PUEBLO CITY-COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES WORK SESSION MINUTES. October 18, 2011

Transcription

1 PUEBLO CITY-COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES WORK SESSION MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL October 18, 2011 Mr. Stuart called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Board Members Present: Board Members Absent: Staff Present: Attorney Present: Jim Stuart, President; Marlene Bregar (arrived at 4:06); Rhonda Gonzales; Philip Mancha; Roy Miltner Sherri Baca, Vice President; Frances Terrazas-Alexander Jon Walker, Executive Director; Chris Brogan, Chief Financial Officer; Charles Hutchins, Director of Information Technology; others not recorded Nicholas Gradisar II. CORRECTIONS OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGENDA None III. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Photocopier Replacement Mr. Stuart announced that a bid process has been completed for replacement of PCCLD photocopiers, and a staff report on the process and recommendations would be presented to the Board. Charles Hutchins provided a presentation reviewing the RFP process which opened September 14 and closed September 30. The RFP specified ten new copiers for purchase which included 7 for public use which could use the present coin-ops and 3 for staff use with all the same models for ease of inventory. Specifications included print/copy/scan to USB or capabilities and easy-to-use interface for the public. The RFP also requested the cost of consumables such as toner and fuser to evaluate the long-term expense. Five vendors submitted bids. Mr. Hutchins reviewed the bids received and hardware costs for each of the proposed models. He also reviewed the 5-year cost of ownership including consumables and labor costs for 2 hours per year for each copier. Mr. Hutchins explained that although Gobins Konica 220 was the least expensive, that model was 12% short of the requested performance of 25 pages per minute for black and white copies, and has 20% less duty cycle than the C280 proposed by All Copy. (Ms. Bregar arrived at this point.) The slight 5% cost difference appears to be the best overall value. Mr. Hutchins said the recommendation is that the library enter into an agreement with All Copy Products for 10 new Konica Minolta Bizhub C280 copiers at a cost not to exceed $47, to be awarded on October 28 with work to begin on October 31 and completion by the end of the year. There was additional discussion among Board members addressing issues such as location of the vendor in Denver, reliability of the equipment, rotation of equipment to extend the life, and the ability to use photocopiers rather than printers. Mr. Hutchins added that staff had a chance to see the equipment in use at the CSU-Pueblo Library. Ms. Gonzales commented they have been pleased with the equipment overall, but there had been an issue with the Pharos system that allows students to swipe student cards to pay

2 copy charges but prevents them from being able to use coins. This is not an issue for PCCLD since it does not use Pharos. Mr. Walker explained that the library went through a bid process and evaluated the bid proposals last year along with the five-year costs of ownership projected at $141, which included maintenance and per-print rates, and if the library can absorb the maintenance fees by focusing on single models so staff can take care of routine maintenance, the library should see significant savings over the costs that were projected a year ago. The library will provide toner, fusers, and Mr. Hutchins pointed out that this is where businesses make a lot of money. Dr. Mancha asked how many copiers the library will be replacing, and Mr. Hutchins said the library will be replacing all the existing copiers except for the high-volume copier used in Community Relations. Dr. Mancha asked if 10 copiers will cover all the library s needs, and Mr. Hutchins said there are copiers at each of the branch libraries, 4 copiers at Rawlings, and 3 in the staff areas. Mr. Miltner asked if the present copiers were on lease, and Mr. Hutchins responded they are and will be returned to the company. Dr. Mancha said the Board looked into buying instead of leasing last year and determined the library would save money by purchasing. Mr. Stuart asked if there were any further concerns, and it was agreed that Board members would be prepared to vote on the photocopier recommendation at the October Board meeting. B. CAL Conference Team Up! Powering Library Partnerships Mr. Stuart said four Library Trustees attended the CAL Conference held last weekend and asked those attending to provide a brief overview. Each of the Board members attending the conference shared their impressions of the CAL Conference. There was agreement that the Awards Banquet was better this year, and they were pleased to see Chris Brogan receive the Unsung Hero Award. There was also a sense that they had not gained as much this year as in previous years. Mr. Stuart said one of the discussions was on the regular use of surveys in the library where they ask a series of questions to assess public relations and how the library is working with the public. Mr. Stuart said he knows we have done that, but he was not sure how much we have done. Mr. Stuart said surveys give library users a chance to speak out, and libraries can use the results to decide how the library should operate, and maybe we should consider using that. Dr. Mancha noted that every time he attends CAL, he comes away impressed with our own processes and our own Board. Dr. Mancha said one example is our Board s use of Work Sessions, and people had a lot of questions about that and seemed interested in adopting that concept. Dr. Mancha said he is impressed with this Board which seems well above the average Board, and other Board members shared similar experiences which reflect that Pueblo s library is regarded highly in Colorado. Mr. Walker noted that Board members may want to consider attending the ALA Conference in 2012 or the PLA Conference which focuses on public libraries to get a national perspective. Mr. Walker encouraged interested Board members to contact the Board Secretary to begin making arrangements. Ms. Bregar used one day to attend the Board of Trustees track, but also attended sessions on how public libraries play a part in helping college students with research skills, public library advocacy, and a lunch on arranging libraries for the net generation which could be useful as we arrange library spaces for teens.

3 Ms. Brogan encouraged Board members to share their comments with CAL, and there should be place on the CAL website to submit comments so the conference can be improved. Next year CAL will be held in Keystone, and she believes it will be held in October rather than November following a survey. Mr. Walker added that Abby Koehler made a presentation during CAL and was invited by Library Journal to participate in a webcast in the near future. They were interested in her perspective on the use of data when determining collection development. C. Board Self-Assessment Mr. Stuart said the Board members had been asked to review the Board Self-Assessment tool and were asked to return with suggestions for five areas of improvement. Mr. Stuart said he thought the Board came out very good in most ways, although he doesn t particularly like just checking a box. One of the suggestions at CAL when doing a survey was to use a range from 1 to 4, so people don t opt for the center it forces them to indicate it is either a little better or a little worse, even if they respond in the middle range. Mr. Stuart said he thinks the Board should evaluate themselves regularly, at least once a year. Mr. Stuart provided these suggestions: (1) The Board needs a better process for orienting new members. Mr. Walker and Mr. Stuart meet with new Board members, and they are provided a book with information, but there is not a real plan. Mr. Stuart emphasized that this needs to be done soon because there will be at least one new member at the end of the year. The plan might include a tour of library facilities, some history of the library, etc. (2) There needs to be a plan for regular policy review. The Board recently went through service policies last year, and some policies may be more volatile than others. Mr. Stuart suggested that when the Board sets a policy, it might also include a policy review date, and maybe a review date should be added to all of the policies. Mr. Stuart said the Board may want to look at whether that has any merit. (3) Trustees should advocate for the library on an ongoing basis and do more speaking to the public about the Library. Mr. Walker tends to represent the library. Mr. Stuart said this will be especially important with new libraries and RFID, and Board members should become more aggressive in speaking with service groups and also to solicit donations. (4) There needs to be more public recognition of Library Board members and officers and the Board s activities. Mr. Stuart said there used to be a member of the press who regularly attended Board meetings, but as controversy settled down, new Board members and Board activities do not get much recognition in the press, although the library gets plenty of press. (5) There should be a regular review of the Bylaws. Mr. Stuart suggested that be done by a committee. Mr. Stuart said it is important that what the Board is doing complies with the Bylaws. Dr. Mancha said he recently did a presentation on Bylaws, and he agrees the Bylaws need to be revised. There are specific statements that have not been used in years, and there are other things that should be included. Mr. Stuart suggested that the new officers put Bylaws on the list and appoint a committee to work on that and report back. It was pointed out that another thing that needs to be done at the start of the year is to have Ms. Brogan give a primer on financials, including the key numbers that need to be watched. Mr. Stuart said that needs to be done on a regular basis.

4 Ms. Bregar said in addition to orientation of new Board members, the Board might consider some orientation for prospective Board members for those who might be interested in serving on the Library Board. The Board might also discuss how to get people interested in serving on the Board. Ms. Bregar also commented that she appreciates having Work Sessions, even though it may seem to the public the Board is just approving things, it actually allows time to more carefully consider actions. Ms. Gonzales said she had only been to one meeting, and there is a lot that she still does not know. Ms. Gonzales said her initial perception has been that this is a healthy Board, and everyone is engaged and knowledgeable, and her impression is that the library is well managed. Dr. Mancha discussed a session at CAL which addressed the difference between assessing individuals and assessing the Board as a whole and whether the public library s users understand the impact of the Board on the library. The concept of what has been the impact of the Board is a useful way to think. The big advantage of this approach is that it is good for development. D. Public Library Foundation Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation Mr. Stuart said Attorney Heidi Glance had reviewed the Pueblo Library Foundation Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation and has made recommendations for revision. Mr. Gradisar said he had reviewed the recommendations, although some were stylistic. Board members reviewed the suggested revisions to the Articles of Incorporation. Mr. Gradisar had used the language from another library foundation, and he noted that the changes suggested are tax specific. Mr. Stuart pointed out a typographical error in Section 3.1 which required the removal of the word, by. Mr. Walker suggested if there are no other issues with the suggested revisions to the Articles of Incorporation that the Board be asked to approve these at the October Board meeting. There was consensus among those present that they were prepared to approve the Articles of Incorporation as revised. Mr. Gradisar said those changes will be made, and after the Board approves them, he will file those with the Secretary of State. The Board then went through a page-by-page review of the recommended revisions. Slight adjustments in language or typographical errors were noted. On page 3, Mr. Gradisar said he needs to speak with Heidi Glance because he is concerned the recommended revisions deal more with private foundations, and he wants to make sure the change referring to disqualified persons is absolutely necessary. Mr. Stuart noted that Heidi Glance was not concerned about the Board of Trustees being too closely tied to the Foundation with the suggested addition, It is the intention of the corporation that it be regarded as operated, supervised or controlled by the Pueblo City-County Library District within the meaning of Section 509(c)(3)(B)(i) of the Code. Dr. Mancha expressed some concern about the inclusion of the Friends of the Library and whether a subtler word than controlled could be used, and Mr. Gradisar said the language is probably straight from the Internal Revenue code. On page 4, the last sentence of the first paragraph of Section 3.3 had read, Any director may be removed at any time, with or without cause, by the Board of Trustees of Pueblo City-County Library District if such removal has been recommended by a majority of the board of directors of Pueblo Library Foundation. Ms. Glance had suggested the Board consider whether the Library Board should have the power to remove members even if the Foundation Board had not recommended their removal. There was significant discussion on the power of removal, and

5 concerns were raised on whether a Foundation Board could move in a different direction without the Library Board having control, issues such as reputations or removal of someone for having a different point of view, and whether the Board may consider having veto power. There was additional concern about the potential for the Library Board having veto power, concern whether that would be heavy handed, and whether Foundation Board members would feel as if their vote would not count, and it was noted the purpose was to prevent the Foundation from going in a different direction. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Gradisar if there should be a statement that says, Any action taken by the Foundation Board can be overturned by the majority vote of the Library Board. Mr. Gradisar said a statement like that would have to include a time limit, e.g., within 30 days, so there would be certainty. Mr. Gradisar plans to follow up with Heidi Glance, but it does look like the Board does control it, and it is important for tax issues that it be clear that it is a public foundation. There was a brief review of prior discussions regarding benefits of public rather than private foundations, additional concerns and the importance of the Library Board s control of the Foundation. The intention is clear that this is a fundraising arm for the Library District. It was agreed that the sentence should simply read, Any director may be removed at any time, with or without cause, by the Board of Trustees of Pueblo City-County Library District. The remainder of the sentence will be removed. On page 7, the Board reviewed the comment from Heidi Glance. There was additional discussion on control and the relationship between the Library Board, Friends Board and the Foundation Board. Ms. Bregar pointed out that the purpose of having committees with members who are not on the Foundation Board is to spread out the work, and the Foundation may need experts. Mr. Stuart agreed, and it gives them flexibility to get others to help with some of the work. The Library Board of Trustees will be the ultimate authority. On page 9, Heidi Glance questioned whether there should be a provision for action without a meeting. The Board had discussed this previously and expressly decided to remove that provision. On page 10, the question was raised whether Officers must be directors of the corporation included an Executive Director or Chief Financial Officer. After discussion it was agreed that the sentence be changed to read, Officers must be voting directors of the corporation. The remaining revisions were considered acceptable without further discussion. Mr. Walker said after Mr. Gradisar has reviewed his concerns with Heidi Glance, he will provide a clean copy for the Board s approval of these revisions at the October Board meeting. E. Pueblo Library Foundation Appointment Process Mr. Stuart said the Board of Trustees may discuss the appointment process for the Pueblo Library Foundation Board of Directors. Mr. Walker has developed a form for potential Foundation Board applicants to fill out. Ms. Gonzales noted that the future Foundation Board members will be recommended by the Foundation Nominating Committee, but it will be up to the Library Board to select the first Foundation Board. A number of questions were raised including how the Board wants to screen applicants, how to solicit applicants and how to select the initial Foundation Board. It was noted two will be selected from the Library Board, two from the Friends Board, and five will be at-large. Additional issues are whether the Board will simply accept the nominees from the Friends or use a screening process. Additional concerns were finding the type of expertise needed by the Foundation such as financial or fund raising skills and how to entice people to join the Foundation. Dr. Mancha suggested that it might be helpful to provide a recruitment packet with information on the donor base, budgetary information and some data such as the Annual Report.

6 Ms. Bregar suggested forming a committee to work with Mr. Walker in the next three weeks to set up a process. Dr. Mancha has great ideas, and maybe the committee could hammer through what the process should be and bring it back to the Board at the November Work Session. Ms. Gonzales suggested that the members of the nominating committee would not necessarily need to be Board members, e.g., Midori Clark. The Board agreed the best approach would be to appoint a committee to come back with a recommendation on what might work. The committee will consist of Dr. Mancha, Mr. Stuart, and Ms. Gonzales, Jon Walker and Midori Clark. Mr. Miltner said the first question on the application could be confusing. There was agreement, but the committee will also consider the application as part of the process. F Annual Plan Update Mr. Stuart said the Executive Director will provide a third quarter report on the 2011 Annual Plan. Mr. Walker referred to the most recent updates reported on October 3 and reported that the library is making good progress in most areas. There are a couple of areas where the objective will not be completed until 2012 which includes the InfoZone remodel and the floating collections. Mr. Walker noted that many of the objectives have been completed, and the Board just heard the report on the photocopier replacement that will be completed by the end of the year. Mr. Walker said there were a lot of neat things to be done this year like the Information Technology Centers, and he expects to provide an evaluation report to the Board on some of the other matters before the end of the year. Mr. Walker said he would be happy to address any questions. Mr. Stuart suggested this be added to the next Work Session to discuss further. G. Discussion of Agenda Items for October 27, 2011 Regular Board Meeting 1. Preliminary 2012 Annual Plan and Budget Mr. Stuart said the Board had been presented the preliminary 2012 Annual Plan and Budget for the Pueblo City-County Library District. Mr. Walker said the Board members should have received this on Friday by because the library is legally obligated to get the preliminary budget to the Board by October 15. Mr. Walker noted that the Annual Plan was developed based on the input received during the Annual Planning Retreat held in August. Mr. Walker brought a couple of key projects to the Board s attention that will be time-consuming and expensive; one is RFID, and the other is the recommendation to begin the process for two new libraries on the Eastside and on the St. Charles Mesa. Mr. Walker said there was a news article last week based on the draft letter that was shared with the Board prior to sending it to the County Commissioners, and the County Commissioners responded by asking Mr. Walker and Mr. Stuart to attend a meeting. The County Commissioners were favorably inclined to donate land for the purpose of building a library. Mr. Walker said he wanted to provide the Board with the background that resulted in the news article. Mr. Walker invited Ms. Brogan to review the budget portion of the document. Ms. Brogan distributed a spreadsheet with 10-year financial projections and the assumptions used in preparing that spreadsheet. Ms. Brogan noted that the budget is preliminary and will likely

7 change by the November public hearing. Ms. Brogan pointed out that the financial projections are needed to make sure the library can afford to do everything in the 2012 plan. Ms. Brogan said the good news is the 2012 Budget for property taxes increases 7% due to Xcel Energy coming on the tax rolls, and that will have a cumulative effect going forward. The 2013 property taxes are projected to increase 5% when Black Hills comes online. The ensuing years project minimal tax increases. In 2014, one of the downtown TIF issues will expire, resulting in $11,000 in additional revenue. In 2017, the Vestas TIF issue will expire, resulting in $272,000 in additional revenue. Ms. Brogan said what she cannot predict, however, are what TIF projects might be coming on that may change those projections. Ms. Brogan said Fines and Miscellaneous revenue are projected to increase 4% annually. Ms. Brogan pointed out the library is in the fourth year of a 25-year COP, and the first call date is a good time to refund those bonds. We have talked with G.K. Baum and Wells Fargo to see what our options are, but it is a good time to borrow money with interest rates so low and 2% below what our bonds are now. If we borrow additional money, it will increase bond service by $175,000 a year, but it is sustainable through 2020 with conservative revenue forecasts. The additional money will allow the library to pay for RFID and build two smaller libraries. Ms. Brogan said the financial projections continue 15% of the budget for materials which is bumped by 51% in 2013 for opening collections at two new libraries as well as extra insurance, salaries, and building maintenance for those libraries. Ms. Brogan said she used numbers for operating the library at 2/3 the operating costs for Barkman for 5,000 square foot libraries. Mr. Walker added that these libraries would be open fewer hours than Barkman with six 8-hour days of operation (48 hours per week rather than 66 hours per week) which reduces the salary imprint. If things work out and revenues allow, they might be able to add hours. The other consideration is that salaries are 50-60% of the budget. Mr. Walker said the opening of these libraries would also involve closing some satellites, and some of those staff hours could be transferred to the new libraries. There could also be some staff savings from RFID so staff would not be laid off but transferred to the new locations. Ms. Brogan pointed out the debt service percentage, even with additional borrowing stays well below the 10% policy maximum at 7%, and the fund balance 20% policy minimum never drops below 41%. Ms. Brogan said the Capital Project Fund is where the costs of the new projects are. Expenses for the Library Replacement Plan are being updated, which covers the cost to replace everything in a building, e.g., carpet, paint, Information Technology, etc. The total combined budget at the end of 2012 is almost $6 million, but this will continue to be updated until the final approval in December. Mr. Walker pointed out some of the other important projects for 2012 include the pay for performance plan and keeping 15% of the operating budget for purchasing materials. The Eastside Library was a top consideration at the retreat as well as RFID. Mr. Walker said the budget reflects the consensus of priority items from the planning retreat. Mr. Walker said it will be a very busy year and challenging for the district in a positive way. Mr. Walker said one of the important things pertaining to the foundation is there is $80,000 in the budget to support a development officer for the budget to help with fundraising. Mr. Walker said the library hopes to raise 10% of the amount needed for new libraries, so money was set aside in the budget for a development officer. Mr. Walker said he envisions that as a relationship between the district and the foundation, although another way to do that is for that person to be an employee of the foundation, but it will be an exciting opportunity for us.

8 Mr. Miltner said the Board has discussed an Eastside Library, but he did not recall plans for a library on the St. Charles Mesa. Mr. Stuart said the Board did discuss this several years ago and looked at some property out there, but it had not been discussed recently. Mr. Walker agreed that he will need to come back to that, but it had been in the 2009 Strategic Plan, and he understands there needs to be additional discussion. Mr. Stuart encouraged Board members to read through the 2012 Budget and Annual Plan document before the next Work Session so the Board can go over it in detail. Ms. Brogan encouraged Board members to contact her if they have any questions. Ms. Gonzales asked about the planned percentage increase in salaries, and Ms. Brogan explained most employees get a 2.5% increase; however, because those are awarded throughout the year based on each employee s date of hire, it does not result in a full 2.5% increase in the salary budget for the year. Employees who are in good standing receive a 2.5% increase. Mr. Walker said the library is moving to a pay-for-performance plan, so that may change. 2. Appointment of Auditor Mr. Stuart said the Board will be asked to appoint the auditor at the regular meeting next week, and it will be on the agenda as an action item. The Board will be asked to engage Swanhorst & Company which was the recommendation of the Audit Committee. IV. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Stuart reminded Board members that the next Regular Board Meeting will be held on Thursday, October 27 at the Rawlings Library. There will be an Employee Recognition Event at 5:00 p.m., immediately prior to the Board Meeting to recognize employees for their efforts and to introduce new employees. Mr. Stuart encouraged Board members to arrive early to help recognize the staff. There being no further discussion, the Work Session adjourned at approximately 6:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jane Carlsen Secretary