HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.04.17 LC Minutes CITY OF BOULDER
BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING
MINUTES
Name of Board/Commission: Library Commission
Date of Meeting: October 4,2017 at the George Re olds Branch,3595 Table Mesa Dr.
Contact information preparing summary:Maureen Malone,303-441-3106
Commission members present:Joni Teter,Juana Gomez,Joel Koenig,Tim O'Shea
Commission members absent:Alicia Gibb
Library staff present:
David Farnan,Director of Library&Arts
Jennifer Phares,Deputy Library Director
Maureen Malone,Administrative Specialist II
Members of the public present:
None
Type of Meeting: Regular
Agenda Item 1: Call to order and approval of agenda [6:01 p.m.,0:00:00 Audio min.]
The meeting was called to order at 6:01 p.m.
Gomez moved to approve the agenda,and Koenig seconded.All in favor.
Agenda Item 2: Public comment [6:02 p.m.,0:00:32 Audio min.]
None
Agenda Item 3: Consent agenda [6:02 p.m.,0:00:38 Audio min.]
Item 3A,Approval of September 6,2017 Meeting Minutes
Teter emailed a suggested edit to the minutes ahead of the meeting(see handouts).Gomez moved to approve the minutes
with the recommended change,and Teter seconded.Vote 3-0,unanimous(O'Shea,was not yet present to vote).
Agenda Item 4:Master Plan project update [6:02 p.m.,0:01:00 Audio min.]
a. Summary of community input from first two draft goal check ins
• Teter suggested that commission discuss the teen advisory group's proposal to eliminate fines.
o Farnan explained that this has been a trending issue over the last 2 years;a number of large metropolitan
libraries decided this year to do away with fines.Denver Public Library is considering an amnesty for all
past fines and then doing away with fines all together in 2019-2020.
o While he doesn't have the exact numbers,Faman suspects that the expenses associated with collecting
fines are probably around the same as the revenue from fines the library is able to collect.
o Faman stated that other libraries take the stance that fines are a barrier to service and disproportionately
affect low-income families. Currently approximately 19,000 Boulder cardholders have suspended
borrowing privileges for exceeding the$10 fine limit;how many of those 19,000 people are truly
impacted(are still in Boulder,had any real intent to pay the fines)is not known.
o Teter recommended that staff keep a list of policy issues such as this one that are not necessarily master
plan dependent and develop a schedule to address those issues;the rest of commission agreed. Staff will
bring back some more information early in the second quarter of 2018.
• Gomez referenced what she found to be an interesting observation received through the online comment form:
"I noticed the word"book"does not appear in the presentation.That pretty well says it all."Phares replied
that staff uses the word"materials"to cover everything,including books.Teter suggested defining
"materials"in the master plan.Farnan stated that books will be stressed more in the master plan;however,he
always says that"books are our brand,but not our business";the library's business is literacy.
b. Update on and discussion of plan for the Nov.28 City Council study session
Teter sent some comments on the draft outline ahead of the meeting see handouts).
• Teter flagged what she anticipates council will see as three radical ideas in the funding options the library is
proposing(p.16 ofav cket,No.5)to make commission aware of obstacles the library may face when meeting
with City Council:
o The library is proposing to earmark funds informally in the first option and formally in the second and
third options.This is a difficult case to make,particularly in Boulder,because so much of revenues are
already earmarked to specific purposes.The community has earmarked certain revenue streams in
perpetuity to certain sources.As a community's needs change over time,you want the flexibility to be
able to change funding to match needs,and Boulder is limited in that.Programs in the general fund
continually get squeezed as big problems arise and take funding from the general fund.
• Farnan clarified that scenario one is not asking the city to earmark money for the library,but asking
them to raise the contribution from the general fund to the library—how they decide to do that is
entirely up to them.There is currently a 0.0333 property tax revenue earmarked for the library;the
revenue goes into the general fund and is transferred to the library.However,as property taxes goes
up,the library receives a decreasing contribution from the general fund.
o In the second and third options,the library is proposing that people who do not live within city limits of
Boulder have their taxes raised to pay for city services.People outside of city limits use city services
and are currently being subsidized by Boulder citizens.
• Faman explained that the neatest solution to creating a regional taxing authority is to only tax those
areas in unincorporated Boulder County wherein people use the library but aren't currently paying a
percentage of their property taxes to the city for city services;however,the library would then be
subject to some extent to two governing entities who would decide how the library spends its
money.
o In the second and third options,the library is proposing that the city reduce its control and decision-
making authority around library programs and services and facilities.
• Farnan added that in the case of a library district,City Council would relinquish governance in all
respects except for appointing the board;if the district was larger than the city of Boulder,council
would also appoint a non-resident member or two to the board.
• Teter shared that there was a previous attempt to form a library district around 2004-2005 that did
not go well because the case wasn't very clearly made.Faman stated that it wasn't so much
controversial,but confusing;there was a lack of understanding of what a library district really is,
and the city thought that they were being asked to continue to contribute the same amount of funds.
• Gomez wondered whether relinquishing control would lighten the city's list of things to worry
about.Farnan replied that they city has chosen to exert little control over the library over the last
four years,aside from budgetary decisions.
• Teter pointed out that while there are some aspects of being part of the city that are beneficial due to
the economy of scale,some savings in operating costs could be realized by separating from the city,
particularly around computer equipment and facilities.Faman agreed that there could be cost
savings in those areas,but added that as a district,the library would have to assume certain other
costs,such as insurance,human resources,legal services,finance.
Gomez wondered if options two and three are like divorce or secession.Faman replied that close to
70%of libraries in Colorado have separated in some way from their municipality;staff does not
want to separate unless it is amicable and beneficial to all constituents.Teter reminded commission
that the goal is to make sure that the library is fiscally sustainable,in whatever form that may be.
• Farnan stated that to him,the single most salient point is the heavy regional use of the library; if you compare
the 143,000 registered users to Boulder's population,it changes the equation used by all other libraries in the
state.If Boulder's funding levels were equivalent to Denver's on a per user basis,our budget would be close
to$4.5M higher that it is currently—a 33%increase.Faman shared that his second argument is the history of
the way in which the city has funded the library;as priorities rise up before council,the general fund gets
pinched and the city has less funding to contribute to the library.
• Phares shared that the Library Commission urged staff to have a study session with City Council in 2010(this
meetingan cket is linked under the resource section on the master plan webpage);staff discussed these same
three funding options with council,and at that time,there was not support for the library to pursue
investigating any of them.
• Faman stated that staff will primarily be presenting the facts with council;he encouraged commission
members to attend the study session and share some of the talking points that Teter mentioned in her
comments(see handouts .Teter commented that there is a high emphasis on being a team player within the
city.Budget decisions are made internally by senior staff after negotiation and discussion and everyone is
expected to support that;council never sees the budget recommendations that advisory boards make with
department heads,and the trade-offs being made get lost.Faman questioned whether City Council is
completely aware of how the priorities they come up with squeeze the general fund budget,and the library
budget in particular.
• Gomez wondered what portion of patrons served are county residents.Farnan replied that around 35-40%of
users are not city of Boulder residents;staff is working on getting data for the last 12 months. Staff has maps
of where users are:the disproportionate number in the near area are in Gunbarrel,Niwot and Chenyvale.
Teter added that these areas are within the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan's planning area,and only the
City of Boulder can provide services within that area because of the way the plan is written.
• O'Shea wondered what options aren't listed.Faman replied that in the 2007 plan,it was standard practice to
list fiscally restrained scenarios;he is not inclined to do that,but to simply lay out what staff has heard from
the community,tell the city what it costs,and leave it to City Council to decide how to pay for it.
• With the expected passage of the 2M&2N ballot initiatives,which include funding for a North Boulder
branch,O'Shea expressed concern about the new council members hesitating to give the library more money
on top of the$5M for the new branch.Faman replied that back when council was deciding whether or not to
include it on the ballot,staff provided council with a dollar amount that would be needed for operating costs
to nm a North Boulder branch.Faman added that whether or not the November ballot passes,staff will be
including a North Boulder branch in the master plan.
• O'Shea questioned whether a$1-1.5M increase for ongoing operations to carry out the master plan goals
(expansion of community library services and access,north Boulder,Gunbarrel,north building of Main
Library)is enough; staff is asking for more in order to continue,but the library has already been operating at a
deficit for some time.Faman responded that he is a realist and believes in being fiscally conservative;he
doesn't want to ask for more than is needed.Teter agreed with O'Shea and wondered whether staff should
prepare more than one scenario:the minimum needed to ran the library($1-1.5M/year)and a vision scenario
that allows the library to be comfortable,have a little padding,and achieve some of the longer-term goals.
O'Shea suggested that staff go to council with the ideal dollar amount needed to accomplish their goals and
come prepared to present comparisons to other city departments or other libraries,if needed.
Agenda Item 5:Finalize Library Commissioner recruitment application 17:20 p.m.,1:19:00 Audio min.]
Koenig sent some proposed questions for the application ahead of the meeting(see handouts).
Commission discussion,questions,and comments included:
• In response to the questions proposed by Koenig,Teter wondered whether commission thinks it's important for
people who want to serve on the commission to be knowledgeable about libraries and have familiarity with
Boulder Public Library.Koenig replied that his questions aim to find someone who has done more to demonstrate
their interest in the position than simply fill out an application.Farnan added that the general rule for boards is that
members are volunteers,advocates and,as a body,to a certain extent determine policy.
• Commission agreed to strike question 1 (p. 18 0£packet and replace it with a version of Koenig's suggestion:
`Have you participated in community organizations?Please describe.If not,why have you selected the Library
Commission as your initial foray into community service?'
• Commission agreed to strike question 3 (p. 18 of packet and replace it with a version of Koenig's suggestion:
`Have you reviewed commission minutes?If so,what are your thoughts about recent decisions?',and include a
reference to the master plan.
• Commission agreed to strike question 6(p. 19 ofap cket)and replace it with a question asking applicants how they
would address the issue of security and safety as an ongoing concern for some patrons.
• Staff will rewrite the questions based on the direction given by commission and submit the changes to the City
Clerk's office before the Oct. 15 deadline.
Agenda Item 6:Library Commission Update [7:46 p.m.,1:44:30 Audio min.]
a. Matters from the Commission
b. Boulder Library Foundation update
Faman stated that at their last meeting,the foundation board voted to support the capital improvement tax renewal
ballot measures 2M and 2N,and have so far contributed$500 to the campaign supporting the measures.
O'Shea shared that the board approved a new mission and vision statement for the Boulder Library Foundation at
their last meeting.
c. City project representative update
i. EcoDistricts
d. Responses to patron emails from the Library Commission
Agenda Item 7:Library and Arts Director's Report [7:56 p.m.,1:55:11 Audio min.]
a. Jaipur Literature Festival summary
Faman commented that the library foundation will have two main questions to consider when deciding whether or
not to contribute to the festival again in 2018:
1. Is the festival having the desired community impact?
2. Is the festival worth the investment?
Staff has asked Teamwork Arts to confirm by November that Zee is willing to be a corporate sponsor again in
2018,and to confirm that they have a second corporate sponsor by February.
b. Update on 2018 City Budget
City Council approved the first reading of the 2018 budget last night.There were no questions from council about
the$60k proposed for materials for BLDG 61.
c. Proposed 2018 Library Commission meeting schedule
Commission saw no issues with the proposed schedule.
d. Update on patron emails to staff and commission
Youth Services has completed their research on the history of the songs that Showing up for Racial Justice(SURJ)
has requested be removed from storytime. Staff will provide a full report and recommendation on how to proceed
at the November meeting.
Agenda Item 8: Adjournment [8:06 p.m.,2:05:11 Audio min.]
There being no further business to come before the commission at this time,the meeting was adjourned at 8:06 p.m.
Date,time,and location of next meeting:
The next Library Commission meeting will be at 6 p.m.on Wednesday,November 1,2017,in the Canyon Meeting Room at
the Main Library, 1001 Arapahoe Ave.,Boulder,CO 80302.
I
I.
APPROVED BY: ATTESTED:
Board air Board Secretary
�] (ul I-)
Date Date