Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Program Room 2B
Tom Bunger and Will Murphy.
President John Walsh called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m.
Sara Laughlin reported that WFHB’s attorney has requested some changes to the memorandum, including using the formal name rather than WFHB; naming an editorial decision-maker; changing the “memorandum” to an “agreement”; and adding waiver of subrogation. MCPL Tom Bunger concurred with these changes.
Steve Moberly felt that this document is a much-improved draft; he thinks joint editorial decisions are good; and it is good to stipulate that MCPL employees remain as such and WFHB employees remain as such.
Randy Paul felt that the project is a great idea and hopes we will move forward with it. He asked whether the Board had strong feelings as to who should make the editorial decisions and noted that he doesn’t foresee any problems since MCPL and WFHB have similar viewpoints.
Kari Isaacson felt that a collaborative process would be good.
Sara Laughlin agreed that someone must be selected to have the final decision in case of disputes.
John Walsh felt that a “tie-breaker” was necessary although it was unlikely that it will be needed.
A revised agreement will be presented at the next regular board meeting.
Sara Laughlin presented background information on the budget shortfall for 2009. The final approved budget received from the Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF) at the end of March showed a $907,268 decrease in funding. The decrease was due to a drop in assessed valuation. The county auditor is required to provide an updated assessed valuation statement by August 1 but the library has no record of receiving it and it was not mentioned when administration met with a DLGF representative on August 18, 2008. The ultimate responsibility lies with the library. An appeal can be filed with the 2010 budget and DLGF said that half of the funds could be restored in 2010.
The shortfall impacts three funds: Debt Service Fund, $333,052; Capital Projects Fund, $55,481; and Operating Fund, $518,735.
Debt Service Fund. The library has sufficient cash balance in the Debt Service Fund to handle the shortfall and these funds can only be used for Debt Service. The cash balance would normally be used to offset the last bond payment but Sara Laughlin proposed to use it this year to cover the shortfall.
Steve Moberly was concerned that using the cash balance now would leave us dangerously close in case something happened next year to reduce funding. Sara Laughlin felt that funding for debt service was a county obligation. Steve Moberly noted that we rarely receive 100% of what we anticipated and felt that additional shortfalls were likely due to the current economy. Bonnie Estell stated that the bond payments are made twice a year and the library will be able to make the June payment if tax distributions are received on time; otherwise a short-term loan would be secured.
Capital Projects Fund. This shortfall can be managed by reducing the amount of main library renovation work. It is necessary for the Board to make a formal reduction in the Capital Projects Fund. This will be presented for action at the next regular board meeting.
Kari Isaacson asked how this reduction will affect long-term renovations. Sara Laughlin said it could either cause a setback or cause the library to use LIRF or Rainy Day funds.
Randy Paul asked if LIRF and Rainy Day funds could be replenished if we do in fact receive half of the lost revenue in 2010. Sara confirmed. Randy thought it would be better to use these funds rather than delay renovations. Bonnie Estell stated that the Capital Projects Fund must be reduced but the library can spend its own money for the project. She felt that it would unlikely that renovation bills presented for payment before the end of 2009 would exceed the funding, as the majority of the project will be completed in 2010.
Operating Fund. Sara Laughlin presented a preliminary list of suggestions to manage the Operating Fund shortfall:
Action |
Impact |
Shift supplies expenses to Rainy Day Fund |
$40,000 |
Unanticipated Polaris credit |
$20,000 |
Savings from unfilled Associate Director |
$40,000 |
Savings from lagged hiring |
$20,000 |
Retain funds scheduled for 2009 LIRF transfer |
$150,000 |
Delay end of year payments to January 2010 |
$50,000 |
Replace with anticipated additional COIOT revenue |
$200,000 |
Total savings |
$520,000 |
The Board discussed the proposed list. Regarding the $50,000 to be saved by delaying year end payments to January 2010, Sara Laughlin explained that this refers to liability insurance premiums that are not actually due until February 2010; the library has always tried to pay in advance. Steve Moberly felt this would not be fiscally prudent as it would then require two such payments in 2010. Sara noted that the library could also make the payment from the Rainy Day Fund. Steve Moberly felt that the library would likely see further reductions in revenue due to the economic situation. In view of this uncertainty he requested that administration try to find $50,000 elsewhere in the budget. Randy Paul agreed with Steve Moberly about the economic situation, but felt that delaying the insurance payment would not be wrong. He suggested that perhaps the library could secure a short-term loan to cover such items or use funds from the Rainy Day Fund. John Walsh commented that a serious mistake was made and it might be necessary to make some serious decisions to save money. He also encouraged reviewing the current budget to see if perhaps more than $50,000 could be saved. John Walsh questioned how comfortable administration was with the $200,000 figure for anticipated COIT revenue. Bonnie Estell felt comfortable with the figure noting that we might lose approximately 5% of that. Steve Moberly noted that no matter what estimate is received from the county or state, if the state does not have the money it will not pay the money and again stressed possible future reductions in revenue. The Board discussed other possible budget savings, including not filling the Assistant Director position or savings from other unfilled positions.
Randy Paul noted that he appreciated Sara Laughlin and Bonnie Estell accepting responsibility for the shortfall error but was not convinced that full responsibility fell to them.
Sara Laughlin and Bonnie Estell will develop another proposal and send it to the Board before the meeting. The reduction in the Capital Projects Fund will be an action item at the next regular board meeting.
Collection Services Manager Pam Wasmer presented proposed revisions to the Collection Development Policy noting that the current policy was approved in 2006. Revisions are proposed that will more closely align the policy with the Strategic Plan.
The board discussed the proposed changes. Adoption of the Collection Development Policy will be an action item at the next regular board meeting.
Human Resources Manager Kyle Wickemeyer-Hardy presented the proposed Compensation Philosophy along with information on its origin. The philosophy is part of the Classification, Compensation and Performance Management Study being conducted by the Singer Group consulting firm. Kyle viewed it as a living document and an underlying piece of the compensation process.
The board discussed the proposed statement. Steve Moberly asked a number of questions: Is this is the first MCPL compensation philosophy statement? Kyle confirmed it was. Did it originate with the consultants? Kyle replied that we requested it. Why it is being presented separately from the rest of the study? Sara replied that it was ready and she considered it to be a first piece. Steve said he was unsure of its relevance, noting that the only reference to reality was one reference to “budget.” Randy Paul wondered if the document should include a statement that staff is important and should not be replaced with technology. Sara Laughlin replied that she didn’t think that would be appropriate in a compensation philosophy statement. Fred Risinger noted that technology is changing but the compensation philosophy statement would remain the same. He felt that it was a nice statement of how the library feels about its employees. Sara Laughlin added that she views it as a broad philosophical statement of how we would compensate our employees.
Melissa Pogue asked what prompted the current study. Kyle Wickemeyer-Hardy explained that compensation inconsistencies in the past prompted the study. Sara Laughlin added that many of the inconsistencies were due to a compensation study conducted 10 years ago and only partially implemented. Sara explained that in the current study the library asked for 1) a compensation philosophy; 2) an internal equity review; 3) an external market review; and 4) an annual review process.
Following further discussion the Board requested that the compensation philosophy be presented for consideration along with the complete study recommendations.
Sara Laughlin stated the consultants have requested that the study be presented to the Board in Executive Session since it deals with very personal information including salary recommendations.
Discussion ensued regarding the compensation study. Steve Moberly and Randy Paul noted that it was to be “budget neutral.” Sara Laughlin noted that a statement had been made at the onset that no existing salaries would be reduced, but that actual job classifications/salary ranges might be reduced (for future openings). She did not recall any reference to “budget neutral.” Fred Risinger asked whether the study was based on what the library had available to spend. Sara explained that the recommendations would be based on the internal and external reviews. Steve Moberly was concerned about raising employee expectations that could not be met with available funding.
Following further discussion regarding the study, the timeline of the budgeting process, and uncertainty of future funding, the Board concurred that the study should be reviewed in Executive Session. Sara Laughlin suggested an Executive Session following the May 13 work session. Sara reiterated the necessity of following through on the entire plan if approved by the Board, noting that not doing so would likely result in continued inconsistencies and inequities.
Sara Laughlin reported that the library has received a grant from the Indiana State Library of $21,132 for a digitization project in cooperation with the Monroe County Historical Society. The project involves digitizing photos, documents and implements related to the Matthews Brothers Stone Company (precursor to Bybee Stone Company). The funding will provide for two part-time temporary employees to conduct research and to digitize the items, as well as digitization equipment.
John Walsh recognized former board member Penny Austin and acknowledged her long-standing service. He welcomed new board member Kari Isaacson to the board.
Randy Paul reported that the Health Care Task Force will not be finished with its charge by May. Sara offered to review and extend the deadline in the original charter.
None.
Meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Contact
Us Monroe County Public Library, Monroe County, Indiana ° (812)349-3050
Updated:
May 8, 2009
° http://www.monroe.lib.in.us/board/200904wrk.html
