HomeMy Public PortalAbout2020.07.16 LBT Minutes Minutes--McCall Public Library Board of Trustees Meeting
July 16, 2020 9:00 AM
Location: Zoom meeting
Call to order: Meeting called to order by Jacki Rubin at 9:02 AM
Attendance:Jacki Rubin, Ed Hershberger, Lola Elliot, David Gallipoli, Bob Giles, Meg Lojek, Erin Greaves,
and Amy Rush.
Amendments to Agenda: None.
Approval of Minutes: 6/18/20-approved and seconded by Ed and Lola
Welcome new Trustee: David Gallipoli
Director's Report:
Payment Approvals: Ed and Lola approved payments of 6/16, 7/1, and 7/9/20.All in favor.
Budget and Stats: May Monthly financial statement approved by Ed and David. Remember to
review the statement online.
LGIP Statements:January 2020-June 2020 approved by Ed and Lola.
FY21 Budget process: Budget remains consistent with prior years budget;July 24th Meg will have
budget hearing with City Council. Fines revenue is way down—consistent with COVID policy to
charge no fines, but it was agreed this is not a concern. Meg explained what funds will carry
forward: grants, LOT and CIP.Trustees requested the library budget should include line item for a
public campaign in 2021.
Staff:Welcome to Bre Anderson, new Children's Programs librarian. Meg and staff preparing
several small grants including a Book Bike and StoryWalk. NEH grant for a County wide Big Read
postponed indefinitely. Huge thank you to Meg and Diane Penny for the Bond Survey analysis.
COVID19 Updates:Staff has done an outstanding job working with the virus guidelines and
failure of the bond. Emotional saturation! Maybe cookies and flowers!
Presentation of City's survey results regarding library bond initiative: Erin Greaves presented, and the
Trustees thanked her for her outstanding effort. Major concerns for bond failure included Saturation,
Lack of transparency,Timing, Cost. (See attached MEMO)
Discussion of upcoming City Council work session and strategic plan for future options for a library
building expansion effort:The Board discussed options and asked Meg to summarize their unanimous
voice in a MEMO.The Board recommends to Council: a May 2021 ballot initiative; a library of
appropriate size, but a changed financial plan to drop cost for the bond package;there are a number of
ways to do that, but Trustees recommend a library-centric initiative and are ready to work together with
Council to solve the problem. Based on survey results,the main suggestion is to not include the Parks
building in the bond financing. (see attached MEMO)
Fundraising report: Amy reported the Ambassador group is enthusiastic, but that going forward,they
only feel comfortable continuing with fundraising specifically for the library in support of any new bond
initiative.All donors have opted to leave contingent donations on the table for us and work hard for the
next bond presentation. Good job Amy!
Page 11
Friends Liaison report: COVID has the Pump House closed until further notice. Storage at the airport has
been very successful and hopefully will be allowed to continue.The annual barbeque and Membership
tea have been cancelled due to the virus. Meg is assisting the FOL with virtual meetings via Zoom.
Foundation report: None. It was noted the Trustees will want to select a new liaison to the Foundation
in place of John.
City Council Liaison report: Bob and City council remain committed to the project but reminded us that
partnership through compromise is essential!
Adjourned: 10:30 AM
Next Meetings: August 20th, 9:00 AM Regular monthly meeting, Legion Hall or virtual
September 17th, 9:00 AM Regular monthly meeting, Legion Hall or virtual
October 15th, 9:00 AM Regular monthly meeting, Legion Hall or virtual
2 attachments: survey results and MEMO to Council.
Minutes prepared by Lola Elliot
Respectfully submitted by Jacki Rubin, Chair '
Page 12
MEMO
To: Library Trustees
From: Diane Penny, Meg Lojek
Date: 7-16-20
Re: Post bond survey patterns
BACKGROUND:
Library staff looked for patterns of responses in the Survey Monkey results and tried to
summarize them in a digestible way.
RESULTS:
1. Most frequent responses from residents who voted "Yes":
• 159 voters—COMMUNITY
The new library will benefit the entire community; libraries are essential for thriving
communities; a library represents the community.
• 67 voters—SPACE
The library clearly needs more space to expand services and materials.
• 62 voters—GROWTH
McCall is growing and needs and updated 2111 century library for the future.
• 32 voters—LIBRARY LOVERS
"I support libraries!"
• 20 voters—EDUCATION
The educational resources that the library offers are very important.
• 17 voters—MEETING SPACES
The community needs meeting/gathering spaces.
• 12 voters—DEMOCRACY
Libraries are important for Democracy and/or community conversations.
• 6 voters—YES BUT...
I voted yes but have concerns about too expensive (4)
1 voted yes but have concerns about including library only in the bond (2)
2. Most frequent responses from residents who voted "No":
• 22 voters—PARKS AND REC/CITY OFFICES
The bond should not have included other entities in a "library" bond.
• 18 voters—COST/SCOPE
The bond was too expensive, cost too great.
• 14 voters—LIBRARY NOT PRIORITY
The City should prioritize other projects; libraries are not needed.
• 9 voters—CORONAVIRUS/ ECONOMY
It is not a good time because of the virus pandemic and the uncertain economy.
• 7 voters—LOCATION
The City should consider alternate sites such as the highway building or the Ponderosa
Center.
• 7 voters—NO NEW TAXES
• 4 voters—MISINFORMED
e.g., live in Lake Fork but don't want to be taxed; library is never used; staff will take up
all the parking leaving no public parking.
3. Most frequent responses from non-residents living outside City limits:
• 34 people would have voted Yes if they could.
• 7 people would vote Yes if the project drops Parks and Rec/City offices.
• 6 people would vote Yes if we lower the cost.
• 5 people want us to look at alternate locations.
• 1 person suggested hiring local architects and builders.
• 12 would not support the bond no matter what. These reasons included:
➢ 5 scope/cost too high
➢ 5 library should be low priority for City funds
➢ 1 alternate site location was the reason they would vote no
➢ 1 Parks/ rec/other city offices were the reason they would vote no
• 4 non-residents asked "can we create a library district so we can vote and share the cost
outside the City limits?"
• 4 non-residents "I support the expansion and have donated"
• 5 non-residents are frustrated that they must pay for a card or that they can't vote.
These 5 respondents were misinformed and show an opportunity to better educate the
public on how the library funding structure works.
4. Did not vote...
• "Other" category included 10 responses that the person could potentially vote in the
next election. The other 61 responses said they were not full-time residents.
MEMO
To: City Council
From: Library Trustees
Date: 7-16-20
Re: library expansion work session 7-23-20
BACKGROUND:
Trustees met on July 16th and had a healthy discussion regarding next steps. Erin Greaves
presented her interpretation of survey results and Mayor Giles helped by participating in the
discussion.
RESULTS:
Based on survey results and conversations,the Library Trustees are ready to work together with
Council and move forward with library expansion.The Foundation and fundraisers are also
ready to continue working toward the goal. The following points were agreed upon
unanimously and suggested to discuss during the work session:
■ Wait until May 2021 for another possible bond initiative.
■ Stay the course with a library of appropriate size for our community, as already
identified through extensive professional research and community outreach over the
past 5 years.
■ Based on survey results, listen to community concerns about cost and scope and
present a slightly adjusted financial package to voters.
■ There are a number of possible ways to get there, and the Trustees are ready to work
together with Council to solve this puzzle. One suggestion that keeps the library
initiative library-centric is to lower the cost by not including a new Parks building in the
bond itself.