Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Program Room 2B
Tom Bunger.
President John Walsh called the meeting to order at 5:48 p.m.
Sara Laughlin reviewed the budget calendar stating that the budget must be approved for advertising at the July 15 board meeting and advertised before August 2. A resolution for excess levy appeal (appealing MCPL drop in income due to incorrect tax levy rate/decrease in assessed valuation) will also be presented at the July meeting. The law allows a 4% increase over previous year budget and Sara proposes to advertise a budget with that increase. Once the budget is advertised it can be lowered but not raised. The Assessed Valuation Growth Quotient (AVGQ) and Assessed Valuation (AV) for the county will not be known until mid-July (AVGQ) and August 1 (AV). A budget advertised with 4% increase will allow us to receive the maximum amount allowed. Reductions may be necessary after actual data is received and after reviews by County Council and Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF).
Randy Paul asked whether there was any way to avoid a repeat of last year’s tax rate mistake and how we could be sure we’re getting the best quality advice. Sara stated that she has been and will continue to be in contact with the County auditor and DLGF. Steve Moberly thought it would be advantageous if all local units of government were to approach the county auditor to try to get the assessed valuation information before August 1. Sara will inquire if that would be possible.
Kari Isaacson asked if approving personnel costs of 68.4% would be binding and whether employees sign contracts. Sara explained that it is strictly a budget and not a contractual agreement. Library employees do not sign contracts but after union negotiations are completed that may change.
Dave Ferguson commented that the County is trying to cut $1 million from their budget and asked how this relates to the library. Sara believed that the county derives a smaller percentage of its funding from property taxes and more from fees and the County Option Income Tax. The County also has other existing issues.
Sara Laughlin discussed the line items in the proposed budget.
Regarding personnel services, Steve Moberly asked how the current number of employees compared with that at January 1 of this year. Sara believed the current number is less. Randy Paul asked whether Sara had discussed lack of pay increases for managers with the managers. Sara explained that she has not polled the managers but neither has she received any negative comments from them. She is trying to adhere to the study recommendations. If partial implementation of the plan is adopted for 2010, the goal would be to address the balance of the recommendations, including manager increases, in 2011. Randy Paul asked whether the board would be asked to vote on the classification and compensation recommendations as a separate item at the June board meeting or as part of the budget. Sara explained that she would like to have approval for the new classification structure and also implementation of the salary recommendations on some level with the budget approval.
Other budget line items were reviewed and discussed. Steve Moberly asked about the 2.3% increase in materials budget. Collection Services manager Pam Wasmer explained that the biggest change in materials costs is that vendors are now charging shipping which accounts for about a 1% increase. The demand for and costs of electronic databases is another area of increased costs. Randy Paul asked whether the library is playing catch-up in materials or keeping up with demand. Pam Wasmer felt that we are keeping up rather than catching up.
The Library Improvement Reserve Fund (LIRF) includes $294,000 for the library renovation project. Steve Moberly asked what the balance in LIRF will be if budgeted items are approved. Sara stated that the remaining balance will be approximately $1 million.
The Rainy Day Fund budget shows a total of $130,000 including $50,000 for consulting services (no services are anticipated) and $80,000 for legal fees. Kari Isaacson asked how the Rainy Day Fund is funded. Sara explained that Operating Fund money can be transferred into the Rainy Day Fund, but typically it has been funded with excess County Option Income Tax funds.
Sara Laughlin presented a streamlined philosophy statement. Steve Moberly requested that “Library Board” be added to the last paragraph that states “Library Administration assumes responsibility for the on-going administration, update and revision of the compensation plan and philosophy.”
The board discussed whether to adopt the study recommendations as a whole or as three parts (philosophy, classification, and compensation). Kari Isaacson felt that adopting only the classification part of the study without any compensation changes did not make much sense. Sara Laughlin agreed that classification is not an abstract idea and that a revised salary schedule would be necessary. It would be impossible to implement without any increase, but the Board could choose an amount other than what she recommended to fund the implementation. Randy Paul commented that he had spoken with many staff, and staff does feel that something should be done. He stated that he would be in favor of the changes if they can be done responsibly but was concerned that implementation might lead to lay-offs in the future. Sara Laughlin stated that there will likely be serious choices in the future and that nothing could be guaranteed. Sara felt that the plan should be implemented, especially the part dealing with compression issues. She felt that library renovation and process improvements would allow some positions to be eliminated through attrition over the next few years. She and Bonnie Estell have been looking at contingency plans if the library were to receive a 5%, 10%, or 15% cut in revenue. John Walsh added that any personnel cuts would be a matter of revenue loss and not whether or not the plan was implemented. Steve Moberly concurred that whether or not implemented, the classification/compensation plan would not drive the library fiscal problems. Steve Moberly asked what percentage of the plan adoption is proposed as partial implementation. Sara clarified that the first year includes half of the minimum salary adjustments and all of the compression adjustments, plus a 1% increase for those above the mid-point; the second year would include the second half of the costs of bringing the minimums up.
Randy Paul asked how much of the classification/compensation plan has been shared with staff. Sara responded that the general staff has not seen the recommendations but the Advisory Committee, managers, and union negotiating team have seen it.
The classification/compensation study recommendations will be an action item at the regular June board meeting.
A resolution to procure temporary tax anticipation loans up to $1,000,000 will be presented for approval at the regular June board meeting. Bonnie Estell anticipated that the June 30 tax settlement would be received late this year due to bills being sent out and paid later than usual. The payment may run 45 to 60 days late thereby requiring the library to procure short-term loans for operating expenses.
The board is required by law to review the library’s internet policy annually. The policy has not changed since last year. Kari Isaacson asked for clarification of the statement “….MCPL does provide links through the Children’s site to search engines with filters.” Sara Laughlin explained that the library does not filter searches but does provide information about filtered sites on request by parents. John Walsh added that the library is not eligible to receive certain federal funds because it does not filter. The library made this choice as it values freedom of access.
None.
Meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
Contact
Us Monroe County Public Library, Monroe County, Indiana ° (812)349-3050
Updated:
August 5, 2009
° http://www.monroe.lib.in.us/board/200906wrk.html
