Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Meeting Room 1B
Tom Bunger and Bob Guindon.
President John Walsh called the meeting to order at 5:50 p.m.
Sara Laughlin reported that copies of full construction documents are available in the administrative offices. The library’s use variance and site plan for renovation were approved for forwarding to the Board of Zoning Appeals by the City Plan Commission with two conditions: 1) no additional curb cuts; and 2) addition of the lay-by in the parking lot. The library’s options now are 1) proceed to the Board of Zoning Appeals with the original site plan (including new curb cut for drive-up window relocation; 2) accept the Plan Commission’s recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals; or 3) do neither and go back to the drawing board.
Randy Paul added that the approvals were granted in two separate motions. The use variance received a positive recommendation with no additional curb cut on Sixth Street. The lay-by was approved as a separate issue.
Sara Laughlin noted that the city ordinance allows only two curb cuts per block and requires that curb cuts be at least 50 feet apart. Adding a new one would total four (including bookmobile parking access). The original plan showed a new curb cut for the drive-up window. The City’s recommendation is to use the existing cut, then have traffic split internally (one direction for drive-up window, other direction for parking lot). Sara noted that the number of parking spaces (35) is the same for either plan, if three spaces on Grant are included. Sara recommended acceptance of the Plan Commission’s recommendations even though she had reservations.
Randy Paul agreed with Sara’s recommendation stating that we would get the drive-up window and the lay-by.
Dave Ferguson felt that we should proceed to the Board of Zoning Appeals with the original site plan.
Attorney Tom Bunger stated that the Plan Commission makes a recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals, but the BZA has final approval.
Steve Moberly asked how often the BZA does not adhere to Plan Commission recommendations.
Tom Bunger explained that the process has been revised, so there are no statistics.
Fred Risinger asked whether it would be possible to go back to the BZA should we proceed with the Plan Commission recommendations and later find that their alternate plan is causing traffic jams in the lot.
Tom Bunger confirmed that this would be possible.
Dave Ferguson reiterated that the variances must come from the BZA and urged proceeding with the original site plan including the additional curb cut.
Randy Paul felt that the Plan Commission recommendations should be accepted and noted that the Plan Commission has been good to work with; has proposed an alternative to achieve the desired goal; and that the third curb cut could make it more dangerous for pedestrians.
Kari Isaacson felt that a greater pedestrian problem would be created with backed up traffic in the lot.
Tom Bunger felt that there are arguments on both sides to justify or not justify the third curb cut. He felt the library would be risking nothing by pursuing the additional curb cut with the BZA.
Dave Ferguson felt that it is a “no lose” situation.
Tom Bunger added that since the matter must go before the BZA in either case it is not adding an additional step to the process.
Following additional discussion, Sara Laughlin withdrew her recommendation to accept the Plan Commission recommendations and agreed that we should pursue our original plan with the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Dave Ferguson moved; Steve Moberly seconded proceeding to the Board of Zoning Appeals with the original site plan (including one new curb cut). Motion carried 6-1 (Randy Paul dissenting).
The construction documents for public bid were discussed. Steve Moberly asked about the timeline.
Bob Guindon, Woollan Molzan Architects, said bids will be due on September 2 and will be presented to the Board for acceptance on September 16 with construction starting in October. Both parking lot options will be bid. The variance request will go before the Board of Zoning Appeals on August 20. The phases being bid are Phase 1 (Children’s Dept.); Phase 2 (Circulation Dept./Adult Services); Phase 2A (parking lot).
Kari Isaacson asked what would happen if we ended up with a parking lot option that was not acceptable to the Board.
Bob Guindon stated that the Board has the right to deny all bids if it decides not to proceed.
Randy Paul asked how the opportunity to bid would be advertised.
Bob replied that the request for bids will be advertised in the Herald Times and Ellettsville Journal newspapers.
Sara Laughlin noted that there are also “plan rooms”, clearing houses/networks for builders that attract outside bidders.
Bob Guindon confirmed that the request for bids would be posted there as well.
Randy Paul asked about funding. Sara Laughlin explained funding sources as: $230,693 (Building Corp. funds); $220,625 (2009 Capital Projects Fund); $152,000 (2010 Capital Projects Fund); $125,000 (2009 LIRF); and $31,073 (flood insurance).
Steve Moberly moved; Dave Ferguson seconded approval of the construction drawings for Phases 1, 2, and 2A for public bid. Motion carried unanimously.
Randy Paul expressed concern with the 4% budgeted increase for health insurance in 2010. He felt that 4% was a very low amount and he was concerned with the necessity of finding the money elsewhere in the budget once the rate increase was received. He was also concerned with the amount of time invested by the Health Insurance Task Force in seeking expanded coverage and holding down costs for staff and was adamantly opposed to passing increased costs on to staff. He was concerned with the assessment by the Long Range Financial Planning Committee that the current health insurance benefit may be “too rich”.
Steve Moberly concurred with Randy Paul regarding the budgeted 4% increase for health insurance and felt that the budgeted amount should be at least 10%, making it easier to transition should we receive a 15 or 20% increase.
John Walsh supported the 10% increase in budgeted amount but noted that the difficulty will be in finding the funds since personnel costs are already 70% of the total budget.
In answer to a question from Melissa Pogue regarding library contributions to health insurance, Sara Laughlin explained that the library contributes roughly $5,500 per employee and explained the breakdown among full-time and part-time employees. Sara noted that one dilemma in offering health insurance to part-time employees is that many cannot afford the insurance but the fact that it is offered to them automatically excludes them from participating in the Healthy Indiana Plan.
Randy Paul reiterated that the Health Insurance Task Force has spent many hours on the issue with the intent of building on it annually and that he hopes the library will continue to build on it and not take it backwards. He proposed a compromise on enacting the Compensation Salary recommendations due to funding uncertainties. He proposed extending the transition from two years to three to four years with economic benchmarks for accelerating the transition (e.g., if the Library’s budget shortfall appeal was successful or consistent property tax revenue was available).
Randy Paul moved modifying the schedule for adopting salary study recommendations to four years with a successful appeal as a benchmark for Year 1 and consistent property tax revenue as a benchmark for Year 2.
Discussion ensued. Randy Paul felt the Board should address such issues as the possibility of losing the appeal or additional lost property tax revenue. John Walsh felt that by extending implementation of the proposed recommendations to four years, it would be five years before the Board could return to regular pay raises. He favored moving ahead noting that if funds were not available the second year changes would not be enacted.
Sara Laughlin noted that the .4% per year decompression issue could be reviewed, perhaps considering a lower percentage. Sara also explained that the salary recommendations affect about 170 employees where insurance issues affect about 85 employees.
Randy Paul withdrew the motion stating that he would like to review the numbers with Sara Laughlin. Randy Paul noted that he would not have supported the Compensation Philosophy had he known that health insurance would be considered. Sara Laughlin felt that the total compensation package should be reviewed. Steve Moberly commented that had the library not done the compensation study, we would likely be still be considering what percentage of raise would be affordable for next year. He felt that the compensation study brought with it many issues (compression, decompression, etc.) and the numbers should be carefully reviewed.
None.
Randy Paul commended CATS on winning two 2009 National Hometown Video Awards from the Alliance for Community Media. Production manager Martin O’Neill won first place for “Cinderella at the Indiana University Musical Arts Center” in the Community Events, Professional Division, and production assistants Zac Canale and Mike Adams won first place in the Entertainment Variety, Professional Division, for “Raw Shorts Live: Morrow/Husband & Wife.”
Meeting adjourned at 6:28 p.m.
Contact
Us Monroe County Public Library, Monroe County, Indiana ° (812)349-3050
Updated:
September 9, 2009
° http://www.monroe.lib.in.us/board/200908min1.html
