|
MINUTES
OCPL Board of Trustees’ Meeting
April 9, 2008
Central Library
Board Room
4:00 p.m.
ATTENDING: G. Biesiada, B. Fisher, A. Lombardi,
ABSENT: S. Jones, H. Bonner, H. J. Hubert, J. Suddaby, R. Strauss, J. Kianka
ALSO PRESENT:J. M. Latham, K. McCaffrey, B. Brown, G. Cox, C. Burton, E. Dailey, M. DePietro, J. Kalkbrenner, S. Kushner, J. Keller, M. Laubacher, E. Loftus, M. Mignano, K. Park, M. Willis, H. Sammons
Ms. Biesiada called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m
INTRODUCTIONS
Ms. Biesiada asked everyone to introduce themselves and give
their affiliation with the library system.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Due to a lack of quorum, the approval of the March 12, 2008 minutes have been deferred to the May board meeting.
ACTION ITEMS
The action items were discussed, but due to a lack of quorum no action was taken.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Ms. Latham gave her report to the Board on the following topics:
Ms. Latham gave her report to the Board on the following topics:
Staff Development Day
County Executive Mahoney’s Visit
Walsh Grant
Gifford Foundation
Branch Library Renovation Project
Internet Capacity
Media: Food for Thought
Laura Hand- National Library Week
DeFrancisco Grant
New Business
In light of the KS&R report, the Central Library staff worked on the change in library hours. They conducted a study of the library’s traffic patterns and came up with the proposed hours that the Board has been given. The executive director supports their recommendations. Dr. Latham is checking to see if state approval is needed regarding the express service hours that would be offered on Monday, Thursday, and Friday, which only has the Browse-About open during those timeframes.
Mr. Fisher inquired about how the process for something like this works. He would expect to see the executive director’s name on the proposal. He feels that from accountability standpoint that the Board needs to know that the executive management of OCPL is advocating for this wants this to happen and has done all the homework that is needed to go into a decision like this. Then the Board can ultimately do their job to hold the executive team accountable for things. Dr. Latham stated this was put out at this time as a stimulation piece, for discussion. The next meeting is when the Board will vote on this proposal. When something of this nature is given to the Board, Mr. Fisher would like to see the background information on it, where did it come from and listing that the executive management team is on board with it.
Ms. Biesiada asked if anyone is assigned to handle the communications that would come along with these changes. Dr. Latham mentioned Ms. Headd would be the one to get this information out to the public.
Mr. Fisher is concerned if specific stakeholders have been consulted such as: County Executive’s Office, FOCL, and E&L Committee. Ms. Biesiada and Mr. Fisher agreed that they would like someone to inform the stakeholders and see what their input may be, before it is voted upon at the Board’s next meeting.
This item is also a discussion item that has come from the OCPL management team. With the Envisionware implementation, which is very successful, it limits how often a person can use a library PC during the day. They are limited to two sessions. If a patron wants more than 2 sessions they “lose” their library card, ask for a new one. The new card would then allow a patron sign up for two more sessions on the PC. Some patrons are losing their library cards very often. We would like to disinscent loss of library cards by charging for replacement cards. The hope is that will encourage patrons’ responsibilities in handling their cards. Dr. Latham mentioned that this is one where there is a range of thought on whether this course of action is appropriate and is it worth it to be charging $2.00 for a lost card. This would also have to go over to E & L. Ms. Lombardi was questioning if there are there any other options.
The sorting room is inundated with materials to be sorted. OCPL can’t continue at this pace. Dr. Latham would like to recommend to the Board at a future meeting, to request a draw down from the fund balance for approximately $15,000 to fund two part-time positions. This will have to go through the legislature at the request of the Board.
Ms. Biesiada asked if using the fund is creative accounting or just a resource available to us that we can occasionally appropriate. Ms. Mignano stated the decision lies between the director and the Board to request pulling that down. It will raise questions because it only covers 6 months, and they are figuring in the preparation stages of the 2009 that the Library would want 12 months of those two positions added to the roster. Dr. Latham mentioned there was discussion with the County Executive about getting a consultant to actually address the entire sorting/delivery issue. In the meantime, the Library cannot function like we are. There were 20,000 items in the first 3 months of 2008 that were not picked up by patrons.
Ms. Biesiada asked about an internal committee to look at this. Dr. Latham responded that there is an internal committee from the 2010 Initiative Committee, which made the recommendation that we get an analysis done.Ms. Biesiada recommended that the Board Executive Committee should meet as soon as possible to cover the action items that need to be addressed before the May Board meeting.
Dr. Latham introduced Kathy Goldfarb-Findling, Executive Director and Heidi Holtz, Community Services coordinator, from the Gifford Foundation. They explained the Lifecycles process, which is basically an organizational evaluation. The Gifford Foundation is in the process of funding some capacity building opportunities for non-profits in the area.
The Gifford Foundation decided about a year ago that instead of giving program funding they would start giving capacity funding. They wanted to really look at ways that they can strengthen the core of an organization. The Foundation began by working with Susan Kenny-Stevens, an author on this topic. Her theory basically uses a fairly common organizational development tool, growth stages as applied to organizations. They came across Susan because she has been doing this type of capacity building with non-profits and foundations all around the country. The point is to do an assessment or a diagnosis of what an organization is like at a certain point. The theory behind is that there is no wrong place to be; it is not deterministic, just diagnostic. They have found in their work that the assessment can still be used whether you have $140,000 tiny little non-profit or a large $23 million non-profit organization. Ms. Holtz reviewed her handout.
Ms. Holtz explained that there are basically two ways you can begin to work with this kind of an assessment. One is anyone can do a self-assessment or there is a facilitated self-assessment. A facilitated assessment digs a little bit deeper than the first type of self-assessment. Nine organizations were selected as part of a fairly intensive pilot project that began in October. It was a four-month assessment with a consultant working with the leadership team from the non-profit organization. In most cases the team included 2 Board members, plus 2 staff members. The team puts in 40-50 hours of work. It is much deeper than you would need to do on a regular self-assessment. It is the consultant looking at three years of finances, interviewing staff, observing staff and doing Board retreats, surveys, and interviews. They talk with the community to do external communications and awareness of the organization.
The next application deadline is mid–May. The application should be completed by the staff, but signed off by the Board.
OCPL would create a leadership team of 2 Board and 2 staff, with no more than six on the team. OCPL would have the consultant for up to $10,000 if the application is approved. All the consultants they work with have all done the assessments with the other nine organizations.Old Business
The Library is continuing to work with the County on developing the $2.3 million dollar renovation for the branches, which will address the critical infrastructure issues that exists now. Ms. Mignano ran this past the branch librarians, who came up with more ideas. The information should be available in May.
Mr. Fisher put together a synopsis on the progress of the Central Library’s roof.
Mr. Fisher will forward a copy to Mr. Kushner.
Staff Reports:
White Branch Diversity Initiative
Ms. Park reported that the funding for this initiative has been approved. The dialog sessions will begin in the fall.
Construction ProjectsMs. Carmer reviewed the report on the current construction projects.
OCSL
Mr. Kushner updated the Board on the following initiatives OCSL has going on.
Internal Polaris Users Group (IPUG) – is a forum in which Polaris users can interact about issues pertaining to using the system, devices they use, helpful hints etc. Polaris has a user group that is broader, but this internal one can include everyone.
Collection Development Task Force
Its purpose is to share ideas on what works and what doesn’t, to improve individually libraries collection development, and also share ideas on trends and tools.
Reports Committee
The committee would look over Polaris reports that exist right now and determine which reports are/are not helpful.
Mr. Kushner spoke about the letter he sent to the Board regarding increase in communication and OCSL’s participation in system issues.
Other Reports
Ms. Biesiada will forward the Mundy Branch letter to the rest of the board members that explains what has been accomplished since the Board meeting there in February.
Ms. Lombardi briefly informed everyone about the last ad hoc meeting they had.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting concluded at 5:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Gail M. Cox
Administrative Aide