Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020Jul20_BLT_AgendaComments_JimMosherJuly 20, 2020, BLT Agenda Comments These comments on Newport Beach Board of Library Trustees (BLT) agenda items are submitted by: Jim Mosher (jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229) Item III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Several of the City’s boards and commissions seem unfamiliar with the “correct” procedure for conducting the election of officers. That, as followed, for example, by the City Council, is as follows: 1. For election of the chair, a neutral party, typically the staff person who normally records votes, takes charge of the meeting and places all voting members on an equal basis. 2. The neutral moderator asks for nominations for chair, which can be made by any voting member who wishes to do so. The names nominated do not require a second. 3. This continues until a motion is made, seconded and approved to close nominations. 4. The neutral moderator then conducts a vote on the nominees, which proceeds until a majority of the voting members agree on one of those (in the event of multiple nominees, a series of run-off votes might be required to achieve this majority for one). 5. The newly-elected chair then takes over the meeting and proceeds with the selection of the remaining officers in the same manner as the neutral moderator did in selecting the chair. Item 1. Minutes of the April 20, 2020 Board of Library Trustees Meeting Comments and suggested corrections: Page 3 (handwritten 7), paragraph 3 from end: “Jim Mosher protested the need to impose a hard one-hour per day limit on patrons' use of computers. The policy and more severe policies have been implemented in other libraries. He suggested patrons reserve computers.” [I assume the minutes reflect what the person preparing them heard me say, so I can offer no correction. But I definitely need to work on speaking more clearly, for they do not convey what I attempted to say. It sounds like I was referring to policies imposed at other libraries in response to COVID-19. The reference was actually to existing, pre-COVID policies. And my recommendation was not that NBPL institute a new reservation system, but that instead of imposing a hard 1-hour limit, it continue with its existing CASSIE reservation system, but shortening the initial time and renewal times to ensure faster turnover if anyone is waiting.] Page 4 (handwritten 8), last paragraph: “Jim Mosher suggested implementation of a three- day grace period beginning on an item's due date for patrons to return items without a fine. Patrons will not receive notice that an item has been reserved, and renewing the item is not possible until the day after the due date.” [Again, I need to work on speaking with greater clarity. I certainly did not mean to say I thought that with the new ILS patrons could not renew items until the day after the due date. July 20, 2020, Library Trustees agenda comments from Jim Mosher Page 2 of 4 What I attempted to point out to the Trustees and staff, was that patrons who came to rely on automatic renewal would not know if the automatic renewal had worked, or not, until the day after the due date. In the event the renewal was unsuccessful, an immediate notice to them with a brief fine-free grace period for return of the item would generate good will as opposed to the bad feelings likely to be generated by an overdue notice (with fine) sent several days later. I think adding an explanation of the new renewal system to the 3-day advance warning of due dates would also be a very good idea.] Page 5 (handwritten 9), Item 8 (Friends of the Library Wish List), paragraph 1: “Library Services Director Hetherton indicated the Friends of the Library has approved $150,000 for the Library's Wish List. Funds will to support general materials, including best sellers, children's materials, and high-demand items in print, DVD, and audiobook formats. The Friends of the Library has also allocated $50,000 for Library programming and supports staff's proposal to use the funds for materials if restrictions on public programming continue.” [I could not tell from the draft minutes if the $50,000 referenced in sentence 2 was part of the $150,000 referenced in sentence 1, or something separate. I could, likewise, not tell if it was part of the Wish List, or something separate. Reviewing the April 20 agenda packet, the $200,000 Wish List contained two components: $150,000 for “general materials” and $50,000 for “programming.” Page 5 (handwritten 9), Item 8 (Friends of the Library Wish List), paragraph 3, sentence 3: “The Friends is exploring a CD as a fundraiser.” [I do not recall the comment and do not understand from the draft minutes what “a CD as a fundraiser” means. A music compact disk? Being sold to raise money? Offered as a premium in return for donations??] Item 3. Library Activities It is interesting the small branches appear to be experiencing a less precipitous drop than the larger ones in the volume of materials circulated and number of persons served. For example, from handwritten page 22, Balboa circulated 72,878 items, for a monthly average of 6,073. The 6,181 circulated in June 2020 is 1.02x that pre-COVID-19 average. By contrast, the June circulation for Mariners and Central were 0.38x and 0.30x their pre-COVID averages (while eBooks were significantly up, at 1.56x the pre-COVID experience). And from page 24, the number of curbside visitors to Balboa is about 0.09 of the normal number of in-person visitors, while the comparable numbers for Mariners and Central are 0.10 and 0.06. Nonetheless, with only about 10 transactions per day, it is not clear the curbside service at Balboa or CdM is cost effective. Does library staff have data on the relative cost per transaction of curbside service at the four locations? I also continue to wonder if the volume of reference calls is greater or smaller than it was pre- COVID-19 – something that is very difficult to deduce from the statistics provided, since the number of reference calls is now conflated with the calls for curbside pickup. July 20, 2020, Library Trustees agenda comments from Jim Mosher Page 3 of 4 Item 4. Expenditure Status Report It would have been helpful to include some narrative giving staff’s interpretation of this data, which apparently represents the final results for fiscal year 2019-2020. It appears NBPL ended the year with $76,000, or about 3%, of its maintenance and operations budget unspent (and, therefore, to be returned to the general fund). Is this within the normal tolerance? Could any of the $457,487 of unspent salary allocation have been redirected to other purposes? Item 5. Board of Library Trustees Monitoring List The “TBD” branch updates for Balboa and CdM are now overdue. With the chance of holding meetings at those locations remaining dim, it would seem like the reports should be scheduled. Item 6. Library Service Policy (Council Policy I-1) I take this now slightly-misnamed City Council policy as a request to the BLT to keep the Council informed about changes in NBPL policies by providing them to the Council as a receive and file item, much as the Council routinely sees reports on activities of the Planning Commission as a receive and file item on the Council consent calendar. That is not the same as the City Attorney review referred to in the staff report. I think it would be a good idea for the BLT to follow Policy I-1 and provide a copy of any newly adopted/revised NBPL policies to the Council for (after-the-fact) “review” as an information item on their consent calendar. Not only does that seem an appropriate professional courtesy, but it would provide some much needed publicity for the NBPL/BLT and the work it does. The BLT should also be aware of City Charter Section 704, which requires every City board and commission (of which the BLT is one), to keep a copy of any rules and regulations it has adopted for the conduct of its meetings on file with the City Clerk. Item 7. Proposed Library Closures for Winter Holidays 2020 The staff report says “Normal schedule resumes on January 2 (Sunday) with operating hours from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. at Central and Mariners.” However, as is apparent from the table, the Sunday following the proposed closures is January 3 (not 2). As a result of this confusion, the plan does not disclose what proposal the BLT is being asked to approve for January 2 (Saturday). Would it be the same as Saturday, December 26? Or would it be normal hours? July 20, 2020, Library Trustees agenda comments from Jim Mosher Page 4 of 4 Item 8. COVID-19 Closure Update I have had occasion to use the curbside service just once, about three weeks ago. I did not find it “somewhat analogous to browsing the shelves to select materials” (staff report, page 36), although it was similar to the former process of picking up holds placed through the catalog. As before COVID-19, using the catalog to place a hold and request pickup at Mariners Branch was easy. One aspect, however, I found much more cumbersome than pre-COVID. Rather than inviting me to visit the branch, the notice that the item had arrived told me I needed to call a certain number to arrange for the pickup. I assume the old hands at curbside pickup ignore the notice and drive to the branch where a sign by the curb gives them a number to call to speak to the librarians inside. However, I do not have a cell phone. So, following the instructions on the notice, I called from home the number given. However, that number did not connect me to the librarians at Mariners. Instead, it connected me to the automated phone tree at Central, from which, after listening to a recorded message, I was given a lengthy list of options, none of which related to curbside pickup (or even mentioned such a thing existed). I then had to go a sub-menu to find an option to “speak to a person,” only to be disconnected after being informed that due to the volume of calls I would have to call back later. An hour and several similarly frustrating efforts later, I was eventually able to use the phone tree to connect to a harried person at Central, whose only function was to connect me to a person at Mariners (with whom as I was quickly and courteously able to arrange for the pickup). Assuming there is a number that a person with a cell phone, arriving at each of the branches, is told to call to complete their curbside pickup, I would suggest the above-described waste of staff and patron time could have been avoided by simply showing that correct number for the designated location on the “hold available” notice – and also (if that is indeed the case), mentioning that those who have cell phones do not need to call in advance (as the notice says they do) but can call just once, when they arrive for the pickup. Item 11. Library Foundation Liaison Reports As indicated in the draft minutes of the June 15 meeting (specifically, on page 10 of the present agenda packet) there was some speculation about the reason for the NBPL Foundation’s increasingly small annual gifts to NBPL. The state of the Foundation’s finances should not be such a mystery to the Board of Library Trustees. In return for offering free office space and use of library facilities for independent programming, I believe the state of the endowment, income and expenses are supposed to be shared regularly with the BLT per the agreement in the Trustee’s Handbook.