Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-01-22 City Council (6)TO: City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report 1 HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY SERVICES JANUARY 22, 2002 CMR:125:02 TRANSMITTAL OF LIBRARY ADVISORY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE NEW LIBRARY PLAN AND IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES SURROUNDING LIBRARY BUILDING EXPANSION PROJECTS RECOMMENDATION This report transmits a Council-requested recommendation from the Library Advisory Commission (LAC) that identifies alternatives to the New Library Plan (NLP), specifically for building expansions at the three identified Resource Libraries, Main, Children’s and Mitchell Park. (See Attachment A.~ Staff requests that the Council discuss and provide feedback on the report, and on the policy issues identified surrounding NLP implementation. BACKGROUND This is the first of several reports planned to come to Council addressing implementation of the NLP from the Library Advisory Commission. This report focuses on the building expansion element of the plan. Future reports will discuss staffing and resource elements. It is anticipated that Council will review the LAC’s recommendations on building, staffing and operating resource data before making final decisions on the proposed projects. The LAC completed its NLP report in May 2000, which describes a plan for current and future library service delivery. (See Attachment B.) The NLP includes recommendations for improved and expanded, full-service Resource Libraries, in both north Palo Alto (Main/Children’s) and south Palo Alto (Mitchell Park). Council conceptually approved the plan in October 2000, and directed staff to proceed with development of Phase I of the plan, components of which include developing feasibility and costing studies for expansion of the Resource Libraries. In July 2001, given concerns about the overall scope and ability to fund all elements of the NLP, Council requested that the LAC develop alternatives. CMR: 125:02 Page 1 of 3 DISCUSSION In its response to Council, the LAC makes the recommendation to fully implement the NLP, basing its decision on the years of study, planning and public input that has shaped the plan. Its recommendation focuses only on physical facility improvements and funding alternatives. The LAC is not prepared to comment on staffing and operational resource alternatives until the in-progress staffing study is complete. In its recommendation to Council, the LAC provides two alternatives to fully implement the plan: funding the NLP building program in phases, and reducing the Library Building Program by 17 percent by reducing both programs and space at Mitchell and Main Libraries. Both of these alternatives are fully described in the attached report. As the LAC, site committees and staff move forward on these building projects, it would be helpful if Council could provide some feedback and direction on some of the issues that have surfaced. Addressing these issues at this juncture will help keep the process on track and allow staff to meet some of the near term deadlines inherent in designing and funding these projects. These issues include: Constructing the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center as a single project: Due to the limited space at the Mitchell Park site, any expansion of the library may be severely impacted by the adjacent location of the community center. Folding the 40-year-old Community Center building into this project may provide enough flexibility on the site to fully implement the NLP vision for an expanded Mitchell Park Library as well as provide greatly needed space for the community’s recreational needs. Phasing of construction: It is possible that the Mitchell Park and Main projects can be phased to initially construct only a potion of the buildings and then complete the project in later years as funding becomes available. (The new Mountain View Library has used this model, constructing approximately 60,000 square feet out of a design that specified a larger square footage total.) Phasing of library projects: The LAC recommends considering phasing the funding of projects over time. A bond election could be held in 2002 for the Children’s Library and Mitchell Park projects, with a subsequent bond measure five to seven years in the future, after Mitchell and Children’s were completed, to fund expansion of the Main Library. Programmatic Reductions: Council discussion on the programs identified in the LAC’s 17 percent reduction, scenario will assist the LAC and staff as it considers staffing and operational cost issues. CMR: 125:02 Page 2 of 3 RESOURCE IMPACT The full cost of building and operating expanded libraries is not yet available. The LAC’s building program expense projections are ballpark estimates and will be more complete and reliable as each stage of site planning and conceptual designing proceeds in the coming months. As noted by the LAC, each of the expanded buildings will require operating expenses, including staffing, collections and other resources. The LAC plans to return to Council with further recommendations at a later time. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Council has authorized funding for development of conceptual planning for the three Resource Libraries in order to prepare for a potential bond measure in November 2002. By the end of April 2002, Council must decide which project/s to include in the bond measure and the relationship of Library projects to other proposed City projects. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A:Memo to Council from the Library Advisory Commission, dated January 14, 2002. Attachment B:CMR:345:00 (Transmittal of LAC report: New Library Plan to Council), including the plan and minutes of the Council meeting of 10/10/00. PREPARED BY: o LEVY Director of Libraries and lty Director of Community Services DEPARTMENT HEAD: PAUL THILTGEN Director of Community Services CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: aARRISON Assistant City Manager CMR: 125:02 Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT A LIBRARY ADVISORY COMMISSION P.O. BOX 10250 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Palo Alto City Council Library Advisory Commission New Library Plan Alternatives DATE: January 14, 2002 Recommendation of the Library Advisory. Commission The Library Advisory Commission (LAC) recommends full implementation of the New Library Plan - (NLP). With regard to capital improvements, both for reasons of defraying financial impact and practicality in continuous operations of affected libraries during construction, we recommend that the building program be undertaken in phases extending up to ten years. We recommend further that such construction occur in the following order: Mitchell Park/Children’s (both the highest priority) and then Main. We stress that our recommendation on phasing capital improvements in no way suggests that one library is less important than another. Capital improvements to these three libraries are integral to the NLP. We believe, however, that the need for expansion at Mitchell Park Library and expansion/renovation at Children’s Library are more immediate than the need at the Main Library. Mitchell Park Library sustains the highest use of any library in the city in a very small building. The physical condition of Children’s makes its immediate repair and renovation essential. The LAC bases this recommendation on its belief that it is essential to improve library buildings and programs to the extent described in the New Library Plan. The NLP describes a library program that is comparable to those in other communities already, and that has the support of the residents of Palo Alto, the City Council, and the City staff. It describes programs and facilities that will serve Palo Alto residents of all ages and interests, people who already make extensive use of our limited facilities. The New Library Plan is the result of years of study, planning and public input about what is important to our city. Background During the discussions of fast-tracking the New Library Plan building program that took place during the summer of 2001, the City Council proposed that the Library Advisory Commission develop alternatives to the NLP in order to help the Council make decisions regarding the scale of the implementation and funding. At our study session on October 1, 2001, we reported on the progress of the alternatives. We confirmed the following: .The basic recommendations of the NLP remain appropriate, reasonable and desirable: ¯Expand and/or renovate the Resource Libraries (Main/Children’s and Mitchell Park); ¯Upgrade collections and improve facilities at Neighborhood Libraries; ATTACHMENT A ¯Improve and expand collections at Resource Libraries; ¯ Increase staffing levels to support the current program level and to increase hours and expand programs. 2. Working assumptions include: ¯Only the buildings housing Resource Libraries will be expanded; ¯City staff estimates that the full cost of new building projects is $500/square foot. We have worked with Library staff since October to formulate program reductions that affect the length of implementation schedule (Alternative A) and square footage (Alternative B). In addition we have discussed ways to modify continuing programs and operations. As we present alternatives for Council review we must point out that only the LAC has been asked to conduct a review of the basic program as developed and proposed with substantial community input over the past six years. Although we welcome the opportunity to test our assumptions and recommendations, we believe that such testing is important for all of the proposals for expanded community services buildings and services that have been forwarded for City funding. Alternatives We preface this presentation of alternatives by stressing the manner in which the LAC developed the New Library Plan. That is, we posed the following question to ourselves, to Council, to staff and to the public: What, within the bounds of reasonableness, should a program of library services be for a community such as Palo Alto? This meant that program was foremost and that facilities necessary to implement that program would follow thereupon. This, too, meant that staffing and other operational expenditures, including collections and information resources, would also follow thereupon. This remains our fundamental orientation. Such a perspective, then, whether we speak of reductions in capital improvements for new or improved facilities or whether we speak of reductions in staffing and collection improvements, has consequences for the breadth and depth of the program which forms the basis of the NLP. In the first instance, cutbacks in square footage in facilities affect how much programmatic remediation or innovation we can undertake. In the second, reduction in improvements in staffing and resources directly affects the human services and basic "goods" such as books, magazines and online resources that form the core of the NLP vision. The NLP alternatives described here were developed initially by a subcommittee of the LAC and City staff. LAC participants were John Kagel, Tina Kass and Tom Wyman. City staff participants were Marilyn Gillespie, Diane Jennings, Mary Jo Levy and Paul Thiltgen. The full LAC has reviewed these proposals and supports them. We have explored three areas of possible reductions- in physical facilities improvements, in phased funding for the NLP and in staffing and resources, including collections. We are not yet prepared to forward to you alternatives for staffing and resources, pending completion of a consultant’s study on library staffing. With regard to the other areas we offer two possible alternatives, given information currently available to us. Alternative A: Implement the NLP buildin~ pro~am in phases The November 2002 library bond measure should include all three library projects, structured so that funding for Main Library would come at least five years after passage; this would allow some reduction in the total amount of a library bond measure. The LAC strongly believes that this is the approach most ATTACHMENT A likely to provide for implementation of a reduced NLP, but one still marked by improvement. We equally believe that the possibility of a second bond measure for libraries, coming after completion of the Mitchell Park and Children’s libraries, would greatly increase the risk for failure and, therefore, for a physically and programmatically truncated set of library services. The LAC proposes that construction of Mitchell Park Library and Children’s Library occur first and at the same time, with construction of the Main Library coming later. We would find this single bond, phased funding approach acceptable only under the following conditions: ¯Mitchell Park and Children’s building programs and ongoing library support would be ~ implemented. ¯None of the space reductions contained in Section B below would be made. ¯Library building projects would not compete with others on the same bond measure. The LAC does not want to reduce the library program to accommodate other projects, regardless of their cost. Survey results suggest that this is the desire of Palo Alto residents as well. Advantages: ¯Allows full implementation of the New Library Plan.¯Presents a bond measure of a size that is palatable to voters. ¯As proposed, allows a focus on librar~ buildings by separating other community services on a bond measure. ¯ Allows design, construction and operating experience with Mitchell Park to be used in Main Library replacement; what we learn from the Mitchell Park project can be useful as we move ahead to expand Main. Disadvantages: ¯ Delays replacement of Main Library for up to a decade. [Note: A phased implementation would not affect Palo Alto’s ability to compete for funding under the state library Bond Act of 2000 that could provide 65% of eligible project costs for the Mitchell Park Library. There will be three opportunities for us to apply: June 14, 2002; March 28, 2003; and January 16, 2004.1 Alternative B: Reduce the Library Building Program by 17% This alternative reduces the square footage recommended in facilities improvements. Comparison of Library Expansion Plans Library Children’s Main Mitchell Park TOTAL Current 3,400 sf 26,300 sf 9,814 sf 39,514 sf NLP (5/00 6,000 sf 60,000 sf 33,500 sf 99,500 sf Area Spatial Study (7/01) Ill 12,443 sf [21 65,826 sf 54,639 sf 132,908 sf NLP Altern (1/02) 10,877sf 53,225 sf 46,725 sf 110,827 sf Spatial Study (7/01) 111 $ 6.2m $32.9m $27.3m $66.4m Cost NLP Altern (1/02) $ 5.4m $26.6m $23.4m $55.4m [1] After the issuance of the NLP, the LAC asked the Library staff to develop spatial studies that would provide realistic estimates of the area required to turn the concepts of the New Library Plan into building plans. In 2001, the Library staff and some LAC members worked with Philips Swager Associates to develop the spatial studies we are now working from. 3 ATTACHMENT A [2] The spatial study showed a need for 12,433 sf at Children’s, but the footprint for the library is limited, given the existing site. Work on the conceptual design of Children’s has reduced the area to 10,877 sf. Based on the Public Works staff estimate of $500/sf, the cost of a building program based on the spatial studies developed last year would be approximately $66.4 million. Library staff and the LAC have identified significant reductions in the square footage proposed in the spatial studies, totaling about 22,100 square feet and resulting in a potential savings of about $11 million. Of the proposed reductions in space, 57% would be at Main Library, 36% would be at Mitchell Park Library, and 7% would be at Children’s Library. The LAC has reviewed all of the possible reductions and agreed that they are feasible, although the consequences are significant for the New Library Plan. The reductions include the following: Eliminate the large public meeting room at Mitchell Park: Public meeting spaces in south Palo Alto are difficult to find and elimination of this would retain the status quo. Public meeting rooms located in libraries in other communities are consistently oversubscribed, however, and we have already heard that there is a great demand for this kind of space in Palo Alto. Presumably space would be made available at the community center and/or Cubberley. There is the possibility of the library and community center at the Mitchell Park site sharing a large meeting space, but only if the same policies governing its use (such as charging or not charging for use) are in place and only if both programs share it equitably. (Savings = 1950 sf) ¯ Eliminate the technology laboratory at Main Library_: The LAC has recommended substantial increases in space and equipment to support existing and emerging technology. This includes space for training library users and staff, as well as dedicated room for use of computer technology and related equipment. We expect that a technology laboratory at Main would be heavily used by students and the general public throughout the day. The technology room in the Art Center would not substitute for this space in the library because of its limited size and scope; in addition it could not be adequately staffed and supervised by library employees. (Saving = 924 sf) ¯ Eliminate homework center at Main Library_: The homework center is one of the keystones of the teen program at Main Library; its elimination will significantly reduce the effectiveness of the teen program. The result would be a significantly reduced set of teen services in north Palo Alto. (Saving = 700 so ¯ Reduce area proposed for the Friends of the Library_ to 700 sf: The Terman site may not be available to the Friends for their monthly book sales by the end of this year when the school district assumes control of the school. The Friends have asked for space at a new Main Library so they can continue this activity. This reduction will eliminate the possibility of the Friends continuing the monthly book sales that currently provide over $100,000 per year in funding for the Library. The Friends would be limited to a continuing book sale at Main in this relatively small space remaining in the plan. (Saving = 1800 sf) ¯ Reduce proposed Palo Alto Historical Association space by 25%: The reduction will limit the growth potential for the PAHA archives. Recent discussions of the Roth Building as a possible home for PAHA does not, as far as the LAC is aware, include moving the archives from Main. (Saving = 600 sf) ¯ Eliminate caf~ at Main Library: The caf~ at Main Library supports the LAC’s goal of creating a community gathering place on the site. Such facilities have been very successful at other public libraries. (Saving = 800 sf) 4 ATTACHMENT A The total space reduced by these changes is 6774 sf. miscellaneous spaces including: Exhibitspaces Study~spaces Staffwork areas Storage In addition, staff has identified reductions in These additional space reductions would bring the total amount of space reduced to approximately 22 100 sf or, again employing the $500 per square foot figure for full costing of capital improvements, a saving of approximately $11 million. A detailed list of all the reductions is included in Attachment A. Advantages: ¯Reduces cost of construction by reducing building program by 17%. ¯ Minimizes building footprints required on Mitchell Park Library site and Main Library site, thereby increasing amount of open space. ¯Likely to reduce ongoing staffing requirements and costs. Disadvantages: ¯ Negatively affects full implementation of New Library Plan; programs and services will be significantly reduced. Attachment: A. Proposed Square Footage R~ductions for Main and Mitchell Park Libraries (n o o o ~ o ~0~ 0 o o o o oo ~o:~o oO~oo oo °o °o o o 0000000 ~~00000 ~ ooSgo~ ._.9. ATTACHMENT B City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL ATTN:POLICY & SERVICES COMMITTEE FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT:COMMUNITY SERVICES DATE: SUBJECT: AUGUST 1, 2000 CMR: 345:00 TRANS, MITTAL OF LIBRARY REPORT: NEW LIBRARY PLAN ADVISORY COMMISSION REPORT IN BRIEF This report forwards the New Library Plan (Plan), a report of the Library Advisory Commission (LAC), to Council. The plan recommends that the City: create Resource Libraries in north Palo Alto at the Main/Children’s libraries and in south Palo Alto at the Mitchell Park Library at which people will find the greatest number of materials and services; preserve geographically-based neighborhood libraries for reading and limited services at College Terrace, Downtown and Terman Park; and expand children’s programs and services. The plan also makes specific recommendations regarding library operations, such as hours, collections, and staffing and recommends significant capital improvements at the Resource Libraries. The plan, if implemented in full as recommended by the LAC, would require an on-going annual increase in General Fund expenses of $4.6 million and $48 million in capital expenses. Staff recommends conceptual approval of the key components of the Plan. Staff also recommends that Council direct staff to return with a Phase I implementation plan and cost proposal and to prepare a multi-year plan to implement and. finance the key components of the plan. CMR:345:00 Page 1 of 7 RECOMMENDATIONS The LAC recommends that the City Council approve its New Library Plan (Plan), Attachment 1, which includes the following key components: 1) Create Resource Libraries at Main/Children’s Libraries and Mitchell Park Library serving the north and south parts of the city at which "people of any age will find the greatest number of materials and services"; 2) Preserve "the concept of geographically-based small neighborhood libraries for reading and limited services at Downtown, College Terrace, and Terman Park (or another facility in the southwest section of Palo Alto)"; 3) "Expand children’s programs and services, including substantial [capital] improvements at the Resource Libraries." The LAC also makes specific recommendations regarding the capital and operating requirements for implementation of the key components. Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Approve the key components of the Plan in concept that is the creation of two Resource Libraries at Main/Children’s Libraries and Mitchell Park Library and the preservation of Neighborhood Libraries at Downtown, College Terrace, and Terman Park Libraries. ~2)Direct staff to proceed in development of Phase I of the Plan and return to Council with a proposal that outlines expense to implement it. 3)Direct staff to return to Council with a multi-year plan to implement and finance and the key elements of the Plan; including projected operating and capital expenses. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Background. A Draft Library MaSter Plan prepared by City staff was submitted to the Council on March 16, 1998 and referred to the Policy and Services Committee. Subsequently, the LAC was established, members were appointed and a yearlong review of the library system was undertaken. In May 2000, the LAC completed its New Library Plan (Plan), a report describing its findings about the library system after a year of study and its recommendations for current and future service delivery. The report, presented to Council at a study session on May 22, was’researched and written in its entirety by LAC members after they analyzed data, gathered community input, visited new and remodeled public libraries in the Bay CMR:345:00 Page 2 of 7 Area, attended meetings with commissioners from other jurisdictions, and discussed issues and options in small committee and scheduled LAC meetings. Staff assisted the LAC by providing information and data upon request, reacting to proposals when requested and assisting in the clerical details of compiling and printing the report. Summary of LAC Recommendation The Plan looks comprehensively at all library service programs and facilities in Palo Alto, often in comparison with other heavy-use public libraries in California. It envisions the development of high quality library, service, ~,et recognizes the expense and operational overhead a multi-branch system requires. After considerable deliberation, the LAC has recommended what it believes to be the most efficient proposal possible. The proposal seeks to balance the community value for multiple neighborhood branches, the need to significantly upgrade services and facilities, the challenge of serving a population that is nearly equally spread between north and south Palo Alto, and the importance of remedial support for current services. The LAC recommendation includes the following key components: 1. Improved and expanded, full-service Resource Libraries, similar in collection size, hours and programs, in both north Palo Alto (Main/Children’s) and south Palo Alto (Mitchell Park). This proposal involves: eventual expansion at all three libraries, which are too crowded and insufficient in size to accommodate current and increasing use; improvements in hours, breadth and depth of collections and-services; new services (such as teen programs); and required basic facility improvements (such as electrical infrastructure, air-conditioning). The Plan includes a significant upgrade in services and collections for all ages at Mitchell Park Librar3Pto make it comparable with the services in north Palo Alto. o A new definition for branches, (College Terrace, Downtown, and Terman Park) as Neighborhood Libraries, with a reading room flavor, limited in services and size but filled with interesting, popular collections. This proposal recommends that collections be updated so that all materials in the collections are current, with Terman Park (or a replacement library in southwest Palo Alto) moving from a paperback-based collection to one similar to the other Neighborhood Libraries. Hours at Terman Park would also be upgraded. Professional staff would no longer provide direct reference service. Some staff CMR:345:00 Page 3 of 7 classifications would be downgraded at these facilities and questions and research tutoring would be referred to Resource Libraries. This model prioritizes library services at Resource Libraries, especially in times of economic decline when expense reduction is required. If funding for library services is reduced, this model supports the continuation of comprehensive library service for both geographic areas of Palo Alto. In addition, the Plan recommends remediation of current library services (collections, services and staffing levels) and the introduction of new services, such as teen programs, consistent with progressive public library services provided in most other communities. Identification of Policy Issues There are ~everal major policy issues to be addressed in review and discussion of the Plan. If Council approves the key components of the Plan in concept, it will establish the following policy directions. 1.The City will continue to operate six libraries. The strength of this policy is its acknowledgement of public support for the value of public libraries as community gathering places in neighborhoods. This is also consistent with public feedback, both through focus groups conducted in 1997, and recent input to the LAC via letters and public meetings. Weaknesses of this policy include the on-going operational expense and capital costs to support and maintain quality library service at multiple sites. In addition, the. six-branch structure is vulnerable in times of financial constraints, and may result in a gradual eroding of quality library services citywide. The City will improve and expand services for all ages at Main/Children’s libraries as full service Resource Libraries serving north Palo Alto, and upgrade Mitchell Park branch to become a full service Resource Library serving south Palo Alto. All buildings will be expanded and renovated or demolished and rebuilt. This policy direction addresses critical weaknesses in the current service level, especially inadequacies of primary facilities (Children’s and Main Libraries and Mitchell Park Library), which receive 85 percent of use. The policy addresses the need to restore and augment collections, services, technology access, space and staffing levels. It is also responsive to the need for more equitable services in south Palo Alto, where more than 50 percent of population resides. As detailed in Appendix G of the Plan, this policy maintains and strengthens a traditional program for children, birth through elementary school, their parents and caregivers and recognizes the need to provide teen spaces, collections and services. CMR:345:00 Page 4 of 7 There are two weaknesses of this policy direction. First, it designates three libraries as Resource Libraries, which will be more costly than maintaining the current focus on Main/Children’s Libraries as the City’s primary service libraries. Second, it maintains a dual-library focus in the north, splitting full service for families between two facilities at different but nearby locations, that is Main Library, (which serves teens and adults) and Children’s Library (which serves infants through elementary schoolage children).. o College Terrace and Downtown branches will be designated as Neighborhood Libraries, with more current and popular reading collections and a reduction in reference service level from that currently provided at these locations. Terman Park, or its successor, will be upgraded to a Neighborhood Library with similar hours, services, collections and staffing. This policy direction clarifies service delivery expectations for each library and acknowledges the need to upgrade Terman Park service. It optimizes professional staff skills at Resource Libraries and provides efficient staffing configurations at Neighborhood Libraries. For some users, this policy reduces direct reference assistance by professional librarians at College Terrace and Downtown libraries, substituting paraprofessional support. Plan Implementation Approving the key components of the Plan in concept at this point does not commit the City to implement every element in the plan. As set forth by the LAC, the plan is estimated to require approximately $4.6 million to fund annual operations and $48 million in capital expense. The Plan need not be implemented in all its details nor all at once. Staff has begun to outline phases for Plan implementation. Staff will develop a multi-year, multi-phase implementation and financing plan to implemen~ the key components of the Plan. More immediately, staff will return to Council with a proposal for Phase 1 implementation and funding which incorporates improvements begun with the 2000-01 operating budget. The Components of Phase I implementation will include: ¯ Complete consultant s~udy of staffing operational requirements and job assignments and a transition plan. ¯Migrate Terman Park services to Neighborhood Library model. ¯Begin upgrading to popular collection concept at Neighborhood Libraries by refreshing collection with new materials. ¯Continue improvements to speed up delivery of new materials to public and removal of out-dated/unused materials. CMR:345:00 Page 5 of 7 ¯Develop funding plan, complete architectural design and begin construction of Children’s Library. ¯Complete expansion. , feasibility and cost studies for Main and Mitchell Park libraries and building service program studies .for expansion of Resource Libraries (Main/Children’s and Mitchell Park). ¯Add morning hours at Mitchell Park and Terman Park, where demand and need are highest. ¯Improve staff development opportunities. ¯Implement outreach program for pre-school children in daycare programs and community/non-profit groups. ¯Relocate Children’s Library staff and services to other library/libraries. ¯Add library staffing to support existing and improved services. Phase I will enable library services to begin immediate improvements and prepare for capital building in the near future. Phase 1 will allow the City to take advantage of some unique opportunities to prepare for capital building and for a potential bond measure. On the horizon are: a joint feasibility study of the Art Center/Main Library site, partially funded by a grant; planning for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center site and its potential for State public library building funds; and use of private funding through the Arrillaga gift for architectural work at Children’s Library. This phase does not account for uncertainties about the potential relocation of the Terman Park and/or Downtown libraries. In addition funds in the 2000-01 budget will support some components of Phase I implementation. However, additional funds will be required and staff will return to Council in the short-term with a more detailed implementation plan and a resource request for Phase I. ALTERNATIVES TO COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS There are many alternatives to the LAC’s plan that could be considered and which would require different levels of funding. The major alternatives are to: ¯Provide only North and South Resource Libraries and no Neighborhood Libraries. ¯Reduce the number of libraries. ¯Retain current facilities’ size and service levels without significant expansion or improvement in services. ¯Augment LAC’s proposed program and services. ¯Selectively adopt/not adopt portions of LAC proposal. CMR:345:00 Page 6 of 7 RESOURCE IMPACT The Plan in its full implementation would require $4.6 million in new, on-going operating funds and $48 million in capital funds. Staff proposes that Council direct staff to proceed in development of a Phase I plan to implement the key elements of the Plan and return to Council with a funding proposal. Support for Phase I will come in part from funds included in the 2000-01 Budget and from opportunities to leverage other City projects and external funding sources. Beyond Phase I, staff will return to Council with a multi-phase implementation and financing pr.oposal to implement the key elements of the Plan. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: New Library Plan prepared by the Library Advisory Commission, May 2000 PREPARED BY:Mary Jo Levy, Director of Libraries DEPARTMENT HEAD: PAUL THILTGEN Director, Community Services Assistant City Manager c. Library Advisory Commission CMR:345:00 Page 7 of 7 Minutes of the City Council - October 10, 2000 Page 6 of 26 Subject of Potential Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS 16. The Policy and Services Committee recommendation re the Library Advisory Commission’s New Library Plan Council Member Beecham said a good review of the plan was introduced in the Policy and Services meeting. The Committee supported the plan and recommended that the Council proceed with it. The new community center, the police building and other projects were putting demands on the City’s resources. He wanted the Council to remember the increasing demand on City resources when considering whether to proceed with the Library plan. Chair of the Library Advisory Commission Tom Wyman, 546 Washington Avenue, said the Commission fully endorsed the Libr~iry staff’s recommendation and commended them for the work they did. The plan was going to cost money, but the libraries had been neglected for too long. He asked the Council to endorse Phase I of the Library plan. Council Member Mossar asked Mr. Benest to explain what the Council would see next if they approved Phase I of the Library plan. Mr. Benest said the difficult part was the subsequent phases, which funded most of the major capital improvements and the operational costs related to the expansions. That was where the discussion was timely, because a community conversation would occur over the upcoming months about what was really important to the community, the priorities in terms of infrastructure and public facilities, and how committed the community was to its library system, and what the community was willing to do. The current and part of the next year’s budgets would deal with some of Phase I. He had no major concerns about the vision. The third item under the staff recommendation would be difficult; where the community was going as far as infrastructure challenges. Council Member Mossar asked Mr. Benest about the design and construction of the Children’s Library, which differed from the ongoing budget. Community Services Department Director Paul Thiltgen said staff would proceed with the Children’s Library. A feasibility study was already conducted to determine whether the Children’s Library could be expanded and approval received. Staff needed to proceed with a marketing program to determine whether or not outside funding could be raised. The goal was to raise sufficient community funds to proceed. Staff also needed to proceed with architectural drawings because money was in the Infrastructure Program to renovate the building. They hoped to begin construction by 2001. Council Member Mossar asked what Mr. Thiltgen meant by going to the community to raise money. Mr. Thiltgen said a community group would work with staff in a way similar to what was done with the Children’s Theater to raise outside funding and come up with additional dollars to help fund some of the renovations, if not all renovations, at the Children’s Library. http://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/clerk/minutes/2000/O01010.html 111612002 Minutes of the City Council - October 10, 2000 Page 7 of 26 Council Member Mossar thought the plan had not been discussed. Mr. Thiltgen agreed. Staff had not raised the issue but thought it could find outside funding to develop the site and had a dire need to do so because of major repairs that should be tied into the process. Council Member Mossar asked Mr. Benest about funding for Phase I. Mr. Benest said the building program dollars for some of the facilities were in the budget. In terms of construction, the major issue was the Children’s Library for which funds were available for major renovations. Council Member Mossar clarified that the monies were set aside in the Infrastructure Plan approved by the Council a couple years prior. .Mr. Thiltgen said those were dollars that were not specifically in infrastructure, but were approved as part of the Capital Improvement Program. Staff would need to return to the Council for approval. Council Member Ojakian thought some of the capital costs were already approved in the past and there were some ideas in terms of raising money for future needs, but asked about operating costs. Mr. Thiltgen said the issue of operating costs was always a tough question. Over the long haul, staff anticipated some type of financial adjustment of additional funding to cover the additional operating costs with expanded facilities. Relative to the Children’s Library, staff would provide an implementation plan and cost analysis to give the Council a better idea about how to proceed with the programs. Staff was also examining feasibility studies for both the Main Library and Art Center and the Mitchell Park Community Center and Library projects to have a better handle on how many square feet were being considered. Staff would then have a better hard dollar amount rather than the current estimates. Council Member Ojakian said the City currently spent $4.3 million in operating costs, questioning what other costs were involved. Mr. Thiltgen said the information technology and custodial costs were separate in another part of the budget. Council Member Ojakian asked whether that was ~ypical of running a library service, i.e., meld dollars into their single budget or off in a different department. Mr. Thiltgen was unsure. A different library district might have costs built in. City organizations were probably structured similar to Palo Alto where not all of the costs were built in. There were also overhead and operating costs but he was unsure how the costs were offset. Council Member Ojakian asked how much the City spent in total operating costs on the library services. Mr. Thiltgen said staff could probably identify custodial costs for all community service facilities at $150,000 to $175,000, which was not very high. If the costs http://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/clerk/minutes/2000/O01010.html 1/16/2002 Minutes of the City Council - October 10, 2000 Page 8 of 26 were spread out, each facility probably only cost around $30,000, but the sizes and ~ cleaning rates differed. The information technology costs were determined by the amount of time spent, but the bulk of the work for equipment in the library was handled within the City’s own system. Council Member Ojakian said a few years prior the City put out.the Library Automation Plan, which contained several points of work that needed to be completed. He asked how far along the City was in satisfying that plan, and how it correlated with the Library Master Plan. Library Director Mary Jo Levy, said the City was approximately one-quarter of the way through the expen.ses associated with the capital project, but progress was made over the past few months in terms of ordering equipment. She anticipated by the end of the year, much of what was already approved would be spent in the capital budget. Council Member Mossar asked for an explanation of how the City would pay for the item identified by the last bullet on the top of page 6 of the staff report (CMR:345:00) under description of items included in Phase I, which said, "Add library staffing to support existing and improved services." Mr. Thiltgen said the addition of library staffing was part of the implementation plan and would be returning to the Council, representing the additional funding mentioned by the City Manager. Confusion seemed to exist between Phase I and the Implementation Plan. Staff would return with the information at budget time. Council Member Mossar referred to page 5 of the staff report (CMR:345:00) indicated "the Components of Phase I implementation will include," and then listed all of the items including the addition of library staffing, asking whether it was an action item... Mr. Thiltgen said the additional staff was an action item but would be included in the proposal that would be brought back to the Council. Council Member Mossar asked Mr. Benest whether library staffing was one of the areas that would be funded in the future. Mr. Benest said yes. Vice Mayor Eakins asked how equivalency would be determined as mentioned in the staff report (CMR:345:00) and Library Plan, which contained the comment that Mitchell Park Library would be the equivalent of the Main and Children’s libraries. Mr. Thiltgen said equiyalency meant providing the same services as the combined Main and Children’s libraries; he anticipated square footage would be close but not matched. Staff would attempt to provide an equal level of services at both north and south Palo Alto. Vice Mayor Eakins thought there was quite a discrepancy in square footage between north and south Palo Alto. Mr. Thiltgen said currently there was a discrepancy. One of the feasibility studies would focus on the Mitchell Park Library. Staff anticipated increasing the size of the http ://www. city.palo-alto, ca.us/clerk/minutes/2000/O01010.html 1 / 16/2002 Minutes of the City Council - October 1 O, 2000 Page 9 of 26 Mitchell Park Library to accommodate the services. Staff also wanted to examine the community center to determine whether there was a more efficient way to use all the space for both functions. Vice Mayor Eakins asked about the popular selections at the neighborhood libraries. Ms. Levy said the analysis indicated the neighborhood library collections had fallen behind and were outdated overall. The focus on the neighborhood libraries was reading and access to popular materials, such as CD Roms, music, etc. The emphasis in the neighborhood libraries was to have a greater level of currency in the collections, which would see greater turnover, be used more highly, and serve a popular audience. The Main Library, Mitchell Library, and Children’s Library would contain more in-depth and older collections over a period of time. The purpose for Phase I was to improve service at all the libraries, not just resource libraries. Vice Mayor Eakins asked whether there was discussion about the neighborhood gathering and community focus aspect of the neighborhood branches. Ms. Levy said yes. Vice Mayor Eakins asked whether discussions included the snack or coffee facilities. Ms. Levy said the coffee and snack facilities were not discussed in the context of neighborhood libraries primarily because of the cost. The appendix at the back of the conceptual plan listed the plans for each facility. The Main, Mitchell Park, and Children’s Libraries were the potential sites. The focus of the plan was greater efficiency but it was expensive to have everything at every location. The proposal was a compromise to maximize in a few libraries while still providing libraries in a neighborhood context. Vice Mayor Eakins said she and Ms. Levy had often talked about the Multnoma libraries with a Popular Room in the Central Library. Ms. Levy said the Popular Room had a Starbuck’s franchise. Popular materials would still be found at Main, Children’s and Mitchell Park Libraries, but the emphasis overall from a library service point of view was to primarily have popular items in the neighborhood libraries. Vice Mayor Eakins asked whether the annual cost of $4.8 million was on top of what was already being spent. Ms. Levy said yes, the cost would more than double. A large portion of funding was for the recommendation to increase the hours by 30 percent. Staff was trying to give the Council options, without knowing how the programs would be flushed out or the size of the libraries. The cost was staff’s best estimate and was admittedly at the upper end, in the case that the City implemented every idea in the larger report. If some of the options in the report were removed, the cost would be reduced. MOTION: Council Member Beecham moved, seconded by Kleinberg, to approve the Policy and Services Committee recommendation,’ with one modification, to take the following actions regarding the Library Advisory Commission’s New Library Plan: 1. Approve the key’components of the Plan (Attachment 1 of CMR’.345:00) in http ://www. city.p alo-alto, ca.us/cl erk/minutes/2000/O01010.html 1 / 16/2002 Minutes of the City Council - October 10, 2000 Page 10 of 26 concept, i.e., the creation of two Resource Libraries at Main/Children’s Libraries and Mitchell Park Library and the preservation of Neighborhood Libraries at Downtown, College Terrace, and Terman Park Libraries. 2. Direct staff to proceed in development of Phase I of the Plan and return to Council with a proposal that outlined expenses to implement it. 3. Direct staff to return to Council with a multi-year plan to implement and finance the key elements of the Plan; including projected operating and capital expenses and incorporate the plan into the City’s master infrastructure community plan and return to Council with a proposal that outlined expenses for implementation. Council Member Lytle complimented the Library Advisory Commission (LAC) and the P&S Committee on the fine report and recommendations. The incredible progress made over the past several years on the issue should not be overlooked. There was alignment of purpose between the City Manager, City Council, a commission of citizens responsible for giving recommendations on the issue, and the citizens of the community on the direction to head on improving the libraries, which was a giant step forward. The Finance Committee was also complimented for its legitimate questions. Even if the capital campaign was accomplished, which was not easy, libraries were one of the most beloved community assets; however, the ongoing operational costs would also have to be financed. Ongoing operational costs were under criticism in the wake of the d.efeat of the storm drain measure. The citizen commission was a tremendous asset to the City because of the leadership it had already developed and the education and understanding of the issue enabling it to move forward in communicating with the community about financing both capital improvements and ongoing operation expenses. Council Member Mossar agreed with Council Member Lytleo She also appreciated the LAC. In order to move forward, support of the voting public was necessary. The Council promised the voting public the right to weigh in on projects, give their priorities, communicate their range of financial comfort, and to indicate how to be approached to participate financially, particularly for new infrastructure. Although libraries were a beloved institution, supporters of libraries reinforced one another’s love but never asked the general public how much they were willing to support the libraries in addition to what was already being paid. She would vote for the motion but with reluctance because in her mind, the ideal way to proceed would be to develop some options and alternatives as part of a package to be taken before the punic when the public was asked how it wanted to deal with storm drains, public safety, and community centers. Various segments of the community were interested in a number of issues. Although the present group might be interested in libraries, another group might be interested in something else. The City would not be successful unless it did a good job of incorporating the efforts into the Infrastructure Long-Range Master Planning process. Council Member Kleinberg agreed with her colleagues. The P&S Committee minutes referenced a discussion about financing. The Council would not enter into such an open-ended wish list easily, so there were some in-depth conversations about options, such as what would happen if there was a recession; where the money would come from; what would happen in terms of staffing and capital improvements. However, things came before the City earmarked with concerns -about finances. The storm drain fee vote was a wake-up call for people concerned about fiscal care. She talked with the City Manager and her colleagues about having a "teach in" about finances. It would be an opportunity that could be folded into a http://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/clerk/minutes/2000/O01010.html 1/16/2002 Minutes of the City Council - October 1 O, 2000 Page 11 of 26 general overview conversation regarding where the City got its money, dispelling myths about property values versus revenues, where revenues came from and how the revenues were spent in the past. Then listen to the public about how money should be spent. The community was not being asked to spend untold numbers of dollars.without any regard. She hoped some important forums would be made available to the community whereby everyone would learn about the fiscal strategies in terms of spending and linking to the community’s priorities. Council Member Ojakian supported the motion. What he supported most was the City trying to endorse a vision, with which he agreed. Several aspects of the City’s libraries could be improved, but change was costly. Having visited about six important libraries in the area, he saw what others communities had compared with Palo Alto. There was no blame to be placed on anyone for the situation; Palo AIto’s libraries were built 20 to 30 years prior in a different environment and time. The other libraries had dedicated computer areas where people could access information. Some libraries had private reading rooms with computer hookups. The teen and children’s programs with clearly dedicated areas were very admirable and would not impinge on adult areas. The City could implement several of the proposals, but there was a sacrifice because of the tremendous cost. The suggestions for Palo Alto would result in a world-class operation. Few cities would have the number of open library hours as Palo Alto. Most operated in the 60-to-70-hour per week range; Palo Alto proposed to have 300-plus hours. Few cities had the type of square footage, even for a city the size of Palo Alto. There was a tradeoff between service and cost, because there was some logic behind the former City Manager’s decision to have fewer branches-sacrificing a level of service for a more cost-efficient operation. By concentrating resources into a single library or a couple of libraries, one could maximize dollars and get a tremendous amount in a particular area. The offset was not having the ability to keep the branch libraries open. There was a benefit when a service was provided directly to the folks, giving easy access to the service, which was an important concept. Raising the necessary funds for operating piece of the project was going to take a staggering effort. A significant amount of money would be needed. The City might want to consider something like an endowment fund or private industry both in terms of advertising or support services in return for giving some use of the libraries. Council Member Fazzino said since he ran for Council, he heard kudos as well as complaints about Palo AIto’s library system, which had not changed in 20 years. The City had wonderful resources, great librarians, and a community and neighborhood- oriented library branch system. The complaints included the fact the libraries were not open long enough, the lack of state-of-the-art technology, etc. The proposal was an exciting step forward. The LAC and staff were thanked for putting together an exciting potential master plan for library development in the community. He endorsed the plan, which would require a tremendous amount of discussion with the community. He supported the idea of neighborhood-based libraries. He believed in the concept of a neighborhood community center/library system throughout the City where people had access to materials available in either the traditional Guttenberg format or Internet format. At the same time, he took to heart Council Member Mossar’s comments concerning the storm drain fee election. It was essential that discussions took.place as a broader master plan and budget. There were good discussions aboL~t such issues as consultants in the Spring of 2000 by the Finance Committee. Unfortunately, the word did not seem to get out to the community at large about the issues and priorities with which the committee and City needed to deal. It was imperative as the City moved forward that such discussions occur and that everything possible was done to teach and involve the entire community. The http://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/clerk/minutes/2000/O010 lO.html 1/16/2002 Minutes of the City Council - October 10, 2000 Page 12 of 26 priorities had to be evaluated against the transportation infrastructure, storm drainage fees, creek improvements, and other priorities. The community had to make a decision as to whether or not it would support the additional costs, both capital and operational. It was also very important to consider alternative ways to operate. He was still a very strong supporter of the concept of a city/school library; Palo Alto should also consider the possibility of working more closely with Stanford in the future, with its wonderful library resources, to see whether there were not different and unique ways of providing library services to the community. Council Member Burch was supportive of the proposal when it went before the P&S Committee and was equally supportive now. The concept of a major resource library in both the north and south was excellent. The Mitchell Park Library would be increased fourfold, from 9,000 square feet to 36,000 square feet. It would still be smaller than the northern library, but represented a significant commitment to the people in the south, which was appreciated. A community’s libraries were a mark of the civilization and always had been, whether books, CDs or Internet. The ability to educate the people who would become the leaders of the future was critical. When looking at resources and the cost, there came a time when one looked at how to spend money and buy quality. Quality was purchased for the City when libraries were fully supported. Vice Mayor Eakins agreed with her colleagues and appreciated the strategic direction of the two kinds of library services .to better provide for what the community said it wanted. The resource libraries and neighborhood libraries were a significant breakthrough in distinguishing the libraries, thus directing resources. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Kniss absent. ORDINANCES 17. Supplemental Staff Recommendations for the Urgency Redwood Tree Protection Ordinance City Attorney Ariel Calonne said two forms of ordinance were before the Council, the first of which was under the cover of the City Attorney’s report dated October 5, 2000, which followed the Council’s direction of September 18, 2000, creating an urgency addition to the existing protected tree ordinance until January 1, 2001 that indicated redwoods 18 inches in diameter or more would be treated like a native oak. The Planning staff had additional ideas for the Council, as seen in the supplemental staff recommendations. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ed Gawf said when staff examined the proposed urgency ordinance, they believed a few things could be added for clarification and improvement. One recognized that the growth and pattern of Redwood trees were somewhat different from Oak trees. Staff identified an additional condition that would allow a tree to be removed: overcrowding conditions. Oak trees tended to grow singly with a large drip line, but it was not unusual to see several Redwood trees on a single lot. Another important issue was having a clear effectiveness date. Mr. Calonne said in the absence of any special Council action, the default rule was that any unissued permits in the City’s collective hands on the effective date of ordinance would be subject to follow the ordinance. Staff’s recommendation would http ://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/clerk/minutes/2000/O01010.html 1/16/2002 NEW LIBRARY PLAN LIBRARY ADVISORY COMMISSION CITY OF PALO ALTO MAY 2000 MEMBERS: Anthony Angiletta Lenore Jones John Kagel Warren Kallenbach Tina Kass, vice-chair Mary Jean Place Tom Wyman, chair Table of Contents Executive Summary Section I. Introduction Section II. Mission and Recommendations Mission and Vision of the Palo Alto L~rary Recommendations Section III. Implementation of Recommendations Program Support. Correcting Current Deficiencies Library Collections Library Staff Program Support. How to Meet Future Needs Library Collections Library Staff Facilities Appendix A. General Information and Data 1. Background Community Participation Commission Meetings and Discussions 2. Assessment of Palo Alto Libraries A. Characteristics of the Palo Alto Library System B. Comparisons with Other Libraries Size of Facilities Library Staff Library Collection Budgets Library Circulation 3. Trends in Library Services Appendix B. Children’s Library Appendix C. Southwest Palo Alto Library Services Appendix D. Friends of the Palo Alto Library Appendix E. Palo Alto Historical Association Appendix F. Chronology of draft Library Master Plan Appendix G. Full Program Descriptions Appendix H. Hours Appendix I. Spatial Chart 05/15/00 page 1 page 3 page 4 page 4 page 5 page 7 page 7 page 7 page 8 page 12 page 12 page 13 page 14 page 16 page 16 page 16 page 17 page 18 page 18 page 19 page 19 page 21 page 22 page 24 page 26 page 28 page 29 page 31 page 32 page 33 page 34 page 52 page 53 List of Tables Table 1. Staff Needed to Support Present Programs Table 2. Budget Improvements page 9 page 13 Table 3. Incremental Staffing Requirements page 13 Table 4. Library Facilities Expansion page 14 Table 5. General Measure of Library Services in 11 California Cities page 19 Table 6. Library Space in other Cities (All Library Buildings)page 20 Table 7. Size of Palo Alto Libraries (includes areas used by other City staff)page 20 Table 8. Comparison of Staff Levels page 21 Table 9. Staff Available to Keep Libraries Open. FTEs per 1000 Hours Are Open per Year page 21 Table 10. Comparison of Library Collections Expenditures page 22 Table 11. Palo Alto Library Collection Budgets. Loss in Purchasing Power, 1985/86 to 1999/2000 page 23 Table 12. Comparison of Circulation. Annual Cireulation per capita Population page 24 Table 13. Library Circulation Compared to Staffing FY1980/81 to 1999/2000 page 25 05/15/00 Executive Summary On March 16, 1998, the City Council received a Draft Library Master Plan fi’om the City Manager. Subsequently, in 1999, Council appointed a commission to advise on library matters. The Library Advisory Commission’s charge was to review the Palo Alto City Library, the Drait Library Master Plan and to make recommendations for improvements of library resources. This report embodies the Commission’s findings in the form of a New Library Plan for the City of Palo Alto. Aiter a year of meetings, including special hearings soliciting citizens’ opinions on the state and future of the Palo Alto Library, we find: Residents value highly continuation of a core and neighborhood library system Residents value expanded services for children and teens ¯ Residents value integration of technological innovation, but not at the price of neighborhood libraries or in reduction or non-growth of printed and other non° computer-based materials and services ¯ Residents value expanded hours and services across the system We find, further: ¯ Financial support for library collections, referenceservices, hours of opening, cataloging and processing and technological innovation has been insufficient to meet present public needs; alone, 17.0 FTE are needed to bring the system up to the requirements of the present program ¯ The Library compares unfavorably with adjacent communities and with cities similar to Palo Alto in California on a number of indicators, including staffing, facilities and size and diversity of programs and services On the basis of these findings, we recommend, in terms of timing: ¯ Immediate remedial actions in staffing and collections, including a revised budget request for FY00/01 that includes 8.0 new FTE and $59,000 in new base dollars for books and periodicals. An additional 9.0 FTE should be added over the short term bringing the total new FTE to 17.0. ¯ Capital improvements in the form of facilities remodeling and expansion, comprising a 115% increase in system-wide square footage which includes approximate doubling and tripling of libraries at the Main and Mitchell Park sites, respectively 05/15/00 1 ¯ Operational funding improvements for incremental staffing, collections and other resources necessary to implement the Library Plan, including a total of 35.5 FTE and a 185% increase in collections outlays over the life of the plan We recommend, in terms of personnel, program configuration and facilities: ¯ Creation of two Resource Libraries at the present Main and Mitchell Park where citizens will find the bulk of improved and expanded services and collections ¯ Preservation of neighborhood libraries for reading and limited services in the downtown, College Terrace and southwest areas of Palo Alto ¯ Expansion of children’s services and establishment of teen services, including preservation of the Children’s Library as part of that program The Library Advisory Commission holds that this plan is at once restorative, preservative and progressive. It is neither futuristic nor unimaginative in character. We believe it is a necessary blending of continuity and change that matches well with the kind of community we are and with the range of information needs our citizens have had and will have. 05/15/00 2 Section I. Introduction In March, 1999, a newly appointed seven-member Library Advisory Commission (hereafter LAC) of Palo Alto took office. It had been almost fifty years since the city last had an official library commission. Since 1989 the community had witnessed a serious decline in library services, program and collections. The City Council’s charge to the new Commission was to review the conditions existing in our libraries and to make recommendations for improvements. On March 16, 1998, the City Manager presented to the City Council a Draft Library Master Plan, created by Library and City staff. The draft was then referred to the Policy and Services Committee. The plan was not received well, either by the community or by many City Council members, mainly because it suggested that three libraries should be eliminated. At the time the Plan was being presented, a proposal by the Friends of the Palo Alto Library to resurrect the idea of a Library Advisory Commission was successfully working its way through the political process. One of the key responsibilities of such a body would be to provide advice to the Council on long-range planning for the libraries. In assessing the needs of Palo Alto’s libraries, the first order of business was to review the staffDraft Library Master Plan that had been referred to the Policy and Services Committee and had been put on hold until the new Commissioners were appointed and took office. The Commission reviewed the Plan and began to elicit the views of the various constituencies ofPalo Alto’s library system. The commissioners were briefed by Library staff on programs, technology, collections, facilities and staffing. They reviewed the evaluation of the Draft Master Plan prepared by the Friends of the Paio Alto Library. They held two public meetings to get public input and to hear first hand the community’s ideas and aspirations for its libraries. The Commission has chosen to create a new dynamic and visionary plan that is program driven addressing the interests and needs of Palo Alto’s highly educated, service- demanding community of library users. That plan is presented in this report. Because context is so important in a major report like this, the Commission is including material that compares Palo Alto to other communities similar in size, geographic location and demographics along with proposals on how to satisfy unmet needs. In order to reduce redundancy, all analysis and data supporting the recommendations in Section II are contained in the Appendixes. Since it is impossible to estimate financial data until specific programs and library spaces are stipulated and endorsed by the Council, cost data are not included. 05/15/00 3 Section II. Mission and Recommendations The Mission and Vision of the Palo Alto City Library, Palo Altans are distinctive, diverse and demanding. They expect high standards in the performance of municipal services and in the provision of community resources. The Palo Alto City Library system exists in order to meet the varied needs of this population. The Library should make it convenient for Palo Altans to acquire knowledge and information, to find recreational reading, and to.develop literacy skills. It should also provide a safe and comfortable setting for community activities. - ¯ The Library Advisory Commission envisions a community library and information system that is at once restorative, preservative and progressive in character. We see a resource program embodied in attractive, comfortable and welcoming spaces where residents can gain access to the world’s knowledge and culture for learning and enjoyment. We see excellent and multifaceted collections of print and multimedia materials at the libraries as well as access to the world of electronic resources in the libraries, homes, offices and schools. We see a helping staff sufficient in number and expertise to achieve these ends. 05/15/00 Recommendations A vision has little meaning without a plan of action. A plan of action requires making choices among available options. The choices that the Library Advisory Commission recommends require significant financial commitments in human, physical, and technological resources. We are striving to satisfy the diverse and dynamic library and information needs of all of Palo Alto’s reading and information-seeking public. The LAC first identified the programs and g~i’vices lhat must’drive-itsproposals. We then proceeded to assess the physical plant, technological infrastructure and personnel needs such an array of programs requires. Finally, we have considered timelines necessary to implement such a program. At the core of our plan of action are three features that embody the most significant changes in program and the necessary physical plant and personnel changes for their execution. They also include continuities that the Library Advisory Commission and numerous citizens value: ¯ Creation of two Resource Libraries at the present Main and Mitchell Park Library sites (serving north and south parts of the city, respectively). At these sites people of any age will find the greatest number of materials and services, including core reference services with electronic links for remote users, email correspondence with reference librarians, centralized phone service, fax, expanded current and historical collections, computer clusters, teen and children’s services, group study rooms, and other features; ¯ Preservation of the concept of geographically-based small neighborhood libraries for reading and limited services, including Downtown, College Terrace and Terman Park or another facility in the southwest section of Palo Alto; ¯ Expansion of children’s programs and services, including substantial improvements at the Resource Library sites; specific plans for the Main Library/Children’s Library will depend on the outcome of the architectural review for the optimal expansion and improvement at Children’s Library. We recommend, therefore, in terms of library programs and services: ¯ Increase in the size of the collection by 56%, and expansion of the character and formats represented by the collection. ¯Expansion of system-wide hours by 31%; ¯ Creation of substantially expanded children’s programs and collections at the Main/Children’s and Mitchell Park sites and expansion of existing children’s services in neighborhood libraries; ¯ Creation of teen programs, spaces and services at the Main and Mitchell Park sites; ¯ Creation of group study and meeting spaces at the Main and Mitchell Park sites; ¯ Creation of computer clusters for electronic access at the Main and Mitchell Park sites; 05/15/00 5 ¯Expansion of services for persons with disabilities or special needs; ¯Creation of a coordinated volunteer program; ¯Expansion of school outreach programs; ¯ Improvements in technical processing,resulting in materials becoming available sooner; ~ted ¯ Integration oftl~ i~ogram of the Pal0 Alto Historical Association, including its collections and the s~rvices era Pale Alto Historian; ¯ ..Integratian of the program a~.d se~.ces of.me Frien_ds of the Pale Alto Library, including its book sales to the public. We recommend, therefore, in terms of physical plant and capital improvements: ¯ Substantial facilities improvements in the form of new construction or additions to the square footage of the Resource Libraries at the Main and Mitchell Park sites; ¯ New construction or renovation of a site (including the present Terman Park site, if available) to maintain a neighborhood library in southwest Pale Alto; ¯ Renovation of the Downtown Library to reclaim space currently being used by another City Department or relocation to an alternate site in the downtown area; ¯ Pending architectural review, renovation and possible expansion of the Children’s Library; ¯ Completion of structural repairs at College Terrace and intemal reorganization of shelving capacity; ¯Upgrade facilities to accommodate evolving technology. We recommend, therefore, in terms of personnel changes required to carry out these programs: ¯ Additions to regular Library staff over a period of 5 years resulting in a net expansion of up to 35.5 FTE (full-time employees); ¯ Immediate conversion of 6 FTE from hourly pan-time to regular benefited status; ¯ Reconfiguration of staff, using only paraprofessional staff at the neighborhood libraries. 05/15/00 6 Section HI. Implementation of Recommendations The programmatic recommendations of the Commission fall into two phases: what must be done now, and what can be implemented over time. Program Support. Correcting Current Deficiencies Over the past fifteen years, increases in library budget and staffing have been insufficient to ke~p up with the inflati~n-ddveh cost ofl~roviding services. During~the same period, however, residents have demanded substantial increases in library services. In addition, there have been dramatic increases in technology, information formats and delivery methods available to the Library. This lack of financial support has resulted in a library system that cannot adequately maintain the current level of programs, including collections, hours, staffing. Comparative data supporting this conclusion are contained in Appendix A, Section 1 (pages 18-26). The Commission believes that amelioration of this past neglect needs to begin now, rather than waiting until the conclusion of the Master Plan approval process. Specific shortcomings of the current program include: ¯Inadequate budgets for purchasing new n~aterials; ¯ Delays in processing new and/or damaged materials, resulting in collections being unavailable; ¯ Insufficient weeding of outdated materials, resulting in collections that are not current, but that occupy precious space available in our limited facilities; ¯Reliance on overtime to open facilities on Sundays; ¯ Limited hours in branches, especially at the heavily used Mitchell Park library; ¯ Staff unavailable to answer phones or to provide reference service to users waiting at the desk; ¯ Library supervisors unavailable to manage staff (train, direct work, develop) or to plan for improved services because they must fill in for staff at service points; ¯ Inadequate access to PCs and electronic resource for patrons; ¯ Insufficient staffto support improvements to the on-line catalog, to implement projects that can improve availability of materials, to maintain support of current technology, and to plan for the future. Immediate steps need to be taken to bring to the library program adequate levels of support, both for staffing and collections. Library Collections The collection of the Library is the foundation of the services it provides. Until more space is available, however, major efforts to improve the collection will have to occur through attention to improving currency of materials, discarding dated materials and increasing the purchase of videos, CDs, CD-ROMs, tapes and other non-book materials (e.g., DVDs and E-books). Increasing library staff will support the weeding and maintenance of collections; increases in the materials budget are required to purchase current materials in all formats. 05/15/00 7 The library materials budget for FY99/00 is $490,000. Increased numbers of updated titles, more unique titles, improved currency of collections and limited expansion of the non-book r~ ~terials and foreign language items (turreted, iv funded by Friends contributions) will require an increase of 15%, resultir~ ,a materials budget of $563,000 a year, beginning with FY00/01, and continuing with annual inflationary increases. -In addition to this increase in the materials budget, staff additions described below will be required to select and purchase new mate’rials, and to weed "the’existing collections. Staff assigned these responsibilities typically carry out other duties as well; therefore the FTE staff included in the "Improve public services" category in Table 1 (page 9) will have collection development duties as part of their assignment. Library Staff To provide even a minimal level of service, the Library requires additional staff. This can be accomplished by: 1) adding new positions (itemized in Table 1, page 9}); 2) converting 6.0 FTE positions from hourly part-t~he to regular, benefited status. This remedial staffing step cannot wait until facilities improvements are under way or completed. Fortunately, it can be implemented quickly and will result in improved service that will be immediately apparent to library users before building and renovation programs receive funding. Improved staffing levels will not only go far to support existing services but will also be consistent with the program recommendations (as described in Pro.~ram Support. How to Meet Future Needs, p. 12) that the Commission is proposing for the longer term. The following summary of staffing priorities provides a reasonable approach to correcting the current situation. This is an example of how increased staffing can improve services immediately. 05/15/00 8 Table 1. Staff Needed to Support Present Programs Purpose 1. Improve public services 2.Improve cataloging and processing 3. Provide technology planning expertise and support for use of equipment 4. Improve collections 5. Sustain overall operations TOTAL FTE 6.5 FTE 3.0 FTE 2.0 FTE 3.0 FTE 2.5 FTE 17.0 FTE Result Staffneighborhood libraries at the 4.5 FTE level (average across branches). Staff Children’s Library at the 9.5 FTE level. Increase library hours by 5 % (reinstate morning hours at Mitchell Park and add hours at Terman Park). Change loan period from 4 weeks to 3 weeks. Establish staffing levels that will accommodate staff illness, training, earned vacation. Reinstate telephone reference service on Sunday and accept inquiries by FAX and e-mail in addition to phone and in person. Increase use by 12% (measured by circulation). Establish capacity for supervisors to spend 75% of their time to hire, train, supervise staff, and to plan and improve services to users. Make 80% of new items available within three weeks. Have dedicated expertise in library for library technology applications, planning and operations, including maintenance. Make 97% of equipment available for public use at all times. Increase new title additions by 10%/year. Increase discard rate of outdated materials by 15% Enable implementation of Dratt Plan, including planning for program and building enhancements. Enable fundraising efforts to proceed by means of grants, Friends of the Library and other private sources with $250,,000 in new contributions received each year. Establish volunteer program and increase volunteer support over time from 4 FTE per year to 8 FTE. Support Library Commission. 05/15/00 9 Positioning the Library in the Immediate Future These additional staff represent the Library Advisory Commission’s best estimate of what we require to address shortfalls that have developed over the past fifteen years. This level of staffing will also position the Library for implementation of the proposed plan for the future. The Commission is requesting a budget revision for the second year (FY2000/2001) of the current budget cycle that includes an increase in staffing of 8.0 FTE in the following areas: Improve public services ¯Begin improvement of staffing at branch libraries ¯Reinstate morning weekday hours at Mitchell Park ¯Increase circulation by 12% ¯Change loan period from 4 weeks to 3 weeks ¯Accommodate morning opportunities at MitcheIl Park for visits by pre-schools, people with special needs, classes, etc. ¯Improve ability to maintain public service during staff illnesses, vacation and training 3.0 FI’E Improve cataloging and processing of materials 1.0 FFE ¯ Make 75% of new items available on the shelf within one month Provide technology planning expertise/support 2.0 FTE ¯ Make 97% of equipment available at all times ¯Provide dedicated expertise for library technology applications in the library Improve collections ¯Increase number of new titles by 5% ¯Increase discard rate of outdated materials by 10% 2.0 FI’E In addition, this proposal assumes conversion of 6.0 FTE hourly part-time staff to regular benefited status. The above summary is not presented in priority order. The sequencing of service improvements will be the responsibility of the library staff once funding is secured. Similar additions to the staff sh’buld also be made over the next three fiscal years in order to bring current library operations to the appropriate level of service. Conclusion We emphasize that we should not separate these recommendations from the Commission’s overall Draft Plan proposal. We believe they represent what must be done simply in order to bring the system up to date and to begin creating the enhanced library system that the community demands and will support. 05/15/00 10 This first phase of the Draft Plan must be implemented before any further phases can be successful. It requires political determination and courage to approve a plan that is both dramatic and costly, but it is the only way to remedy past neglect. No long-term building plan, however inspired, can overcome the serious deficiencies in operational support that the library and its patrons have tolerated for so many years. On April 20, 2000; the foregoing analysis was presented to the City Council’s Finance Committee. That Committee has recommended 2.0 FTE IT positions for the Library. It recommended an’hdditional" $200,000 for the City Manager’s budget for staff additions to the Library. It also recommended an expenditure for an outside consultant to assess Library operations, the consultant to be employed, after consultation with the LAC, on a "fast track" to report back as soon as possible so that additional timely Couneit- - consideration can be gi.ven to Library staffing. The LAC believes that the foregoing, if approved by the full Council, would be a responsive first step to begin to meet the Library’s current staffing deficiencies as found by the LAC. 05/15/00 11 Prosran:~ Support. How to Meet Future Needs The program recommendations described in Section II will require increased support for collections and staff in addition to substantial capital investments in almost every library facility in Palo Alto. Analysis and data supporting this conclusion are..~ovided in Appendix A, Section 1 (pages 18-26). The Commission and the Library staff cannot yet determine with certainty the costs of a library building program. Staffing and collections costs can be estimated with greater precision, although all of these components of the library program depend on decisions by the City Council regarding the Draft Plan. The following sections contain a recommendation for expanded staffing and facilities as well as our best current estimates of the costs of improving collections. Library Collections The City’s library collections budget has not kept pace with the Consumer Price Index for at least fifteen years, with the result that the library has lost approximately 24% of its purchasing power during that period (see table on page 23). The library collection has fallen behind those of comparable communities in terms of number of volumes and types of materials, and Palo Alto residents are frequently forced to use libraries in other cities for their information needs. As an example, a "snapshot" taken on one day in April 1999 showed that over 6100 items from the Los Altos library were on loan to Palo Alto residents. The following improvements in the collections are essential: ¯ Increase the overall size of the collection to 400,000 items, an increase of 43% over the current size of 280,000 items. ¯ Expand the number of unique titles from 169,000 to 232,000, an increase of 37%: Unique titles will typically be located in the Resource Libraries, providing broader and deeper collections for research needs of residents. ¯ Increase the number of copies of popular titles purchased by 33%: Palo Alto residents have a history of high use of the public libraries, not only for study and research, but also for keeping up with popular titles. The Neighborhood Libraries will continue to maintain their collections of the duplicate popular titles. ¯ Improve the collection replacement rate (number of titles withdrawn and replaced from current collections divided by size of total collection) to 10%-13%: This ratio has ranged from 4.4% to 7.4% for a number of years. This is the only way we can be sure the collections remain current and useful. 05/15/00 12 Table 2. Budget Improvements Budget Period Budgeted Amount Increase over FY 99/00 Current Collections Budget FY99/00 $490,000 Immediate Improvements (FY00/01)$563,000 15% Library Plan Full Implementation $1,400,000"185% * Budget is augmented by 3% annually for each often years until 2010forpurposes ofplanning; the actual . amount required may be more or less than this. These recommended increases in the collections budget will add a wide range of current fiction, nonfiction, and reference books and periodicals--plus electronic databases and audiovisual items--to the City library collections at both the adult and juvenile levels, thus meeting the needs and expectations of Palo Alto library users. The Commission recognizes that the Friends of the Palo Alto Library have raised and contributed significant funds for the collection that have been critical to the libraries over many years. The Commission strongly urges, however, that no line budgetary items such as books, periodicals and audio materials should be funded by donations. If this were to continue, it would represent an abdication of public funding responsibility and an assumption that there would be a continuing subsidy. The fundraising efforts by civic organizations such as the Friends should instead be used to seed, enhance or supplement special programs of the Library and its operations, and not to support ongoing needs of the Library. We leave the determination of what those special aspects and programs might be to the City library staff and the Friends. Library Staff Library staffing in Palo Alto has remained virtually unchanged over the past twenty years despite dramatically increasing demands for library services; the staff count for FY99/00 is 55.5 FTE, while for FY 80/81 it was 52.87 FTE. As a consequence, the Palo Alto library system, with one of the highest per capita circulation levels in California, has fewer full-time employees than comparable communities with fewer libraries and lower circulation levels (see Table 8 on page 21 and Table 12 on page 24). What this means is Clear: Palo Alto cannot offer its citizens the same level of library service and personalized attention that patrons in other communities enjoy. The LAC urged immediate improvements in staffing levels earlier in this section. In addition, implementation of the public programs identified in Section II (pages 5-6) of the proposal and the opening of new, larger facilities when the Library Plan is completed will require additional staff to maintain the level of support expected by Palo Alto residents. Table 3. Incremental Staffing Requirements Budget Period Current FY 99/00 Immediate Improvements (see p. 10) Library Plan Full Implementation Total FTE 55.5 FTE 72.5 FTE 91.0 FTE FTE over FY99/00 I7.0 FTE 35.5 FTE Facilities 05/15/00 13 Except for the building of the Downtown Library in 1971, Palo Alto’s library buildings have received little attention since the Main Library and Mitchell Park Libraries were opened in 1958. (Terman Park opened in 1985, although its limited collection, services and hours have not resulted in significant use; it currently represents 3% or less of total library service.) The city’s population has grown by 50% since 1958, with corresponding increases in library usage and demand for services. Although Palo Alfo has’six llbrarid~ theiota1 de’dicateg libr’a~ space is significantly less than it is in comparable cities with fewer libraries (see Table 6 on page 19). Library facilities at Main, Mitchell Park and Children’s are operating beyond capacity. These facilities lack sufficient parking, seating, shelving, quiet study areas, small group meeting areas, and designated program spaces. Increasing square footage and improving the existing space available to the libraries is a start, but only a start. We must improve the technical infrastructure that will let the libraries provide access to electronic sources of information. The libraries are severely limited in their ability to accommodate technology-based services. At present, there is a waiting list for every computer we have at almost any hour of the day. We cannot project the cost of expanding and renovating library buildings without detailed program and building plans. These will involve both the City’s Public Works staff and Library staff. They cannot begin, however, until the City Council approves the Library Plan. Also, the feasibility study for the Children’s Library will affect the final recommendation of the LAC regarding facilities. The following summarizes library space the Library Commission believes is needed to support our program recommendations: Table 4. Library Facilities Expansion Library Main (1) Mitchell Park (2) Children’s College Terrace Downtown (2) Southwest TOTAL Current Size 26,300 sq. it. 9,814 sq. ft. 3,400 sq. ft. 2,400 sq. ft. 7,964 sq. ft. 3,980 sq. ft. 53,858 sq. ft. Recommended Size 60,000 sq. ft. 33,500 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. 2,400 sq. ft. 8,774 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 115,674 sq. ft. Increase 128% 241% 76% 0% 10% 26% 115% 1. In addition to collections and public space, it is assumed that the technical processmg staff will be housed at the Main Library. In addition, space for the Friends of the Palo Alto Libraries and for the Palo Alto Historical Association history collection will be located in the Main Library. ~4ny of these functions couM be moved to another facility with the resulting alteration in recommended size. 2. The current square footage of both the Mitchell Park and Downtown Libraries does not include space currently occupied by other Oty departments (1170 sf for Mitchell Park and 810 sf for Downtown). The Recommended Size figures for Mitchell Park and Downtown assume returning that space to library use. The funding strategy for such substantial projects will be complex; it will involve city funds, possible bond issues and the potential of the Proposition 14 public library construction bond support, and possible private funding. 05/15/00 14 Conclusion The plan outlined in this section will enable the Library to provide the services and facilities that Palo Alto residents demand and require. It will move Palo Alto to a level of library service that is already enjoyed by neighboring cities. The Library Advisory Commission strongly recommends that the City Council take positive action on the proposals for the Palo Alto Library presented in this plan. 05115/00 15 Appendix A. General Information and Data The following pages provide information and data to support the Library Advisory Commission’s recommendations. On virtually every measure, the condition of Palo Alto’s library system is deficient. ¯The entire library system is under-funded; ¯Staffing is inadequate; ¯Library collections have declined in depth and breadth; ¯Library buildings are dated and unattractive; ¯Main, Children’s and Mitchell Park libraries are crowded beyond capacity and there is little shelf space to expand collections; ¯There are no dedicated spaces for teens, for group work or for meetings. Ten California cities comparable in various ways to Palo Alto were selected as the basis for comparing the City’s library system. This cross-comparison of library systems was most revealing. Palo Alto’s six-branch library system far surpasses the number of branches that comparable communities have. In terms of library circulation, Palo Alto ranks near the top. In terms of the money it spends on library collections it ranks near the bottom. This assessment ofPalo Alto’s library system is a call to action. Palo Alto’s library system must be substantially expanded and services must be improved to meet the rapidly evolving technological challenges of the new global information era. 1. BACKGROUND Community Participation The history ofPalo Alto’s libraries and the active public participation in making them what they are today can be traced back to 1895 when the Woman’s Club assessed its members one dollar per year to establish the town’s first "Free Reading Room." As the library system developed, it became one of the community’s most important services, ranking alongside the City’s schools, parks and recreational facilities in attracting new residents to Palo Alto and making our community uniquely desirable. In developing plans to transform Palo Alto libraries to meet the evolving requirements in the 21 st century, the LAC relied heavily on community participation in public hearings and on written input fi’om library users. Information elicited during eighteen Library- sponsored focus group meetings involving over 230 participants of all ages over a five- month period in 1996 provided a good initial overview of how Palo Altans feel about their libraries. This input was supplemented last October by two well-attended LAC- sponsored meetings--one at Cubberley and one at the Art Center. At these meetings, members of the public were invited to express views on what should be done about the City’s library system. In addition, the LAC received many letters from individuals and 05 / 16100 16 noted written comments involving libraries that appeared frequently in local newspapers. The thrust of the public sentiment gleaned from these sources may be summarized as follows: ¯ Don’t close our libraries. Even during the focus group sessions in 1996, well before the Staffreport that appeared in 1998 proposing the closure of three libraries, strong community support was expressed among all groups for the Palo Alto branch library system. ¯ Our library collections are inadequate and in many cases dated. We need more books as well as more material in non-book ~-t~rmats and in foreign languages. ¯ Facilities are dated, poorly lighted with unattractive interiors and uncomfortable seating. They are often too crowded and have no space for group meetings, small or large. Parking is insufficient at some of our libraries. ¯ Services are too limited. Children’s programs are too few and over-crowded; there is insufficient staffing, a condition heightened by limited and inconsistent hours at the branches; there are no specialized services or spaces for teens and there is no Internet access at some branches. ¯ More funding is required. For some time funding has been insufficient to support needed services and collections and to improve facilities. The public expressed willingness to provide more financial support for Palo Alto’s libraries. The message from the public was consistent: The public loves its libraries and recognizes that we are fortunate to have as good a system as we do. At the same time, library users clearly recognize that the City has fallen behind in funding basic library facilities and services, and they believe that corrective action should be taken without delay. After completion of its draft report in April 2000, the LAC invited public review and comment of the report before formally transmitting it to the City Council for action. There was strong support for the LAC recommendations, both at the public meeting and in letters from residents. Commission Meetings and Discussions Following its first meeting, Library Advisory Commission members concentrated on developing an in-depth understanding of the Palo Alto Library System. Information contained in the staffDraft Library Master Plan provided Commission members valuable background and perspective. Library staffhas been extremely helpful in this education process. They have been forthcoming in providing information and in responding to LAC requests for clarification and supplementary data. Friends of the Palo Alto Library also offered helpful comments on the City’s Draft Library Master Plan. More than twenty LAC meetings were devoted to learning about the City’s library system, receiving public input and visiting public libraries in nearby communities. 05/16100 17 During its retreat on November 7; 1999, the LAC formally began to exchange thoughts on developing its own proposal. Three committees composed of Commission members were formed to study and prepare sections of this report. These were the Operations, Finance and Data and Southwest committees. Since that time, the Commission has developed, discussed and refined elements of its Library Master Plan. Tiffs plan defines what the Library should become to respond to the needs and resources of Palo Alto. 2. Assessment of Palo Alto Libraries Palo Alto’s library system has not been a City priority for some fifteen years. Funding has been inadequate to sustain and build a system that meets current user needs and fully incorporates evolving technology. As a result, the City now faces the challenge of playing catch-up for past neglect. The Commission sees this as both a problem and an opportunity. _ A. Characteristics of the Palo Alto Library System Library services in Palo Alto reflect the population of the city and the history of the library system. Following are some of the special characteristics of Palo Alto that affect its library service requirements. ¯ High Usage: Despite the deficiencies of its system, the Palo Alto Library is second in per capita usage within its population range. Statewide, Palo Alto ranks sixth among all communities; in the past it has ranked first. ¯ Changing City Demographics: As Palo Alto has grown, library locations and the availability of library services no longer reflect the population distribution within the City. Approximately 54% of Palo Alto’s population now lives south of Oregon but only two libraries--comprising 27% of the City’s total library space--are located there. Over the last decade, the circulation at Main has gradually declined while that at Mitchell Park has been growing; now the two libraries are virtually equal at about 30% of total circulation in each facility. ¯ Branch Libraries: Palo Alto’s six-branch library system poses both fiscal and operating challenges. The branch system requires added expenses for a daily delivery system, for multiple handling of returned materials, for purchase of multiple copies of books and magazines, and for regular scheduled use of overtime to staff six facilities. Management of a branch system is complex on a number of measures, including materials selection and processing, coordination of schedules and policies, coordination of patron accounts, and accommodation of daily travel by library staff. Despite the expense and complexity of the branches, however, library users have grown to depend on it. In addition, the branches address broader City priorities. For example, retention of the six-branch system is consistent with the Policy C-29 under Goal-5 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan which states, "Strategically locate public 05/16/00 18 facilities...to serve all neighborhoods in the City." It is also consistent with the Plan’s objectives to reduce traffic and to discourage use of private transportation. B. Comparisons with other Cities The Commission compared the Palo Alto library system with libraries in ten other communities that are similar to Palo Alto on various measures. The population-of the cities selected for analysis range from Menlo Park with a population of 31,250 to Sunnyvale with a population of 132,900. Table 5. G~neral Measure of Library Services in 11 California Cities- Palo Alto Berkeley Beverly Hills Carlsbad Menlo Park Mountain View Newport Beach Redwood City Santa Clara Sunnyvale Thousand Oaks 2 Pop. 111/98 60,500 107,800 34,050 73,700 31,250 74,700 72,600 65,800 101,900 132,900 115,700 3 # of Libs 6 Total Circ. Annual Staff per Hrs of (FTE)Cap Service 6 54.5 16.9 13,967 5 121.1 14.7 16,822 2 78.1 24.8 3,262 3 82.4 14.6 7,852 2 19.1 13.8 3,272 1 52.6 10.1 4,019 4 63.9 18.1 11,036 3 64.8 10.8 8,216 2 57.1 13.3 6,732 1 63.9 10.2 6,057 2 83.5 11 5,876 7 Library Budget $4,130,098 $9,336,665 $6,650,153 $5,300,000 $1,388,750 $3,784,831 $3,937,455 $4,814,400 $4,758,400 $5,766,609 8 General Fund Budget $94,577,000 $93,081,091 $99,755,913 $61,600,000 $25,917,410 $63,100,000 $85,031,578 $48,144,000 $97,320,000 $52,040,490 %of Gen Fund Budg 4.4% 10% 6.6% 8.6% 5.5% 6% 4.6% 10% 4.9% 11% Columns 2-6from California Library Statistics, 1999; fiscal year 1997/98. Published by California State Library, Library Development Bureau, Sacramento, 1999. Columns 7-9 show data for FY 1999/2000. Notes: Menlo Park General Fund Budget does not include fire services. Column 9 in Table 5 above shows the proportion of total general funds dedicated to the library budget in selection other communities. Since each city compared uses a different accounting system, a precise comparison between total general funds and library funding is difficult. It is clear from this survey, however, that other cities allocate significantly more of the general funds to libraries than does Palo Alto. Analysis based on this data consistently shows that Palo Alto’s library system is seriously deficient and compares poorly with library systems in other communities. Deficiencies of Palo Alto’s services are revealed in several ways. Size of Facilities: Although Palo Alto has six libraries, its total library space is significantly less than comparable cities with fewer libraries. Palo Alto has 57,600 square feet of library space divided among six libraries; the ten other communities surveyed have an average of 66,000 square feet of library space divided among 2.5 libraries. Four of the libraries surveyed have together another 235,000 square feet authorized and under construction. 05/16/00 19 Table 6. Library Space in Other Cities (All Library Buildings) 20O 150 100 5O m[~]Projected Actual Palo Alto’s 53,900 square feet of library space is not as large as it would appear since part of it is lost because of the need to duplicate facilities such as checkout areas, staff space and restrooms at six locations. Table 7. Size of Palo Alto Libraries (includes areas used by other City staff) ¯ Other Staff [] Library Area Since Palo Alto’s comparatively modest total library space is divided among six libraries, no single library has adequate work or program spaces. Finally, approximately 1,980 square feet, or some 7% of Palo Alto library space, is currently occupied by other City staff and is not available for library use. 05/16/00 20 Library Staffing: With the exception of Menlo Park with two libraries and Mountain View with one library, Palo Alto has fewer full time library employees than the other communities. Table 8. Comparison of Staff Levels 140I120 IO0 80 60 4O 2O 0 The average number of employees for the ten communities surveyed is 68.7 while Palo Alto currently has an authorized FTE level of 55.5 employees. Staffing is 25-30% below that of other communities with shorter hours and fewer libraries. Because of this low staffing level, the Palo Alto Library has only 3.9 FTE available per 1000 hours that the libraries are open each year. The average number of employees available in other communities surveyed is 9.3 per 1000 hours. Palo Alto staff spends more time on routine tasks such as checking books in and out, and less time on providing user services (reference, collection development, etc.). One example of the consequence of this situation is that during 1998/99, 40% of library users who telephoned the Main library reference desk were unable to get through. Table 9. Staff Available to Keep Libraries Open. FTEs per 1000 Hours Libraries are Open per Year ::.-’:::: o 05/16/00 21 During the period 1980 to 2000, the Palo Alto City Library has added 2.63 FTE to the Library staff, peaking in 1984/85 .at 56.35 FTE. Current staffing is 55.5 FTE, an increase of 5% over the 1980/81 level of 52.87 FTE. During this same time, Library circulation, a basic measure of workload, however, has grown by 67%. Additional measures of increased workload over the twenty-year period include: 1980 1999 ¯Reference/inquiries 109,000 ¯Collection size (cataloged items, excluding Terman) 226,050 ¯Programs (adult and children)414 ¯ Program attendance (adult and children)8889 182,671 283,050 317 24,651 This level of staffing places heavy burdens on Library employees. It requires frequent assignments across the city to cover ~chedules, vacancies and illnesses. Supervi.sion, planning and essential training must often be neglected, and staffmorale suffers. Personnel turnover and recruitment are becoming problems. City residents have been clear that they View the Library staff as the best part of the system. We must provide enough staffto ensure that employees have opportunities to do the work they have been trained for. Library Collection Budgets: Palo Alto’s budget for its library collection-including books and non-book items-ranks among the lowest of the communities surveyed. This shortfall is dramatically worsened by the fact that PaloAlto has more branch library collections to maintain than any of the other cities surveyed. In addition, minimal inflation-based increases in the collection budget since 1985 have resulted in a significant loss in purchasing power. Table 10.Comparison of L Branches 6 5 2. Palo Alto Berkeley Beverly Hills Carlsbad Menlo Park Mountain View Newport Beach Redwood City Santa Clara Sunnyvale Thousand Oaks 4 2(2) 1(3) 4 3 2(3) 2(3) 2 brary Collections Budgets Budget for Collection Size Collecdons $475,100 (1)283,050 $790,000 574,890 $1,237,706 275,165 $666,500 236,727 $144,500 131,383 $375,444 264,275 $675,304 360,724 $400,900 223,609 $711,000 289,808 $591,625 330,937 $640,300 348,477 (Items) (1)In addition, the Friends of the Palo Alto Library contributed $60,240 for libra1 (2)Menlo Park opened the Belle Haven branch in 99/OO fiscal year. (3)Also operates a bookmobile. Collection Size (Titles) 165,662 n.a. 238,130 214,561 205,063 201,114 n.1. 184,000 220,000 219,423 ~collections. 05/16/00 22 Over the years, funds budgeted for Pale Alto’s library collections have not kept pace with inflation. From 1985/86 to 1999/00 there has been a 20% increase in the amounts budgeted for library collections. Over the same period, however, inflation has eroded purchasing power to the point where the library’s collection budget is can now purchase only 76% of what it could 15 years ago. The current collection budget is about 25% lower in real dollars than it was fiscal year 1985/86. If budgeted amounts had simply kept pace with the Bay Area CPI over the 15- year period fi’om 1985 to 2000, the collections budget for 1999/00 would be about $607,000 instead of $490,000. Table 11. Palo Alto Library Collection Budgets. Loss in Purchasing Power, 1985/86 to 1999/2000. lOO 90 70 60 50 20 !~1 Loss vs 85/86 ~ Budget Fiscal Year - (Source: u.s. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose) As a result, the depth and breadth of book and other media collections have seriously declined. Collection breadth and depth are measures of a library’s reputation and merit. To the extent the City slacks off its support of libraries, Palo Alto’s reputation as a community that places a high priority on having a first class library system is diminished. The only way that the library has been able to maintain collections and establish new ones (such as foreign language collections) has been as through the generosity of the Friends of the Palo Alto Library. The contributions of FOPAL, however, are meant to add richness and diversity to our collections and cannot take the place of the basic support required fi’om the City. 05/16/00 23 The cons~uence of the woefully inadequate growth of the collection is clear. Collection weaknesses are becoming evident in nonfiction areas with science, history and biography leading the list. Collections are aging and becoming less relevant because our collection replacement rate is half of what it should be. Library Circulation: Despite the poor showing of on many comparative measures, Palo Alto’s annual per capit~ library circulation of’i 6.~-items is exceeded ~nty.by Beverly Hills and Newport Beach. This reflects this community’s reliance on City library collections and services despite the inadequacies of the collection. Table 12. Comparison of Circulation. Annual Circulation Per Capita Population COMPARISON OF CIRCULATION Annual Circulation Per Capita Population 3O Part ofPalo Alto’s high library use is attributable to the fact that our residents are very well educated. Census data show that Palo Alto residents’ level of educational attainment increased during the 1970-1990 time period. Among persons over 25 years of age, those with college education increased from 61% in 1970 to 85% in 1990. Those who had completed four or more years of college increased from 42% in 1970 to 65% in 1990. In fact, one-third of the 1990 population of persons 25 or over in Palo Alto had received at least one graduate degree. (From draft EIR document for Sand Hill Road/Stanford West in Library Administration Demographics folder.) Despite this heavy usage, Library collections continue to age and become less relevant. For the first time in FY 1998/99, Palo Alto became a net borrower rather than a net lender in the region-wide Silicon Valley Library System. Palo Altans make active use of nearby libraries, highlighting perceived inadequacies in their own City libraries. A "snapshot survey" showed that on April 1, 1999, Palo Alto residents had over 6,100 items checked out from the Los Altos library. These. items included a wide range of fiction and nonfiction hardbacks and paperbacks, videos and teen items. 05/16/00 24 Clearly, Palo Altans are active library users. The City should assure that its library facilities and the quality of its collections and services are commensurate with that use and with what is available in other communities. Over the twenty year period 1980 to 2000 the Palo Alto Library System has added the equivalent of 2.63 FTE employees, an increase of 5%. During this same time library circulation has increased by 67% and would have increased even more had the checkout times for library items not been extended from three weeks to four weeks in 1992. Table 13. Library Circulation Compared to Staffing FY 1980/81 to 1999/2000 7O 65 45 801 811 82/83/84/85/86/871 88/89/90/91/92/931 941 951 96/971 98/99/ 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 O0 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 FTEs Circulation Fiscal Year This provides further evidence that the current staff level is not adequate in terms of growing demands on staff time. As the staff workload necessary to directly serve library patrons "at the front desk" increases, other library functions such as collections processing, staff training and development and user services and programs naturally receive correspondingly less attention. 05/16/00 25 3. Trends in Library Service Books and technology: Public libraries nationwide are exploring how facilities and services must change to adapt to the rapid growth of new technology and make best use of the phenomenal expansion in new information sources. Information technology is evolving at an astonishing rate, and the most forward-thinking libraries are positioning themselves |~.~, help their various publics access the full potential of these resources. Library buildings, staffing and 0rg~-tizations must be created with the flexibility and mind-set to accommodate and adapt to change. Technology is becoming pervasive, but traditional paper and print are-also here to stay. Both are valuoble and have their own requirementsmboth space and staffing. Library space is needed for an increased number of dedicated computer terminals to avoid waiting lines. Particular attention must be given to providing library users with convenient access to power and to electronic information banks as well as to online networks where they can eormeet their personal electronic equipment. This requires up- to-date infrastructure and skilled maintenance staff. The demand continues to grow for greater depth and breadth in a wide range of collections covering all segments of the population. These collections include books, magazines and other periodicals, compact discs, CD-ROMS, books-on-tape and videos. Each media format has its own cataloging, storage and circulation requirements. Librarian’s changing role: With the proliferation of information sources, the role of the librarian is changing from that of a provider of information to consultant and guide. The new role of the librarian is like that of a navigator who is knowledgeable about information sources and is prepared to help guide people in evaluating those sources and accessing them. This requires ongoing staff training and skill improvement programs. Working at home: Many Palo Altans now telecommute or use their home office for business. These people will depend increasingly on libraries to supplement their home resources. A natural outgrowth of this work-at-home phenomenon will be extended library hours and adjustments to collections, including more electronically accessible resources. Meeting places: New libraries are increasingly providing public areas to accommodate the growing demand for meeting spaces. These include small enclosed areas where study groups can work together, rooms for use by .tutors and staff in teaching and training, plus areas for convening small meetings that may require teleconferencing. The objective is to provide meeting areas that can be used by the public without disturbing other library patrons. This is an extension of the services traditionally offered by libraries, provision of meeting spaces has wide community support, and our libraries should provide such services. 05/16/00 26 Communities are also looking to their libraries to provide architecturally attractive buildings with comfortable, well-lighted interiors that can serve as meeting places for small groups in addition to being sources of information and providing opportunities for recreational reading, listening and viewing. Increasingly, libraries are becoming broadly based resource centers serving growing public needs. 05/16/00 27 Appendix B. Children’s Library For sixty years, generations of Palo Alto residents have enjoyed the Children’s Library, the focus of children’s library services in the northern part of the city. The library is considered a Palo Alto treasure by many, but the beloved and venerable building is showing its age. The tile roof needs repair and space is at a premium, offering little room for growth of collections or programs. As the Library Advisory Commission conducted its review of library services in Palo Alto, it became clear that the Children’s Library building in its current state cannot support the programmatic improvements envisioned by the LAC. The Friends of the Palo Alto Library proposed to provide.pm-tial~funding for a.jointly- managed FOPAL-City Feasibility Study to determine the "footprint," the number of square feet available for potential expansion, options for expansion and estimated cost of the options. The report will be completed in June 2000, and will provide the LAC and the City with alternatives to the current configuration along with cost estimates. It is the hope of the LAC that a robust children’s program can continue in the building. Depending on the possibilities for expansion, however, it may be necessary to house a portion of the full birth through fii~h grade program in an expanded Main Library. The program description for children’s library services assumes the following: ¯ Expanded children’s services-both programs and collections-to ensure comprehensive programming in the two Resource Libraries (Mitchell Park and Main/Children’s); the ultimate configuration at the Main/Children’s nexus will depend on the possibilities for expanding and updating the Children’s Library building. ¯ Continuing limited children’s programming and collections in the neighborhood libraries. The LAC recognizes the importance of the Children’s Library building to residents. The feasibility study should provide the LAC and the City with an understanding of the possibilities for the building within the context of overall library services. 05115/00 28 Appendix C. Southwest Palo Alto Library Services The Library Advisory Commission’s recommendations for improved library services in Palo Alto contain two important components: 1.Creation and operation of neighborhood libraries in existing locations: College Terrace, Downtown and Southwest Palo Alto -now served by the Terman Park Library. 2.Development of comparable library services and collections in the neighborhood libraries, including collections, programs, and hours. The neighborhood libraries will supplement the program at the two Resource L~raries, providing localized facilities that are considered to be essential by Palo Alto residents. The Commission expects that improvements and changes to College Terrace and Downtown will beincremental. The Terman. Park Library, however, will require significant changes, ranging from the nature of the collections and hours to the location of the library itself. Given the uncertainties surrounding the use of the Terman Park site at this time, the Commission cannot recommend a specific location. It does, however, make the following recommendations specific to this facility: ¯A library will be located in the southwestern part of Palo Alto; ¯The Southwest Library facility will contain 5000 square feet of space In addition, the Southwest Library will be comparable to other neighborhood libraries in the following ways: ¯Collections (not exclusively paperback as is now the case at Terman Park) ¯Broadband connections to City and library networks and the Interact ¯Hours and staffing Following are three options for the location of the Southwest Library: Locate the Southwest Library at its current site within the Terman Park facility: The PAUSD has begun action to recover the Terman site for a third middle school. The Southwest Library could be located within the new middle school. Such a location presents a number of problems such as high noise levels near the library, parking, traffic congestion, public access to a secure campus, public access to the school during school hours. Advantages include easy access to the library via public transportation, and opportunities to collaborate with the PAUSD on programs and facilities. Locate the library in a commercial area: The E1 Camino Real corridor provides a number of shopping center possibilities for a public library. Such sites typically have adequate parking and would be located on an active public transportation route. 29 05/15100 3.Construct a new library within the Terman Park site, or elsewhere in the southwestern part of the city: This option is likely to be the most exp~nsive. A fourth option is one that the Library A(~’dsory Commission does not support at this time: o Locate the library on the Gunn High School campus as part of the new school library: Earlier public hearings suggested developing a technology center at this site. PAUSD officials have reported that their plans for the school library allow for an adjacent 5000 square foot public library facility. There has not been public support for this option; residents have stated that they prefer a neighborhood library in the southwestern part of Palo Alto and are willing to forego the planned technology emphasis. 3O 05/15/00 Appendix D. Friends of the Palo Alto Library The main financial support for Palo Alto libraries in recent years, outside of the City budget, has come from the Friends of the Palo Alto Library. The Library Lovers’ Fund, membership and the Friends’ monthly book sales have given $350,000 to the libraries in the last five years. The Friends operate monthly book sales at Terman Park. In late 1999 and early 2000, they have had extr~’Lspace’for this evx,-nt;,-whieh-for’many years suffered from extremely limited space. As a result of the expanded space, the Friends have produced bigger and bigger sales each month. Every month between 10,000 to 12,000 books are sold. Books that are not sold are donated to 53 non-profit organizations for use overseas and-locally. This great service keeps books out of the landfill, an environmental need we all must address. Many surrounding libraries, including Los Altos, Menlo Park, and Redwood City, offer on-site book sale spaces in their libra_des, which produce on-going revenues and acquaint many new people with the book sale concept. The Palo Alto School Board has proposed taking back Terman Park for their use. This would make it imperative for any Library Plan for the Libraries to include a space where the Friends could continue their very useful book sales activities. In addition, FOPAL has no administrative space beyond that provided by it own members. This has made operating efficiently a challenge, with files in five different locations. As FOPAL expands its membership, public awareness of library needs, and financial support for the libraries, a small but consistent office space is a high priority. At the present time, volunteers manage all Friends’ activities. The LAC is including space for FOPAL in its recommendations for library sites in the future. This will ensure that the Friends can continue its efforts on behalf of the Library. Specifics include: Administrative space: 100 to 150 square feet for files, fax, and computer. Book sale space requirements: o Monthly Book Sales at a regular location o 2400 square feet work space for sorting and storage o 1200 square feet multi-use space (this is temporary space needed two days before the sales) o For daily book sales: 150 square feet of in-library sales space in the two Resource Libraries. 31 05/15/00 Appendix E: Palo Alto Historical Association The Palo Alto Historical Association (PAHA) has staffed and maintained the City’s historical collection for over forty years as a result of a long-standing agreement with the City of Palo Alto. The Guy Miller Archives occupies 390 square feet of open space in the northeastern corner of the Main Library. In this area are located the Staff‘Historian’s desk, a large map case, and thirty file cabi~,:~ containing approximately 5000 photographs, thousands of news clippings and other iustorical ephemera. Additional historical materials are stored in the basement of Main Library; two hundred square feet of historical collections are stored off-site and are not available to the public. The Library Advisory Commission is including expanded space for a local history room in its recommendations for library facilities. This will include 1180 square feet of dedicated secure space for the local history room in one of the libraries. The space would: ¯ Provide enough space to house the current collection of photographs, clippings, books, letters, documents, manuscripts, etc., as well as future additions to the collection. ¯Provide ready access to the collection ¯Provide working space for the public using the collection ¯ Enable the StaffHistorian to consult with collection users without disturbing users of the general library collection ¯ Accommodate classes, volunteer training sessions, history groups and individuals learning about the collection without disturbing users of the general library collection ¯ Enable patrons to listen to oral histories, view videotaped oral histories, and see PAHA video programs ¯ Provide museum-type display space for Palo Alto artifacts; these cannot be viewed in the current facilities. Interest in local history continues to increase, and a history room is essential to house the growing collection of historical documents and artifacts. Neighboring communities (Mountain View, Redwood City, Menlo Park) all have dedicated, secure local history rooms in their libraries which are used by large number of their residents. 05/15/00 32 Appendix F: Chronology of the Staff Draft Library Master Plan The staff’Draft Library Master Plan prepared by City Staffwas submitted to the City Council for review and action on March 16, 1998. The Plan proposed a three library system with improvements and expansions to Main, Mitchell Park and Children’s libraries and phasing out College Terrace, Downtown and Terman Park libraries. As it developed, the progression of the Draft Master Plan was subordinated to the creation of a Library Advisory Commission. *~fter hearing from members of the public, the City Council unanimously agreed to refer the Draft Library Master Plan to the Policy and Services Committee. Council Member Gary Fazzino asked if the pending issue of the proposal to form a.lihra_,-y advisory group would fit into the Committee’s discussion of the Plan. City Manager June Fleming commented that the question as to whether the proposed library group would be advisory to the City Manager or report to the City Council was scheduled for discussion at the Council’s April 13th, 1998 meeting and that there would be no public input on the Plan until this issue was resolved. ¯On April 13, 1998, the City Council conducted hearings on the agenda item "Evaluation of Proposal to Establish an Advisory Body for the Libraries," and after receiving extended public comment, the Council moved to continue the item to its May 26th meeting. ¯Following its discussion of the library advisory body on May 26, 1998, the City Council unanimously agreed to direct staff to prepare a proposal to establish a Library Advisory Commission appointed by the City Council. Although not explicitly stated, it was generally understood that the first charge of the Commission would be to review the Draft Library Master Plan. City Manager Fleming saw the new Library Commission’s involvement as not being limited to the Library Master Plan although, as she noted, it should be considered a foundation for the Commission. She went on to observe that in her years of experience with government and libraries, she knew issues would remain and evolve over time and become more complex as the world became more complex. ¯The seven members of the Library Advisory Commission were appointed February 16, 1999. Again, it was implicit that the Commission’s first order of business would be to review the Draf~ Library Master Plan and to develop a plan of its own that it could submit to and recommend for action by the City Council. Members of the Library Advisory Commission are: Anthony Angiletta, Le, nore Jones, John Kagel, Warren Kallenbach, Tina Kass (Vice Chair), Mary Jean Place, Thomas Wyman (Chair). The Library Advisory Commission’s first meeting was on March 25, 1999. The City’s 1998 draft Library Master Plan remains with the Policy and Services Committee where it was referred on March 16, 1998. The Committee plans no action on the earlier draft plan since it will be superseded by this plan. 05115/00 33 Appendix G. Full Program Descriptions The following statements flesh out concepts of library service incorporated in the Library Advisory Commission’s plan. These include many entirely new services as well as en- hancements to current services. Items which are new or improved services are under- lined and in italics throughout. All have been discussed in detail by the.Commission and were formally adopted as integral to the service plan on February 9, 2ooo. CHILDREN’S SERVICES PROGRAM Definition Library services targeted to children from birth to fifth grade, their parents, teachers, caregivers, authors and others interested in children’s literature. Location of Children’s Services ¯Comprehensive juvenile collections and services at two Resource Libraries, Main/Children’s and Mitchell Park ¯Smaller juvenile collections and limited service provided at neighborhood libraries. Services Provided Reference and Readers’ Advisory: Full service provided at the two Resource Libraries supports in-house users including: ¯Assistance with search strategies, use of collections and resources, and answering ques- tions ¯Finding age-appropriate materials for children and their caregivers ¯Assignment of librarians to respond to remote users (telephone, FAX,, e-mail inquiries) ¯Providing age- and skill-appropriate training in use of library resources ¯Consultation with librarian by appointment ¯Enhanced Kids Pages on Web to assist in-house and remote users Limited services provided at Neighborhood Libraries; including: ¯dssistanee by paraprofessionals trained to complete simple reference inquiries and refer other inquiries by telephone, FA~, or e-mail to professionals designated as Resource Libraries. 05/16/00 34 ¯Electronic connection available_forpatron from Neighborhood Libraries to children’s li- brarians at Resource Libraries Programming At Resource Libraries ¯Weekly story times (one each location): lapsit/baby, toddler, preschool, school age, bed- time, and family ¯Monthlyspecial events (one per location): multicultural programs, author visits, story- telling festival, Children’s Book week, seasonal programs, entertainment to promote col- lections, etc.) ¯Weekly book discussion groups (alternating between Resource Libraries) ¯Homework centers staffed by volunteers at each location ¯Specialprograms to serve specialpopulations, e.g. ESL students, homeless, develop- mentally challenged. ¯Lectures and workshops for adults (parents, teachers, care givers, and others) as re- quested or need arises. ¯Bookleggers (volunteer program of book talking in public/private schools and day care centers) At Neighborhood Libraries ¯Monthly sto~_ times at each facility ¯Quarterly special event at each facility At All Libraries ¯Outreach to public andprivate schools (day care, preschools, and elemental_ schools) as requested and/or ideally at least once a year ¯Summer Reading Program ¯Class visits and library tours as requested Implementation When appropriate, programs are collaboratively planned, produced and funded in coop- eration with other City departments, community agencies and organizations, and with lo- cal schools. Publici_ty and promotion of libra._ programs and services coordinated centrally 05/16/00 35 Juvenile Collections Resource Libraries ¯Circulating collections similar in size and scope. ¯Depth of the collections expanded in all content areas and formats ¯Maihtain historical’juvenile materials anti a Newb~’y and,Caldeeott awards,collection at one Resource Library. ¯Support parent/teacher collections. ¯Provide more non-English materials in various formats; divide language specialties be- tween Resource Libraries. ¯Collaborate with the Famil), Resources program to develop a collection which will sup- port its goals at a Resource Libra~ ¯Address needs of children with disabilities (e.g. large print books). At Neighborhood Libraries Provide core collection of juvenile standards and focus on popular materials for circulat- ing collection. Electronic access to reference materials; limited hard copv reference items. At All Libraries ¯Timely response to new purchase requests from children and caregivers. ¯Provide all formats at all libraries ¯Add new formats, as they become available/as needed ¯Use displays to highlight collections. ¯Weed and maintain collection and related equipment on regular schedule. Staff ¯Plan requires sufficient, skilled, customer-oriented, efficient children’s librarians at Re- source Libraries. ¯Designate outreach children’s librarians at Resource Libraries. ¯Public relations staff support required. ¯Paraprofessionals staffchildren’s services at Neighborhood Libraries, with collection management oversight by children’s librarians. ¯An on-going staffdevelopment component for all children’s services staff ¯Volunteers support on-going and outreach services. 05/16/00 36 SERVICE TO TEENS Definition Library services, collections, staffing, space and programs targeted to teens (ages 12-18; grades 6- 12). This population group is also actively involved in planning and carrying out their services and programs. This ~,ro~ram is almost en~irelF new. Location of and access to services All facilities have some services for teens. However, the Resource Librariesprovide designated space, expanded and targeted collections, programs and staff for this target age. The Resource Libraries provide multiple use areas offering both places for study and for "hanging out". Teen-friendly libraries offer comfortable chairs for reading and tables and chairs and enough space for research and writing. Homework and multimedia centers offering word proc- essing, photocopiers, scanners, and video transfer equipment are state-of-the-art. They have tech- nology resources teen users are familiar with fi’om school available to meet their after-school needs. Spaces elsewhere in the libraries may be used for performance and program purposes. Services Provided Types of services available to teens: Resource Libraries ¯Internet access ¯PCs for word processing, etc. ¯Recreational reading ¯Teen an displays ¯Reading clubs/discussion groups ¯Outlet for creative writing/poetry ¯Book discussion groups ¯Homework materials ¯Homework help ¯Teen-planned library Web page Neighborhood Libraries ¯Internet access ¯Limited recreational reading ¯Limited homework materials ¯Teen art displays 05/16/00 37 Outreach The Library, other City Dep .mments~ivisions and the community interrelate by: ¯Schools promotion of. public library use ¯School class visits to a public library ¯Public Library outreach to schools ¯City divisions cooperation with library staff.to produce joint programs (e.g., the City’s Arts and Culture Division joins with th~ library to produce a teen poetry or art contest) ¯Friends of the Palo Alto Library support of teen author programs Collections Teen collections emphasize both physical and digital resources. Materials are kept in good condi- tion. Multiple copies for assignments and pleasure reading are a high priority; outreach to teach- ers determines what assignments are coming up. Materials that are popular and contemporary- especially magazines, CDs, videos and books on tape-are essential. Providing paperback books in series is a plus. Library materials are marketed and merchandized in a way that is attractive to the teen audience. Teen Involvement A teen advisory committee composed of teens from public and private schools acts as a liaison between the teen community and the library. This committee helps influence staff decisions and policies. Staff Resource Libraries have professional youth librarians focused on collections, services and pro- grams. Staff members at all facilities are trained to be sensitive to and understand the needs of the teen patron. Every librarian is also trained on how best to communicate with the teen patron. 05/16/00 38 ADULT REFERENCE SERVICES Definition Reference Service is the direct assistance that is provided in response to requests for help in an- swering questions, locating information and utilizing resources, equipment and services needed to satisfy each inquiry. Access to Reference Services is available free of charge to those who visit the library and those who contact the library by telephone, mail, fax, and elec~’onically by email. Locations ¯Full service provided at both Resource Libraries. Main and Mitchell Park ¯Paraprofessionals at Neighborhood Libraries provide limited reference service. ¯Remote users referred to Resource Libraries. Services provided at Resource Libraries Librarians at public service desks support in-house users, including: ¯Assistance with search strategies, use of collections and resources ¯Answering questions ¯Readers’ advisory provides help finding a "good read" ¯Staffdedicated to supporting remote users ofreadF reference (quick-look-up) via tele- phone, voicemail, e-mail and fax both during and b~_ ond open hours. ¯Training in use of libra._ resources and tools for beginning, intermediate, advanced searching consistent with building research skills of librar~ users to promote self- su~icienc_~. ¯Librarians available for consultation by appointment ¯Strong and timely Web pages to help in-house and remote users get the information they need or find the right information resources ¯Publications and other information tools available to assist patrons in use of collections, libraries, resources, and topical information. Research service is provided to meet the information needs of the homebound and persons with disabilities. Communit~ outreach is made available to assist and train communi~ groups and non-profits to meet their special information needs. Collaborate with Palo Alto Historical Association for library users to gain access to Palo Alto’s historical resources. Coordinate Interlibrary loaning and borrowing. 05/16/00 39 Services provided at Neighborhood Libraries Paraprofessional staff assist in-house users, by ¯Assistance with simple reference inquiries ¯Help finding a "good read" (Readers’ Advisory) ¯Referring other inquiries to Resource Libraries. ¯Electronic connection for neighborhbod palr0ns to reference librarian at Resource Librm-ies. Reference Collections Overview Size, current: 11,000 volumes;_future, 22923 volumes Main Library houses: ¯Print materials relevant to need ¯Unique reference tools ¯Historical materials ¯Retrospective periodical collections, i.e. the archive collections from Library’s early days through present Mitchell Park houses: ¯Print materials relevant to need ¯Retrospective periodical collections, current - back ten years Neighborhood Libraries house: ¯Minimal hard copy reference items. *" Electronic resources are available at all library locations and, as appropriate, remotely. Building/space configuration Reference service is provided from spaces configured to provide easy access to people using electronic resources. Staff ¯Professional librarians staff Resource L~raries and remote reference service center, co- ordinate and provide public, staff and volunteer training programs. Paraprofessional staff is trained to assist patron ’s use of library resources. Continuing education program is in place for all reference and adult services employees. 05/16/00 40 Impact measure Respond to remote users within 8-24 hour tumaround (excluding holiday closure periods) 98% of time. 05/16/00 41 SERVING PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES Definition People with disabilities are those with physical disabilities, mental limitations and learning differ- ences. The Library provides free and open access to all people, including people with disabilities. This access is provided both inside and outside (e.g. at home and at work) libraries, as well as through collections, services, programs and electronic and assistive technology. Location of and access to services People with disabilities are served at all facilities. However, the Resource libraries provide more adaptive and assistive devices and more staff available to render special services. All buildings are Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant, e.g. furnishings, electronic doors and rest- rooms. Services Provided Types of programs, services and equipment that enable people with disabilities to have free, open and equal access to the Palo Alto City Library include: Outreach to homebound A ccess ¯ The Operation Homebound program provides increased home or institution delivery of library materials by volunteers to Palo Altans who cannot get to the library because of a long-term illness or physical disability. to specialized equipment and materials by: Establishing more site licensing agreements for software, such as screen-readers, assistive " Internet browsers or learning disabilities programs. Connecting people with disabilities to the library through more varied access to equip- ment and materials, such as computer with browser providing Web access to people with visual impairments, reading machine that turns print into speech, print enlarger, described (DVS) and American sign language (ASL) videos, books on tape, large print books and magazines and TDD telephone for hearing impaired people. Increased use of alternative delivery of information including fax, mail, e-mail, Web download. Accessible Library Web site, catalog, and portals to subscription databases and relevant pages of_particular interest to people with disabilities. Space, attention and service to individuals and groups of people with physical and/or mental disabilities; this includes one-on-one assistance for parents and learning disabled child, training sessions on use of adapted equipment, a place to sit and enjoy being part of the community. 05/16/00 42 Publicity Adequate publicity through a variety of sources (e.g., radio, community television, agency publications, newspapers, etc.) to keep people in the community aware of library services, programs and equipment for people with disabilities. Outreach to agency and/or school directors and staffas well as to users in the community. Networking between other professionals and .organizations (library and other) within and without the City. Technical Support Sufficient technical support ensures reliable service of computer hardware, software and elec- tronic infrasm~cture. Staff ¯Lead staff person to coordinate services to persons with disabilities including program development, staff training, and outreach. ¯All staff are trained to be sensitive to the needs of people with disabilities. ¯Some staff are assigned and trained on the use of assistive equipment. ¯Staff seek input on informal basis from people with disabilities to solicit needs for changes in services, policies, amenities or facilities. ¯Circulation Manager monitors special requests and needs for changes in circulation pol- icy to facilitate fair access to all individuals, including those people with disabilities. 05/16/00 43 LIBRARY COLLECTIONS Definition Library collections include books, periodicals and other serials, cassettes, videos, compact discs, CD-ROMs, electronic databases and other formats not currently held by the Library (e.g. DVDs). The professional library staff selects these items for addition to the collection and maintains its relevancy and currency by removing outdated items. The Technical Services staffprovides proc- essing - acquisitions, cataloging and repair - for the materials acquired for the Library collec- tions. Technical Services also maintains the online library catalog and provides oversight for the Library’s computer system and related equipment. Resource Libraries Collections ¯Main/Children’s Libraries serve the City north of Oregon as Resource Libraries for adult and juvenile collections. Main houses historical collections, including local history, Palo Alto Historical Association files, periodical archives and printed indexes. Periodical collection remains non-circulating. Children’s continues to house "historical"juvenile collections, such as folktales and award winners. Mitchell Park Library serves as Resource Library for south City for adult and juvenile collections. o Reference collection is expanded to provide richer service. o Periodical collections are increased from two to l O.Fears of back issues. Most new items are purchasedfor Resource Libraries. There is a high degree of overlap in subject areas between Resource libraries, but some unique titles are held at each. Teen collections, located at Mitchell Park and Main, contain all formats, including magazines. Collections are ver~ similar at each Resource Libra,_. Resource Libraries house non-English language collections, including audiovisual, cur- rent newspapers and magazines. D~fferent languages are found at each Resource. Newspaper and periodical holdings are expanded to include more titles. 05/16/00 44 Neighborhood Library Collections ¯College Terrace, Downtown, and Southwest/Terman becomepopular reading centers with large degree of overlap among these collections. ¯Southwest/Terman Park’s collections converted from paperback to hardback, enlarged and cataloged like those in other librar), facilities. ¯Collections contain all formats. ¯Collections have a higher "refresh" rate than those do in Resource collections, with non- fiction books refreshed at a higher rate than fiction. ¯Mass-market paperbacks_found in higher percentages in popular collections than in Re- source collections. All Collections ~Increase number of unique titles in sgstem b), 40%. ¯Double the annual replacement rate sgstem-wide to insure collections are up to date. Re- place Resource Librar~ collections at approximatelg 9% and Neighborhood collections at approximatelg 16% per gear. ¯Gradually increase size of collection to 450, 000 over whole sgstem. ¯Increasepercentage of audiovisual items in collection from less than 10% to 20%. ¯Reduce waiting timeforpopular titles bg increasing number of copies of high-demand items purchased. ¯Increase number Of electronic databases for use bg public at Resource and Neighborhood Libraries and via remote access. Collection Management ¯Ensure timely ordering of new titles. ¯Expand use of standing orderplans topromote quick receipt of items. ¯Provide adequate accessible and well-lit shelving_for all collections. Shelves should be no more than 2/3_full when full collection size is reached. ¯lncrease speed ofdeselection of titles that should be removed from the collection. ¯Current circulatingperiodicals prepared with barcodes to track usage. ¯Popular mass-market paperbacks receive minimal cataloging_for improved access to collection. ¯Securit~ systems installed or replaced at all libraries to protect collections, improve op- erational e_fficienc~; ergonomic issues related to staff handling of materials addressed. 05/16/00 45 Collection and Access Services ¯Make 90% ofnewpurchases available on shelf within 14 days of receipt. ¯Complete in-house repairs of damaged and worn materials within 4 weeks. ¯Ability to purchase, catalog and process new media types, such as DVD, ~. ¯Ability to catalog more non-English collections with in-house staffversus hiring and training contract staff. ¯Purchase pre-processed and/or pre-searched materials that improve quality of service or ~neet current standards. ¯Maintain currency of online catalog with a record for each item in the library collection. ¯Enhance catalog records to include active Web links when appropriate, and catalog ap- propriate Internet resources. ¯Bibliographic indexes should be updated to meet user’s changing needs. ¯Catalog all items according to national standards and local practices. ¯Provide enhanced cataloging records that include table of contents, bookjackets or other supplementar~ material, when technological advances make them a part of the standard cataloging record. ¯Convert and enlarge Terman Park ’~ collections_from paperback to hardback and catalog the collection like those in the other library facilities ¯Provide minimal cataloging forpopular, mass-marketpaperbacks to provide access to the collection that is currently not cataloged. ¯Undertake and complete in a timel}; manner special projects that will improve access to the collection. ¯Provide next day delivew service of Palo Alto City library materials between any two City libraries. Technology Services ¯Provide oversight and planning for technology and equipment needs library-wide. ¯Keep the library’s automation systems up to date with latest releases of ’vendor’s software and products. ¯Respond to all technology and equipment problems and resolve them as soon as possible. ¯Train all staffon equipment and technology used in the library. Staff ¯ ¯ Professional staff provides oversight of collection development at all facilities. Paraprofessional staff will be trained to support collection development at neighborhood libraries. 05/16/00 46 Sufficient skilled paraprofessional and professional Technical Services staffwill be added, including staff to manage technologv planning and implementation. Ensure on-goine staff development component for Technical Services staff and all staff involved in collection development. Institute a cross-training program between Technical Services and Public Services staff to improve decisions made in Technical Services. Provide Technical Services staffwith the appropriate computers, scanners and high-speed connectivity to perform their tasks, many of which involve electronic transactions with vendors outside the city network. Use volunteer staff support for on-going tasks where feasible. Location of Technical Services Because Technical Services staffneed to consult the collection and interact with other library staff, Technical Services needs to be located at the library with the largest retrospective juvenile and adult collection. Building Space Requirements ¯Delivery area on ground floor for easy access and efficiency in handling of materials. ¯Delivery/shipping and receiving room should be big enough to accommodate variable size shipments and have a safe materials handling system. ¯Provide a loading dock near the delivery area to receive large shipments. ¯Provide staff with individual, ergonomical!~ designed work areas. ¯Make access to laser printers, copy machines, fax machines convenient for all authorized users. ¯Book repair area includes a sink for mixing glues, cleaning tools, etc. ¯Adequate space to accommodate materials in process without impacting aisle wa])s, as- suring wheelchair accessibili_tv. ¯Adequate lighting and ventilation_for staff. 05/16/00 47 CIRCULATION SERVICES Definition Circulation services provides for the reservation and loan of library materials; this includes estab- lishment of borrowing policies, registration of borrowers, maintenance of patron accounts, cash handling, and shelving of materials. Location Circulation service at all locations. ¯One checkout desk provided at each location, with multiple stations at Resource Libraries. Circulation Services ¯Expand delivery service of materials between Palo Alto City libraries to offer next da.~ delive~ from one library to another. Also provide weekend delive~ service for all li- braries. ¯Change loan period for most items from four to three weeks. ¯Circulation policies serve the needs of people with disabilities, providing extended loans and free mailing o_f items, for example. ¯Place self-checkout stations at both Resource Libraries and at Neighborhood Libraries where space allows and circulation rate makes it cost-effective. ¯Allow A TM/Debit and credit cards to PaY libra~__/ines and fees. ¯Enhance the libra~ card by making it a "Smart Card" that would allow patrons to add value and use it to pay fines, fees, photocopies, faxes, and other services. ¯Provide overdue and reserve notices in a variety of formats: paper, phone, and e-mail. ¯Upon request, mail items to patrons for a fee," Mail requests to homeboundpatronsfree of charge. ¯Install drive-up book returns andpickups at Resource Libraries to make book exchanges more convenient. Equipment Evaluate automatic sorting equipment for returned library materials to reduce staff han- dling of materials and facilitate the re-shelving of items. Improve abili_ty to protect librarF collection and staff hy installing a new loss prevention system at all facilities. ¯Bring allcirculation equipment up to ergonomic standards. Space/Environment ¯Improve efficiency of customer workflow at heavily used Resource Libraries. Designing circulation areas to locate check-in physically close to shelving area will reduce ban- 05/16/00 48 dling: moving checkout to an area apart ~’rom check-in will decrease interruptions and improve accuracy. Provide a "Customer Service/Registration Desk" (not Reference. questions) to assist pa- trons with general questions at Resource locations. 05/16/00 49 VOL~’’~ER SERVICES Definition Volunteers working under the direction of library staff on a broad spectrum of activities are a major support for the library in meeting present and future needs. Individuals, groups, businesses and organizations may provide volunteer assistance and/or may parmer with the library to provide financial contributions or sponsorships. The Friends of the Palo Alto Library are also a vital con- tributor to library programs and services through their volunteer efforts. Location of Volunteer Services Volunteers provide on-site as well as outreach services at all Palo Alto City Library facilities. The Resource Libraries will have, greater volunteer involvement than the Neighborhood Libraries. Services Provided Types of volunteer activities which provide assistance to library staff: ¯Opening assistance-includes newspaper check-ins, bobk drop and delivery bin unpacking ¯~ours ¯Operation Homebound service for people residing at home or in retirements centers who are unable to come to the library ¯Clerical support ¯Latchkey children’s or teen programs ¯Family or adult programs ¯Exhibits or display design ¯Special projects, like library landscaping, grant proposal writing ¯Conservation/preservation, book repair ¯Book discussion groups_for various ages ¯Intemet tutoring ¯Homework helpers ¯Shelving and shelf reading ¯Sponsorship of library programs ¯Storytelling ¯Friends of the Library board and projects ¯English as a SecondLanguageprogramming 05/16/00 50 ¯Student Service learning programs Staff Volunteer Coordinator: ¯facilitates planning and oversees all volunteer activities ¯recruits, interviews, trams, and recognizes volunteers ¯works with local businesses and organizations to promote support and partnerships on a variety of levels. Library staffs who request volunteer assistance handle the orientation, training and supervision of volunteers at their site. The Operation Homebound coordinator oversees volunteers associated with this program. Friends of the Palo Alto Library organize, train, and acknowledge their own cadre of volunteers. Current volunteer program statistics: 1998/1999 245 Volunteers 9,948 hours The above include Library and Friends of the Library volunteers. 05/16/00 51 Appendix H: Proposed Library Hours Now Main Library Monday-Friday 10 am -9 pm Saturday 10 am - 6 pm Sunday 1 pm -- 5 pm Total = 67 hours Mitchell Park Monday-Thursday Noon- 9pm Friday & Saturday 10am - 6pm Sunday lpmm5pm Total = 56 hours Proposed Times in bold denote changes Monday-Friday 9am - 9pro Saturday ’9am - 6pm Sunday Noon - 9pm Total = 78 hours Same as Main Library Monday-Friday 9am - 9pm Saturday 9am - 6pm Sunday Noon - 9pm Total = 78 hours College Terrace & Downtown Monday-Saturday 11 am - 6pm Total = 42 hours x 2 = 84 hours Terman Park Tuesday Noon- 7pm Wednesday-Saturday 2 pm - 6pm Total= 23 hours Children’s Monday & Wednesday Noon-8 pm Tuesday & Thursday 10am-5pm Friday & Saturday 10am-5 pm Sunday lpm-5 pm Total=48 hours Grand total of hours = 278 per week Note: Revised by Library Advisory Commission at 2/10/00 meeting. Monday-Saturday 10am - 6pm & one day/week: 10am - 9pm Total = 51 hours x2 = 102 hours Same as College Terrace & Downtown Monday- Saturday 10am - 6pm & one day/week: 10am - 9pro Total = 51 hours Monday & Wednesday 10am - 8pm Tuesday & Thursday 10am - 6pm Friday & Saturday 10am - 6pm Sunday lpm - 5 pm Total = 56 hours Grand total of hours = 365 per week (31% increase) 52