Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Ames Public Library Board of Trustees Minutes of the Regular Meeting 05/24/2012Ames Public Library Board of Trustees Minutes of the Special Meeting May 24, 2012 The Ames Public Library (APL) Board of Trustees met in special session on Wednesday, May 24, 2012, in the Dale H. Ross Board Room at 515 Douglas Avenue with Bradley, Budd, Campbell, Luckett, Meier, and Stow in attendance. Library Director Art Weeks, Assistant Director Lynne Carey, the library’s Construction Advisor Brad Heemstra, Finance Director Duane Pitcher, and City Manager Steve Schainker were also present. Rawlins was excused. Call to Order: Board President Luckett called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Schill arrived at 7:02 p.m. Unfinished Business: Approval of FY 2013 maintenance agreements with SirsiDynix (postponed on May 17) Moved by Stow, seconded by Bradley, to adopt a resolution approving renewal of SirsiDynix Annual Maintenance Agreements for fiscal year 2012/13 in an amount not to exceed $27,846.34. Weeks stated that the SirsiDynix invoice is nearly seven percent (7%) higher this year. Last year the company offered three-, five-, or seven-year plans which would have limited the increase, but the City discourages multi-year contracts and the savings would not have been substantial. Manus arrived at 7:04 p.m. Campbell asked if there were an alternative to SirsiDynix. Weeks said that another provider could only be used if the library were to migrate to an entirely different Integrated Library System (ILS). Migration would be very expensive and would take about a year. Campbell wondered when it might become cost effective to look at an alternative. Weeks said that there are other systems, and Horizon will be sunsetted at some point in time, but SirsiDynix is still supporting it, and he recommended waiting until the building project is complete. Network Services Supervisor Mark Harris stated that there were some open source options, as well as a system called Polaris, that could be examined. Campbell said he would like staff to keep alternatives in mind, given that the annual increase was rather substantial. Manus also felt it was a good idea to check on the options and the functionality offered by other systems. Vote on Resolution: 7-0. Motion approved unanimously. Resolution adopted. New Business: Funding Plan for the Library Renovation Project City Manager Steve Schainker commended the trustees, staff, and citizens for the work they had done in passing the bond issue. He said that City staff stands ready to help accomplish the project, which he realizes is complex when a renovation is involved. Schainker noted that the library was now at the point where it was starting to incur obligations in the name of the City. Since it will be the responsibility of the City, not the Library, to meet the funding obligations of the contracts, he felt it was important for himself and Duane Pitcher, Director of the City’s Finance Department, to get together with the trustees and find out exactly how much money there is and what the alternatives are. Schainker distributed an overview of the project funding, which included the architect’s most recent estimate of $19,889,357. He said total revenue currently on hand amounted to $19,373,000, leaving a shortfall of $516,357. The traditional way of going into a project would be to base it on that figure. However, this case is different, in that the library also has $470,966 in outstanding pledges that may be coming in over a three-year period—and with that amount included, the shortfall would be closer to $45,000. In either case, since the entire amount is not in the bank, Schainker said there were three options: the architect could cut the project back, more donations could be raised, or the Council could take some risk. Ultimately, the Library Board and the City Council need to come up with an agreement based on the whole package, with the understanding that risk tolerance is up to the City Council and that the Council may only want to allow moving forward with the cash on hand. There was discussion about who was responsible for raising and managing the pledges, and about a potential grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities. It was agreed that it did not seem likely there would be much improvement in the library’s position with respect to cash before the time came to enter into the next big contract, which will probably be for the rental of temporary space. Schainker suggested the trustees come up with a strategy to save $500,000. At the same time, he emphasized that it was imperative that the library open a functioning facility. He said he would not want the Board to cut on things such as replacement of the 1940 windows, because the public expects improvements to the building, or the infrastructure of the building, because the City will just have to pay for those things later on. Stow brought up the idea of adding the furniture in later, and Manus suggested furnishing the public areas first and staff areas later. Weeks mentioned that the existing beige shelving could probably be used instead of buying new white units for the second floor. Luckett pointed out that there is a 950,000 project contingency, and Heemstra said there is also a $968,000 design contingency included in the architect’s estimate. Weeks said that he had advised the architect to bring the project down to $19.5 million, so the architect did include bid alternates, but he also asked for a document that would direct him to that goal. Schainker said the Board would need to know what those alternates are. Manus added that the Board needed to give the community what it promised. Stow asked what level of risk the Council might be comfortable with, but Schainker declined to guess. Pitcher offered that the council members will be more comfortable if they have more information. Since they don’t know the plan for collecting the pledges, he suggested that it would be helpful to have the Friends Foundation give a report at the same time as the Board. Meier said she felt the library needed to work with city staff for help. Schainker agreed; he said the library is part of the City and he has put the word out to other departments to do whatever they can to help. He proposed that that might possibly even include helping collect pledges. Heemstra asked if it would make more sense to keep the project at $20 million (rather than cut it back), with direction that the library could not exceed the amount of cash in hand. He said there were two points in time when decisions could be made: on the bid date and when the time came to decide whether to buy new or use existing furnishings. And if it were possible to raise $45,000 in the next few months, funding would be right on track. Schainker said he would rather not have the Board spend anything they don’t have in the bank. However, he said he believes there is a way to move forward without taking on risk; the Board just needs to come up with a plan. He said it may even turn out that the library does not have to cut any more. He advised the trustees not to obligate themselves over time for more than they have on hand, but possibly time the purchases so that if the money doesn’t come in, they could walk away and still have a great library. Schainker emphasized that he does not want to open a facility that is substandard in terms of furnishings, nor does he want to see anything cut out that the city will have to pay for three years later. He asked Weeks to give Pitcher the cash flow information. Stow asked if the City Manager felt the Council would be comfortable if the Foundation took the risk on a loan of the pledges. Schainker said that that would be perfect. He said he had not realized before that that the city was going to take the risk—he had imagined that local banks, the Friends Foundation, or another third party would float some amount. A comment by trustee Campbell prompted a discussion about what the library had promised to deliver. The list included: renovation of the old library, more space, more meeting rooms, larger collection, a drive-in/drive-out garage, bigger youth space, maintenance of the building’s historic character, and energy efficiency. The City Manager said he felt that starting from the promises was an excellent way to begin, and recommended that the board give the architect priorities about what to cut. He stated that he would like to sit in on the brainstorming with the architect. Campbell mentioned that he was concerned that the library’s potential listing on the National Registry might increase the construction costs. Gloria Betcher, former chair of the Historic Preservation Commission, said it would not necessarily increase them, but did say that it would be better to repair the old windows than to replace them. Manus proposed the board come up with a list of items that could be deducted and possibly added back in later, in order to come up with a strategy for moving forward without risk. Weeks said that Heemstra and some staff members would be going to meet with the architect, and the fundraising team was working on additional strategies. Schainker said that he would like to meet with the Library Board again before going to the City Council, in order to have a strategy he can present. It was tentatively agreed that the Board would meet with the Council on July 10 or 24. Schainker reiterated his thought that a risk-free plan would be best, because until someone proves that the project cannot be completed without risk, he does not feel the Council will want to assume it. He again invited the trustees to ask for any help they need from city staff, adding that it is important to keep faith with the citizens and have credibility for the next bond issue. Approval of Library Commissioning Agent for LEED Certification Moved by Stow, seconded by Budd, to adopt a resolution approving contracting with Cornerstone Commissioning of Boxford, MA, to serve as the Library’s Commissioning Agent for LEED Certification for an amount not to exceed $49,880, subject to receipt of required insurance certificates and compliance with the City of Ames’ Affirmative Action Program. Budd asked if the cost of LEED Commissioning was included in architect’s estimate, and Weeks stated that it was. Meier initiated a conversation about which fund would be used to pay for the services. Weeks stated that Finance Director Pitcher had determined that this was not something that could be pre-spent and reimbursed with general obligation bonds. If paid from bequest funds, it would come out of the $1 million that had been set aside for the project, not from the remaining $75,000. Stow asked if Cornerstone was one of the firms selected by MS&R to send Requests for Proposal (RFPs) to. Weeks said he could not say; he did know that the Purchasing Department had identified nine companies. Twenty-eight made inquiries, and eleven responded. Manus asked if the contract had been reviewed by the City Attorney and Weeks stated that the contract that was in the RFP had been. Manus said she was referring to the actual contract the board was being asked to execute. During discussion it was determined that the board did not have the final contract at hand, only the draft version as it had appeared in the RFP. Responding to a question from Luckett, Weeks said that this contract would cover the enhanced commissioning, as well as the fundamental service. Trustee Campbell asked if any discretion was allowed for hiring a local vendor. Weeks said that this contract was actually somewhat local—even though the firm is located in Boxford, MA, one of the persons who will be doing the commissioning lives in Randall. Meier and Manus both stated that before approving contracts such as this, they would like to see the actual contract, including the amount, the dates, the names of those who are executing it, and something in writing showing that the City Attorney had seen it and approved it. Manus added that the trustees are not contractual experts. They just want assurance that the attorney has done his part, and that information should be included in the briefing paper. Weeks said it would not be a problem to do that. Campbell said suggested that, since there is a standing Building Committee, things like this could be reviewed by that group first. It was agreed that future contracts would be taken to the Building Project Committee for a recommendation and then passed on to the entire board. Vote on Resolution: 7-0. Motion approved unanimously. Resolution adopted. Trustee Comments: Stow said the board had an outstanding discussion and requested a board meeting next week as follow-up to the closed session meeting on May 9 and the subsequent written response from the library director on May 15, 2012. He also requested an action item on the agenda that would be made available on the agenda upon posting. Manus asked if the full board or the Executive Committee would be following up with the City Manager. Luckett said he would like administration to present a plan to work from, and felt the Building Committee could start a conversation. Campbell acknowledged the representation of library staff at the meeting. He also said he had been thinking about Gilbert and what needed to be done to get the contract back. He suggested it would be good to begin to court Gilbert without waiting until the last minute. Weeks wondered why Campbell wanted to bring Gilbert back, noting that the city will be large enough to have its own library at some point, and it could set up a situation where APL would just lose the contract again. Campbell said the kids in his neighborhood play together all the time, even if they go to different schools. He would like them to be in the habit of meeting at the library. His feeling is that “Gilbert is more Ames than it is Story City.” Manus said that once her firm loses a contract, they know it might be four years before they can win it back, but they start trying two years in advance to get it back and keep the relationship. Bradley said she appreciated having input on the building project from the City Manager. Meier thanked Brad Heemstra for being present. Adjournment: Moved by Stow, seconded by Schill, to adjourn at 8:21 p.m. Motion approved unanimously. The next regular meeting will be on Thursday, June 21, 2012, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 515 Clark Avenue.