
D
O
0
c0
0
c0
0
I`
ti
P-
p-
06
06
06
OiS
>'
>'
>'
>'
?'
"a
>'
O
O
O
O
O
D
Ln
LO
Ln
D
LO
a.
a
a.
C
a
>
a
>
s
7
a
a
a.
C
a.
U
U_
of
�
�
�
L
�
3
L
�
3
L
�
3
L
�
3
L
A•
L
�
L
�
L
�
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
c
m
.r-
m
m
.c
m
L
O
O
O
O
3
O
3
O
3
O
3
O
O
O
O
O
N
U
U
U
U
a.
n
a
a
a
a
a
a
2'
2'
2,2
i'
c'
2'
i
c
c,
2�
L�
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
m
0
(D
(D
(D
(D
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
c
c
c
c
c
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
co
N
N
0
N
O
0
N
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
O
O
O
O
O
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
C
O
c
0
c
O
c
O
a
0
N
N
0
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
(�
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
(�
m
?
U
U
U
010
01
U 10
U
0
U
U
010
010
U 101
U
01010
U
U
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
a
c
c
c
c
c
LM
rn
0
rn
0
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
0
rn
rn
'co
rn
rn
rn
Lm
rn
0
(0
U)
(n
Cn
w
(q
(n
(n
fn
w
(0
(n
!�
(q
(q
(q
(n
cn
(A
n
(n
fn
N
N
N
N
0
N
"Z
M
Q
Q
n
s
o
z
o
Q
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
a
a
a
o
o
o
a
o
o
°°°a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
d-
a
a
Q.
Q.
Q.
'Vj
`O
`O
`O
o
o
L
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�
a
a°
ao
ao
ao
ci
Li
ci
LL
ci
ii
LL
ti
ii
CD
(D
(D
C�
C7
C�
C�
C�
ii
O
QO
0
0
d
d
d
O
>+ O
W
>+ O
O
-0 N
`
CL
C:
CL qt
Q N
H
H
N
N
N
N
:2
-0
� C)
7 0
N
N
m
U
cA ao
s I
Y
Y
m
m
m
p
fl
i Cl
NOO
s O
NO
L M
..
c
O
c
O
c
O
�
F
3
a 0
3 0
a 0
• »0Cl
U
rn
J
rn
J
O
O
m
c`o
c`o
C-
n-
C:
c �
c -0
Y�
Y�
Y2Q
U
U
U
(j
0
LO
0
LO
0
LO
0
LO
LO
0
N
N
N
N
N
M
"•
N
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
.-
r
r
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Cl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Cl
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
co
co
N
r
N
M
ct•
LO
0 w
v CO
N 0Np
v, u>
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
�M
O
O
O
J
-i
J
rn N
rn m
*k
d
d
J d
J d
s
O N
O
❑
O
❑
O
❑
O
❑
O
❑
p)
o')
co
�
_
c
i
_
c
J�
LO
LO
LO
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
N
m
E
m
E
c6
0 rn
.-
.-
:::i
cu
m
ca
cn
p 3
O 3
t-
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
a
a
a
=
m a
m v
o
c
c
c
c
c
w
w
❑w
0
0
0
li
li
U-
m
M
m
m
M
o
o
U
o
J LL
0
J U-
0
J U-
C
C
C
N
0
0
0
c0
O
O
O
u
ca
Y
Y
Y
0
0
0
0
0
U
O
a
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
4-
.f-
v-
w-
v-
0
O
O
O
c
c
c
C
c
O
co
O
N
(
(0
N
c
.�.
0
0
U
U
U
U
U
0
±
0
f��
o
(n
U
;
2-
2-
-o
"a
-a
-0
-0
E
E
Y
Y
Y
c
c
a
O
O
O
O
CL
O
w
c
1�
O
O
O
o
o
o
0
o
O
'c
:
c
c
I-
°
rn
rn
J
J
°
`
co
`m
c`v
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y-C
�,
>,
>,
>,
>,
d
d
c
c
c
N
Y
CD
U
U
U
0
0
0
0
(D
U`
Y
Y
Y
J
J
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
0
O
O
O
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
i�
in
in
i�
in
in
w
w
i�
in
N
N
N
N
76
N
—a
N
-
N
76
N
—
N
N
N
�
N
N
N
N,
N
76
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
CL,
CL I
a I
a
a
a
a
a
Q
a
o.
0
0
o
CL,
❑
a
C.
a 1
0-1
C
n I
cx
//
U "
w
•
S
3
3
3
z
z
z
O
L
L
L
Y
Y
J
Y
J
O
C7
LL
Fa
LL
J
LL
Y
Y
Y
Y
�C
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y.
_
_
C
O
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
G
=
C-
_;
_
_
3
2
i
to
L
O�
U �
�
N
�
O
M
a
U O
C N
N O
cu
_ E W
ago
r-
fl-
co
v
O
O
O
r
r'
r
r
[�
r
T
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
O
O
to
6L)
H
{-
tCj
N
O
a
v
N
O
0)
O
0)
N
O
Lo
in
Lo
000
Lo
V
CD
m
'jr
°¢°
,°mma�
�vtU
'�a0
N
�°
a
m
CD
L
°
N
L
Y
L
Y
.F.
-
C
c
M
Q -
(a
Q
S
N
J
Q
ca
E
C:
Q
U
U
°:
E
=
o
o
L
V
L
C
C
o
'_
0
0
'_
o
°°
o
i
O
_
O
O
a
0
`U
X
�,
>
p
p
O
2
O
'a
o
LL
LO L
O
U
O
O
N
O
O
O
CL
O
CO
N
O
6
c
°
cO
0
°O
E
O
m
0
a
w
O
O
N
o
U
w
w
Q
(o
t=
0
�Q •-•
[
Y
a
a
m
N
a
>
d°
w
d w
t°
0)
a
E
E
E
E
w
o
° o2
o
0
'.0
N
N
N
0
N
L"
0
N
L
N
0
L
N
L
0
L
0
1
0
L
L
0
L�
0
N
b'
0
0
u
=
=
Li
N
N
N
a'
O
w
L
U)
N
N
N
S
O
r
O O O O O N LO O
N
CD N N N N � N N
O O O O O O O ci
N N N N N N N N
N
O
N
N
CD CD 0 I N( N I N I Cl CN I N I N
LO N
N
O
d
N
�
O
_
O
X,
a
Lo
_
r
O
t
O
t
r
O
t
O
t
O
O
c
0
�#
O
O
c
0
O
O
c
0-0
O
0
co
il
r
W
7
U
O
r
W
U
O
N
W
0>>
O
cfl
0
m
2
Y
co
to
m
2=
Y
cfl
In
m
>�
Y
Q
O
0
D
E
C
C
G
(D
(1)
(D
a3i
L
w
0�
0�
w
a
a
z
a
v
v
z
z
z
z
a
L
L
L
L
L
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
L
L
L
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Y
O
O
O
O
'C
'(p
'M
Y
Y
Y
Y
O
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
Ut
Ut
J
_ _ 1
C7
C9
C�
C�
LL
LL
LL
J
J
J
J
Ut
O
r
O O O O O N LO O
N
CD N N N N � N N
O O O O O O O ci
N N N N N N N N
N
O
N
N
CD CD 0 I N( N I N I Cl CN I N I N
LO N
N
O
d
N
�
O
_
O
X,
a
Lo
_
r
O
t
O
t
r
O
t
O
t
O
O
c
0
�#
O
O
c
0
O
O
c
0-0
O
0
co
il
r
W
7
U
O
r
W
U
O
N
W
0>>
O
cfl
0
m
2
Y
co
to
m
2=
Y
cfl
In
m
>�
Y
Q
O
0
D
E
C
C
G
L
w
0�
0�
w
O U
o
m
O
J
J
J
J
M
m
U
O
U) CD
>
>
>
>
� M
N
N
N
O
N
O
Y
t
Y
Y
Y
O
U
N O
c
c
c
c
O
3
.o
to
Co
� M
� O
O
00
O
oo
o
0
o
n`.
o
Y
m
Y
�
Y
Y
N
CL
00
i
0
V
U
L
U
L
U
L
U
L
J
X
[�
(yy,
M
Y
z
Q
Y
z
Q
Y
z
Q
w
Q
�..
Qi
X
`}F
O
r
O O O O O N LO O
N
CD N N N N � N N
O O O O O O O ci
N N N N N N N N
N
O
N
N
CD CD 0 I N( N I N I Cl CN I N I N
LO N
N
O
d
N
�
O
_
O
X,
a
Lo
_
r
O
t
O
t
r
O
t
O
t
O
O
c
0
�#
O
O
c
0
O
O
c
0-0
O
0
N
r
W
0
O
il
r
W
7
U
O
r
W
U
O
N
W
0>>
O
cfl
0
m
2
Y
co
to
m
2=
Y
cfl
In
m
>�
Y
Q
O
0
D
E
C
C
G
L
w
0�
0�
w
o
m
J
J
J
J
U
>
>
>
>
N
N
N
O
O
N
O
Y
t
Y
Y
Y
O
U
c
c
c
c
O
3
.o
to
Co
O
00
O
oo
o
0
o
n`.
o
Y
m
Y
�
Y
Y
N
N
N
00
i
0
V
U
L
U
L
U
L
U
L
J
X
[�
(yy,
M
Y
z
Q
Y
z
Q
Y
z
Q
w
O
�..
Qi
`
`}F
a
fi
CL
fn
CL
fn
a
fn
U
C
¢
p
CL
_
v
r
v_
c
v
c
t
c
c
W
O
O
O
O
O
G
L
U
V
-�
D
rn
J
rn
_1
rn
J
0)
J
•-
fn
•-
fn
•-
Ui
J
O
:3
3
O
O
O
N
t0
(Q
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
N
LO
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
N
> j
N
'2
�
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
Q
cc
N O
tlS
N
i
i
i
(6
N
f0
t
t
t
t
C
Y
L
a
a
a
a
Q
U
0.
CL �.
Q
Q
"M
m
V
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U_
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
rn
rn
o
O
o
o
0
S?
0
0
0
0
-a
0
.2
0
.9
o
O
•0
a°�i
m
aoi
aoi
aoi
m
m
v
�
v
_0
v
"o
a
v
U)
5)
N
N
(b
<
(n
c
n
(n
''—
U)
vJ
0
0
W
.
� 5
CO
co
Ui
Vi
(/i
co
co
co
,9
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
i-
O
O
O
O
O
(D
O
(D
O
0
O
(D
O
C9
O
C7
O
0
O
(D
O
(D
LL
LL
Li
LL
LL
LL
M_
O
fl.
L-
t
O
J
C
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
Cl
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
r
H
L-
0
CD
C7
W
J
LU
J
W
J
a
O
>
>
>
O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
`�
W
LO X
X X
X
X
X
X
J
X
❑
N
N
N
c
LO
m
CL
0
a
O
a
O
a
O
a
O
a-
O
U
U
U
U
O
L
O
O
O
c
N
N
N
N
N
N
7
0
7
. C
N
C
N
C
N
,V
Y
•�•�
C
��••
C
•�••
s
�%
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
i-
O
I-
O
F-
O
H
N
N
`
m
rn
t
t
c
t
-C
L
L
y
L
N
J
o
J
0
J
0
J
o
Q
rn
N
07
N
rn
N
rn
N
N
O
N
•3
•3
•3
•3
�
�
�
E
=a
�
=a
=a
�
c
c
c
c
0
0
0❑
_
N
in
c
�
c E
rn
L C
L E
rn
L E
rn
t E
rn
L E
rn
0
0
0
o
L
L
L
L
E
E
_rn
`a
i5
r0-.
;
-
'O
rn
J
�
J
rn
J
rn
J
E
❑
E
❑
E
❑
O
O
O
a
LL a
LL Q
L!' CL
LL _L
�
�- _a-
fA
❑
w
❑
w
❑
fn
❑
0
7
0
0
O
j
X
X
X
X
a •-
>>
a•-
N d
N
N d
U 3
N a
y 3
N d
d
N
y
N d
N
wc_
J
wc_
J
we
J
Lt�c
J
.-
fA
65
��
_
(n
❑
D
❑
N S
��
o N
3�
N O
3L
N O
13
3�
N O
0�
O O
0"
N N
E
m E
E
E
E
E
E
m E
m
m
m
to
c
J
L rn
c
L 0)
c
L 0)
c
L 0)
c
L rn
c
L m
c
Y�
N
Y�
m
Yp
YD
Y
Y
m
Y
Y
Y
to
Y
m
Y
Y
cam.
�_
�_
_
cu
cu
�_
�_
¢
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
¢
¢
¢
a
a
a
0
0
o
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
0
_0
-a
a
a
a
a
a
=a
*a
=o
�o
_0
-a
'a
-0
-0
-a
=o
q
0
-
tcn
A
�
�
�.
�
k
k
k
z
k
2
2
2
2
2
2
f
2
0
g
m
o
0
LL
LL
LL
/
/
/
/
/
/
$
/
j
q
q
q
/
/
k
k
_
&
CL \
�o
k\
7
04
20
f0
/
<
<
x 7
<pq
<2m
CL
c�LO
LO
_
co
J JC)
C)
LL
E
E
—
q
q
q
q
q
o
g
a
c
c¥
w
#
0
q
0
q
0
q
0\
q
q
0
q
\
q
8
q
3
q
8
N
8\
N
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
8
N
3
N
0
q
0
q
�
f
k
�
q
04
�
f
±
±
LL
LO
LO
j
ƒ
/
/
3:
/
0
0
3
9
9
9
0
0
k
\
g
$
E
E
E
\
19
\
Cl?
R
N
c
§
m
f
q
m
\<
==
2
q
2
t
2
y
R
R
k
k
k
k
\
0
0
u
�
§
%
0
_
\£
/
/
/
/ƒ
J
J
k
r-
/
/
ƒ
ƒ
LM
0
/
o
�_
%
f
k
C
m
m
n
m
n
c
c
2&
c
c
§
c
&
c
0
2
b
m
S
S
\ C
\
ƒ/
f
\
ƒ
ƒk
k
= k
= b
t
&/<0
o
k
\:
/
®
o
g
/
a.
I
I
/
//\
/
2
2
2
2
f�
2
£
L E
E
7
o
c
c
c
O
ƒ m
g
2
o
k£
2•
k
f
f
f
t.
ƒ
E
�
m 2
7@
t
e
e
o
0
0
q
q
/
@
o
.o
.
=
o
CL
�
>
>
>
L
L
\
k E
o
o
G\
M
M/\
d
2
2
2
/
2
/k
f\
M
G E
§_&
5
2
e
■
m d)
CO
CO
2
e
~�§§§
^�
CL
c
c
c®
c
c
c
c
a
E
Q c
c
c/$
.
f
I f
ƒ
M
2
2
f
2
f
w\
2
1$$\
\
7
3
3
ƒ
ƒ
<
<
«
2
g
g
»
g
0
0
g
g
g
c
c
c
a
e
-0
a
5
k.
5
�
a
�
5
■
.»
»
.
�
�
: .
�
:.
�
.
«
?
«
2
2
2
7
7
2
«
«
7
/ I
/
/
/
�
�
�.
�
v°�
�9
O
O
O
/O
O
O
L
(a
LL
O
O
C�
L
(4
LL
L
N
LL
L_
(IS
LL
L_
i0
LL
L_
N
LL
L_
f0
LL
L_
Rf
LL
L_
m
LL
L
m
LL
L
m
LL
L
fa
LL
Q
O
0
L_
N
LL
L_
M
LL
I I
+-
+-
+•+
_
E
w
()
O
C
m
O
C
=
O
C
=
O
C
7
O
C
7
Q�
c
"O
c
0
IT
O
j
0
2
2
c
3
U)
3
LL
—
�,
=
O
O
d
V
JTG
Q
Q
Q
O
O
=
in
N
4
%n
m CN
L
O
L
N
L
0)
N
p
r`
LL
O
O
O
O
O
c
a)
L.L
y
W a
m
N
X
r
O
r
O
Q
2
o E
73 W
7
7
7
D
a
>
mo
a
U
U
.�
U_
U_
U_
C7
r
�
X
N
to
d.
d.
d
O
Q
O
`
a
fn
O .-.
E 5Z 0-)
>>
1-
O C
E O
U
N
Y
ti U
�?
=.
CL
a
a
LL
O
W
>
N
N
N -0 00
0
0
0
0
0
0
O U r
Z
J
-O
to
>
M
co Su
3
O-
3
O-
3
O-
a
0
o o
- c
U O
�J0000
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
�Yo
U
J
�
U a
m
a d
a s
a d
=
C7
Q
0) c
a Q
m a�
—0)
6 o
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
- CD
rn
a
c m
c m
c m
t 0
�
U
m
- s
> n
c v
=
(D C)
c
c
c
c
c
c
N C)
c
:
X
LU 0
"h--
x
h
m -5
5
�
aN
N
N O
y N
m0W
w
w
w
N
rn
mow
w
co
,-
>,
o
o
o�o0o.�m�
(n U Y
mmmmmm
In U Y
m�RmE�oE
Co.
O
O
N
1 Cfl
O
O
N
1 w
O
O
N
1-
O
O
N
O
r
O
N
M
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
O
r
O
N
M
r
O
I N
Lo
O
O
I N
N
r
O
N
O
O.
O
3 N
+-
+-
+•+
_
E
w
()
O
C
m
O
C
=
O
C
=
O
C
7
O
C
7
Q�
c
"O
c
0
IT
O
j
0
2
2
c
3
U)
3
O
—
�,
=
O
O
d
V
JTG
Q
Q
Q
O
O
=
in
N
4
%n
a
L
O
L
N
L
0)
N
p
r`
LL
O
O
O
O
O
c
a)
L.L
y
m
N
X
r
O
r
O
Q
2
o E
M M'
�+ o
7
7
7
D
a
>
mo
a
U
U
.�
U_
U_
U_
C7
Y
�
X
N
to
d.
d.
d
O
Q
O
`
a
fn
U
>>
1-
>>
U
N
Y
ti U
�?
=.
CL
a
a
LL
O
W
>
N
N
Z
J
0
0
0
0
0
0
I-
0
Z
J
-O
to
>
M
co Su
N
N
N
0
N
�
+-
+-
+•+
_
E
w
C
m
O
C
=
O
C
=
O
C
7
O
C
7
Q�
c
"O
c
0
a
O
j
0
2
c
3
a
N
3
O
—
�,
=
O
Q
Q
Q
O
O
=
in
4
%n
O
L
O
L
N
L
0)
V
r`
-
O
O
O
O
O
c
a)
O_
0)
Q
2
o E
U
�E
c a'
v��
c a'
c
E
O
m
O
>
mo
m
U
U
.�
U_
U_
U_
C7
Y
cn
>
OY
U U
QY
U U
QY
U U
O
U•=
Q-
O
`
a
Op 2
>>
1-
>>
Y
ti U
�?
a
N T
N
N T
N
•?
>
y
p J
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I-
0
0
O
o
3
O-
3
O-
3
O-
a
0
o o
- c
U O
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
U
J
�
U a
m
a d
a s
a d
=
C7
Q
0) c
a Q
m a�
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn
a
c m
c m
c m
t 0
�
U
m
- s
> n
c v
=
c
�
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
�
c
:
X
LU 0
"h--
x
h
m -5
5
�
aN
N
N O
y N
w
w
w
w
N
rn
�
w
co
,-
>,
o
o
o�o0o.�m�
m
mmmmmm
m
m�RmE�oE
LL
LL
LL
c� a
t�
a
w
CO
cn
cn
cn
CO
cn
cn
cn
U)
cn
to Q
co X
L
L
L
L
=
L
r L
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
L
LL
U-
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
'LL
LL
CD
0
C7
C7
C�
C�
C�
C�
C�
iL
d'
Lo
N
Z (0
N to
0
p
(a E Lo
0
Q
CL
N
Y O
U o
Q O
O Np
N
L
cun
QaooO
w
O
o
O
O
—
O
�
O
�
O
�
O
O
O
O
LO
O
O
O
O
O
}n
CO
O
O
O
O
0)
O
N
O
N
O
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
o
N
O
N
O
:N;
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
N
I
�
U
Co
C
C6
M
O
�-
m
m
m
m
d
C�
O
U N
�
M_
r
00
C�
r
OL
V
❑
00
=
i
r
r
:i
O
C
O
C
N
r
V
N
N
0
U
U
U
U
I—
>
❑ N
>
>
O
O
X
cn
m
❑❑
w
w
w
w
co
a
cn 2
a-
a
❑
❑
❑
Y
C)
Y
U
Y
U
N
Z
N
c
c
c
c
C6
CL
CO
a
C6
a
-0
N
0
N
_
L
L
L
O
O
a
a�
a
N
Q
CO) N
N 01
Y c�
2
2
�'
o
o
>
>
>
=
Z
o 0
❑
v
2
Q
J
J
J
C
cc
ui
au)
°N
Ci
E
O
O
\
m
TU
N v
ai
>L. '
U
O
v
N
v
U
C7
U
C7
U
U`
c
o
I
�
pp N
v
cOi�
w
w
0
c
c
(1)
c
(0i
>
Q
0
L
>
>
Q
Lh
m
(O
U
v
v
v
O
v
N
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
c
O
_
Q
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�
�
X
.0
m Y
U
U
U
ca
oo
❑
U
U
(1)
m
W
cn ..
U) 0
ON
ON
.N
C,)
C
O
C
O
C
O
N
N
N
Y N
3 N
C
N
-j
Z
_o
CA
N
N
7
C
i-
c
c
0
=
X
x
X
T
T V
T Y
❑❑
W
W
W
W
I--
t=
I—
b
O
O
O M
T
0
T
0
T
0
T
0
T
0
T
0
T
0
>+
0
>,
0
T
000)
T
0�
,,
_
N
TE
N^
>,E
N^
>:,E
O ,�
O T
O A T
U)
m
co
m
co
(n
(
m
U�
m�
3
m
3
m
��
co w
cw
>,E
w
>1L
Ua
>10
U) wa
06
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
.
.
.
O
O
0
�
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
0
�
O
O
O
LL
0
0
iD
Q
(D
0
(D
0
(7
0
LL
(D
0
LL
LL
LL
(7
0
Q
LL
N
U
a)
m
c
X �
O N
O
CO
M
M
qt
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
0)
m
(O
w
w
w
M
M
N
(0
O
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
O
O
O
O
O
o
r
r
r
O
O
Cl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Z
N
m
m
0
U)
O
LO
0
�
CD
N
LO
N
LO
U)
i
j
°o
M
0
O
O
m
Cl
0
no
0
.Q
0
-2
m
O
CL
0
o
X
n
0
o
I L
c
LL
c
LL
c
X
LO
�
N
a)
O
N
a)
N
N
N
N
N
j
ti
L
O
N
M
-
` X
00
Z
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
N
a
N
y
N
N
0.0
v
,.
(q
a#
to
m
U
m
U
m
U U
LO
Y
ao
Y
ao
Y
00
Q
U
0
U
0
v
0
U
0
U
0
m
0
m
0
m
0
m
0
m
0
r
0
o Z
o
0
0
0
0
LO
0 U)
0
DO
m
tL
p
LL
p
LL
p
2
Z
2
=
=
ii
o
o
O
O
O
O
O
o
O
r
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r
r
L-
4
�
N
LO
N
N
N
a>
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
m
c
m
c
m
c
m
c
m
c
m
c
c a
m O
C
m
Z
(n
(n
(n
m
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
m
cl
F-
F-
F-
CL
F-
F-
F-
F-
F-
F-
F-
F-
F-
F-
M
212
2,2
N
C
>
3
Q
m
C
(D
CC
cc
CC
E
E
U
N
m
m
U
U
2
U
2
0
0
0
U
N
(D
4)
�.
(D ()
0
a)
a)
a)
(D
IV
a)
CO
O
C
c
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
V-
Q
m
m
m
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
�
Q
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
c
U
m
U
m
U
m
U
m
U
m
U
m
U
m
U
m
m
•0
r
N
N
N
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q V
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
m C
L
y
N
-a
W
-0
y
-0
N
-0
O
,0
U
-0
N
-D
N
-a
C
C
C
Q
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
O
m
m
a)
m
0
a)
. a)
m
� E
Q
a
fl
fl
a
a
fl
a
o
(n
H
F=
I`
F-
F-
H
I
F-
--
I
H
f
H U
h
H
E`
!`
H
F-
F-
F-
F`
06
9
alc�lc�lc�ltilu� °- Iiilc�Ic�Ic�lUol' LL U- 0 I (D I ao I �il�ilU- LL i ii �i
8
NINININOIIIIINIIINI'N
'IN
N I N I N I N I N I N I N
Z
N
N
tl-
It
Oo
L
Q
E
E
E
LO
p
LO
LO
LO
N
N
N
M
LO
o
W
u)
X
X
�2
*
*
*
m
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
T3
O
o
LO
LO
LO
Q-
2
O L
O
O
O
L
L
L O
C
C
C
C
C
N-
C
C
w-
c
C
C
4__
C
4-
C
C
M
O
O
a`
n
a
a�
a�
ca
m
(D
>
N
L
0
v
a)
(D
aci
aci
o
0
0
E
E
c
c
.c
rn Y
rn Y
o
0
V-
o
VII
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
cn
cn
to
w sa
m .Q
o
o
V-
a
a ,_
m
c
c
c
c
c
A
N
C:)
M
J
J m
J
J
J
m
J
J O
Lc a
a
E
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
O
°�
0
U
`
Y
E
`- 0
3
L D
3
cp
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
v o
a� o ..0
�
�, o
o
E
0
a�
a�
a�
a�
a�
a�
Z
Z
._
a cn
Q. CO cn
m
Q
I-
c
c
a
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
xU
xU
a
c
c
o
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
cn
m
"a
m
'8
cn
'0
m
to
'O
v1
N
O
'0
N
"6
ai
Z .
N
Z E
o
c
a)
uM 1
� N
m
LO
a
L
N
L
o
L
N
L
N
L N
L N
L
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�
O
O
M N O
O
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
a
Q.
o
5 a)
:5, to
>
>
> LL
> LL
L
L-
O
A= L
L
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
L
O
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
LL
LL
d
LL
LL
0
(D
0
CD
0
UD
0
LL
CD
LL
LL
LL
LL
LPL
LL
LL
+) O
O
E M
a) Y
Y
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Cl
Cl
OD
00
00
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Cl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
1 N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
00
m
^L`
a)
L
a)
L
a)
•QC
•Qc
•Q
O
O
O
O
C
G
G
O
O
" Q
O
O
L
a)
L
a)
L
(Q ~
U
N
U
to O
U F-
N f—
U
'
a
a
a
a)
�o
N
M
w
O_
O
00
a0
aa)) aa))
O
aa))
O
aXi W
0 0
aa)) aa))
O
Z
ikkk
O
_O
O
_O
O
_O
O
r
O
v O=
v O
L L O
J
J
J
_U
C
CO) L
N
C-C
J
J
J
U
U
U
U
N
a)
a) O
O
.00
a) 0 O
N-0 O
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
2
O
fn
O
co
O
(n
O
(n
O
fn
O
co
O
U)
O
(n
O
fn
O
fn
L
U)
L
07
L
(n
C 0.—
N U
t 0 •—
0 U
O •—
fn U
_r_ 0.
N U m
OD
w
a)
VJ
VJ
�
C
O
tT
07
^fQ
LL
L
O
J
J
a
(D
Z
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
N
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
m
m
a)
2
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
U
U
=
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
.0
L
.0
L
t
L
C
L
t
0
0p 0
Q
O
O.
O
Q
O
Q
O
Q
O
Q
O
Q
O
Q
O
Q
O
a
O
Q
O
Q
O
Q
O
0.
O
a-
O
O � .
O Q
u)
L
>—j
m
L
m
L
C
a)
v7
N
y
Ow
N
N
N
to
fn
fn
fn
M
V)
fn
V7
N
N
N
a)
m
3
N
fA
con
cn
M
fn
M
fn
M
fn
m
a)
fn
a)
W
a)
N
a)
O
ID
N
a)
o
c�
ca
U�.
9
OL
LO
OL
LO
L
a
o
O
0
0
0
a
0
a
0
0
0
0 0
a
' 0
0 0
6
0
O
0
0 0
a
0
0
0
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
d
a
(L
d
ti
7
U
U
U
U
o E0
E
a�
0
ca
a
Q
OL
Q
_
o
LO
o
OL
o
0
LO
o
Lo
OL
(D
E O
E o
O
o
O
N LO
O 8 O
N U
N
m
N
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
00
00
00
00
00
r
O
r
In
In
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
O
O
O
O
O
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Cl
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
CL
U Y
U Y
U Y
U Y
U Y
aXi awi
axi awi
aXi m
a) a)
aa) m
_U O C
bl O
U_ O C
0 O
_U O co
(o
U_ O C
co O
U_ O C
M O
O
O
1-
U
C .0
cr' C .0
� C t
C=
C .0
O
I-
CL
4)
M M
M
M
M
C V
7 C U
7 C U
7 C U
7 C U
i
C
C)
O
M
U)
(o �
�0
v 0
n �
=
u
a
a
a
Q
a¢
a¢
a
L
a)
O
U
E
�
O
U
�
�
Q
Z v
-
cc
c
c
c
p
c
c
c
m
m
C
00
3
O
a
o
a
O
a
O
a
o
a
O
a
=
o
�,
0
0
0
0
o
V
.�
2
=
c
m
V
m
�
Z
Q
co
U)
y
N
�'
N
fif
=
U
J)
J
J
J)
J
J
J
J
J
V
f0 N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
L
O
L
L
N
L
L
Q
E (L)
E
o
v
-0
X
CU
H
N
't
cA
fn
(D 1
fn
N
N
fn
U) I
U)
co
�
�
�
�
R
. 0
R
0
R
0
R
o
R
c
R
o
R
0
R
0
R
0
S
0
R
0
0
O
k
_
-
g
04
04
04
q
q
a/\
E
\\
k k
k
k
k\
c
\
2
f
/
k
k
k
k\
k
k
E
E
E
R
R
R
G
04
CN
¢
¢
¢
E
k
k
\\
\
k
E
E
k
0
0
0
0,0
0
1 0
CL
I CL
.
2
k
f
«
l
X
&
.
o
o
�
/
/
/
o�
o
0
a
./
a
J0
x
x■
0a
2
g
2
g
2
o �
3
o
E
E
E
E
=
6
)
2.
m/
7
I
3
o
Q
�
�
�
�
APPENDIX 6
Suggested RCTV Equipment Replacement/Upgrade Packages
rib \q5
41
L
41
u
U
41
L to
C
4J
4) M
u �
10 y1
fl. L
In
O m
to
m
m
m
Ln O
O
O
00
w
0
r-I
i-1
N
N
w
m V/
O
O
Q
N
01
N
N
1,
w
O
n
M
In
M
O
00
M
M
M
N
to
Ol
M
1.
t0
:'
N
OM
L4
i/T
to
N
N
.N -I
M
in
in
t(n
V/
000
V}
to
to
to
rj
O m O O m o 0 1n o 0
N N V?
a-1 to to
to
O O O O M M M to O O O
to to to to n 1.0 0 m to O O
M N Lr 6 M t0
N N m to to -1
to to in t/}
01 0) ,
r ^ cn
co 1\ 0)
tD
j 0� I�
06
L
>� T
f
M L C
. aI1 41 f6
T T v) SZ M
V1 C C L j, a-I
T
0 u v C II i
M -I T
CL 4) 4J c0 'O O
E h 'A M co
3 vii vTi r1 T u m
tD 0) Ol N N
Q n C1' 1Z n 2' T T •a+ N E
4E
NvTi
++ ++ Y Y C C U U
M M C 41
E E E E E E N 4c1 C ,,
m m > ^ ^ E v
CL Q Q !a. o o N N u,o u
v v a a a to Q
C C V N 0. 75 1i ti 1i u d N m N w Z) w
l•1
lD
N
{h
M
Ori
O
a-i
a-1
H
f0
O
H
m
M
CL
U
41
m
L
CL
C.
D
Y
Q)
E
41
N
G.
w
f0
m
41
T
O
N
U-
O
-1
W
Q
a
X
0
Z
W
a
a
Q
0
0
0
0
to
M
O
Ln
0
0
0
tir
tn.
tn.
to
�
r4
to
m
in
An.
in
c
co
I-
N
L4
01'
N
in
to
Y
C
�
r
Ln
1n
in
1.n
r-I
vi
00
00
O
O
O
C.
N
-i
-i
w
1-1
00
t0
In
O
O
f0
OI�
M
M
N
N
00
M
kO
00
N
M
to
(j
~
00
00
M
M
c-i
a
a--I
F
r-I
M
to
N
N
O
O
IH
cA
c-1
to
t
.n
to
=
to
to
to
to
�
y
C
73
O
�
Y
S
L
Q
N_
Q)
-O
1✓
O
!_
O
-,
\
m
U
U
+T+
i
U
O
0
N-0O
O
Y
_
•C
O
++
a�
L
v
u
1~
-p
N
Q
4=13
=
LL
W
a
d
v
U
a
Q
E
r-I
N
M
d'
to
w
1,
00
0)
O
r-I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ri
r-I
H
f0
m
41
T
O
N
U-
O
-1
W
Q
a
X
0
Z
W
a
a
Q
_A
J
Ln
Ln O
V
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0 0
it
N Ln
Y.I
O
Ln
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
a
I� N
00
O
O
Ln
N
N
Ln
C
C
C
C
C
C C
00
ri n
O
N
O
N
M
i�
cq
N
O
Ln
O
to
N Ln
N
r-I 11
N
ih
a-i
i/A
i/?
t/?
iR
L}
-i
in
rt
V).
a--I N
i-i
to ri
t/l.
to
C
O
t/}
L4
a
to
to
O c
+
�
N O
bA f0
&00000000000000
t�0
01
CL
L
+.
C ..
C
O
u•1
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
CU
EL p
N
O
O
Ln
N
N
Ln
C
C
C
C
C
C C
L
Q,
0�
Ln
N
O
N
M
i,
ri
N
O
Ln
O
l0
N Ln
u
u
E
a)
to
t/1•
N
in
i/?
t/1•
t/}
t/)•
to
V).
\
`
0 N
O
t�/>
c
O
v
t/1
t/?
to vi-
E
06
N
L
u
\
N
c
O
E
L
O
o
x
m
cu
z
O
o
m
u
v 3
+-�
a°—
*'
s
v
i�
a�
o
v>
M
*'
Ln
m
c
0
0
40
o°°
c c3o
G
c
Ov
O
O❑
_
_
41
U
U
U
U
U
U
0)
cL
N
O
V)
N
(0
7
O
❑
Ln
=
v
>�
E
u
C
O
a
x
Ln
O c
+
�
N O
�
t�0
01
CL
L
W
=3
CL
CU
E m
O L
•E
v
>
U
"6
L
0�
O
a+
C
M
_
N
H
u c
O
±'
co
u
u
E
a)
L
,..
.0
u
N
(0
Q
C
C
Y
\
`
N
O
c
O
v
c
O
CC
E
L
N
L
u
\
N
c
O
E
L
O
o
\
m
cu
z
O
o
Z
u
v 3
+-�
a°—
*'
s
v
3>
a�
o
v>
*'
Ln
m
c
0
0
40
o°°
c c3o
G
c
Ov
O
O❑
_
_
41
U
U
U
U
U
U
0)
cL
N
O
V)
N
(0
f0
(0
f0
f0
X_
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
D
a
a.
u
a
>
a
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
d
V ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
(U
F- F00- H H H H H Fm- Fm- H Im- H Fm- F-
E O a-4 O N mo dO O n lO 0 8 O 0 SO rO l r. 1 t .N -i .M -i � d•
ice+
6
l�. J
N
r-i
U-
0
N
W
Q
a
X_
Z
W
a
a.
Q
E
0
0
ix
to
Y
d
Cd
L
V
d
E
m
t
U
u
c
3
u0
Ln
Ln o
X
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o o
I,
N Ln
W
O
Ln
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
a)
I, N
W
0
0
Ln
N
N
Ln
O
O
O
o
0
0 0
00
1 1-
O
N
O
N
M
r
ri
N
O
Ln
O
k6
N Ln
N
-4 H
N
V?
11
V?
V?
in
V?
VF
1-i
V?
a-1
Ln-
c-I N
a-1
V} r-I
V}
in
C
V).
V}
i!? V)•
in
V}
O C
'++
O
•+,
00
O
Y
!_' 7
U; O
O
f0
O1
1?
0
i
c
o
Ln
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o 0
0
O. 0
O
N
O
O
Ln
N
N
to
O
O
O
O
o
o 0
M
Ln
N
O
N
M
1
N
N
O
L11
O
l0
N Ln
t 7
Y
N
i/T
in•
r1
Vt•
ill
i/?
V?
rl
V1•
a-i
Vl•
a-i N
H �
N
E
V}
E
O
V?
Y
V?
V)• V}
L
N
L
U
\ Y
°
N
0
x
C
d
v
\
s
o
O1
3
v
'N
0
O
m
S
N 3
U
O
•U
"O
-a
_
Y
U
Y
s
N
a+
3
'>
O
m
E
to
u
N
° .5
o
v>
`O
o
`O o
i
c @
c
cr
i
Ou
O
O
+'
4-
v
ti-
v
4-
v
4-
v
w
u v
OJ
v
3
O
O
O
�
Z
Q)
E
C
O
x
Ln
O C
'++
O
•+,
00
O
Y
!_' 7
U; O
O
f0
O1
1?
0
i
W)
O
O_ Y
N
Y
CU
0
E u
O
_
C N
@
N
U c
O
_
Y
N
N Y
.0:
N
f9
C
Y \
N
N
E
E
O
v� O
Y
f0
W 'L
L
N
L
U
\ Y
°
N
0
°
C
d
v
\
s
o
O1
3
v
'N
0
O
S
N 3
U
O
•U
"O
-a
_
Y
U
Y
s
N
3
'>
O
m
E
to
u
N
° .5
o
v>
`O
o
`O o
i
c @
c
O
i
Ou
O
O
+'
4-
v
ti-
v
4-
v
4-
v
w
u v
OJ
v
EL
m
p
c
m
.0
V)
coo
m
m m
N
E
p
'Q
\
x
O
O
O
O
O O
o a
u
a
a '>
_
a¢
a
a
a
a a
v
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y
f6 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Fm-
E ri N m. d' Ln 8 8 00 al O r1 r-4, M d•
W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri c-I . c-I c-I
4.
N
V-1
U-
0
M
LL
Q
o_
X_
O
Z
W
d
!i
Q
0
'C
7
N
E
U1
+' C _O
c
L 0
Y O O O cLa
tw
CL E M w
u p -0
0 V
a ` `^ p 'Cn ru
+v m E
L V) •- O ao C c
O Y E L C O vi O
p
p E
COL L O L O C
M O O 3 N a0 o
}r
L % L ` L
i0 i9 p p 3 C N a Q to w N O-0 bA O - - - L L
C U1 N a ur' L= ? 7 -D -.0 C ',N a w w w w w
v cz D y_ OV Y O 0 a N 7 O ..0 7 N N N w w N
++ U U N Y Q N E CU L N Q M M C C C C C C
CL 0 O O m u @ 6 O0 p Y L M M M M M M
L 3 m O a 0 i„ L � g 3 3 3 3 3 3
o V) V) V) V° a v> IL >° a vai z> a •J i% j a a a a a a
a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F-
4)
C 0 N M d' Ln lD 8 W MO O r1 N M c}' Ln lD I� 00 01 O '-i N M cf' mN l0
� O O O O O O O O O c-i r-I r-I ri N N �-I e-I �-I H N N N N N N N
a+
66�
N
r-I
U-
0
d
w
C7
Q
a
lD
x
0
Z
w
a
n.
Q
0 0 O
O
O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O
—1
W L
W
0 0 0
n
0 0 0 0 0 0
N
1f1 tD
O O O
u1 O O N 111 ri N O O
M
00
u1 O O N O O O
W I.f1 O O O
M
I, M
O O N
N-;I' LD wt a1 M I, ct c-i
N 00 N N 01 If1 N
M N O N O
O
N Il
1,0 M a-i
V} N r4 V)• V, to VF VT V}
V} V} V)• V) V? -i -i
V? VA c-I cH M
M
V? N
V? to V?
V}
in V}
V} V} V}
in
V}
f0
f
=
O O O
O O O O O O O O
O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O
4'
� 4"
0 0 0
1 VO 1
0 0 0 0 O O
1l
f
O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O
0
a 0
41
0 0 0
M O O 14 Il Ln N O O
N
ch
M O O N M O O
w M 0 a 0
Q
11 O F
N d` D N tn N i
�tO
'
N 00 r N r M N
I N O N O
M 7
a-i r-I Vi•
V? N -4 in V1• V). N VI•
in V> V? t4 V? 1-4 1-1
V? 1-i a-I M
IA IA
V? V}
V4 V).
VT V}
to 't/1• t/?
06
x
m
r
yct
M M
a-i .-I c-I N N N a-i a i ci
N
N
r- V- N .-1 w V-I i-I
w e-i r i r-1 a-I
ry
E
U1
+' C _O
c
L 0
Y O O O cLa
tw
CL E M w
u p -0
0 V
a ` `^ p 'Cn ru
+v m E
L V) •- O ao C c
O Y E L C O vi O
p
p E
COL L O L O C
M O O 3 N a0 o
}r
L % L ` L
i0 i9 p p 3 C N a Q to w N O-0 bA O - - - L L
C U1 N a ur' L= ? 7 -D -.0 C ',N a w w w w w
v cz D y_ OV Y O 0 a N 7 O ..0 7 N N N w w N
++ U U N Y Q N E CU L N Q M M C C C C C C
CL 0 O O m u @ 6 O0 p Y L M M M M M M
L 3 m O a 0 i„ L � g 3 3 3 3 3 3
o V) V) V) V° a v> IL >° a vai z> a •J i% j a a a a a a
a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F-
4)
C 0 N M d' Ln lD 8 W MO O r1 N M c}' Ln lD I� 00 01 O '-i N M cf' mN l0
� O O O O O O O O O c-i r-I r-I ri N N �-I e-I �-I H N N N N N N N
a+
66�
N
r-I
U-
0
d
w
C7
Q
a
lD
x
0
Z
w
a
n.
Q
In
In
o
X
o o
o o
o o
o o o o o o
o
o
o o o o o o o
o o o o o
11
l0
u1
W
O O
O O
O O
O O O O O t!1
O
O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O
N
111
tc
O O
O In
O O
N to a--I N O O
M
W
v1 O O N O O O
W V1 O O O
M
I,
V1
O O
N N
4 w
4 -1 M I, 4 -I
'14
"�
N 00 N N 6 tf1 N
M N O N O
O
N
r,
l0 M
r-I -Ln
N a--I
r-I M
M
4Ln
N
41). 4A.
t
t!A
C! (4
i/A L}
i/? i i/?
!}
t4
IL4
R
OA
-
O O
O O
O O
O O O O O O
O
O
O O o o O O O
O o o O O
•'
=
a.
c
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 m m O O In
In
O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O
0
a
0 o
o V1
O O
.-i I, N N O O
N-t
Ln O O N to O o
w to O O O
M
Vl O
-�e N
I' lD
N 4 ri
V)'
in
N to N 00 1 N ri
In N O N O
r-I
ih L?
N rl
L? i/? t4 t4 iA
t/} t4 t/? In i/? r-I -4
vl} r4 rH M
w
tn• t!}
tn• tn.
to ifL
4j*)- in in
�VI
W
x
f6
Y
Y
NM
M c-i
c-I c-I
N N N c-I c-I c-I
N
N
r-I r-I N i-I W v-1 r-I
l0 i-i ri r-I r-I
E
v
} c o
c
•++
n1 p O O iLo
Q- E c nn
E Y O s
O E
O
v a on o =a u E `L°
O m Y +
p '
m E E co r
O C: N
O v O
O E U
O -0 E 'E O 12 E
a a U a v v E v o U n
�E hE O o o o a .E -0 0 CL
o E E v co L o }U o 0 fl m m Y O c v v v v v v
O v v v E E a ca m U on �+ U U U U U U
Q U U ++ U U c O. O m In Q bA — to C C C C C C
v 3 v iL° v a v °- m a� o o 'Y °p 41 3 3 3 3 3 3
a+ o° o a Q °' a am, cx m 0 0 0 0 0 0
v1 in cn in a v> LL> x= Q in z G> Q� v1 a a a a a a
Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
0
N
N
2
-4 N M d' In l0 i, 00 0 O -1 N M �t In 10 I, W M O � N M tt In ID
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r-I r-1 r-1 r-I r-I a--I e-I a--1 r-I N N N N N N N
0-
Orb
9
N
r-1
LL
0
111
W
a
o_
x
0
z
w
a
CL
a
C
O
a+
u
3
M
O
L
a
a
a
LL
ri 00 M a• O O O Ln O O O O O w
00 O � LY O N ri V? ' * V' lli n
c-I v-I O F V} VF V)• V} Nf -(n _ V}
ri V>• ri V? V4 i4
hA
=
0 0 m in
0 0 0 0 0 zh
+O+ _ 4Z
C
O r-i ri i�
M M O LO 0 I�
V7• y/}
Q
4 VN} V}
i M re-i-I �
VT
V} V}
_(A
W
x
fE
i+
4+
Nr-1
ri N r-i
ri ri ri r-I ri N
Y
U
OA
N \
V 3
*'
Y i
Q
O v n U
U Y
C \
L �
.V O. Ov v i .0 O O
N b4 o
4) N N
U U co co
G N L.L H M G
d
m m m m m m m m m m
d
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I-
w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°
D
N
ri
Li
0
w
W
Q
d
x
E
Z
W
a
a
a
J
N
C
O
u
v
3
-o
O
L
a
d
LL
rl N 00 W o O O^ O rn oo 00 o O Wf
M O N Lr N - c--i V). Cf' [t �--I n c-I
M in in V4 to
V} V}
� C tlo C o H r-i n mM 0w0 O Z ON r,
GEL Y Ln N V). V� V? � V?
V.).
A M M i
.0 7 in VT V}
VI N
06
X
f0
Y
Y
Y1
O) � -i a-i N .--I a--1 a-1 c-I c-1 c-I N
cr
U
Q
OA
7
E Q
W \
3
V) h
u) U @ U_ 0
p + U
u
p: cLa co �, 4Y-+ v cn 0
v m v oo L s o
E E+ O u a� v N
Gl
d
X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F- F- F- F- F-
E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4.
O
C-16
N
LL
O
r,
W
Q
d
X
0
Z
w
CL
a
Q
c
O
u
O
.a
O
I-
0
CL
000 0 lM0 N W O O N O O
l0 C l0 L/I 00 ri O N
ri 1-1 O V1 tn in M r.
r-I tn
in th
r f0
45
-
C
0 0 1
O O N
0 0
O O
0 C. a0
m d' r-I
O N
=
t!1
tn H
T
_
W
N
x
f0
Y
y�
41
ri N c-1
ri a-i
t
OJ
w
.2900000
2 N H F F H
E i-1 N M d' V1
0 0 0 0 0 0
41
N
ri
W
0
00
W
a
a
X
0
z
W
a
a
Q
m
00
T
N
41
�
t
i
O
Q
�
O
3
E
v
v
c
O
O
�
v
O
C.
L
0 f0
_ O
Q
u
of LJ
u
w
E
++ O
Q Y
(u
G
W 2
s
N W
OJ
w
.2900000
2 N H F F H
E i-1 N M d' V1
0 0 0 0 0 0
41
N
ri
W
0
00
W
a
a
X
0
z
W
a
a
Q
T
to
O
a
0
M
u
3
'O
O
a
0
a
oo m Ln x o o Ln o
00 I-t -;T LY O 00 —1 Ln
V?
f0 f0 := O O Ln O
0 a O O z c-i OA
Q J2 � � -t4
t 3 V}
N N
X
M
Y
Y
ya q C j a-i i-i
cr
N
R
L
t
Q
a)
Q
3 �
L
C L
O O u
y- a1
CL m 0 a%
C
L
0) Y 0 0
D w 2 s N
d
p 0 0 0 0
H H H H
Y
m C o c o
tm-
E SH 't
w 0 cN m 0 0
41
Cn
T
N
T-1
LL
0
0)
LU
Q
a
X
0
Z
LU
a
a
Q
4Z
0
M
C
M
O
S
Y
u
m
.Q
m
a
O O O X o o o
N I� r O W O O L'
ri co I, O M I;zf
LCl7' i/} lrn icn iA Ln
m m
-
O
O O
a °
�
°o
o °
L o
O
m d
r
m
in in
1n N
in
ca
x
m
4+
+;
c
O
m c cA
E o c
O i
O
m '2
o O
a E
cu `o `o
c v w
o N v
CL u C C
m m m
V1 >` O O
O a Q Q
d
M
m m m
Y
m m m m
E ri N m
d o 0 0
0.
1�
U '
N
r-I
U-
0
O
r-I
w
U
Q
a
X
Z
w
o_
a
Q
O O O X O
0 M m 0 O LY O
M V'� M rf
in V? to
M c ce O
_ i+ C
CL 41
t 3 L?
H H
ca
X
m
Y
Y
IA
V
C
O
7
..O
H
i
0
C �
O N
i+ V
r
`u 3
� o
o a
a
C
cM
G H
0
.G
H
0
0
Y
S� CO
`
U
d
t-I
0
O
�o
`9
e
0 0 0 X O
O
Ln Ln O 00 W 00
to '4 Ln Ln
i/? V). L?
+W+ r- 4-
C O
0 FL 0
M
O
t 3
V1
-c
01!
X
f6
Y
Y
d
i.+y
V
W
Q
cc
Y
T
i
4!
Y
7
E
O
O N
a �
`v 3
� o
o Q
d
o
co
v
Y �
f0 co
G H
d
L d O
Q �
Housing Production Plan
Town of Reading
Prepared for the Town of Reading
By: Elizabeth Rust, ECR Enterprises and
Jennifer M. Goldson, AICP, IM Goldson community preservation + planning
with the assistance from the Town of Reading: Jean Delios, Assistant Town
Manager; Julie Mercier, Community Development Director; Kim Honetschlager,
GIS Administrator, and Ryan Percival, Town Engineer
Date: January 16, 2018
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 1
�jc�
F 1; l
Introduction........................................................................................................ ............................... 3
ExecutivcSummary .......................................................................................... ...............................
5
Summary of Demographic and Housing Characteristics ................................. ..............................6
Goals for Affordable Housing Production ............................................................. ..............................7
Section1: Comprehensive Housing Needs Assessment ....................... ...............................
9
A. Demographic Analysis ............................................................................................ ..............................9
1. Total and Projected Populations: ................................................................................................................. 9
2. Household Types: ................................................................................................................................................ 9
3. School Enrollment and Projections .............................................................................. .............................13
4. Race and Ethnicity: ...........................................................................................................................................
14
S. Residents with Disabilities ............................................................................................... .............................14
6 Income Analysis: .................................................................................................................................................
15
B. Housing Stock Analysis ......................................................................................... .............................19
1. Housing Units and Types ................................................................................................... .............................19
2. Housing Tenure ..................................................................................................................... .............................19
3. Year Housing Units Constructed ................................................................................... .............................20
4. Housing Market Conditions: .........................................................................................................................
20
S. Housing Affordability Analysis: ...................................................................................................................
22
6. M.G.L. Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing Inventory ................................................ .............................26
C. Affordable Housing Efforts ................................................................................. ...............................
29
1. Adoption of Smart Growth Districts ( 40R) ................................................................ .............................30
2. Challenges and Constraints to the Development of Affordable Housing ...... .............................32
Section 2: Affordable Housing Goals and Strategies .......................... ...............................
41
HousingGoals ................................................................................................................ .............................41
HousingStrategies ....................................................................................................... .............................42
Reaching10% ................................................................................................................ .............................42
RegulatoryStrategies ............................................................................................... ...............................
43
LocalInitiative Strategies ....................................................................................... ...............................
48
ActionPlan .................................................................................................................... ...............................
55
Appendices........................................................................................................ ............................... 56
HousingProfile .............................................. :................................................................................ 56
InteragencyPolicy .......................................................................................... ............................... 57
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 2
5O-
Introduction
A Housing Production Plan (HPP), defined in regulations at 760 CMR 56.03 and administered
by the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), is a proactive strategy
for planning and developing affordable housing. The HPP identifies the housing needs of a
community and the goals and strategies it will use to identify and achieve or maintain the
10% threshold mandated by M.G.L. Chapter 40B. The Town's status relating to this 10%
threshold is documented on the Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI), also administered by
DHCD.
This HPP Program enables municipalities to develop a strategy to meet its affordable housing
needs in a manner consistent with the MGL Chapter 40B statute, produce housing units in
accordance with that plan, and demonstrate progress towards their affordable housing
production. By taking a proactive approach in the adoption of a HPP, cities and towns are
much more likely to achieve both their affordable housing and community planning goals.
HPPs give communities that are under the 10% threshold of Chapter 40B but are making
steady progress in producing affordable housing on an annual basis, more control over
comprehensive permit applications for a specified period of time. HPPs give communities
over the 10% threshold a framework to maintain the statutory minima in accordance with
local needs and community goals.
The Town of Reading places great importance on planning for affordable housing through
the HPP process. The Town of Reading's Housing Plan was approved on May 15, 2013 and
will expire after a 5 -year term on May 15, 2018, and as such, the Town of Reading has
updated the Housing Production Plan ( "HPP ") in accordance with 760 CMR 56.03(4).
Housing Production Plans can create a safe harbor for a community. When a municipality
has a certified plan, decisions on comprehensive permit applications by the Zoning Board of
Appeals (ZBA) to deny or approve with conditions will be deemed "consistent with local
needs" under MGL Chapter 40B.
Reading has secured a two -year safe harbor certification from the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) for the period
beginning on February 23, 2017 to February 22, 2019 as a result of meeting its planned
production efforts. As summarized below, a municipality may request that the DHCD certify
its compliance with an approved HPP if it has created the required number of SHI Eligible
Housing units in a calendar year.
Housing Production Plans are certified by the following process, as identified in the
regulations:
• Prepare the HPP: In accordance with the regulations, write the plan, including a
public process, and have the plan adopted'by the Board of Selectmen and
Community Planning and Development Commission,
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 3
�3
Approve the HPP: DHCD approves the plan,
Certify the HPP: Communities may seek DHCD certification of the HPP (safe harbor), if
in a calendar year, affordable units (AFU's) are created as follows:
• One -year safe harbor_ Create at least 0.5% of the total number of housing
units in Reading (48 for Reading)
• Two -year safe harbor — Create at least 1.0% of the total number of housing
units in Reading (96 for Reading)
Renew the HPP: The term of the HPP is five years from approval.
The Town of Reading Public Services Department updated the Housing Plan with future
planned housing, completed projects, Census data and other demographic information as
required by DHCD. DHCD regulates Housing Production Plans under 760 CMR 56.00,
promulgated on February 22, 2008. HPPs are designed to create strategies to meet
affordable housing needs that are consistent with Chapter 40B requirements. In order for
the HPP to qualify for approval from DHCD, the plan must be comprised of three
components: (1) Comprehensive Needs Assessment; (2) Affordable Housing Goals; and (3)
Implementation Strategies.
(1) Comprehensive Needs Assessment —an evaluation of a community's demographics,
housing stock, population trends, and housing needs. The assessment will include a
review of the development capacity, as well as constraints, to ensure that current
and future needs can be met.
(2) Affordable Housing Goals — defined housing goals consistent with both community
character and the local housing market. This section will identify strategies that can
be used to produce the required number of annual housing units needed to obtain
the 10% statutory minima and safe harbor certification from DHCD.
(3) Implementation Strategies — targeted areas for future development that will enable a
community to reach the affordable housing goals. This may include identifying sites
for development or redevelopment, investigating re- zoning options to encourage the
production of affordable housing units, and establishing other tools such as regional
collaborations that can foster the development of affordable housing.
Once a community has achieved safe harbor certification, within 15 days of the opening of
the local hearing for a Comprehensive Permit application, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA)
shall provide written notice to the Applicant, with a copy to DHCD, that a denial of the
permit or the imposition of conditions or requirements would be consistent with local needs,
the grounds that it believes have been met, and the factual basis for that position, including
any necessary supporting documentation. If the Applicant wishes to challenge the ZBA's
assertion, it must do so by providing written notice to the Department, with a copy to the
Board, within 15 days of its receipt of the ZBA's notice, including any documentation to
support its position. DHCD shall thereupon review the materials provided by both parties
and issue a decision within 30 days of its receipt of all materials. The ZBA shall have the
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 4
burden of proving satisfaction of the grounds for asserting that a denial or approval with
conditions would be consistent with local needs, provided, however, that any failure of the
DHCD to issue a timely decision shall be deemed a determination in favor of the
municipality. This procedure shall pause the requirement to terminate the hearing within
180 days.
Affordable Housing Highlights Since 2013 HPP
• Gateway Smart Growth District (GSGD) under Chapter 40R: Continued support for
the completion of the Reading Woods project with 43 affordable units located in the
Gateway Smart Growth District (GSGD)
• Implemented the Metro North Regional Housing Services Office as the lead
community to administer affordable requirements, including preserving existing
affordable units, along with North Reading, Saugus and Wilmington.
• Downtown Smart Growth District (DSGD) under Chapter 40R Expanded: In April 2017,
Town Meeting voted to expand the DSGD to include the remainder of the downtown
in the Business B underlying zoning district.
• 40B Project Approval: In February 2017, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) approved
a 68 -unit rental housing project known as Reading Village, proposed next to the
Reading Commuter Rail Station downtown. In July 2017, the ZBA approved a 20 -unit
rental housing project known as Schoolhouse Commons, as an adaptive re -use of the
former school building associated with St. Agnes church.
• 40R Project Approval: In September 2017, Postmark Square, an adaptive re -use of
the historic Reading Post Office, received 40R Plan Review approval from the Reading
Community Planning and Development
Commission (CPDC). Postmark Square will
be a mixed -use project with 50 residential
units, 10 of which will be affordable. In
November 2017, the CPDC approved
another mixed -use 40R project at 20 -24
Gould Street. This project includes 55
rental units, at least 14 of which will be
affordable.
Through all of its planning efforts, Reading
has added 157 units (and 1.64 %) to its
Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI).
Executive Summary
WILNWNGTON
WOBURN
NOR1H READING
WMEFIELD
The Town of Reading continues to be a desirable I `W
place to live and work. It is characterized by a traditional New England center, surrounded by
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 5
LYNNFIELD
family- oriented neighborhoods. It has evolved over time from largely an outlying community
with a strong agricultural presence to a modern residential suburb just north of Boston.
Reading's proximity to Boston has added to its attractiveness. The Town has worked to
shape housing development and growth that complements the character of the community.
The HPP identifies tools for Reading to use that will encourage the development of
affordable housing while maintaining the distinct town character.
Summary of Demographic and Housing Characteristics
The following summarizes the notable findings from the needs assessment section of the
Housing Production Plan.
The Bottom Line: Reading has grown since 2000, with increases in population, the number of
households, and housing units. In particular, the growth of the 65+ population is noted and it
is projected to continue. Reading's median income has risen significantly, but 25% of the
population is low- income, and 30% of households are housing cost - burdened. Much of
Reading's housing stock is out of reach for lower income households. There is a need for
more affordable housing, particularly rental housing and housing targeted at the 65+
demographic.
Population
• As of the 2010 US Census, the population of Reading is 24,747, an increase of 4.4%
since 2000. In 2010, the largest age group of Reading's population was 35 -54 year
olds (35% of total population). There was an almost 30% increase in the 60+ year -
old grouping.
• As of the 2010 Census, 36% of Reading's households have children under 18 years
old, and 26% have persons age 65 +.
The median age increased from 39.1 years old in 2000 to 41.6 years old in 2010.
• Racial make -up is predominantly white, with 93.5% of the population; 4.2% of the
population is Asian; 1.5% of the population is Hispanic or Latino.
Income
• In 2015, Reading's median household income was $107,654; a 40% increase from
1999, and significantly more than the Boston - Cambridge - Quincy Metro Area
($98,500) or the state as a whole ($68,563). (ACS)
• An estimated 26% of Reading households have incomes at or below 80% of AMI
(Low /Moderate Income).
• 3% of Reading's population is below the poverty line (annual income below $24,600
for a household of 4), much lower than Middlesex County (8.4 %) and Massachusetts
(11.6 %).
• The 2016 median price of single family homes in Reading was $525,000. The 2016
median price of all homes, including condos, was $479,600. After a dip in prices
during the national recession in the mid- 2000's, housing prices have been rising
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 6
steadily since 2012 and are now the highest they have ever been.
Of the 7,405 of Reading households who own their homes, 29.4% are cost - burdened
(spending over 30% of their income on housing), while 33.1% of Reading's renters
are cost - burdened. 71% of Reading's low- income households are cost - burdened.
Housing Stock, Sales and Prices
• Nearly 80% of Reading's housing units are owner occupied, with 20% renter
occupied.
• The Town's housing stock remains primarily single - family at 75% of total housing
units. The remaining 25% is: 7.5% of units are in two to four family buildings, 7% of
units in 5 -19 unit buildings, and 10.5% of units in multi - family buildings with 20 or
more units.
• 9.35% (896 units) of Reading's total housing stock is counted as affordable on the
State's Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI), which falls short of the State's minimum
affordability goal of 10% by 62 units.
• Reading's 2016 median sale price of $525,000 requires an annual income of
approximately $140,918, over $33,000 higher than Reading's median household
income of $107,654.
• Based on the median sale price, Reading's ownership affordability gap is $125,000
for median income households, and $263,000 for low income households.
• Based on current median rents, Reading rentals are out of reach for low income
households. In addition, there are not very many rentals available.
Goals for Affordable Housing Production
Reading has identified housing goals that are the most appropriate and most realistic for
the community. These goals were developed by reviewing previous studies and
documents including the Reading Housing Plan of 2013, analyzing the current housing
situation in Reading, and through public input from town citizens and officials.
The goals are as follows:
1. Create SHI- eligible housing units
Support the creation of affordable housing units, both rental and ownership units, that
will count on the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory to reach the state's 10%
affordable housing goal while also focusing on the specific housing needs of Reading
residents.
2. Support Reading's low income residents
Support the housing needs of Reading's most vulnerable residents including families,
seniors, and individuals with disabilities, especially households with extremely -low and
very -low incomes.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 7
5�'
3. Preserve existing affordable housing
Preserve existing affordable housing to ensure they remain affordable and qualify for
listing on the subsidized housing inventory.
4. Proactively manage growth
Manage growth and proactively plan to mitigate impacts of new housing and mixed -use
development to preserve and enhance the quality and character of existing residential
neighborhoods and commercial areas and to provide a greater diversity of housing
options to support housing needs.
S. Support affordable rental properties and tenants
Support owners of affordable rental units to ensure appropriate maintenance and
upkeep and seek opportunities to increase affordable housing units within these
properties.
6. Strengthen education and local relationships
Educate the public on affordable housing issues and strengthen relationships with other
local entities and regional partners on the topic.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 8
5 �S
The Housing Needs Assessment examines demographic and population data and trends from
available sources such as the Census, regional planning agencies, media, etc., that illustrates
the current demographic and housing characteristics for the Town of Reading. Assessing
needs will provide the framework for the development of housing production strategies to
meet affordable housing goals.
A. Demographic Analysis
The purpose of analyzing demographics is to look at quantitative and qualitative trends and
use the data for future planning. This section provides an overview of Reading's
demographics and how they have changed over time. As the demographics change in the
future, the housing needs of the community can also change. The size and type of families as
well as householder age and economic status all influence the needs of the community. The
analysis of the Housing Needs Assessment will provide a guide to identify goals and
strategies for this plan.
1. Total and Projected Populations:
In the last ten years, the Town of Reading has only had a 4.4% increase in population. Over
the next 10 years, the population is expected to experience a slight decline before having a
minor increase by 2030. The total number of households in Reading has increased from,
2000 and is expected to only have minor increases through 2030. Similar to the national
trend, Reading's average household size has decreased in the past ten years. In 1999 the
average household size was 2.84 and decreased to 2.71 in 2010. Smaller household size is
consistent with communities experiencing slow but steady growth.
Table 1: Total and Projected Populations: 1990 -2030
Year
I Population
% Change
Households
% Change
1990
22,539
--
7,932
2000
23,708
5%
8,688
10%
2010
24,747
4.4%
9,305
7.0%
2020
24,342
-1.6%
9,707
6.0%
2030
25,189
3.4%
10,346
6.5%
Source: 2010 US Census and MAPC Metro Future 2035 Update, March 2011
2. Household Types:
There were a total of 9,305 households in Reading in 2010, with 72% family households, and 28%
non - family households in Reading. The non - family, which includes single person households or
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 9
5��
persons living in the same household who are not related. The presence of a mix of family and non -
family households indicates that there is likely a need for a variety of housing types that may not fit
the traditional single - family home model, The data reflects 2,620 non- family households. This may
suggest a need for affordability options for non - family households who may have special housing
needs.
Table 2: Households Types: 2010
Household Type
2010
Percentage
Family Households:
6,685
71.8%
With own Children under 18 years
3,205
34.4
Married, Husband -wife family:
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
With own children under 18
5,695
2,791
61.2 ...............................
30.0
Male householder, no wife present
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
With own children under 18 years
2,43
89
2.6 ...............................
1.0
Female householder, no husband
present
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
With own children under 18 years
747
325
8.0
...............................
3.5
Nonfamily households:
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Householder living alone
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................-......................................................................
Householder 65 and over living alone
2,620
2,189
962
28.2 ...............................
23.5 ...............................
10.3
Average household size
2.64
Average family size
3.18
Total Households
9,305
Source: 2010 US Census
Other important factors to consider when assessing housing needs are household size and
the age composition of residents. Household size is an important factor as it can help
determine the demand for certain types of housing. Similarly, analyzing the age composition
of a community over time can help develop trends for housing needs. For example,
established families with children living at home have different housing needs than an empty
nester and or someone who is over 65.
MetroFuture is a regional plan developed by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPQ
that addresses future growth in the Boston metropolitan region until 2030. Figure 1
summarizes Reading's age composition from 2000 and includes MetroFuture projections
until 2030. Table 3 illustrates this in more detail.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 10
Figure 1: Age Composition of Residents, 2000 - 2030
Source: Zulu US Census and IVIANc, metrol-uture Zuss upaate, iviarcn turn
Table 3: Current and Projected Age Distribution of Residents: 2000 -2030
Source: 2010 US Census and MAPC MetroFuture 2035 Update, March 2011
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 11
Change
2000
2010
2020
2030
from
Age
2010
Cohorts
2030
%
%
%
Number
Number
Change
Number
Change
Number
Change
Oto9
years
3,464
14.6
3,297
13.3
-4.8
2,717
11.2
-17.5
2,865
11.4
5.4%
-13.1
10 to 19
years
3,141
13.2
3,349
13.5
6.2
2,947
12.1
-12.0
2,940
11.7
-0.23
-12.2
20 to 24
years
830
3.5
1,053
4.3
26.9
1,012
4.2
-3.9
905
3.6
-10.6
-14.1
25 to 34
years
2,671
11.3
2,433
9.8
-9.0
2,627
10.8
8.0
2,522
10.0
-4.0
3.7
35 to 59
years
9,309
39.3
9,661
39.0
3.8
8,525
35.0
-11.8
6,613
32.4
-22.5
-31.6
60 to 74
years
2,676
11.3
3,134
12.7
17.1
4,816
19.8
53.7
5,353
21.3
11.2
71
75+ years
1,617
6.8
1,820
7.4
12.6
1,699
6.9
-6.6
2,438
9.7
43.5
34
Total
Population
23,708
100
24,747
100
24,343
100
25,189
100
Source: 2010 US Census and MAPC MetroFuture 2035 Update, March 2011
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 11
MAPC's MetroFuture plan suggests that Reading's population will have a minor increase in
overall population for the next 20 years. However it is anticipated that a significant change
in the cumpusition of the age groups will occur. Based on the MetroFuture projections, the
younger age groups are expected to decline by 2030; ages 0 -9 (- 13.1 %), ages 10 -19
(- 12.2 %), ages 20 -24 (- 14.1 %) and ages 35 -59 (- 31.6 %). However, the 35 -59 age group is
expected to remain the largest age group in Reading and is projected to comprise 32.4% of
the population in 2030, with the 60 -75+ age group following close behind at approximately
31% of Reading's population in 2030.
In 2010 the largest age cohort in Reading was those aged 35 -59 (39 %). People in this age
group are likely to be in an established family household with a larger home than the
younger age groups. The next concentration of residents was a much younger age group;
those aged 10 -19 years (13.5 %) and aged 0 -9 years (13.3 %). These age groups, with the
exception of 0 -9 years, experienced an increase in population between 2000 and 2010. The
elderly population also increased from 2000 to 2010. Persons aged 60 -74 experienced a
population increase of 12.7% and those aged 75+ increased by 7.4 %.
The data shows that the second largest age group in 2030 will be those aged 60 -74 with an
increase of 71% in 2030 from 2010. Even though the childhood age groups of 0 -9 and 10 -19
are expected to decrease by 2030, collectively they will make up almost one - fourth of the
population (23.1 %). Adults who will be aged 25 -34 are expected to grow slowly by 2030, only
increasing by 3.6 %. The young adult population (aged 20 -24) is expected to decrease by 2030
and become the smallest age group in Reading.
By contrast, the elderly population (ages 75 +) which comprises 9.7% of Reading residents is
expected to increase by 34% in the next 20 years. When combined with the 60 -74 age group
(21.3 %), the 60 -75+ age group will consist of approximately 31% of Reading's population.
This is not surprising as the "baby- boomer" population is contained within this age group. It
is important to be aware of this trend as this population tends to prefer smaller housing
units with less upkeep. Elderly residents could have special housing needs such as nursing
homes and assisted living facilities.
Adults aged 20 to 24 years and aged 25 to 34 years are expected to make up approximately
13.6% of the population in 2030. These age groups are more likely to make up younger
families who will purchase a starter home that is smaller and more affordable. In the next
twenty years, as the 35 -59 age group moves into the next age group, the stock of larger
traditional family homes (detached, single - family units) may become more available. This
may allow the younger population to trade up or take advantage of the larger homes.
The analysis of population projections is vital for planning and determining future housing
needs. With the expected increase in the older population, planning efforts should consider
the need for smaller housing units with less maintenance, senior housing or assisted living
facilities. As the middle -age population shifts into the older age groups the demand for
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 12
larger, traditional family housing units will be reduced and will increase the opportunity for
younger families looking to trade -up to more of those homes now available.
3. School Enrollment and Projections
Figure 2 below illustrates the public school enrollments from 2010 to 2018. Overall, Reading
school enrollment has remained fairly stable over this timeframe. From 2010 to 2018 total
enrollment decreased by 5.51 %. Enrollment decreased across the board as depicted in the
table below.
The Town has not updated its school enrollment projections. The 2013 HPP included
projections on enrollment which were available at that time. Figure 2 provides eight years of
enrollment data which is the only data that is available for inclusion in the updated 2018
HPP.
Figure 2: Reading Student Enrollment
Source: Reading School Committee FY 2018 School Budget
*Reading School Department as of 1011117
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 13
5��3
PK, K
Elementary
Middle
High
Total
2010 -11
438
1692
1083
1246
4459
2011 -12
419
1746
1050
1262
4477
2012 -13
407
1736
1055
1285
4483
2013 -14
390
1722
1013
1307
4432
2014 -15
1 417
1670
.1069
1 1251
4407
2015 -16
413
1691
1020
1270
4394
2016 -17
358
1675
1038
1270
4341
2017 -18*
387
1552
1039
1235
4213
+/- since
2010
- 11.64%
-8.27%
-4.06%
-.88%
-5.51%
Source: Reading School Committee FY 2018 School Budget
*Reading School Department as of 1011117
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 13
5��3
Figure 2 illustrates public school enrollments from 2010 -2011 through 2017 -2018 (the
current school year). Overall, Reading school enrollment has remained fairly stable in recent
years with an overall decrease of 5.51 %. Although total population projections predict a
continuing decrease in school aged children by the year 2030, this age group will Still
comprise 23.1% of the total population.
4. Race and Ethnicity:
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the majority of Reading residents are white (93.5 %) and
the largest racial minority group in Reading is the Asian population (4.2 %) followed by the
Hispanic or Latino population at 1.5 %. There were no respondents in the 2010 Census that
identified themselves as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islanders.
S. Residents with Disabilities
According to the 2011 -2015 American Community.Survey,
2,266 people in Reading reported living with a long duration condition or disability. Of those
people, approximately 57% were aged 65 and older. As this population continues to
increase, it is assumed that the number of disabled individuals within this age group will also
rise. Many disabled residents require special housing needs, including certain
accommodations for housing design (physical accessibility) and reasonable access to goods
and services. Consideration for these types of housing options is necessary, as the demand
will continue to increase.
Table 5: Residents with Disabilities
Source: 2011 -2015 American Community Survey
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 14
� C �\'V\
Percent of All
Age
Number
Disabled
Residents
5 -17
221
9.7
18 -64
754
33.3
65+
1,291
57
Total
2,266
100
Population
of Disabled
Residents
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 14
� C �\'V\
6 Income Analysis:
1. Median Household Income:
In 2015 Reading's median household income of $107,654 represented an increase of
39.7% from 1999. Median household income in Reading was one of the highest among
adjacent neighboring communities and exceeded the median for the Boston -Cam bridge -
Quincy Metro area, as well as the median for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and
the US. All the adjacent neighboring communities also experienced increases in
household income from 1999.
Table 6: Median Household Income: 1999 and 2015
Town
1999
2015
Increase 1999 -
2010
Reading
77,059
107,654
39.7
North Reading
76,962
123,103
60.2
Wilmington
70,652
100,862
42.8
Woburn
54,897
78,750
43.5
Stoneham
56,650
78,099
37.9
Wakefield
66,117
85,573
29.4
Lynnfield
80,626
118,828
47.4
Boston - Cambridge-
Quincy, MA Metro Area'
62,700
98,500
57.1
Massachusetts
50,502
68,563
35.8
US
41,994
53,889
28.3
Source: 2000 US Census & 2011 -2015 American Community Survey
2. Median Income of Senior Households:
Although Reading's overall population has experienced a large increase in income in the
past 15 years and is earning quite a bit more than some of the surrounding communities
(as displayed in Table 6 above), Reading's 65+ households are not doing nearly as well.
Unfortunately, data is not available for 1999, but the recent data for 2015 is informative
on its own. Reading's senior households have significantly lower incomes than
households overall. Senior households also earn less than most of the surrounding
communities and just slightly more than Massachusetts and the country overall. In fact,
households earning the median senior income of $46,617 would qualify for affordable
housing based on the income limit guidelines described in Section 4 below, "Area Median
Income." This data makes clear that affordable housing for the senior population will be
a significant need in the coming years due to the projected increase in the senior
1 This income data comes from HUD's 1999 income limits for the Boston - Cambridge - Quincy, MA Metro Area
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 15
5��5
population in Reading as demonstrated in Figure 1 and Table 3 above, and due to the
limited income of this group.
Table 7: Median Income of 65+ Households: 2015
Town
2015
Reading
46,617
North Reading
59,739
Wilmington
57,325
Woburn
49,504
Wakefield
54,567
Lynnfield
54,242
Massachusetts
45,893
us
42,113
Source: 2011 -2015 American Community Survey
3. Income Distribution:
Table 8 identifies and compares the distribution of Reading household incomes from
1990 and 2010. In 1999, nearly half of all households (48.2 %) earned less than the
household median of $77,059. Of the households earning over the median income in
1999, 34% of households earned more than $100,000. Reading households earned much
more in 2010. Approximately 49.5% earned more than $100,000 which was just over the
median income of $99,130. Of those earning more than $100,000 approximately 13%
earned more than $200,000, a 135% increase from 2000. By 2015, the number of
households in the highest income brackets increased even further. However, there were
also increases in three of the lower income brackets ($15,000- $24,999, $25,000 - $34,999,
and $35,000 - $49,999) between 2010 and 2015. Approximately 2,064 households (22.5%
of all households) earned less than $50,000 in 2015.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 16
S���D
Table 8: Income Distribution: 1999, 2010, 2015
Income Category
1999
2010
2015
% Change
Percent
Percent
Percent
1999 -2015
Households
Households
Households
Less than $10,000
286
3.3
231
2.4
218
2.4
-23.8%
$10,000 to
$14,999
351
4.0
251
2.8
224
2.4
-36.2%
$15,000 to
$24,999
564
6.5
386
4.3
446
4.9
-20.9%
$25,000 to
$34,999
590
6.8
470
5.3
553
6.0
-6.3%
$35,000 to
786
9.1
620
7.0
623
6.8
-20.7%
$49,999
$50,000 to
$74,999
1,608
18.5
1,214
13.7
974
10.6
-39.4%
$75,000 to
1474
17.0
1,327
15.0
1,158
12.6
-21.4%
$99,999
$100,00 to
$149,999
1,892
22.0
2,158
24.3
2,250
24.5
18.9%
$150,000 to
$199,999
626
7.2
1,086
12.2
1,345
14.7
114.9%
$200,000 or more
492
5.7
1,157
13.0
1,377
15.0
179.9%
Total Households
8,669
100.0
8,882
100.0
i 9,168
100.0 1
Lj
Source: 2000 US Census, 2006 -2010 & 2011 -2015 American Community Survey
4. Area Median Income
One way to determine the need for affordable housing is to evaluate the number of
households that qualify as low /moderate income by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD). The Area Median Income (AMI) is a number that is
determined by the median family income of a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and
thresholds established by HUD are a percentage of AMIs. Reading is included in the
Boston - Cambridge - Quincy Metropolitan Fair Market Rent (FMR) area. FMRs are gross
rent estimates that include the rent plus the cost of tenant -paid utilities2. Section 8 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 authorizes housing assistance to lower income
families and the cost of rental homes are restricted by the FMR thresholds established by
HUD.
2 U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development Office of Policy Development & Research
July 2007 (rev.)
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 17
Typically, thresholds are 80 %, 50% and 30% of AMI and vary depending on the household
size. HUD defines low /moderate income as follows:
• "low Income" - households earning below 80% of AMI;
• "very low income" households earning below 50% of AMI;
• "extremely low income" -households earning lower than 30% of AMI.
Table 9: Income Limits by Household Size, Boston - Cambridge - Quincy, Reading: 2017
Income Limit
Median
Income
1
2
3
4
5
6
Area
Income
Limit
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Person
Category
Low
$54,750
$62,550
$70,350
$78,150
$84,450
$90,700
(80 %)
Income
Limit
Very Low
$36,200
$41,400
$46,550
$51,700
$55,850
$60,000
Boston-
Cambridge-
(50 %)
Quincy
$103,400
Income
Metropolitan
Limit
Extremely
$21,700
$24,800
$27,900
$31,000
$33,500
$36,000
MSA
Low
(30 %)
Income
Limit
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development http://www.huduser.orqloorto
shown in Table 9, the AMI for the Boston - Cambridge - Quincy FMR area, effective April
19, 2017, is $103,4003. Using this number, the income thresholds for various household
sizes were determined. For a 3- person household, household incomes lower than
$27,900 are considered extremely low income, household incomes lower than $46,550
are considered very low income, and household incomes lower than $70,350 are
considered low income. The Reading income category data presented in Table 8 is not
available by household size, but assuming a 3- person household, as of the 2015 ACS,
there were probably about 3,000, or almost one -third of households, that were likely
eligible for subsidized housing according to HUD.
3 AMI data for 2017 was used in this plan to compare to 2011 -2015 ACS income data. AN data for 2017 can be
found at: www.huduser.org /portaldatasets
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 18
�) U��
B. Housing Stock Analysis
1. Housing Units and Types
The predominant housing type in Reading continues to be single - family homes. In 2000,
there were approximately 8,823 total housing units, 74.3% of which were 1 -unit, detached
homes (single - family homes). Only 6.8% of housing structures contained 20 or more units;
however this type of housing was the second largest in Reading in 2000. Similarly, in 2015
single unit detached homes remained the predominant housing type, though the percentage
of total homes dropped a bit. Meanwhile, the number of housing units in structures with 20
or more units jumped from 601 units (6.8% of total units) in 2000 to 1,027 units (10.6% of
total units) in 2015.
Table 10: Total Number of Housing Units by Structure: 2000 and 2015
Housing Units Per
Structure
2000
2015
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
1 -unit, detached
6,553
74.3
6,827
70.7
1 -unit, attached
257
2.9
395
4.1
2 units
565
6.4
535
5.5
3 or 4 units
246
2.8
192
2.0
5 to 9 units
214
2.4
280
2.9
10 to 19 units
381
4.3
397
4.1
20 or more units
601
6.8
1,027
10.6
Mobile Home
6
0.1
0
0
Total
8,823
100
9,653
100.0
Source: 2000 US Census and 2011 -2015 American Community Survey
2. Housing Tenure
According to the 2000 US Census, there were a total of 8,688 occupied housing units, 82.5%
of which were owner - occupied, and 17.5% of which were renter - occupied. By 2015, the
percentage of owner - occupied housing units decreased to 78.2% and the percentage of
renter - occupied housing units increased to 21.8 %. Section B of this HPP discussed
household types and the prevalence of non - family households in Reading. In particular, ACS
data shows that non - family households, specifically elderly, non - family households are
growing in number. The data also show that non - family households are more likely to be
renters, so these demographic changes could provide some of the reason for the recent
increase in renter - occupied units. The demand for rental housing is likely to continue
increasing as the population continues aging and this aging population is likely to include
many who are looking to down -size or spend less on housing related costs.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 19
3. Year Housing Units Constructed
Reading has a large stuck of olden and historic homes. Over half of the housing units were
constructed prior to 1960 and of that 331 were constructed prior to 1940. There is roughly
an even distribution of units constructed from 1969 to 2000. As these homes contribute to
the town's character, many of them are also in need of repairs and renovations. Many
residents in Reading indicated they have difficulty affording repairs to their homes, which
only adds to the cost burden experienced by some residents4. Multi- generational living is
now an easier option due to recently adopted zoning changes that facilitate creating
accessory dwelling units in single - family homes.
Figure 3: Year Housing Constructed
1990 to
March 2000,
731
1980 to 1989,
904
M 1990 to March 2000
1980 to 1989
f 1970 to
3 x 1979,
{ 1970 to 1979
896
wU 4
1960 to 1969
1940 to 1959
1939 or earlier
Source:201011. Census
4. Housing Market Conditions:
a. Median Selling Prices
Home sales in Reading were impacted by the economic recession of 2007/2008, but have
recovered. Figure 3 indicates the median single - family home price in 2006 was $420,000.
Prices then decreased for a few years culminating in a low point of $400,000 in 2009.
Prices rebounded the following year in 2010, and then dipped again in 2011. However,
single - family home prices have been rising steadily since 2012 with the median price
hitting $525,000 in 2016. Warren Group data shows that single - family home prices have
continued to increase in 2017, with a median price of $595,000 in sales from January
through July 2017.
4 Town of Reading Housing Survey 2012
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 20
Condominium sales followed a similar pattern with a few years of lower prices followed
bya steady increase in prices beginning in2O12.
Figure 4: Median Sales Price of Single-family Homes and Condos 2006-2016
Source: The Warren Group
b. Home Sales
As shown in Figure 4 below, Reading experienced a decrease in the total number of
sales of both single-family homes and condominiums before 2012. Then, in 2012, the
number of sales began to increase at the same time that prices began to increase.
The number of condo sales in particular rose significantly with a jump from 35 condo
sales in 2011 to 103 condo sales in 2012. That number continued to grow and condo
sales reached a high of 174 in 2016. This could be indicative of a demand for more
diverse housing types.
Fieura5: Total Number mfSJnmUe-famnilvHome and Condo Sales 2006-2010
300
»78
255
259 264 251
250
z41
»28
196 20w
195
195
200
150
$4W,000
9
at
$300,000
tmCono
100
91
vi
m Single Family
46
53
Es Condo
so
| 0
$100,000
2006
2007
2008 2009
2010
2011
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
|
2006
2W7
10
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016 |
Source: The Warren Group
b. Home Sales
As shown in Figure 4 below, Reading experienced a decrease in the total number of
sales of both single-family homes and condominiums before 2012. Then, in 2012, the
number of sales began to increase at the same time that prices began to increase.
The number of condo sales in particular rose significantly with a jump from 35 condo
sales in 2011 to 103 condo sales in 2012. That number continued to grow and condo
sales reached a high of 174 in 2016. This could be indicative of a demand for more
diverse housing types.
Fieura5: Total Number mfSJnmUe-famnilvHome and Condo Sales 2006-2010
300
»78
255
259 264 251
250
z41
»28
196 20w
195
195
200
150
9
m Single fimily
tmCono
100
91
46
53
so
| 0
2006
2007
2008 2009
2010
2011
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 21
Source: The Warren Group
Rental Prices:
The cost of rental units is an important factor to consider when evaluating the
housing market. Back in 2000 the median rent in Reading was $739, the second
lowest of all the neighboring communities that abut Reading. By 2015, median rent
increased by 73.5% to $1,282, one of the higher increases amongst neighboring
communities. One possible reason for the substantial rent increase may be due to
the increase in the population group more likely to rent, creating more demand for
rental units. High home prices may also force more households to rent. This trend is
seen in the neighboring communities as well which all experienced substantial
increases in median rent between 2000 and 2015.
Table 11: Median Rent 2000, 2010, 2015 for Reading and Neighboring Comrr
Median Rent
2000
2010
2015
% Change,
2000 to 2015
Reading
739
1,032
1,282
73.5%
North Reading
756
1,289
1,482
96.0%
Wilmington
948
1,567
1,624
71.3%
Woburn
881
1,187
1,331
51.1%
Stoneham
827
1,161
1,289
55.9%
Wakefield
795
1,042
1,203
51.3%
Lynnfield 572 623 1,443 152.3%
Source: 2000 US Census, 2006 -2010, 2011 -2015 American Community Survey
S. Housing Affordability Analysis:
1. Cost Burden
unities
One way to evaluate housing affordability is to examine the ability of households to
pay mortgage or rent as a percentage of annual income. Households who pay 30% or
more of their annual income on housing costs5 are considered to be housing cost -
burdened. Households who pay 50% or more of their income on housing costs are
considered severely burdened. This analysis may help determine how "affordable" it
is to live in a particular community.
The US Census Bureau prepares custom tabulations of American Community Survey
(ACS) data that demonstrate the extent of housing problems and housing needs.
These data are known as the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy or CHAS
data. Table 13 below uses CHAS data to show housing cost burden for renters and
homeowners. Approximately 29.4% of owner - occupied households, and 33.1% of
5 Costs for homes with a mortgage include all forms of debt including deeds of trust, land contracts, home
equity loans, insurance, utilities, real estate taxes, etc. Source: US. Census
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 22
5�aa
renter households are paying more than 30% or more of their annual household
income on housing related costs. Therefore, a total of 2,800 of 9,295 households
(30.1 %) in Reading may have difficulty paying their housing - related costs and are
considered moderately to severely housing cost - burdened.
Table 12: Monthlv Housing Cost as a Percentage of Annual Household Income
Source: 2010 -2014 CHAS data
CHAS data also shows how rent burden impacts households at different income
levels. Table 13 below shows a greater percentage of low- income households are
housing cost - burdened than higher income households. 1,730 of 2,440 (71 %)
households who earn less than 80% AMI are housing cost - burdened. However, only
760 of 6,070 (13 %) households who earn more than 100% AMI are housing cost -
burdened. This indicates a need for more housing in Reading that is affordable to
low- income households so they do not experience such a substantial level of cost
burden.
Table 13: Housing Cost Burden According to Income Level
Household Income
Level
Households
in Reading
<= 30510 of income
spent on housing
>30% to < =50% of
income spent on housing
>50% of income
spent on housing
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Owners
7,405
5,220
70.5%
1,205
16.3%
970
13.1%
Renters
1,890
1,265
66.9%
330
17.5%
295
15.6%
Source: 2010 -2014 CHAS data
CHAS data also shows how rent burden impacts households at different income
levels. Table 13 below shows a greater percentage of low- income households are
housing cost - burdened than higher income households. 1,730 of 2,440 (71 %)
households who earn less than 80% AMI are housing cost - burdened. However, only
760 of 6,070 (13 %) households who earn more than 100% AMI are housing cost -
burdened. This indicates a need for more housing in Reading that is affordable to
low- income households so they do not experience such a substantial level of cost
burden.
Table 13: Housing Cost Burden According to Income Level
Household Income
Level
Spending >30% of
income on
housing costs
Spending >50% of
income on housing
costs
Total
Households
< =30% AMI
550
495
725
>30% - < =50% AMI
705
400
990
>50% - < =80% AMI
475
245
725
>80% - < =100% AMI
315
95
780
>100% AMI
760
35
6,070
Total
2,805
1,270
9,295
Source: 2010 -2014 CHAS data
2. Home Ownership Affordability — Gap Analysis
Another way to measure the affordability of a community is to assess the affordability of
home ownership. To do so, the income of the buyer must be evaluated against the sales
price of the home. The gap between the sales price and the purchasing ability of a
potential home buyer is called the "gap analysis ".
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 23
5�a'�
The median sales price of a single- family home in Reading in 2016 was $525,000. A
household would have to earn approximately $140,9186 to afford such a home. This
income is above Reading's median household income of $107,654 in 2015, and higher
than the area median income of $103,400 by over $37,000. A household only looking to
purchase a condo would still need to earn approximately $125,685 to afford $438,445 —
the 2016 median sales price of a condo in Reading.
A household earning the 2015 median income of Reading of $107,654 can afford a single -
family home priced at about $400,000 resulting in an "affordability gap" of $125,000.
The gap widens for low income households. A 3- person household earning 80% of AMI or
$70,350 could afford a home costing no more than $262,000. A 3- person household
earning 50% of AMI at $46,550 could afford a home costing no more than $173,430.
Table 15 shows the affordability gap in Reading for households at different income levels.
Table 14: Gap Analysis — Single - Family Home
Income Level
Income
Affordable
Gap +/- from Median Sales
Purchase Price
Price
Median Income
$107,654
$400,000
$125,000
Low Income (80 %)
$70,350
$262,000
$263,00
(3- person HH)
Very Low Income (50 %)
$46,550
$173,430
$351,570
(3- person HH)
Source for income limits: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
httn ://www.huduser.orp /portal/
3. Rent
Another measure of housing affordability is whether local rent exceeds HUD - determined
Fair Market Rents (FMR) which were established as guidelines for Section 8 voucher
holders. HUD does not permit voucher holders to rent apartments above the FMR
because HUD has determined the FMR to be a fair and reasonable price for the
geographic area. Table 16 below identifies the FY18 FMRs for the Boston -Cam bridge -
Quincy, MA -NH HUD Metro FMR Area. As Table 12 above shows, the median rent paid by
Reading households in 2015 as reported by the 2011 -2015 ACA was $1,282, indicating
that households are paying less than the FMR for the Boston - Cambridge - Quincy area
(assuming a 1- bedroom). However, the- 2011 -2015 ACS also indicates that 35% of renters
in Reading were paying $1,500 or more in monthly rent, and 11% of renters were paying
more than $2,000 in monthly rent.
6 Figures derived using the DHCD Sales Price Calculator, including a 5% down payment, 30 -year fixed mortgage
at 4.1% interest rate, and Reading's 2017 tax rate.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 24
5�a�
Table 16: Fair Market Rents, Boston - Cambridge Quincy, MA -NH HUD Metro Area
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, http:l /www.huduser.org /portal/
Since ACS data looks at all current renters, including some who may have been renting
for a long time without a rent increase, they do not necessarily paint an accurate picture
of the current rental market. An examination of rental listings on Trulia on September 14,
2017 gives a more accurate assessment. Based on these listings in Table 17 below, we
can see that there is not much available rental housing —there were only 11 listings on
Trulia on September 14t ". In addition, the median rents of homes currently listed are
quite a bit higher than the median rent reported in the ACS, and also significantly higher
than the FMRs for 1, 2, and 3- bedroom units.
Table 17 Reading Units listed for rent on Trulia.com, 9/14/17
Bedroom size
Efficiency
1- Bedroom
2- Bedroom
3- Bedroom
4- Bedroom
Fair
$1,253
$1,421
$1,740
$2,182
$2,370
Market
Rent 2018
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, http:l /www.huduser.org /portal/
Since ACS data looks at all current renters, including some who may have been renting
for a long time without a rent increase, they do not necessarily paint an accurate picture
of the current rental market. An examination of rental listings on Trulia on September 14,
2017 gives a more accurate assessment. Based on these listings in Table 17 below, we
can see that there is not much available rental housing —there were only 11 listings on
Trulia on September 14t ". In addition, the median rents of homes currently listed are
quite a bit higher than the median rent reported in the ACS, and also significantly higher
than the FMRs for 1, 2, and 3- bedroom units.
Table 17 Reading Units listed for rent on Trulia.com, 9/14/17
Bedroom size
Median Rent
1- bedroom units (5 listings)
$1,994
2- bedroom units (4 listings)
$2,462
3- bedroom units (2 listings)
$3,713
Source: Trulia.com, September 14, 2017
Reading households would have to earn over $51,000 to afford the 2015 median rent in
Reading according to the ACS. However, using the current rental listings from Trulia.com,
a household would have to earn $79,680 to afford a one - bedroom at the median price.
Therefore, a 3- person low- income household earning $70,350 would not even be able to
afford a one - bedroom rental at the median price based on recent listings.
Another measure of housing affordability is whether local rent exceeds HUD - determined
Fair Market Rents (FMR) that were established as guidelines for Section 8 voucher
holders. HUD does not permit voucher holders to rent apartment units above the FMR
because HUD has determined the FMR to be a fair and reasonable price for the
geographic area. In Figure 17 below, the upward trend reflects the annual adjustment
factor intended to account for rental housing market demands. Given the constraints on
the Greater Boston rental housing market, rising FMR's are unsurprising and point to the
need for more rental housing at multiple price points. Although HUD determines a
certain level of rent in an area to be fair, FMR's do not take into account household
income, so even an apartment at the FMR is not necessarily affordable to people at all
levels of income.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal
Page 25
5�a5
6. M.G.L. Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing Inventory
Under M.G.L. Chapter 406, affordable housing units are defined as housing that is
developed or operated by a public or private entity and reserved by deed restriction for
income - eligible households earning at or below 80% of the AMI. In addition, all
marketing and placement efforts follow Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing guidelines
per the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).
Housing that meets these requirements, if approved by DHCD, is added to the subsidized
housing inventory (SHI). Chapter 40B allows developers of low- and moderate - income
housing to obtain a comprehensive permit to override local zoning and other restrictions
if less than 10% of a community's housing is included on the SHI.
A municipality's SHI fluctuates with new development of both affordable and market -
rate housing. The percentage is determined by dividing the number of affordable units by
the total number of year -round housing units according to the most recent decennial
Census. As the denominator increases, or if affordable units are lost, more affordable
units must be produced to reach, maintain, or exceed the 10% threshold.
Within the past 6 years, Reading has made great progress with increasing the number of
affordable units within the Town. According to the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory
(SHI), approximately 9.35% of year -round housing units in Reading are considered
affordable as of December 2017.
Table 18 below illustrates the status of subsidized housing in Reading from March 2004
to December 2017.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 26
t a�
Table 18: Reading SHI Units
Time Period
Total SHI
Units
Difference in Units
from Previous Period
Percent
Affordable
March 2004
682
NA
7.74%
June 2011
684
2
7.14%
December 2017
896
212
9.35%
The 212 increase in units is comprised of:
•
20 -24 Gould Street
55 units
•
Postmark Square
10 units
•
Schoolhouse Commons
20 units
•
Reading Village
68 units
•
Oaktree
11 units
•
Johnson Woods II
12 units
•
Reading Woods
43 units
•
Department of Developmental Services (DDS) Units
6 units
•
Reading Housing Authority Units
-13 units (despite efforts
654
by the Planning staff to work with the Housing Authority, affordability period
12%
expired)
6.81%
Table 19 compares the number of SHI units with neighboring communities that abut
Reading.
As identified in the table, Reading has a percentage of affordable housing units that is
higher than four of the neighboring communities and lower than three — right in the
middle of the neighboring communities.
fable 19: Total Subsidized
Housing Units for Reading and Neighboring Communities
Community
Year Around
Housing
Units 2010
Total Subsidized Housing
Units
Percent SHI Units
March
2004
Dec
2017
Percent
Change
March
2004
Dec
2017
Reading
9,584
682
896
31%
7.74%
9.35%
North Reading
5,597
83
540
551%
1.72%
9.65%
Saugus
10,754
654
732
12%
6.47 %
6.81%
Wilmington
7,788
615
799
30%
8.61%
10.26%
Woburn
16,237
1489
1419
-5%
9.72%
8.74%
Stoneham
9,399
494
495
0%
5.35%
5.27%
Wakefield
10,459
729
758
4%
7.35%
7.25%
Lynnfield
4,319
78
495
535%
1.84%
1 11.46%
Source: Department of Housing and Community Development, Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing
Inventory (SHI)
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 27
tc"
S. Existing Subsidized Housing Stock
Table 20 below identifies the existing subsidized housing units currently included on the
SHI lisL (Lhruugh September 2017). This information is regularly gathered and reported
by the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). The properties are
listed by property type (not chronological).
Table 20: Reading Subsidized Housing Inventory Properties
Development Name
SHI
Units
Property Type
Subsidizing
Agency
Zoning
Permit
Affrd
End
RHA: Senior housing
80
Age Restricted Rental
DHCD /PHA
Local
Perp
RHA: Family Scattered Site
12
Family Rental
DHCD /PHA
Local
Perp
RHA_: Scattered Site
6
Family Rental
DHCD /PHA
40B
Perp
RHA: Pleasant Street
2
Family Rental
FHLBB
Local
2020
RHA: Wilson Street
2
Family Rental
FHLBB
Local
2021
EMARC Reading
12
Supportive Housing
HUD
Local
2036
Reading Community Residence
3
Supportive Housing
HUD
Local
2037
Hopkins Street Residence
4
Supportive Housing
HUD
Local
2042
DDS / DMH Group Homes
52
Supportive Housing
DDS
Local
NA
Cedar Glen
114
Age Restricted
Rental
MassHousing
40B
Perp
Peter Sanborn Place
74
Age Restricted
Rental
MassHousing
40B
Perp
Residences at Pearl
86
Assisted Living
MassHousing
Local
2046
Reading Commons
204
Family Rental
FHLBB
40B
Perp
Oaktree
11
Family Rental
DHCD /40R
40R
Perp
Reading Village
68
Family Rental
MassHousing
40B
Perp
Schoolhouse Commons
20
Family Rental
MHP
40B
Perp
20 -24 Gould Street
55
Family Rental
DHCD /40R
40R
Perp
Sumner /Cheney
1
Ownership
FHLBB
40B
Perp
George Street
3
Ownership
MassHousing
40B
Perp
Maplewood Village
9
Ownership
DHCD /LIP
40B
2054
Governor's Drive
2
Ownership
DHCD /LIP
40B
2103
Johnson Woods
11
Ownership
DHCD /LIP
Local
Perp
Johnson Woods II
12
Ownership
DHCD /LIP
Local
Perp
Reading Woods
43
Ownership
DHCD /40R
40R
Perp
Postmark Square
10
Ownership
DHCD /40R
4011
Perp
TOTALS
896
Census 2010 Units
9.35%
Key to Subsidizing Agency:
MHP — Massachusetts Housing Partnership
DHCD /PHA: Department of Housing and Community Development, Public Housing Authority
DHCD /LIP: Department of Housing and Community Development, Local Initiative Program
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 28
5�a,
DHCD /40R: Department of Housing and Community Development, 40R
DDS: Department of Developmental Services
FHLBB: Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston
HUD: Federal Housing and Urban Development Public Housing Authority
Reading also has a few projects in the pipeline, which will generate additional affordable
units to the Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI).
Johnson Woods phase II has an additional 7 ownership units to construct and sell. The
units will be included on the Town's SHI once Certificates of Occupancy are issued.
The Community Planning and Development Commission (CPDC) is currently reviewing a
mixed -use 40R project at the former Sunoco station property on Main Street. To -date,
the project consists of 31 rental units, 8 of which will be affordable. As a rental project
for which at least 25% of the units are affordable, the total number of units in the project
will qualify for inclusion on the SHI.
The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) recently received of a 120 -unit rental Comprehensive
Permit application known as Eaton Lakeview Apartments. The project received a Project
Eligibility Letter from MassHousing in October 2017. As a rental project for which at least
25% of the units are affordable, the total number of units in the project will qualify for
inclusion on the SHI. The ZBA hearing is scheduled to open in March, 2018.
C. Affordable Housing Efforts
-Reading has pursued a proactive planning based strategy in an effort to increase the supply
of affordable housing and meet the 10 %minimum statutory requirement. The Town has
made strides towards meeting that goal through adopting zoning changes and utilizing
current planning best practices. The Town's 2013 HPP created a roadmap to follow as the
Town worked towards meeting its affordable housing goals.
Safe Harbor — As reported earlier, in CY 2017 Reading added 98 affordable housing units to
the Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI), the inventory used by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts to monitor the affordable housing statutory requirements. Asa result, the
Town secured a two -year safe harbor certification through February 22, 2019.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 29
5�a�
1. Adoption of Smart Growth Districts (40R)
Gateway Smart Growth District (GSGD)
In December 2007, Reading adapted the Gateway Smart
Growth District under MGL Chapter 40R and 760 CMR
59.05(4). The overlay district is located at the southern
town line, near Interstate 95 /Route 128 and Route 28
(Reading's Main Street). The 424 unit Reading Woods
project is currently completed and nearly fully occupied.
The GSGD includes 200 of the 424 units. Of those 200
units, 43 are affordable and are included on the SHI. This
site was formerly a commercial use owned by the
Addison Wesley Corporation.
Downtown Smart Growth District (DSGD)
In November 2009, Reading adopted
the Downtown Smart Growth District
(DSGD) under MGL Chapter 4011 and
760 CMR 59.05(4). This zoning change
was also a response to the 2007
Housing Plan which identified
downtown as an area for future
housing opportunities. At that time,
the DSGD overlay district did not
encompass the downtown in its
entirety. The DSGD will allow for 203
additional housing units by right. The first project that was permitted and constructed
within the DSGD was the Oaktree Development located at the former Atlantic Market site on
Haven Street. This project is a mixed -use development with retail uses on the ground floor
and 53 residential units above. At 53 units, this project exceeded the maximum density
allowed, but was granted a waiver from the CPDC for a density of 73 units per acre. A total of
11 units are affordable and are listed on the SHI.
In September 2017, Postmark Square, an
adaptive re -use of the historic Reading
Post Office, received 40R Plan Review
approval from the Reading Community
Planning and Development Commission
(CPDC). Postmark Square will be a mixed -
use project with 50 ownership residential
units, 10 of which will be affordable.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 30
� 30
Expanded Downtown Smart Growth District (DSGD)
In April of 2017, Town Meeting adopted and the AG's office approved, an expansion of the
DSGD to include approximately 21 additional acres, with a potential for 113 new residential
units.
Increased Affordable Housing Percentage Requirement (rental) in the DSGD
In April 2017, Town Meeting also adopted, and the AG's office approved, increasing the
affordable housing requirement from 20% to 25% for rental projects within the DSGD.
Pursuant to MGL Chapter 4013, the increase to 25% will allow the Town to count all of the
units in a rental project versus only the actual number of affordable units.
In November 2017, 20 -24 Gould Street, a redevelopment of the former EMARC site (which is
within the expanded DSGD area), received 40R Plan Review approval from the Reading
Community Planning and Development Commission (CPDC). The mixed -use project will
include 55 residential units, at least 14 of which will be affordable. As a rental project for
which at least 25% of the units are affordable, all 55 units qualified for listing on the SHI.
The proposed mixed -use 40R redevelopment of the Sunoco station property, mentioned
above, is also within the expanded DSGD area. The 31 -unit rental project is currently under
review by the Community Planning and Development Commission. As a rental project for
which at least 25% of the units are affordable, the total number of units in the project will
qualify for listing on the SHI.
Planning Efforts
• 2015 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) -The EDAP recommendations include
expanding housing and mixed use. A key recommendation was to expand the DSGD. The
EDAP link is: httD: / /www.readingma.gov /planning- division /files /economic- development-
action -plan- with - appendices
• Metro North Regional Housing Office ( MNRHSO) — In 2015, Reading established the
MNRHSO comprised of the towns of Reading, North Reading, Wilmington, and Saugus.
The MNRHSO shares the expenses of a full -time housing coordinator who monitors
existing affordable housing and provides expertise related to affordable housing. An
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 31
5C3\
Advisory Committee oversees the MNRHSO. Massachusetts has only a handful of RHSO's
and Reading is proud to have developed this for the Metro North region.
* Comprehensive Update of the Reading Zoning Bylaw (ZBL) In 2014, the ZBL was
updated to clarify, simplify, and modernize zoning for ease of use by developers.
Accessory Apartments are now allowed "by- right" if performance standards are met and
if the unit is located in an existing single - family structure. A special permit is required for
accessory apartments in detached structures, or involving increases in gross floor area to
an existing single - family structure or new construction. Permitting checklists have been
developed to simplify zoning further.
2. Challenges and Constraints to the Development of Affordable Housing
a. Existing Housing Allowances
The Reading Zoning Map illustrates residential uses taken from the Reading Zoning Bylaw
effective as of April 2017. The tables below identify which types of residential and business
uses are allowed in each zoning district. "YES" indicates uses allowed by right. "SPP" means
the use requires a Special Permit from the Community Planning and Development Commission
and "SPA" means the use requires a Special permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals.. "No"
denotes a use that is not allowed.
Table 21: Uses for Residential Districts
Principal Uses
RES
S -15
S-20
S -40
RES
A -40
RES
A -80
PRD -G
PRD-
M
PUD -R
Residential Uses
Residential Uses
Single Family Dwelling
YES (1)
YES
NO
SPP
SPP
Two Family Dwelling
NO
YES
NO
SPP
SPP
Multi- Family Dwelling
NO
YES
YES
SPP
SPP
Age Restricted Multi-
Family Dwelling
NO
SPP
SPP
SPP
SPP
Boarding House
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Table 22: Uses for Business and Industrial Districts
Principal Uses
Bus A
Bus B
Bus C
IND
PUD -B
Overlay
PUD -I
Overlay
Residential Uses
Single Family Dwelling
Yes (1)
No
No
No
No
No
Two Family Dwelling
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Multi - Family Dwelling
Yes
No
Yes (2)
No
I No
No
Age Restricted Multi-
Family Dwelling
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Boarding House
No
No
No
No
No
No
Source: Town of Reading Zoning By -Law, Tables 5.3.1 and 5.3.2, Table of Uses, September, 2017
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 32
Although Reading is primarily zoned for single family homes, other zoning districts including
A -40, A -80 and Business A alluw fur other forms of residential development such as
apartments or multi -unit homes. Table 23 below identifies the base zoning districts in
Reading.
Table 23: Reading Base Zoning Districts
Zoning District
Short Name
Area (sq miles)
Acreage
Percent
Single Family 15 District
S -15
3.3
2,120.1
33.2%
Single Family 20 District
S -20
4.1
2,643.2
41.3%
Single Family 40 District
S -40
1.9
1,235.1
19.3%
Apartment 40 District
A -40
0.0
30.8
0.5%
Apartment 80 District
A -80
0.0
12.8
0.2%
Business A
BUS A
0.1
48.4
0.8%
Business B
BUS B
0.1
55.2
0.9%
Business C
BUS C
0.1
38.8
0.6%
Industrial
Ind
0.3
209.1
3.3%
Totals
10.0
6393.4
100.0%
Source: Town of Reading Zoning By -Law, April 2017
In addition to the base zoning districts, Reading has several overlay districts. Table 24 below
is a comprehensive list of all the zoning districts, including overlays within the Town of
Reading.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 33
Table 24: Town of Reading Zoning and Overlay Districts
Type
Full Name
Short Name
Residence
Single Family 15 District
S -15
Residence
Single Family 20 District
S -20
Residence
Single Family 40 District
S -40
Residence
Apartment 40 District
A -40
Residence
Apartment 80 District
A -80
Business
Business A District
Bus A
Business
Business B District
Bus B
Business
Business C District
Bus C
Industrial
Industrial
Ind
Overlay
Flood Plain District
F
Overlay
Municipal Building Reuse District
MR
Overlay
National Flood Insurance Flood
Management District
NF
Overlay
Aquifer Protection District
AQ
Overlay
Planned Unit Development
PUD
Overlay
Planned Residential Development
PRD
Overlay
Gateway Smart Growth District
GSGD
Overlay
Downtown Smart Growth District
DSGD
Source: Town of Reading Zoning By -Law, April 2017
b. Development Capacity and Constraints:
Residential development is constrained by many factors including availability of land, land
use regulations, natural resources such as wetlands and threatened and endangered species,
and limitations on infrastructure capacity. In order to evaluate the potential development
capacity, the availability of land must be evaluated against potential development
constraints.
Available Land: The Town of Reading is approximately 10 square miles in size and contains
6,394 acres of land. Using a GIS analysis it was estimated that 1,756 acres (27.5 %) of land in
Reading is undeveloped or Chapter 61 Land. Of that, 372 acres are potentially developable,
and only 139 acres of developable land remain after regulatory constraints' are applied. This
results in approximately 262 buildable lots based on the minimum lot size of 15,000 square
feet required in the S -15 residential zoning district. However, this build -out is for
undeveloped land and does not take into account previously developed land that could be
subdivided to yield more homes. Using the same GIS analysis and regulatory constraints, it is
estimated that a potential of 513 new homes could be built on currently developed land.
Only residentially -zoned parcels were included in the analysis. Constraints include FEMA 100 year flood
zones, 100' buffers around wetlands, streams, and vernal pools, and 200' buffers around perennial
streams. Aquifer protection district and slope were not included as constraints. Infrastructure needs were
not considered in calculating potential lots.
Town of ,Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 34
5�3�
However, the actual number is likely to be significantly less when taking into account
infrastructure costs, lot shape, or other geological conditions, as well as particular zoning
district (specifically 5 -20 or 5 -40).
As identified above, Reading has several overlay districts. Overlay districts are zoning districts
which may be placed over the underlying districts. The provisions for the overlay district may
be more stringent or flexible based on the purpose of the particular overlay. The following
are overlay districts that relate to housing development and the provision of affordable
housing in Reading. Some of the overlays allow for other forms of development, increased
density in development, and may have requirements for affordable housing.
Planned Unit Development — Residential
Denoted as PUD -R this overlay district allows, by a Special Permit from the CPDC, single
family, two family, apartments, elderly housing, among other uses. At least ten percent of all
residential units in the PUD -R must be affordable. The affordable percentage requirement
increases to 15% for property within 300 -feet of a municipal boundary. It should also be
noted that the Planned Unit Development — Industrial (PUD -I) overlay district also allows
residential development when the proposed development is within 200 -feet of another
residential district.
Planned Residential Development (PRD)
A PRD district is an overlay zoning district which may be applied to parcels within the S -15, S-
20, 5 -40 and A -80 residential zoning districts and must be approved through Town Meeting.
Upon approval of the overlay, the CPDC may issue a Special Permit for residential
development. In Reading, there are two types of PRD districts; General (PRD -G) and
Municipal (PRD -M). The PRD -G requires a minimum lot size of 60,000 square feet and
encourages affordable unit development. PRD -M development is allowed on current or
former municipally -owned land of at least eight acres and requires a certain percentage of
affordable units.
Municipal Building Reuse District
The Municipal Building Reuse District is an overlay district that allows for the redevelopment
or reuse of surplus municipal buildings. At least ten percent of the residential units must be
affordable.
Smart Growth Districts (40R)
Reading has adopted two Smart Growth 40R Districts. The Downtown Smart Growth (DSGD)
District is an overlay district that allows for mixed -use or multi - family residential within the
downtown area via plan approval by the Community Planning and Development
Commission. This overlay district requires a minimum of 20% affordable units
(homeownership projects) and a minimum of 25% affordable units if the development is
rental or limited to occupancy by elderly residents. The Gateway Smart Growth District
(GSGD) is also an overlay district located at the intersection of Route 28 (Main Street) and
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 35
tc)?`�
Interstate 128/95. This district is fully developed with one 424 -unit project (200 of the units
are technically within the GSGD) and includes 43 affordable units (10 %).
Natural Resource Limitations: Wetlands and other natural resources such as endangered
species habitats can place constraints on development. As mentioned above, many lots are
considered unbuildable due to the presence of some of these resources. Almost one - fourth
of the land in Reading is considered wetland or within the jurisdictional buffer zones of
resource areas. Another 6% of land is within the 100 -year flood zone. Reading is located
within the Aberjona, Ipswich and Saugus river watersheds and many of Reading's wetland
areas are located in associated floodplains.
Rare and Endangered Species: There are three areas in Reading which contain rare or
endangered species. These areas are protected under the Massachusetts Endangered
Species Act and the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act. Any development within these
areas is subject to review by the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species
Program (NHESP). The three areas of designation include a large tract of land within the
western side of the Town Forest and two separate tracts of land within the Cedar Swamp
near the Burbank Ice Arena located on the eastern side of the town.
c. Infrastructure
Public Water: The Town of Reading's water distribution system is comprised of 115 miles of
distribution main, 2 water booster stations and 2 storage facilities; one 0.75 M gallon
elevated tank located at Auburn Street and one 1.0 M gallon standpipe located at Bear Hill.
Presently, Reading purchases all of its drinking water from the MWRA which is supplied into
the Town's distribution system via a 20" water main located on Border Road. Construction of
a second 36" redundant supply pipe line was recently completed by the MWRA which will
provide a second supply source to the Town's distribution system at Leech Park on Hopkins
Street. The Town also has 5 emergency water connections with 3 of the bordering
communities.
Prior to purchasing water from the MWRA, Reading operated a water treatment plant
adjacent to the Town Forest which drew water from nine wells within the Town Forest and
Revay Swamp, all contained within the Ipswich River Watershed. Following the temporary
closure of wells as a precautionary measure to avoid contamination from an overturned
petroleum vehicle on Rte. 93 and to aid in relieving stress to the Ipswich River aquifer, the
Town decommissioned the treatment plant in 2006 and began purchasing 100% of the
Town's drinking water from the MWRA. Reading continues to maintain the wells as a
backup water supply until the redundant MWRA water supply source is on -line.
Reading has established a strong water conservation program offering residents rebates
for the installation of low flow fixtures and appliances, irrigation sensors and rain barrels.
The program has been extremely successful and has lowered water consumption by 10%
over a 10 year period. In 2016 the average daily water consumption equaled 1.7 MGD with
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 36
a maximum daily demand of 2.2MGD.
All water purchased rrum the MWRA is metered at the supply mains lhruugh meters
owned by the MWRA and the Town of Reading. Residential and Commercial meter reading
is modern and efficient, with an automatic system that uses radio transmitters for optimal
accuracy and efficiency. Water rate changes are established by the Board of Selectmen
based on recommendations from staff.
Reading's water distribution system is maintained on a GIS mapping and database system.
The operation of the water system is overseen by the Department of Public Works, and is
on an enterprise basis, through which the full costs of operations are borne by the water
users, and not paid for by local property taxes.
Public Sewer: The sewer system is owned and operated by the Town and serves
approximately 98% of all properties within the Town. While 159 individual properties
throughout the Town are not yet connected to available public sewer, the only major
unsewered areas are portions of Main Street north of Mill Street, and the westerly portion of
Longwood Road. The system consists of 107 miles of sewer main, 12 wastewater pump or lift
stations, and approximately 7,800 local service connections.
All sewage from the Town's system discharges into the MWRA's regional collection system
through 2 major outfalls; one along Rte. 93 in the west adjacent to Arnold Avenue, and one
at the end of Summer Avenue in the south. An isolated collection system servicing Border
Road and a small portion of the West Street area discharges into the regional sewerage
system via the City of Woburn. The regional sewerage system is operated by the MWRA,
with principal treatment at Deer Island facility.
Water usage meters measure outfall flows and discharges. Sewer rate changes are
established by the Board of Selectmen based on recommendations from staff. The Town's
connection policy requires all new development to tie into the public sewer system and
requires conversion to public sewer when residential septic systems fail. In addition, the
Town sewer connection policy requires that all new developments perform system
Inflow /Infiltration improvements or that equivalent contributions of twice the new flow
multiplied by $4.00 are made to the Town.
Reading's sewer system is maintained on a GIS mapping and database system. The
operation of the sewer system is overseen by the Department of Public Works, and is on
an enterprise basis, through which the full costs of operations are borne by the sewer
users, and not paid for by local property taxes.
Stormwater System: Reading is located in the upper reaches of three (3) separate drainage
basins; the Ipswich River basin to the north, Saugus River basin to the southeast, and
Aberjona River basin to the southwest. All stormwater is collected through a series of
approximately 3,400 catch basins, 80 miles of piped system, numerous open water bodies
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 37
� cibl
and 450 outfalls. The GIS mapping of the stormwater system was updated in 2016.
The town has evaluated problemaft areas of Lhe Aberjuna and Saugus River basins and
has developed a capital plan for the improvements. The system is operated and
maintained by the Department of Public Works and is funded partially through local
property taxes and the balance through enterprise funds. Following the authorization of
the MS4 permit program by the EPA in 2003, the Town established a stormwater
enterprise in 2006 to fund the additional operation and maintenance of the stormwater
system mandated by the MS4 permit. The enterprise funding is apportioned based on the
extent of impervious area within the parcel.
Through the policies established under the Town's M54 permit program, all new
developments are required to install and maintain stormwater management systems. Each
system must include a long -term operation and maintenance plan which includes annual
reporting to the Town.
Roadway Network: Reading contains approximately 102 miles of streets and roads,
however, the Town only maintains approximately 92.7 miles. The remainder of roadways not
maintained by the Town are state -owned or privately -owned roadways. The Town is
bordered by Interstate Highway 95 (also known as state Route 128) on the south and
southeast, and Interstate Highway 93 on the west.
Reading's. roadway system consists of several arterial, collector and local roadways.
Arterial streets, carrying large traffic volumes and serving as principal local routes as well
as regional routes, include: Main Street (Route 28), and Salem Street and Lowell Street
(Route 129). These three main arterials intersect at the Common in the middle of Town,
and are lined almost uninterruptedly with commercial and densely developed residential
uses.
Minor arterial streets include: Haverhill Street (residential), Walkers Brook Drive
(commercial and industrial), Washington Street (residential), Woburn Street (commercial
through Downtown and otherwise residential) and West Street (almost entirely
residential).
Collector streets, serving traffic from neighborhood streets and feeding into the arterial
streets in Town, include: Franklin Street, Grove Street, Forest Street, Charles Street,
Washington Street, High Street, Summer Avenue, South Street, Hopkins Street, and Willow
Street.
Since 2000, Reading has utilized a computerized pavement management system to assist
in developing a roadway capital improvement plan. In 2011 the system was converted to a
GIS based management system. The system enables the Town to reliably develop cost
effective roadway maintenance plans. Based on roadway inspections, each roadway is
given a pavement condition index (PCI) that is used to identify the overall condition of the
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 38
5�3�
roadways. PCI values range from 0 to 100 and the 2016 average PCI of all roadways was
77. Every 3 -4 years, each roadway is physically inspected to update the database for
pavement distresses factors, which are used to determine pavement longevity in the
program. Through the use of the computerized program, state Chapter 90 roadway funds
and the general operating funds (which is a result of a proposition 2 % override), the
Town's planned annual expenditure of roadway maintenance will insure an overall
increase in the roadways PCI value for the next 10 to 15 years.
Commuter Rail: Reading is served by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
(MBTA) Commuter Rail system. The current MBTA schedule has 19 commuter rail trains each
weekday inbound to North Station in downtown Boston. A total of 23 commuter trains travel
outbound to Reading each weekday from North Station and of those 13 continue on to the
final destination of Haverhill. The Reading train station is located in the heart of downtown
at the "Depot ". There is a mix of MBTA /Town parking available at the Depot. The 113 MBTA -
owned spaces are available for a rate of $4.00 /day and there are also several Town -owned
parking spaces available to residents only for a one -time fee of $150. The most current
ridership data available is contained in the MBTA "Blue Book" dated July, 2014. The 2014
Blue Book statistics show a typical weekday station boarding (inbound) at Reading station as
of April, 2013 was 799 commuters. The average boarding count for the period 2007 — 2013
for Reading Station (inbound) was 834 with a high of 1010 in 2011 and a low of 444 in 2012.
The 2009 ridership in Reading was higher than any other station on the Haverhill /Reading
MBTA line. Lawrence had the second highest ridership at 722.
Bus Service: The MBTA operates two bus routes from Reading to the Malden Center Orange
Line subway station. Bus 136 service begins at the Depot and travels east on Salem Street
through Wakefield then continues south on Main Street with service in Melrose and
eventually terminates at the Malden Center subway station. Bus 137 also departs from the
Depot. This route travels south on North Avenue through Wakefield and continues south
through Melrose on Main Street and terminates at the Malden Center subway station. The
entire route from Reading to Malden takes approximately 40 minutes.
Electrical — Reading Municipal Light Department (RMLD): In 1891, the Massachusetts
Legislature passed a law enabling cities and towns to operate their own gas and electric
plants. Following several years of study and Special Town Meetings, Reading began
producing electricity for 47 streetlights and 1,000 incandescent lamps on September 26,
1895. Special Legislation was enacted on April 8, 1908 authorizing the Town of Reading to
sell and distribute electricity to Lynnfield, North Reading and Wilmington. As a result, RMLD
began delivering power to Lynnfield Center on December 10, 1909; to North Reading in 1910
and to Wilmington in 1912.
There have been decades of advancement and achievement since those early days of
electricity, but some things have remained constant. After more than 110 years, RMLD is still
committed to reliable service at competitive rates, but maintaining that commitment
requires astute planning, innovative ideas and close attention to detail.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 39
The Gaw substation on Causeway Road in Reading was constructed in 1969 -1970 allowing
RMLD to connect to the grid and purchase power from almost anywhere on the northeast
power pool. In June 2000, construction was completed on a distribution substation
connected to 115,000 -volt transmission lines in North Reading in order to accommodate
growth and enhance the entire system's efficiency and reliability. To ensure reliability,
RMLD has an ongoing preventative maintenance program aimed at solving problems
before they occur.
Today, RMLD serves more than 27,000 customers in its four -town service area. A
professional staff of 80+ employees brings a broad scope of utility experience to RMLD's
daily operation, including an up -to -date understanding of the evolving energy market.
With its peak demand for electricity at more than 155 megawatts, RMLD purchases
electricity from a number of different sources through long- and - short -term contracts.
Recent technological advances at RMLD include a fiber optic cable network that links all
substations for state -of- the -art system monitoring and control. Computer systems are also
state -of- the -art, and now include a sophisticated website. Meter reading is modern and
efficient, with an automatic system that uses radio transmitters for optimal accuracy and
efficiency.
RMLD supports in- lieu -of -tax payments, community development and energy education
programs. This includes energy conservation programs, school safety projects, school -to-
work partnerships, outreach to senior groups, community support, and active
memberships in local civic groups.
Infrastructure Capacity for Planned Production: Reading's overall infrastructure contains
adequate capacity and capital facilities for existing build out and anticipated future
development. The Town also periodically reviews and assesses its 10 -year Capital Plan to
insure that infrastructure will be maintained and sustained for projected growth. The Town
expects to continue the policy and practice of requiring mitigation from developers, financial
or otherwise, for the impacts of their proposed projects, including infrastructure
improvements. Therefore, as needs are identified through staff level and consultant review
of individual permitting applications, the Town expects to require - as conditions for
approval - adequate improvements and upgrades to systems, resources and capacity to
allow for development under this Housing Production Plan, while protecting and enhancing
natural, cultural and historical assets consistent with the 2005 Master Plan.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 40
5 G�°
The housing goals and strategies included in this section are aimed primarily at creating
more housing choice and affordable housing in Reading. The goals and strategies also
support the Town's ability to achieve other interrelated community goals, including goals for
economic development as well as protecting quality of life and community character.
Housing Goals
In reviewing the previous Reading Housing Plan of 2013, other Reading related documents,
analyzing the current housing situation in Reading, and in discussing housing issues with
town citizens and officials, the Town has identified six housing five -year goals that are the
most appropriate and most realistic for the community. They are identified below.
Goal 1— Create SHI- eligible housing units
Support the creation of affordable housing units, both rental and ownership units, that will
count on the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory to reach the state's 10% affordable
housing goal while also focusing on the specific housing needs of Reading residents.
Goal 2 — Support Reading's low- income residents
Support the housing needs of Reading's most vulnerable residents including families, seniors,
and individuals with disabilities, especially households with extremely -low and very -low
incomes.
Goal 3 — Preserve existing affordable housing
Preserve existing affordable housing to ensure the units remain affordable and qualify for
listing on the subsidized housing inventory.
Goal 4 — Proactively manage growth
Manage growth and proactively plan to mitigate impacts of new housing and mixed -use
development to preserve and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods and
commercial areas and to provide a greater diversity of housing options to support housing
needs.
Goal 5 — Support affordable rental properties and tenants
Support owners of affordable rental units to ensure appropriate maintenance and upkeep
and seek opportunities to increase affordable housing units within these properties.
Goal 6 — Strengthen education and local relationships
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 41
5�a�
Educate the public on affordable housing issues and strengthen relationships with other local
entities and regional partners on the topic.
Housing .Strategies
This section includes descriptions of local regulatory strategies, local initiative strategies and
an action plan, all of which are intended to assist the Town of Reading in meeting its
affordable housing goals. The strategies are listed immediately below and discussed in more
detail on the following pages.
Strategy 1: Encourage development in the Priority Development Areas
Strategy 2: Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning bylaw
Strategy 3: Explicitly Permit Congregate Housing
Strategy 4: Provide support for 40R, 40B and Local Permit applications
Strategy 5: Seek opportunities for locally- initiated development
Strategy 6: Strengthen the Affordable Housing Trust
Strategy 7: Explore Creation of a First -Time Homebuyer Program
Strategy 8: Identify potential homes for congregate housing
Strategy 9: Seek funding to create a local aging -in -place program
Strategy 10 Foster partnership initiatives with landlords
Strategy 11: Work in cooperation with community partners to promote
enhanced public understanding of housing needs and promote creation of
affordable housing
Strategy 12: Support the Metro North Regional Housing Services Office
Reaching 10%
The Housing Production Plan guidelines require that the HPP set an annual goal for housing
production, pursuant to which there is an increase in the municipality's number of SHI
Eligible Housing units by at least 0.50% of its total units during every calendar year included
in the HPP, until the overall percentage exceeds the 10% Statutory Minimum.
There should be a direct link between the setting of these goals and the results of the needs
assessment. The numerical goal should be based on the total year -round number of housing
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 42
5�aa
units. The total year -round housing units is the total number of units for the community in
the latest U.S. Census including any changes due to demolition or new construction.
The Table below projects the Town of Reading SHI. Note that the denominator of Year -
round housing units will be updated by the Census and then reported by DHCD in
2021/2022. These projections are not included in this updated, but will included in the 2023
update.
Regulatory Strategies
Regulatory strategies refer to recommendations that entail amendments to local zoning
bylaws or other local development regulations to help encourage development of more
housing options including affordable housing.
Note: There is a new state funding source— MassHousing's Planning for Housing Production
Program$ —that could help to support Reading's efforts to implement the plan's regulatory
strategies. The Program provides municipalities with funding for additional technical capacity
to implement recommendations of the housing production plan and deliver new mixed -
income housing.
8 More information about MassHousing's Housing Production Program:
www.masshousing.com/ portal /server.pt /community /planning programs /207 /planning for housing produc
tion
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 43
5�a�
FY18
FY19
FY20
FY21
FY22
FY23
Johnson Woods
7
Eaton Lakeview 40B
120
467 Main Street 40R
31
SHI Units Created
896
0
38
120
0
0
Cumulative SHI Units
896
896
934
1054
1054
1054
Year Round Units (2010 Census)
9584
9584
9584
9584
9584
9584
SHI %
9.35%
9.35%
9.75%
11.00%
11.00%
11.00%
10% Requirement
958.40
958.40
958.40
958.40
958.40
958.40
+/-10%
-62.4
-62.4
-24.4
95.6
95.6
95.6
Regulatory Strategies
Regulatory strategies refer to recommendations that entail amendments to local zoning
bylaws or other local development regulations to help encourage development of more
housing options including affordable housing.
Note: There is a new state funding source— MassHousing's Planning for Housing Production
Program$ —that could help to support Reading's efforts to implement the plan's regulatory
strategies. The Program provides municipalities with funding for additional technical capacity
to implement recommendations of the housing production plan and deliver new mixed -
income housing.
8 More information about MassHousing's Housing Production Program:
www.masshousing.com/ portal /server.pt /community /planning programs /207 /planning for housing produc
tion
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 43
5�a�
Strategy 1: Encourage mixed -use development in the Priority Development
Areas by considering adoption of various regulatory tools.
As part of the Reading EconornlC Development Action Plan 2016-
2022 (EDA Plan), the town identified four regionally- significant
Priority Development Areas (PDAs). As described in the EDA
Plan, redevelopment in these PDAs will help meet projected
regional demands for housing and commercial uses and
strengthen existing places by improving the mix of development
types in areas where development already exists. The PDAs are
sited in areas
defined as
having major
growth
potential and near existing transportation
resources including public transit, bike,
and trail facilities, thus contributing to
the creation of more walkable
communities.
The four PDAs are described below, as
excerpted from the EDA Plan (page 6):
PDA #1- Downtown Reading. PDA #1 is a
nine -acre area consisting of 46 parcels —
the Town's 40R Smart Growth Overlay
District was expanded to include a
portion of this area (PDA #1A) in April
2017. PDA #1A is bounded by Haven
Street, Main Street, Washington Street,
and High Street and includes mixed use,
commercial, and residential
development. PDA #113 is adjacent to the
Commuter Rail and is bounded by Lincoln
and Prescott streets and includes
commercial and residential development
— this property is the location of an
approved Comprehensive Permit.
PDA #2 — South Main Street. PDA #2 is a
26 -acre area consisting of 82 parcels located
Source: EDA Plan
south of the downtown on South Main Street. PDA #2A presently contains primarily low -
density commercial development and underutilized parcels. PDA #213 consists primarily of
low- density residential development. The Town is interested in facilitating more retail and
mixed -use development and implement streetscape and road reconfigurations that will
enhance safety and the street's overall connectivity to downtown.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 44
SGaa
PDA #3 – New Crossing Road Redevelopment District and Ash Street Parcels. PDA #3
consists of the five -acre New Crossing Road Redevelopment District, which consists of
four parcels and Includes vacant lots, derelict buildings, sites with industrial uses, and
adjacent parcels on Ash Street.
PDA #4, -1 General Way. PDA #4 is one large 20 -acre parcel with a mix of single -story
commercial uses and ample parking. The Town is interested in facilitating a more vibrant
mix of uses and structures of different densities in this area.
In accordance with the recommendations of the Reading Economic Development
Action Plan 2016 -2022, the Town recently expanded the Downtown Smart Growth District
(DSGD) to PDA #1A and the rest of the underlying Business B zone in the downtown area to
continue fostering mixed use development in the Commuter Rail station area. This zoning
will facilitate mixed -use infill development, which will help meet Reading's Economic
Development goals as well as regional demand and potential shortages of housing.
More specifically, this strategy recommends the following:
Adopt Sub - Districts with Design Guidelines for PDA #1
To ensure appropriate development and redevelopment of properties in the DSGD, the
Town should adopt sub - districts with design guidelines tailored to enhance the character
and further the Town's vision for each sub - district.
Consider zoning changes to promote more compact, mixed -use
development
In accordance with the recommendations of the Reading Economic Development Action
Plan 2016 -2022, facilitate more compact, mixed -use development in PDAs #2 (or as a
40R, described above), #3, and #4. Amend underlying zoning (or through adoption of
40R) to facilitate higher density mixed use and in PDA #2 —South Main Street —with a
focus on increasing mixed -use redevelopment potential in PDA #2A, which has
underutilized retail parcels that could be redeveloped to mixed use with commercial on
the first floor and residential above. Rezoning for mixed use will generate more foot
traffic downtown. Facilitate development in alignment with South Main Street Design
Best Practices.
Adjust zoning requirements to facilitate mixed use in PDA #3 and #4. Work with property
owners, developers and major tenants to pursue parcel consolidation to facilitate
redevelopment.
Consider zoning changes to parking requirements to promote more
compact, mixed -use development
In accordance with the recommendations of the Reading Economic Development Action
Plan 2016 -2022, evaluate parking requirements and consider zoning amendments to
make parking requirements consistent with best practices.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 45
5�a5
Strategy 2: Adopt an inclusionary Zoning bylaw
The purpose of inclusionary zoning bylaws (IZ) is to ensure that production of affordable
housing units keeps pace with construction of new dwelling units. IZ mandates that
developers provide affordable housing units in addition to market -rate housing. Section 9 of
the Zoning Act authorizes communities to adopt bylaws that require a developer to provide a
certain portion of affordable units (usually 10% to 25 %) within an overall development. To
help offset the cost of providing these units, the bylaw may offer an incentive, most
commonly a density bonus. Other incentives include a waiver of zoning requirements or
permit fees, fast -track permitting, local tax abatements, and subsidized infrastructure.9
Many variations of inclusionary zoning provisions have been adopted in Massachusetts
communities with varying levels of success at producing affordable units. IZ provisions
include:
• a unit threshold that triggers the affordable unit requirements
• minimum percentage of affordable units required
• maximum household income targets (e.g., at or below 80 percent of the area median
income)
• eligibility for the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory
• density bonuses, if applicable
For example, density bonuses are sometimes offered to encourage deeper affordability of
units (e.g., units affordable to extremely low- income households) or a higher percentage of
affordable units.
The Town should consider allowing cash payments, off -site units, and donated buildable land
as an alternative in lieu of construction of units. The cash payments and donated buildable
land could be allocated to the Reading Affordable Housing Trust to create or preserve
affordable housing.
It will be important to examine the most current information regarding best practices for
Inclusionary Zoning provisions and to customize a Reading bylaw to ensure a successful
outcome.
Strategy 3: Amend the Zoning Bylaw to explicitly permit congregate
housing
Congregate housing is a shared living environment designed to integrate the housing and
services needs of elders and disabled individuals. The goal of congregate housing is to
increase self- sufficiency through the provision of supportive services in a residential setting.
Some types of congregate housing are often in converted single- family homes; however, the
Reading zoning bylaw restricts dwelling units to "families" or not more than four unrelated
individuals, and this restriction may pose an issue in certain situations for congregate
housing, which will often house up to 16 people.
9 Excerpted from the Housing Toolbox for Massachusetts Communities:
https: / /www. housingtoolbox.ors /zoning- and -la nd- use /adaptive -reuse
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 46
� C�11
In addition, congregate housing sometimes provides small kitchen facilities in each private
unit in addition to the shared common facilities, which may constitute multi - family housing
under the current bylaw's use regulations and thus be prohibited In certain residence
districts (5 -15, 5 -20, and S -40).
Reading's zoning bylaw does not appear explicitly permit congregate housing (a.k.a. group
homes), which can be an important housing choice to accommodate later life stages for an
older population and provide supportive housing for individuals with disabilities.
The Reading zoning bylaw provides the below definition for "family," which presents Fair
Housing considerations. Policies that require relations by blood /marriage and /or have a limit
of unrelated adults in a household may be considered discriminatory if they have an adverse
impact on a protected class including people with disabilities. For example, limiting the
number of unrelated persons in a dwelling can impact group home uses, foster families, or
other alternative household composition.
Family: One or more persons living together in one dwelling unit as a single
housekeeping unit; provided, however, that a group of more than four individuals who
are not related by blood, marriage, or legal adoption shall not be deemed to
constitute a family.
Dwelling, single family: A detached dwelling unit arranged, intended or designed to be
occupied by only one family.
However, it is important to note that despite these limiting definitions and lack of zoning
provisions for congregate housing or group homes, the Dover Amendment exempts
educational uses from local zoning and programs and services that provide support, training,
and skill building for persons with disabilities have been found to be educational in nature.
Many congregate living and group home facilities provide such services to residents and
would qualify as educational in nature. In addition, federal laws prohibit municipalities from
discriminating against persons with disabilities through their land use and zoning policies.10
The zoning bylaw should be amended to ensure consistency with these laws and to explicitly
permit congregate housing in all residential districts. This strategy would help to support the
local initiative Strategy 8 to identify existing houses with potential for conversion to
congregate housing.
Strategy 4: Provide necessary support for 4OR, 4OB /Comprehensive and
Local Permit applications.
The Town has had multiple development proposals in recent years that can help to create a
more diverse housing stock including affordable and mixed - income units. The Town should
continue to provide technical and political support for appropriate projects that further the
Town's housing and economic development goals. These projects could be developments in
10 Federal laws referenced here includes Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988, and the American with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal . Page 47
40R Smart Growth Districts, 40B Comprehensive Permit applications, or local permit
applications.
Local Initiative Strategies
Local initiative strategies refer to recommendations that the town can undertake to foster
the creation of more housing options, especially affordable housing. These initiatives are not
regulatory in nature —they deal with allocation of town resources including staff time,
funding, and property.
Strategy 5: Seek opportunities for locally- initiated development of
affordable housing.
Continue to catalogue, prioritize and target tax - foreclosed, foreclosed, and
surplus public properties with development potential
Tax - foreclosed, foreclosed, and underutilized surplus public properties can have negative
impacts on neighborhoods and municipal finance. These properties can be developed or
reused as affordable, mixed - income housing and /or mixed -use development and can
present opportunities for neighborhood improvement.
The Town has been tracking such properties and should continue to do so to identify
properties with development potential for town acquisition and /or or a cooperative
effort with non - profit partners.
In addition, the Town should adopt a tax title disposition plan or policy that lays out a
process for town officials, including the Treasurer, to work collaboratively to foster
development /reuse for affordable housing of appropriate properties. Property acquired
in tax title foreclosure can be disposed of under Chapter 60 by auction or under Chapter
30B when the tax title custodian transfers the property to another municipal agency
(including an Affordable Housing Trust). Such a property disposition through Chapter 30B
can specify that the property be developed within a time frame and for a specific
purpose, including affordable housing.11
Current Tax Title Inventory: As of October 2017, the town had three tax title properties
with existing single - family houses that could have potential for conversion to affordable
units (9 Swan Road, 179 Pearl Street, and Brook Street /Redfield Road).
Public Property: There are roughly 332 acres of state land including Camp Curtis Guild
(25 River Road) with 291 acres (part of which is under consideration for use as a new
DPW garage). The property will require further study to determine if there are
environmental constraints or contamination. State land also includes a property at 9
Causeway Road (lot 31 -9) with 4.7 acres. In addition, the Town declared an
approximately 4.3 -acre parcel on Oakland Road (near the High School) as surplus in April
11 Source: CHAPA, Back on the Roll in Massachusetts: A Report on Strategies to Return Tax Title Properties to
Productive Use, 2000.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 48
5�a�
2017. The Board of Selectmen will establish a fully public process to help determine the
future disposition of the land; many options for development or use of this parcel are
possible.
Explore partnership opportunities with the Reading Housing Authority to create and
preserve public housing units
The Reading Housing Authority (RHA) was established in 1963 and has been developing
and operating housing for low- income elderly /handicapped persons, families, and people
with special needs throughout the Town of Reading. The Authority owns and manages
public housing units for both families and seniors.
The RHA owns fourteen (14) or so units of housing that it leases to income eligible
tenants. These units are currently unrestricted, despite efforts to work with the RHA to
preserve units on the SHI. Some units have expired restrictions, and were recently
lapsed from the SHI. In 2017, the Housing Authority hired anew director, which
presents an opportunity for the Town to revisit collaborative efforts to restore the
affordability of these units by regulating them as Local Action Units under the Local
Initiative Program. The Town has identified locations of these fourteen units as follows:
Summer /Main (6), Sanborn Schoolhouse (4), 13 Pierce (1), and Gazebo Circle (3).
The Housing Authority owns property on Waverly Road, which could have some potential
for development of additional units. In addition to exploring the development potential
of the Housing Authority's existing properties, the Town plans to work collaboratively
with the Housing Authority to identify other properties for possible expansion of the
public housing inventory — possibly through the development or redevelopment of tax -
foreclosed, foreclosed, and /or surplus public ��.,_
properties, as described above.
Strategy 6: Strengthen the Affordable
Housing Trust with Additional Sources of
Revenue and Further Collaboration
The town adopted the Reading Affordable Housing
Trust (AHTF) through a special act in 2001. In 2001
the Reading Town Meeting passed a warrant
article which authorized the Selectmen to petition
the Massachusetts General Court to establish an
Partial List of Potential Funding Sources for
Affordable Housing Trusts
Inclusionary Zoning payments, including
40R incentive payments
Payments in lieu of providing affordable
units
Voluntary developer payments
Affordable Housing Trust Fund for creation and Proceeds from sales of surplus municipal
preservation of affordable housing. The State or tax - foreclosed properties
legislature approved the special legislation. The Private donations
Board of Selectmen act as the Trustees of the
Trust. 12 Revenue from the lease of municipal
12 Mitchell, Robert P., FAICP, Affordable Housing Trust Funds: AtRe tot the -To-wn of Beading,- Ml]- 20.13.w_.�—._u
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 49
5u a�
The AHTF is required to submit an allocation plan to Town Meeting annually indicating how
Trust funds will be utilized in the coming year and accounting for how the prior year's funds
were allocated. The AHTF requires a majority vote of the full combined membership of the
Board of Selectmen and Housing Authority for all expenditures.
Secure additional funding for the AHTF
Adoption of an Inclusionary Zoning bylaw with provisions for cash payments in lieu of
units can provide a source of revenue for the AHTF, in addition to other potential sources
(see side bar above). The current balance of the AHTF is approximately $263,000. The
AHTF's past funding sources included the buy -out of an affordable unit at Sumner
Cheney and the sale of surplus lands. No Town - generated funds have been allocated to
the AHTF.
Collaboration with Community Partners
The AHTF funds can be leveraged by working in collaboration with community partners
including non - profit housing organizations to create and preserve affordable housing.
The AHTF funds could support a first -time homebuyer program (see below), locally -
initiated developments, or other local initiative strategies.
Strategy 7: Explore Creation of a First -Time Homebuyer Program
AHTF funds can be used to support the programmatic and administration costs of
homeownership assistance programs, which assist low- to moderate - income households to
purchase a home. The programs can be designed in a variety of ways including the following
three examples:
1) Down Payment Assistance: Down payment assistance programs provide financial support
to assist with down payment and closing costs. This assistance is provided in the form of
deferred payment loans with recapture provisions. However, this type of program does not
create units that would count on the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory because the
subsidy provided is modest and would not create a deed - restricted unit — therefore, Reading
would benefit from considering alternative models, as described below.
2) Purchase /Rehab Model: In this model, the sponsoring entity, such as the AHTF or a non-
profit organization, acquires property, rehabilitates it as necessary, and sells it to a qualified
buyer for an affordable price with a deed restriction to. secure ongoing affordability. It is
important to determine an acceptable level of rehabilitation for the subject properties which
stays within the program's budget and does not place unreasonable repair costs on the new
homebuyer. These units may be eligible for inclusion on the state's Subsidized Housing
Inventory.
3) Subsidy Model: In this model, the sponsoring entity, such as the AHTF or a non - profit
organization, qualifies potential buyers, who then locate a market rate home to purchase
with the help of a subsidy from the sponsoring entity which buys -down the cost of the
mortgage to an affordable price. A permanent deed restriction is then executed for the
property to secure ongoing affordability. It is critical to set program parameters, including
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 50
maximum subsidy per unit, maximum property acquisition cost, and minimum property
condition /rehabilitation needs with quality standards, at the start of the process to ensure
the sustainability of the program. These units may also be eligible for inclusion Uri the dale's
Subsidized Housing Inventory.
In all of these homeowner assistance models, the sponsoring entity must create a
transparent, fair, and affirmative process to market the program and select qualified buyers
to ensure compliance with federal Fair Housing laws and the Massachusetts Anti -
Discrimination Act.
For the units to count on the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory, the program guidelines
and marketing plan must meet with the requirements of the Department of Housing and
Community Development (DHCD) under the state's Local Action Unit program. Units must
have a permanent deed restriction, be affirmatively and fairly- marketed, and comply with
DHCD's resident selection criteria.
Strategy 8: Identify existing houses with potential for conversion to
congregate housing.
Congregate housing, a shared living environment designed to integrate the housing and
services needs of elders and disabled individuals, is often created by converting larger single -
family homes to house up to 16 residents with private bedrooms and shared common areas
including kitchen, living, dining, and outdoor space. Congregate housing will often also have
a resident manager with a small (accessory) apartment within the house or in an outbuilding
on site. In addition, it is often beneficial for congregate housing to be in a walkable
neighborhood that is close to community services, shops, and public transportation including
bus and commuter rail.
The town, perhaps working through the AHTF and in conjunction with community partners,
should inventory existing single - family properties to identify potential for conversion to
congregate housing. AHTF funds could support acquisition and /or rehabilitation costs of
community partners to facilitate such conversions.
Strategy 9: Seek funding to create a local aging -in -place program
To help low- income seniors afford to stay in their home as they age, it can be helpful to fund
small repairs and safety improvements including handicap accessibility improvements. The
town could fund such a program. There are many models. It will be important to design a
model program that has limited administrative needs, due to limited staff capacity.
As an example, the town of Agawam applied for $85,000 in federal Community Development
Funds to create the Agawam Aging in Place Program (AIP Program). 13 The AIP Program would
provide grants up to $5,000 per qualified senior household to complete non - structural
modifications to increase the health and safety of the occupants. To be eligible, owner
occupants must be 65 years of age or older, meet HUD income guidelines for low /moderate-
income persons, and have home safety needs that fall under the purview of the program.
"Although Agawam did not receive the award of federal funds in FY2018, the city is applying again for FY2019.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 51
5�5�
Funding per unit would vary from a few hundred dollars to the maximum $5,000 to support
improvements to the health and safety of participants' homes allowing seniors to remain
living independently in their own homes. Specific improvements will Include the Installation
of grab bars, door levers, slip resistant stair treads, dead- bolts, peep holes, smoke and /or
carbon monoxide detectors, the cleaning of furnaces and chimneys or other similar work and
activities.
Strategy 10: Foster partnership initiatives with landlords to upgrade
existing apartment complexes and convert to affordable apartments.
Reading has a significant stock of rental units in older, mid -size to larger rental complexes of
20+ units. About 40 percent (777) of rental units are in buildings with 20+ units.14 Of these
units, about 38 percent are in older buildings that were constructed prior to 1980.15
Community workshop participants supported upgrading older apartment complexes and
converting more market -rate rental units to affordable units that would count on the SHL
The Town could work to foster and support private deals to upgrade and convert some of
these complexes to affordable apartments.
The Town could target local funds (e.g., AHTF) to work with private partners to purchase,
upgrade, and convert. The Town could release a Notice of Fund Availability (NOFA) or
Request for Proposals (RFP), in accordance with MGL c.3013, to seek proposals from private
developers or existing property owners to upgrade the complex and units in return for long-
term affordability restrictions.
In addition, the Town /AHTF could work collaboratively with property owners and non - profit
organizations to encourage use of the state's new Donation Tax Credit for property
donations to non - profit organizations to convert existing buildings to affordable units. As
part of the Act Relative to Job Creation and Workforce Development (H.4569), the state
created the Donation Tax Credit that provides a credit against Massachusetts income tax
liability for property owners who donate existing housing properties or other structures for
the conversion of housing to qualified non - profits that commit to long -term affordability.
The credit is worth 50 percent of the donated value, but may be increased to 65 percent by
DHCD. Perhaps in Reading this tax credit could help to encourage conversion of market -rate
apartment complexes to affordable units.
Strategy 11: Work in cooperation with community partners to promote
enhanced public understanding of housing needs and creation of
affordable housing opportunities
The Town, working with community partners, should expand community outreach and
education efforts by initiating a public awareness campaign to build and maintain support for
local affordable housing initiatives. Towards that end, the Metro North Regional Housing
Services Office could help with this effort by clearly articulating the unmet local housing
needs, perhaps through creation of infographics to include in brochures, posters, and online.
14 2012 -2016 ACS, 625032: Tenure by Units in Structure.
15 2012 -2016 ACS, 625127: Tenure by Year Structure.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 52
5�5a
In addition, the Town could solicit the assistance of other organizations to help with this
effort, such as the Reading Clergy Associations or other groups invested in issues related to
affordable housing.
As part of this effort, the Town and Metro North Regional Housing Services Office could
consult a variety of publications exploring a variety of concerns and debunking myths related
to multifamily housing development and density. For example, the Massachusetts Housing
Toolbox.may provide ideas to help gain support and address fears of new development,
specifically around affordable housing initiatives, including strategies for community
engagement and dispelling misperceptions: https: / /www.housingtoolbox.org/
There are multiple organizations working to create or preserve affordable housing and to
provide needed services in Reading and the region such as Habitat for Humanity and Mystic
Valley Elder Services. The Town has established strong dialogue with these organizations and
should continue to have regular dialogue with non - profit entities to promote the creation of
affordable housing opportunities, possibly in combination with fostering local initiative
projects, as described earlier in this section.
Strategy 12: Continue to support the work of the Metro North Regional
Housing Services Office
The Town of Reading is the host town for the Metro North Regional Housing Services Office
( MNRHSO). The MNRHSO includes the towns of Reading, North Reading, Wilmington and
Saugus. The MNRHSO provides affordable housing support and information to member
communities and citizens looking to live in our region. Its primary task is monitoring the
more than 2,500 units in the four member towns with the mission of expanding low- and
moderate- income housing options.
The MNRHSO maintains a website with useful information for current and future residents of
the member towns including housing opportunities, refinancing instructions and current
inventory presentations. https: / /www.readingma.gov /regional - housing- services - office
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 53
553
The Table below shows the relationship between the Goals and Strategies. Some strategies
address multiple goals. All goals are addressed by at least one strategy.
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 54
5C5a
M
on
c
M
N °' 3
0
a —° r-
+,
is v=i
N a) U N C7
70
N 3 V v c"o
N
0
a o
U'� C7
w °C
Strategy 1: Encourage mixed -use development in the Priority
Development Areas by considering adoption of various
regulatory tools
Strategy 2: Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning bylaw
Strategy 3: Amend the Zoning Bylaw to explicitly permit
congregate housing
Strategy 4: Provide necessary support for 40R,
40B /Comprehensive and Local Permit applications.
Strategy 5: Seek opportunities for locally- initiated
development of affordable housing
Strategy 6: Strengthen the Affordable Housing Trust with
additional sources of revenue and further collaboration
Strategy 7: Explore creation of a First -Time Homebuyer
Program
Strategy 8: Identify existing houses with potential for
conversion to congregate housing
Strategy 9: Seek funding to create a local aging -in -place
program
Strategy 10: Foster partnership initiatives with landlords to
upgrade existing apartment complexes and convert to
B B
affordable apartments
Strategy 11: Work in cooperation with community partners
to promote enhanced public understanding of housing needs
B
B
and promote creation of affordable housing
Strategy 12: Continue to support the work of the Metro
North Regional Housing Services Office
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 54
5C5a
Action Plan
The Reading Public Services Department, specifically the Planning Division,having
spearheaded this planning effort, will be the natural entity to oversee all aspects of its
implementation and to provide regular updates on progress to the Board of Selectmen and
Community Planning and Development Commission. The matrix below provides more
specific assignment of responsible entity, supporting entity, and timeframe to implement the
housing strategies.
Housing Strategies
00
.-1
o
Ol
rl
0
O
N
0
rl
N
0
N
N
o
Responsible Entity
Supporting Entities
N
Lrl.
yN
it
yN
ii
N
�
N
W
Strategy 1: Encourage mixed -use development in the
CPDC
Planning Division
Priority Development Areas by considering adoption of
Town Meeting
various regulatory tools
Strategy 2: Adopt an Inclusionary Zoning bylaw
CPDC
Planning Division
Town Meeting
Strategy 3: Amend the Zoning Bylaw to explicitly permit
CPDC
Planning Division
congregate housing
Town Meeting
Strategy 4: Provide necessary support for 40R,
Planning Division
Boards, Committees
40B /Comprehensive and Local Permit applications.
& Commissions
Strategy 5: Seek opportunities for locally- initiated
BOS
Planning Division
development of affordable housing
RHA
Strategy 6: Strengthen the Affordable Housing Trust
BOS
RHA
Fund with additional sources of revenue and further
Town Meeting
collaboration
Town Manager
Strategy 7: Explore creation of a First -Time Homebuyer
Planning Division
Local banks
Program
Strategy 8: Identify existing houses with potential for
Planning Division
State
conversion to congregate housing
Strategy 9: Seek funding to create a local aging -in -place
Planning Division
BOS
program
Human Elder
Council on Aging
Services Division
Strategy 10: Foster partnership initiatives with
Planning Division
State
landlords to upgrade existing,apartment complexes and
Town Manager
convert to affordable apartments
Strategy 11: Work in cooperation with community
Planning Division
Community
partners to promote enhanced public understanding of
Partners
housing needs and promote creation of affordable
housing
Strategy 12: Continue to support the work of the Metro
Planning Division
Town Meeting
North Regional Housing Services Office
Town Manager
BOS
AHT = Affordable Housing Trust
CPDC = Community Planning
and Development Commission
BOS = Board of Selectmen
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 55
555
Appendices
Housing Profile
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 56
5�5�D
Interagency Policy
Town of Reading Housing Production Plan, 2018 Renewal Page 57
5�"
16 Lowell Street
Reading MA 01867
www. readingma.gov
Public Services Department
Town of Reading
G
Al I 110i ' 93W A
To: Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. CFA, Town Manager
From: Jean Delios, Assistant Town Manager
Date: January 17, 2018
Re: Wayfinding Project Update
JEAN DELIOS
Assistant Town Manager
Phone 781.942.6612
jdelios @ci. reading. ma. us
In the Spring of 2017, The Town of Reading secured a $15,000 " Wayfinding" grant from the
Commonwealth of Mass., Department of Housing and Community Development, Downtown
Initiative program. The grant funded the hiring of a consultant, Mark Favermann, who has been
working with the community to develop a branding and wayfinding plan. Wayfinding can be
described as a tool designed to strengthen a community through the use of signage and other
graphics that are used to convey location and direction.
Last Summer an informal working group was formed comprised of downtown retailers, community
partners, and Town officials. The working group met six times, including a meeting last week with
the business community, to provide input into the wayfinding plan. The project consultant
collaborated with the working group to develop an attractive network of signage to reinforce the
Reading brand and more clearly direct motorists to public parking areas and improve the
experience of visiting downtown.
Reading's wayfinding /branding plan will capitalize on the downtown's unique identity and
encourage patronization of businesses via ease of navigation. The Town of Reading has led
improvement plans related to streetscape, rezoning, and retail initiatives which have breathed
new life into downtown. Improving wayfinding and branding is another economic development
strategy that will support downtown and the small businesses located downtown.
The Town has prioritized efforts such as wayfinding /branding as a vital part of an ongoing multi -
pronged economic development effort that promotes business growth and improves the
experience of the patron in downtown Reading. The ultimate goal is to help reduce business
turnover, eliminate confusion, and continue to revive the downtown.
Es
16 Lowell Street
Reading MA 01867
www. readingma• gov
Public Services Department
Town of Reading
�(C y:�14jO
►
IMUMil l:\0119110ail
To: Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. CFA, Town Manager
From: Jean Delios, Assistant Town Manager
Date: January 17, 2018
Re: Downtown Parking Updates
JEAN DELIOS
Assistant Town Manager
Phone 781.942.6612
jdelios @ci. reading. ma. us
There has been consistent and overwhelming support for an updated downtown parking strategy
from all affected parties ranging from downtown businesses, to residents and patrons. Building
on the foundation of the 2009 comprehensive parking study completed by consulting group,
Nelson /Nygaard, the town could take actionable steps towards addressing various concerns.
The prior Economic Development Director worked on downtown parking and met with the
downtown business community on September 19, 2017 and got their feedback as follows:
NOTES FROM PARKING CONVERSATION
9 -19 -17
Downtown Businesses
• Convenience retail (dry cleaner) has issues with turnover and would like more short -term spaces
(15) min
• Peaks and valleys for downtown parking. Issues at 10:00 and 3:00
• Trouble finding employee parking
• Would like to increase hours of enforcement and improve process (heard anecdotes of
enforcement officer specifically targeting employees who may be "repeat offenders ")
• Julie C, Aine's — "We average —$60 /week in parking tickets that we just pay. We're willing to pay
for designated employee spots if they were actually available"
• Would like the opportunity to purchase or have available some long term visitor parking (over 2
hrs)
• "Why can't we use the Town Hall parking lot on Friday's and after hours ?"
• There is a need for improved signage directing people to parking. Also a need for pedestrians
• There is a need for a solution to the 2 hour parking. Either make available moving or increase #
of spaces
• We do not want meters
• There are (safety ?) issues for employees who park farther away from store after hours
CPDC recently discussed downtown parking at their January 8, 2018 meeting. One idea was to
have Town staff take the lead in analyzing options for studying downtown parking needs. A
working group of local businesses similar to the Wayfinding project could be created to work with
Town staff. A small "peer review" consultant could be engaged as an added technical element of
the project.
Discussion with the Board of Selectmen, the Roadway Commissioners of the Town of Reading, is
an essential next step.
LEGAL BUDGET
LEGAL BUDGET TOTAL
Town Counsel
Typical Issues
Other Issues
Town Labor Counsel
Cable Negotiations
TLT - Outside Counsel
TOWN COUNSEL TOTAL
Typical Issues
Other Issues
T
other
YTD ACTUAL
$ 37,479
$ 30,288
$ 21,534
$ 8,753
$ 6,112
$ -
$ 1,080
YTD ACTUAL
$ 30,287.84
$ 21,534.43
$ 8,753.41
BUDGET
$ 250,000
$ 200,000
$ 150,000
$ 50,000
$ 25,000
$ 25,000
$ -
BUDGET
$ 200,000
$ 150,000
$ 50,000
BALANCE
$ 187,521
$ 169,712
$ 128,466
$ 41,247
$ 18,889
$ -
$ (1,080)
BALANCE
$ 169,712
$ 128,466
$ 41,247
YTD
15%
15% 2 mo.
14%
18%
24% 4 mos.
0%
YTD July
August September October
Miyares & Harrington Total
$
30,287.84
$
200,000
$
169,712
$
10,243
$ 20,045
Public Policy
119%
$
5,693.50
$
60,000
$
54,307
9%
Town Meeting
T
$
1,579.00
$
40,000
$
38,421
$ 1,579
Zoning Bylaws
T
$
59.50
$
4,000
$
3,941
$
60
General Bylaws
T
$
972.00
$
4,000
$
3,028
$
454
$ 518
Licensing
T
$
3,083.00
$
7,000
$
3,917
$
2,124
$ 960
Elections
T
$
-
$
2,000
$
2,000
other
T
$
-
$
3,000
$
3,000
Management Policy
9%
$
15,246.43
$
40,000
$
13,344
38%
General Town issues
T
$
769.50
$
10,000
$
9,231
$
398
$ 372
Town /Assessors
T
$
195.00
$
500
$
305
$
195
Town /Bd of Health
T
$
11,814.43
$
5,000
$
(6,814)
$
1,473
$ 10,342
Town /Hist Comm
T
$
262.50
$
S00
$
238
$
263
Public Works
T
$
589.00
$
5,000
$
4,411
$
214
$ 376
Public Safety
T
$
960.00
$
5,000
$
4,040
$
82
$ 878
Public Library
T
$
-
$
2,500
$
2,500
Building department
T
$
-
$
1,500
$
1,500
Facilities
T
$
656.00
$
5,000
$
4,344
$ 656
General School issues
T
$
-
$
5,000
$
5,000
Construction projects
3%
$
963.50
$
15,000
$
14,037
6%
Public Library
T
$
594.50
$
7,500
$
6,906
$
595
Perm Bldg Comm
T
$
-
$
2,500
$
2,500
TLT /RMHS
other
$
369.00
$
5,000
$
4,631
$
369
other
other
$
-
$
-
$
-
Land Use Issues
16%
$
8,384.41
$
45,000
$
13,894
19%
Reading Village 40B
other
$
-
$
5,000
$
5,000
Woburn St. 40B
other
$
1,434.66
$
5,000
$
3,565
$
1,435
Lakeview 40B
other
$
-
$
5,000
$
5,000
Oakland Road land
other
$
-
$
5,000
$
5,000
245 Summer /Criterion
other
$
2,175.50
$
2,500
$
325
$
699
$ 1,477
506 Summer Ave /Gallo
other
$
922.50
$
2,500
$
1,578
$
390
$ 533
86 Bancroft
other
$
328.00
$
2,500
$
2,172
$
328
75 Pearl
other
$
1,994.25
$
2,500
$
506
$ 1,994
119 Salem St.
other
$
20.50
$
2,500
$
21
Ferrazi
other
$
1,148.00
$
2,500
$
1,148
other
other
$
361.00
$
10,000
$
9,639
$ 361
Other Issues
0%
$
-
$
40,000
$
40,000
0%
Miyares & Harrington
T
$
-
$
40,000
$
40,000
LABOR COUNSEL TOTAL
$
6,111.50
$
25,000
$
18,889
Morgan, Brown & Joy
$
6,111.50
$
25,000
$
18,889
$
3,240
$ 520 $ 400 $ 1,952
SPECIAL CABLE COUNSEL TOT
$
$
25,000
$
25,000
encumbered
from last year
TBA
$
-
$
25,000
$
25,000
NEW: TILT LITIGATION TOTAL
$
1,080.00
$
-
$
(1,080)
TLT /K &P
$
1,080.00
$
(1,080)
$
1,080
TLT /Master
$
-
$
-
Saunders, Caitlin
From: vtsdmailer @vt -s.net on behalf of Contact form at Reading MA <vtsdmailer @vt- s.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 2:07 PM
To: Saunders, Caitlin
Subject: [Reading MA] Reading Girl Scouts 100 (Sent by Joanne Senders, kjsenders @verizon.net)
Hello csaunders,
Joanne Senders (kisenders @verizon.net) has sent you a message via your contact form
(https: / /www.readingma.gov /users /csaunders /contact) at Reading MA.
If you don't want to receive such e- mails, you can change your settings at https: / /www.readingma.gov /user /281 /edit.
Message:
Hi,
Reading Girl Scouts is turning 100 on March 10 with a big celebration at Camp Rice Mooday. We were hoping the BOS
could proclaim March 10 GS day and make an announcement at one of their meetings prior to March 10. And of course
town officials are very welcome to attend the days festivities on the 10th.
thank you
Joanne Senders
100th Committee Member
'I - . 50 f inity
nn Jr" 10
December 27, 2017
Board of Selectmen
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867
Re: Comcast Government Relations — Contact Change
Dear Chairman and Members of the Board:
I am writing to share with you that Jane Lyman, Sr. Government Relations Manager for your community,
will be retiring from Comcast effective December 29, 2017.
As a result, I am pleased to advise that Greg Franks, Sr. Manager of Government & Regulatory Affairs will
be the Government Relations representative for your community effective immediately.
Within the coming weeks Greg will be reaching out to you personally as our goal is to make this transition
as seamless as possible for you. However, should you have any issues or concerns before then please do
not hesitate to contact Greg via email at Gregory _Franks @cable.comcast.com or by phone at 508 -647-
1418. In addition, Greg can also be reached at:
Greg Franks, Sr. Manager
Government Relations
Comcast
241 W. Central St.
Natick, MA 01760
Sincerely,
A�?�-�
Gerald Buckley, Director
Government & Regulatory Affairs
DAVID MONAHAN
25 Maple Ridge Road
Reading, Massachusetts 01867
781 - 315 -2586
December 21, 2017
Members, Board of Selectmen
Town of Reading
Town Hall
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867
i�
ca
t`13
Re: Increase in fee for depot parkin
01
To the Honorable Selectmen,
I am writing to convey my opinion that the 500% increase in the price of a sticker for
residents to park at the train depot is unfair, and was handled unfairly.
The Town says the increase from $25 to $150 is "meant to cover costs attributed to the train
depot that were otherwise being paid for by taxpayers." But the increase does not require all Town
residents who use the depot to contribute toward its upkeep, only a small subset —those who park at
or near the depot. Many people use the depot but walk there, or are driven there and dropped off by
a family member. With this huge fee increase, those numbers will probably increase significantly.
Which unfairly leaves this increase in revenue solely on the backs of people like me who do not live
close enough to walk to the depot and back without taking a large chunk of time out of each day,
and don't have someone to drive us to and from the station.
It's also unfair to have a huge jump for the depot sticker while the compost -only fee remains
the same. Those who only want to use the compost center will pay the exact same price that they
paid more than 20 years ago, not a penny more. Haven't the costs for upkeep of the compost center
risen since then, just like the costs of upkeep of the train depot? The Town will likely sell many
more compost -only stickers than depot stickers. It's possible that the Town could have raised the
same amount of revenue by increasing the compost -only fee to $30 or $35 and capping the cost for
depot stickers at, say, $100. That would have been more equitable.
The Selectmen justify the increase by saying people pay a lot more to park at other stations,
so this "still represents good value." To me, that translates as "you've had it good for a long time,
consider yourself lucky, we've got to raise revenue somewhere." If I was paying the owner of a
garage or parking lot, I would expect to pay a substantial price. But I don't even park at the depot, I
park nearby —on streets which I already pay to maintain with my tax dollars.
I also think the Selectmen could have done more to notify train riders about the hearings and
the decision regarding an increase. I ride the train every day, and I never saw any notice that
hearings were being held regarding a possible increase. I realize that meeting agendas and minutes
are public, and an increase has been discussed for a while. But many of us do not regularly keep
apprised of Town business, and if you wanted true input from those who would be affected by the
increase, you could have posted a notice or handed out fliers at the depot. The same goes for word
of the vote for the increase. With a 500% increase announced so close to the end of the year —it
would have been helpful for the Town to provide notice directly to train riders at the depot.
Fortunately a friend mentioned it to me recently, or I would have walked into the Police Department
with my usual $25 in hand, and had quite a rude awakening.
I greatly appreciate your service to the Town and its residents. But I think this decision was
unfair and not handled well, and I hope you will respond to my concerns.
Respectfully,
0&44 At&�
David Monahan
Mariclaire Rigby
Lead Vegetation Strategy Specialist
n at (i F'", . r}. Vegetation Strategy
loll ro / f i L15
_
939 Southbridge Street Worcester, MA 01610
508 - 860 -6282
mariclaire .rigby @nationalgrid.com
December 5, 2017
Board of Selectmen Chair
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 1867
Dear Board of Selectmen Chair:
In compliance with 333 CMR 11.06, 45 Day Yearly Operational Plan Public Notice, Review and Comment,
please review National Grid's (New England Power Company and /or Massachusetts Electric Company) 2018
Yearly Operational Plan (YOP) at the following website (hard copy available upon request):
https://www9.nationalgridus.com/non html /2018 %20YOP.pdf
National Grid's YOP details specific information pertaining to the intended 2018 program. Please note that
the YOP also lists the rights -of -way from the 2017 treatment program in case National Grid needs to request
a "touch -up" retreatment of scattered locations from our contractor(s).
Please review the enclosed YOP map(s) that locate the right -of -way corridors and the plotted location of
known sensitive areas including public and private drinking water supplies. If there are any additional
sensitive areas located on or near the rights -of -way, please advise us as soon as possible so we may
establish permanent records and implement appropriate field protective actions. We particularly rely on
this process to collect corrections to the public wells and to record the location of private wells.
A copy of the Environmental Monitor Notice is enclosed and published under the Massachusetts
Environmental Policy Act (MEPA): http://webl.env.state.ma.us/EEA/emepa/emonitor.aspx
This notification also serves as a 21 day herbicide application notification. As detailed in National Grid's Five
Year Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) and Yearly Operational Plan (YOP), this treatment is conducted
as a component of an integrated vegetation management (IVM) program that also utilizes mechanical and
natural control techniques. National Grid's current Five Year Vegetation Management Plan (2014 -2018) is
posted at the following website (hard copy available upon request):
http: / /www national grid us. com /non html/ National %20Grid %20VMP %202014 %20- %202018.pdf
As described in the VMP and YOP, the program will consist of a late winter- spring mechanical control, cut
surface (CST) or basal treatment; a summer selective foliage, and, as necessary, summer and fall CST and
basal treatments.
Trpatmpnt Periods*
January 29, 2018 — May 31, 2018
May 31, 2018 - October 15, 2018
October 15, 2018 — December 31, 2018
CST
Foliar
CST
Basal
CST
Basal
Basal
* The exact treatment dates are dependent upon weather conditions and field crew progress.
� r
In compliance with 333 CMR 11.06- 11.07, no herbicide applications will occur before the conclusion of the
45 day YOP review period, the 21 day treatment notice and the 48 hour newspaper notice. At the end of
these review periods, which can run concurrently, no application shall commence more than ten days before
nor conclude more than ten days after the treatment periods listed above.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts recommended herbicides for use in sensitive areas listed in Section 7
(pages 13 -15) of the YOP will be selectively applied to target vegetation by experienced, Massachusetts'
licensed /certified applicators that walk along the rights -of -way using backpack equipment. Copies of the
manufacturers' herbicide labels and fact sheets are also included in the YOP, Appendices 8 and 9.
The work will be performed by one of the following companies:
Vegetation Control Service, Inc.
2342 Main Street
Athol, MA 01331
(978) 249 -5348
Lucas Tree Experts
12 Northbrook Drive
Falmouth, ME 04105
(800) 339 -8873
Lewis Tree Service, Inc.
300 Lucius Gordon Drive
West Henrietta, NY 14586
(585) 436 -3208
Stanley Tree
662 Great Road
North Smithfield, RI
(401) 765 -4677
This informational 21 -day notification is in compliance with Chapter 132B, section 6B of the Massachusetts
General Laws, 333 CMR 11.05 -11.07 Rights of Way Management and Chapter 85, Section 10 of the Acts of
2000. National Grid's vegetation management program is subject to federal and state regulations only. By
statute, local permits or rulings are not applicable.
For inquiries concerning safety of the herbicides, please contact:
MDAR- Pesticide Division
ROW Coordinator
251 Causeway Street, Suite 500
Boston, MA 02114 -2151
Telephone: (617)626 -1782
Please contact me if you have any questions about the application and monitoring of the vegetation control
program.
Sincerely,
Mariclaire Rigby
Lead Vegetation Strategy Specialist
Enclosures: Environmental Monitor Notice
Map(s)
CC: Board of Health
Conservation Commission
Private and Public Water Suppliers
Lewis Tree Service or Lucas Tree Experts or Stanley Tree or Vegetation Control Service
Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources
Municipality: Reading
q�,a
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
Department of Agricultural Resources
251 Causeway Street, Suite 500, Boston, MA 02114 DA
_M 617 -626 1700 fax: 617 -626 -1850 www.mass.gov /agr MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
CHARLES D. BAKER KARYN E. POLITO MATTHEW A. BEATON JOHN LEBEALIX
Governor Lt. Governor Secretary Commissioner
Notice
Pursuant to the provisions of the Rights -of -Way Management Regulations, 333 CMR 11.00, to apply herbicides to
control vegetation along rights -of -way, a five year Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) and a Yearly Operational Plan (YOP)
must be approved by the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR). National Grid has submitted and
holds a current VMP, therefore, notice of receipt of a YOP and procedures for public review is hereby given as required by
Section 11.06 (3).
National Grid has submitted a YOP to MDAR for 2018 and National Grid's YOP identifies the following
municipalities as locations where they intend to use herbicides to treat their electric Rights-of-Way in 2018:
Abington
Amesbury
Andover
Attleboro
Auburn
Ayer
Barre
Belchertown
Berlin
Bernardston
Boxford
Bridgewater
Buckland
Charlemont
Charlton
Chelmsford
Chelsea
Clinton
Colrain
Dudley
East
Bridgewater
Easthampton
Erving
Everett
Fall River
Florida
Foxborough
Franklin
Georgetown
Grafton
Groveland
Hanover
Haverhill
Heath
Holden
Hopedale
Hudson
Lancaster
Leicester
Leominster
Leyden
Lowell
Lunenberg
Lynn
Lynnfield
Malden
Mansfield
Marlborough
Melrose
Mendon
Merrimack
Milford
Millbury
Monroe
New Salem
North
Adams
North
Brookfield
North
Reading
Northampton
Northborough
Norwell
Oakham
Paxton
Petersham
Plainville
Princeton
Reading
Revere
Rockland
Rowe
Rutland
Salisbury
Saugus
Scituate
Shelburne
Shirley
Somerset
Southborough
Spencer
Sterling
Sutton
Tewksbury
Upton
Uxbridge
Wakefield
Webster
Wendell
West
Boylston
West
Brid ewater
West
Newbury
Westborough
Weymouth
Whitman
Williamstown
Wilmington
Worcester
Wrentham
In 2018 National Grid will conduct a selective herbicide treatment program on their rights -of -way as part of an
Integrated Vegetation Management (IVM) program on transmission and distribution lines.
The intended vegetation control program will be consistent with the guidelines set forth in National Grid's VMP and
YOP. Herbicides will be selectively applied to target vegetation by licensed /certified applicators carrying backpack or hand
held application equipment.
National Grid will only use herbicides recommended by MDAR for use in sensitive areas for their IVM program.
Pursuant to 333 CMR 11.04, no herbicides will be sprayed within any designated "no spray sensitive sites." Instead,
mechanical only methods will be used to control vegetation in these areas.
Public notification will be provided to each "affected" municipality at least twenty -one days prior to any herbicide
application and in a newspaper notification at least 48 hours before the beginning of the spray season.
V�
In accordance with 333 CMR 11.06 (2), National Grid's YOP includes the identification of target vegetation; methods
of identifying, marking and protecting sensitive areas; application techniques; the herbicides, application rates, carriers and
adjuvants proposed for use; alternative control measures, a list of the application companies and YOP supervisor; procedures
for handling, mixing and loading herbicides; emergency resources including local, state and federal emergency telephone
numbers; maps of the rights -of -way that include mapped sensitive areas, and herbicide fact sheets and labels.
PUBLIC REVIEW
MDAR seeks to verify the location of sensitive areas defined in Section 11.02 and reported in the YOP. MDAR itself
has a limited ability to survey the geography, land use and water supplies in all the communities through which rights -of -way
pass. Municipalities have most of this information readily available, and the particular knowledge with which to better certify
the sensitive areas in their communities. MDAR, therefore, requests, and urges the assistance of the "affected" municipalities
in reviewing the completeness and accuracy of the maps contained in the submitted YOP.
The YOP can be viewed on MDAR's website: http: / /www.mass.gov /eea /agencies /agr/ pesticides /vegetation- management -and-
yearly- operation- plans.html or National Grid's website: https: / /www9.nationalgridus.com /transmission /c3 -8 standocs.asp
MDAR has established the following procedures for this review:
Copies of the YOP and this Notice will be sent by the applicant to the Conservation Commission, Board of Health (or
designated health agent), the Head of Government (Mayor, City Manager, Chair of the Board of Selectman) and appropriate
water suppliers of each municipality where herbicides are to be applied during the calendar year of 2018; and if applicable, to
the Natural Heritage Endangered Species Program of the Massachusetts Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, the
Massachusetts Water Resource Authority and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation. Municipal
agencies and officials will have forty -five days, following receipt of the YOP, to review its map for inaccuracies and omissions
in the location of "sensitive areas not readily identifiable in the field."
Municipal agencies and officials are requested to forward the YOP to the appropriate official(s) in their municipality
who are qualified to certify the accuracy of the sensitive areas indicated on the maps. The maps should then be "corrected" and
returned to the applicant and a copy should be sent to MDAR, at the address listed below, within the forty-five day review
period. If a city or town needs more time to carry out this review, it should send a written request for an extension to MDAR
and cite why there is a "good cause" for requesting additional time.
The applicant is required to make corrections and the corrected maps will be sent back to the city/town that requested
the disputed changes within fifteen days of receipt of the request. MDAR will decide whether or not the YOP should be
approved without the requested changes. MDAR will consider the "final approval" of a YOP individually for each
municipality.
The twenty-one day public review period of the Municipal Notification Letter may serve concurrently with the forty -
five day YOP review period in order to provide public notifications as required by 333 CMR 11.06 -7, if the applicant has an
approved VMP and if all the requisite city-town offices that received copies of the YOP completed their review and all
corrections were duly made by the applicant and approved by MDAR.
A failure by the city /town to respond to the applicant's submission of the YOP within the forty-five day period will
automatically be considered by MDAR to indicate agreement by the municipal officials with the sensitive area demarcations
provided by the applicant in their YOP.
Any questions or comments on the information provided in this Notice and the procedures established for the
municipal review outlined above should be addressed to:
Clayton Edwards, Rights -of -Way Programs
Massachusetts State Pesticide Bureau
251 Causeway Street, Suite 500
Boston, MA 02114-2151
Any questions or comments regarding the YOP should be addressed to:
Mariclaire Rigby
Lead Vegetation Strategy Specialist
National Grid Vegetation Management Strategy
939 Southbridge Street,Worcester, MA 01610
COMMENT PEROID ENDS AT THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON January 19.2017
Saunders, Caitlin
From: LeLacheur, Bob
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 11:16 AM
To: Saunders, Caitlin
Subject: FW: [Reading MA] Town budget (Sent by Etain O'Dea, etainodea @gmail.com)
BOS packet
Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. CFA
Town Manager, Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street, Reading, MA 01867
townmanager @ci.reading.ma.us
(P) 781 - 942 -9043;
(F) 781 - 942 -9037
www.readingma.gov
Town Hall Hours:
Monday, Wednesday and Thursday: 7:30 a.m - 5:30 p.m.;Tuesday: 7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.; Friday: CLOSED
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: vtsdmailer @vt -s.net [mailto:vtsdmailer @vt- s.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 9:55 AM
To: Reading - Selectmen
Subject: [Reading MA] Town budget (Sent by Etain O'Dea, etainodea @gmail.com)
Hello Board of Selectmen,
Etain O'Dea (etainodea @gmail.com) has sent you a message via your contact form
(https: / /www.readingma.gov /user /475 /contact) at Reading MA.
If you don't want to receive such e- mails, you can change your settings at https: / /www.readingma.gov /user /475 /edit.
Message:
Dear Board of Selectmen
As a Reading resident for the past 6 1/2 years and a Town Meeting Member, I thank you for your service to Reading and
your consideration of a budget over ride in order to get the town back to service levels. With three children in
elementary school, yes, my first priority is education, but I also know that I need support from police, fire fighters, and
hopefully will be fortunate to age in Reading and take advantage of everything Reading offers to our citizens of all ages.
Our children today will be our citizens of tomorrow, and they have a right to a decent education and will give back to the
town with that same education.
The world is a big and a small place; learning languages is great for the brain and for a greater understanding of the
world. The opioid epidemic is not'somewhere else' and we need health education in middle school; sexual activity starts
well before high school for many kids, as much as most of us are sure that it will not be'our kids'. Children with special
needs make our schools better and our kids more empathetic, so we need to support inclusion where ever possible.
a��
I moved to Reading in large part for the schools, and while I know that I am the most accountable element in my
children's education, I am hopeful that our schools can get back to earning the reputation they have in helping to create
and develop well rounded, highly educated, caring citizens of this town, state, country and world.
Thank you
Etain
Saunders, Caitlin
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
BOS packet
Sent from my Whone
Begin forwarded message:
LeLacheur, Bob
Saturday, January 13, 2018 8:08 AM
Saunders, Caitlin
Fwd: Verizon Fios TV - LFA Notification
Customer Notice - SONY.pdf, ATT00001.htm
From: "Connors, Niall S" <niall.s.connorskverizon.com>
Date: January 13, 2018 at 6:32:45 AM EST
To: undisclosed- recipients:;
Subject: Verizon Fios TV - LFA Notification
Dear Municipal Official:
This is to inform you that effective January 13, 2018, SONY Movie Channel (ch. 737)
and Cine SONY Television (ch. 1689) were removed from the Rose TV channel lineup.
Verizon began notifying subscribers through the Fios® TV Message Center on or
around January 13, 2018. A sample customer notice is attached.
As you're probably aware, we receive new proposals from content providers when it's
time to renew the existing agreement for a channel we currently provide. Given that
the cost of programming is the single biggest factor in higher TV bills we carefully
review these proposals to be sure that the content providers' rates are in line with their
viewership. This practice allows us to bring our customers a competitive rate for the
channels that they actually watch.
Access to the Rose TV channel lineup is available 24/7 online
at verizon.com /fiostvchannels.
We realize that our customers have other alternatives for entertainment and our goal is
to offer the best choice and value in the industry. Verizon appreciates the opportunity to
conduct business in your community. Should you or your staff have any questions,
please contact me.
Sincerely,
Niall Connors
Fios Franchise Service Manager
Massachusetts and Rhode Island
me
6 Bowdoin Square, 10th Floor
Boston, MA 02114
O 857.415.5123 1 M 781.715.7058
niall.s.connors(aD-verizon.com
�
9a
verizonJ
Fios® TV Programming Change
As you're probably aware, we receive new proposals from content providers when it's time to
renew the existing agreement for a channel we currently provide. Given that the cost of
programming is the single biggest factor in higher TV bills we carefully review these proposals
to be sure that the content providers rates are in line with their viewership. This practice allows
us to bring you a competitive rate for the channels that you actually watch.
As a result, we have decided to drop SONY Movie Channel and Cine SONY Television from our
lineup effective January 13, 2018.
We encourage you to watch similar content that is available on Fios TV:
AMC: Channel 731
Turner Classic Movies (TCM): Channel 230
MGM: Channel 744
Cine Latino: Channel 1685
We remain committed to providing you with diverse and compelling entertainment options at a
great value.
Thank you for being a loyal customer.
()\ I
y T T THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
^� ) OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
z,, T ONE ASHBURTON PLACE
yC'A -1 y%~ BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02108
MAuRA HEALEY (617) 727 -2200
A (617) 727 -4765 TTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL
www.mass.gov /ago
January 16, 2018
Emily Maughan,
263 Woburn Street --
Reading, MA 01867 00
RE: Open Meeting Law Complaint
Dear Ms. Maughan: sNl)
Thank you for.contacting the Attorney General's Office, On January 16, 2018, we
received your Open Meeting Law complaint, which was originally received by the Reading
Board of Selectmen on or about November 9, 2017. We will review your complaint and will
contact you in the event that we require additional information. We will notify you of our
determination following our Office's review.
Your complaint may be resolved through either a formal order or informal action.
Formal orders contain a detailed discussion of the alleged violation, applicable legal
requirements, and may order any of the remedies provided in G.L. c. 30A, § 23(c). If a
complaint is appropriate for informal action, we will attempt to resolve the matter by speaking to
the parties, followed by a brief letter noting whether or not there was a violation and what
remedial action was taken.
For additional information on the Open Meeting Law and the complaint process, please
visit our website at www.mass.gov/ago/opem-neeting, Please do not hesitate to contact the
Division of Open Government with any further questions.
cc: Ivria Glass Fried, Esq., Miyares and Harrington, LLP
Reading Board of Selectmen
0