Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04151997 - D4 DA THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on April 15, 1997, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Uilkema, Gerber and DeSaulnier NOES: Supervisor Canciamilla ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Library Services The Board considered the report and recommendation dated April 15, 1997, of the County Administrator and the County Librarian on Library Services, attached and included as a part of this Board order. Subsequent to an oral report from staff, Chairman DeSaulnier invited the public to comment on the issues and the following persons spoke: Patricia Boom, City of San Ramon, 2567 Shadow Mountain Drive, San Ramon; Terry Segerberg, City of Hercules, Hercules; Thom Stark, 3029 Carlson Boulevard, El Cerrito; Dave Rowlands, City of Antioch, P.O. Box 5089, Antioch; Bill West, Contra Costa County Library Commissioner, 8360 Kent Drive, El Cerrito; Winkie Camacho, 486 La Mont Way, Danville; Mary Ann Hoisington, Friends of the Lafayette Library, 959 Hawthorne Drive, Lafayette; Paul Flores, City of Pittsburg, 340 Marina Boulevard, Pittsburg; Mike Doyle, Mayor, Town of Danville, 510 La Gonda Way, Danville; Joe Calabrigo, Town of Danville, 510 La Gonda Way, Danville; Marta Van Loan, 930 W. Arlington Way, Martinez; Lou Rosas, City of Concord, 1818 Elkwood Drive, Concord; Gwen Regalia, City of Walnut Creek, 1950 Whitecliff Court, Walnut Creek; Ed James, City of Concord, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord; Betty Boyle, Mayor, City of Pinole, 2534 Dodge Avenue, Pinole; Herb Moniz, City of San Ramon, 2222 Camino Ramon, San Ramon; Amy Worth, Contra Costa County Library Commission, 304 La Espiral, Orinda; Sandy Falk, Local #1, P.O. Box 222, Martinez; John Wolfe, Executive Vice President, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association, 820 Main Street, Martinez; Dan Lee, Save Our Libraries, 1105 Danberry Court, Antioch; Kim Brandt, Save Our Libraries, 100 Gregory Lane, Pleasant Hill; Lynn Kuehl, Save Our Libraries, 2230 Huron Drive, Concord; Kathy Hicks, Mayor, City of Walnut Creek, 74 Amberwood Lane, Walnut Creek; Joan Lautenberger, League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley, 3979 South Peardale, Lafayette; Page 1 of 3 All persons desiring to speak having been heard, the Board members discussed the issues presented in the report and noted by the speakers. Board members expressed their concerns about issues including the funding/budgetary matters pertinent to the library, the proposal for a performance contract, and the regional governance issue. At the conclusion of their discussion, the Board took the following action: 1. ADOPTED the recommendations regarding library service as proposed at the March 11, 1997, Board meeting (Attachment A) as modified in Sections A, B, C, D, and E of the April 15, 1997, report (Item D.4/Attached); 2. ADDED Number 2 in Section A of the April 15, 1997, report with the following language: 2. The Central Library is guaranteed current County-funded levels of hours, services, staff and configuration. 3. ADDED letter (e) in Section C of the April 15, 1997, report with the following language: C. The 10% cost savings must be demonstrated clearly for long-term similar service savings. 4. AMENDED Number 2 in Section D of the April 15, 1997, report to read: 2. Include the requirement that both the $1.5 million in facility funds and the additional $170,000 in operations funds for Concord come from funds other than those currently designated for non-capital library operations and other than those from a future ballot measure. 5. AMENDED Number 1 in Section E of the April 15, 1997, report with the following change: Strike the followine: "...county-wide regional ballot measures..." and Replace with the following: "...county-wide library regional ballot measures..." 6. FURTHER AMENDED Number 1 in Section E of the April 15, 1997, report to read as follows: 1. Include recommendation that the county-wide library regional ballot measures not be placed on the same ballot with any individual city or library service area ballot measure to raise funds for libraries. Page 2 of 3 7. DETERMINED that the county regions shall be defined as listed in the first option on Page 3 of the April 15, 1997, report; 8. AMENDED the language at the top Page 4 in the April 15, 1997, report with the following change under the "Role and purpose of regional boards" section: Strike the following: "...the intent is that the Board of Supervisors,..." and Replace with the following: "...it is the clearly stated intent of the Board of Supervisors that... AND 9. ADDED the possibility of a provision for the County to commit and maintain operational funding for an East County Library which demonstrates an ability to secure its own capital costs, similar to the funding strategy utilized by the City of Concord and/or the City of Hercules. Supervisor Canciamilla advised that even though he supported the majority of the actions set forth above, he could not support the motion due to serious budgetary concerns. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTFSTED: AprilIS 1997 Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator Christine Wampler, Deputy Clerk cc: Supervisors County Administrator County Librarian County Counsel County Clerk County Auditor-Controller County Treasurer-Tax Collector Page 3 of 3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Anne Marie Gold, County Librarian DATE: April 15, 1997 SUBJECT: Library Services SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATfON(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: 1. ADOPT the recommendations regarding library service as proposed at the March 11, 1997 Board meeting as modified in the following areas: A. CENTRAL LIBRARY 1. Request the City of Pleasant Hill to take action no later than July 1, 1997 to commit $200,000 annually in support of Central Library services. B. REGIONAL GOVERNANCE 1. Add one seat representing the unincorporated area to each regional board, to be appointed by the Board of Supervisors. C. PERFORMANCE CONTRACT 1. Add the requirement that the documentation of the 10% cost savings have the following criteria included in it: a. Service delivery subject to cost savings documentation must be of like service program. b. Cost savings must be documented over a 3 year period. c. Cost savings cannot include evening and weekend hour differentials. d. Documentation would be subject to independent audit by a mutually agreed upon outside auditor. D. BRANCHES 1. Include the requirement that the City of Concord return the $1.5 million in facility funding in full if it withdraws from the County Library within 5 years, and an annual diminishing scale percentage for the next 5 years should it withdraw within the following 5 years. 2. Include the requirement that both the $1.5 million in facility funds and the additional $170,000 in operational funds for Concord come from funds other than those currently designated for non-capital library operations. 3. Include the commitment in the original consultant report for operational funding for the Hercules library. � CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:, / YES SIGNATURE: V "' }}}y�/ � M^t 4 _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE _APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROLASOMMENDED_OTHER VOTE OF VISORSI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THISND CT COPY OF UNANIMOUS(ASSEN ) AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTENUTES OF THEBOARD AYES: NOES:� OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DA ABSENT: ABSTAIN:__,,,,._ ATTEST= Contact: Anne Marla Gold, 646.6423 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR cc: County Library � ,DEPUTY County Administrator BY -- o:IbosUibst415.doc Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 2 4. Require County staff to work with the cities and communities to develop facility and operational plans to meet current and growing service needs. E. NEW REVENUES 1. Include recommendation that the county-wide regional ballot measures be placed before the voters before any individual city or library service area ballot measure. 2. Direct the County Librarian to work with the regional boards, cities, local communities, library supporters, Friends groups, schools officials, business officials and other library stakeholder groups in a planning process to determine the library services to be funded by a ballot measure. BACKGROUND: At its meeting on March 11, 1997 the Board of Supervisors received public testimony on the proposed recommendations regarding library services. The recommendations are included as Attachment A. In subsequent Board discussion of the recommendations a variety of issues and questions were raised regarding the recommendations. In addition to those raised at the meeting, Board members submitted additional areas of concern. The issues and questions are as follows. CENTRAL LIBRARY Board issues/questions: Issue: Is there a definite commitment of funding from Pleasant Hill? As of this time the Pleasant Hill City Council has not taken any definitive action to commit city funds in support of Central Library services. However, both the Mayor and City Manager have been involved in discussions with county officials regarding the city commitment of funds. Both have indicated that they believe that the city is supportive of the pass through of redevelopment tax increment funds from the development of the county-owned Oak Park Elementary School site. A preliminary exploratory meeting of County staff has been held to review the options and process for development of the site. In order for the recommendations to be fully implemented it is necessary to have the commitment of $200,000 from Pleasant Hill, as well as $150,000 from the County and the generation of$250,000 from the passage of a parcel tax. With the commitment to fund Central Library operations at the current level, the lack of any of these funding sources will reduce the funding available for the regions. Additional issues/questions received from others: 1. Why are the dollar figures in the Central Library section of the staff report included there, when no dollar figures are included in the section on branch operations? If there is a funding shortfall, shouldn't it be treated as a system shortfall rather than a Central shortfall? The specific funding sources were included in the recommendations as they are new sources of revenue, not current funding sources such as those used to fund branch services. Removing them could create the inference that the additional $600,000 in funding for Central Library services would be funded from current funding sources, which is not the intent of the recommendation. 2. Non-local branch related system service cost, as shown in Attachment B of your March 11, 1997 staff report, should be considered part of the current basic service level costs and therefore funded entirely from current County-wide revenues. We, therefore, oppose the portion of the recommendation that call for new ballot measure revenues to be shared in the amount of $250,000 from all regions, believing that new revenue should instead be devoted to new services, hour and resource materials. . As part of the original consultant study recommendations the reduction in funding and services at the Central Library resulted in additional funding being made available to three regions - Central, South and Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 3 East. In order to retain the availability of this additional funding for these three regions it was necessary to find alternative funding sources for Central Library services. The alternative funding sources identified included the $250,000 from ballot measure revenues. Either an alternative to the ballot measure revenues or a reversal of the recommendation to provide additional regional funding would be the only other options. The three regions benefiting from the additional funding have indicated that they are not interested in changing this recommendation. Any change in the funding commitment for the Central Library would have to be agreed upon by all the cities and the County. REGIONAL GOVERNANCE Board issues/questions: Issue: Representation of unincorporated areas on regional boards A variety of suggestions were offered as to the best way to provide for representation for unincorporated areas on the proposed regional boards. Suggestions included: • Having each Board member nominate a MAC member from their district as the County representative . Adding a MAC member from each region to the regional board • Adding one member to each regional board from an unincorporated area within the region The solution most likely to reach agreement would be to add one seat on each regional board to represent the unincorporated areas within that region, with Board of Supervisors having the appointing authority for that seat. It would be at the choice of the Board as to whether the individual appointed was a member of a MAC. Under the current proposed regional configuration, one region (Lamorinda) does not have any unincorporated communities with a MAC. Issue: How should the regions be defined. As proposed in the consultant report and the March 11 recommendations the regions are defined as follows: LLQ • a • - East Antioch, Bay Point, Brentwood, Oakley, Pittsburg Central Clayton, Concord, Martinez, Pleasant Hill Lamorinda Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda South Danville, San Ramon, Walnut Creek, Ygnacio Valley West Crockett, EI Cerrito, EI Sobrante, Hercules, Kensington, Pinole, Rodeo, San Pablo The region would consist of all the incorporated and unincorporated areas within its boundaries. The regions were originally proposed in this configuration based primarily on naturally occurring library service delivery patterns and were agreed upon by the PMA. If any region were to be reconfigured it could only be done with the agreement of all cities and the county, in particular the cities within the two affected regions, as any reconfiguration would require recalculation of the revenue formulas affecting all regions. If any city is interested in pursuing a reconfiguration it can do so with its fellow cities. If the regions were to be defined to follow supervisorial districts they would be reconfigured as follows: COMMOM • East (V) Antioch, Bay Point, Brentwood, Oakley, Pittsburg Central (IV) Clayton, Concord, Pleasant Hill Lamorinda (II) Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Martinez, Pinole, Crockett, Hercules, Rodeo South (III) Danville, San Ramon, Walnut Creek, Ygnacio Valley West (1) EI Cerrito, EI Sobrante, Kensington, San Pablo As defined each regional board would have a representative from each city within the region as well as one representative from the County. This includes the City of Hercules in the West Region, which does Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 4 not currently have a library facility within its borders. The issue of representation from the unincorporated areas could be provided as proposed above. Issue: Role and purpose of regional boards As stated in the March 11 recommendations the role of the regional boards would be to determine service needs and hours of operation to be funded by new revenues and the growth on existing revenues within the region over and above that needed to fund the base level of 29 hours per week of branch service. It is understood that within this recommendation that the Board of Supervisors remains the overall governing board for the library. While the technical role of the regional boards could only be advisory, the intent is that the Board of Supervisors, as part of its overall fiduciary responsibility for the library, would enact the decisions regarding new revenues made by the regional boards. Additional issueslquestions received from others: 1. County library staff should in fact be the principal staff resource to these bodies. The March 11 recommendations included the statement that all staffing and costs associated with such boards would be borne by the agencies within each region and not from library resources, except to the extent that library staff are needed to assist in the meetings. The intent of this recommendation was to address a concern that establishment of these regional boards would result in additional cost to the library. The intent is that library administrative staff and branch managers would attend every regional board meeting and work closely with each body and city represented. The involvement of the branch managers is seen as an opportunity to enhance their relationships with the cities with which they work. The involvement of county library staff with the regional boards will be necessary to insure the communication of information critical to the decision making responsibility of those bodies. 2. There still remains a need for a County-wide advisory board. The March 11 recommendations included the statement that there would be no technical staff committee or countywide board. Recently both the Board of Supervisors and the Mayors Conference agreed to have the County Library Commission remain in place until March 1998. If both the County and the cities are interested in continuing to have some form of countywide board after that time they could choose to do so. 3. Delete reference to Regional boards and replace with "The existing Library Commission should be reconfigured to include elected representatives from cities and unincorporated areas and also others representing the library community. The Library Commission, as noted above, has been reauthorized for another year with its current configuration. The replacement of the five regional boards with one countywide board is not likely to meet agreement by all the cities. Any change in the regional boards would have to be acceptable to all cities and the County. 4. Change March 11 recommendation regarding the purpose of the regional boards to the following: "The purpose of the Library Advisory Board would be to provide recommendations regarding service needs. The function is not to manage, oversee operations, or engage in labor relations, but is to provide residents of cities and unincorporated areas an opportunity to make recommendations regarding community-based needs related to library services." The role of the regional boards is only over services funded with new revenues, not overall library service needs. The link between support in the regions for additional funding for library services and control over that funding by the regions is integral to the existence of the regional boards. Any change in the charge to the regional boards would have to be acceptable to all cities and the County. 5. We wish to strengthen the language regarding the authority of the five regional boards. We suggest the following revision to the language in the March 11 recommendations "The purpose of the regional boards will be to determine and establish service needs and hours of operation to be funded by new revenues." Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 -Page 5 As noted above while the technical role of the regional boards could only be advisory, the intent is that the Board of Supervisors, as part of its overall fiduciary responsibility for the library, would enact the decisions regarding new revenues made by the regional boards. The advisory boards have no independent legal status outside of any agreement reached between the county and the cities as to their existence. 6. Do regional boards control all new money? If so, how will cost increases in operation of Central library, automation, library administration, etc. which serve all the branches be paid for? As part of the original consultant study recommendations the cost of library administration and support services, as well as the centralized public service program of the Central Library, is an ongoing cost to be funded 'off the top" of the library budget. As such, necessary cost increases in these operations, such as employee COLAs, will included in this 'off the top" cost. After these costs have been funded, plus the guaranteed branch service levels, any additional revenues would be considered "new money" and would be allocated based on the formula in the original consultant study. The library services to be funded by this "new money' would be under the decision-making authority of the regional board. PERFORMANCE CONTRACT Board issues/questions: Issue: 10% reduction not be based on wages, hours, working condition changes The overall question is what constitutes documentation of 10% cost savings and what can be included in such documentation. The intent is that such documentation be a true "apples to apples" comparison of like services by like provision. The example of replacing staff currently at higher pay scale grades with entry level pay grade staff would not be an "apples to apples" comparison because documentation could not be made that such new staff would have the same ability to provide services as currently provided. The same would hold true for any documentation which changed the service level, e.g. eliminated one or more components of a service program during open hours of operation. Issue: Over what time period is the 10% cost saving based There is no specific reference to a time period for the cost savings to be documented. In order to provide a reasonable documentation period a period of 3-5 years could be recommended. This would eliminate a "low ball' proposal of a service provider who was willing to provide service at a loss for a short period in order to obtain a service contract, and later increasing the service rates substantially. Issue: Specify regarding loss of weekend or evening hours/differentials As the recommendation is currently written, there is no reference as to exactly what can be included or excluded in documenting the cost savings. Currently library staff receive a 5% shift differential for evening and Saturday work and a 7 1/2% shift differential for Sunday work. These differentials are similar to ones for other area library staff. The recommendation could be amended to include these differentials as outside the cost savings documentation. Issue: Base pullout on other or more criteria The original consultant study recommendation regarding the performance contract was consciously lacking in specifics other than to link its conditions to the authority of the then-proposed regional boards. In refining the overall recommendations the link to solely a financial performance contract was proposed. The recommendation could be amended to include additional criteria such as having a specific agency or individual such as outside auditor determine that the savings had been documented or that the documented service delivery agency would have to be another public agency. Issue: Insure no reduction in services and continued support for Central Library As the recommendation is currently written, while there is no specific reference to either maintenance of current services or the Central Library, the inference can be drawn that if a region were to withdraw, taking with it its property tax revenues, that such loss of revenues to the overall library system and the Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 6 individual regions most likely would result in a reduction of overall services and/or Central Library services. A way to address this issue would be to insert a "hold harmless" clause into any withdrawal recommendation. Such a hold harmless clause could require the result of the withdrawal of any region to have no material impact on the remaining regions and/or services. This is similar to city incorporation requirements requiring any negative fiscal impact from incorporation to be mitigated by tax sharing agreements, lump-sum payments, payments over a fixed period of time, or similar options. Any such clause would have to be acceptable to the cities and the County. Additional issues/questions received from others: 1. Has the language for the performance contract been reviewed by County Counsel and our City Attorneys? Since the discussion of the performance contracts are only in draft stage no specific legal review has taken place either in the County or with cities. At the time that specific language needs to be drafted or reviewed, County Counsel will be involved on the part of the County. Each city will have the opportunity to have their City Attorney review the draft language also. 2. Is a performance contract really necessary? Isn't there a better way to insure efficient service? Can the county legally make it easier to withdraw from the system than currently provided by state law? This section should be deleted. The performance contract is considered by the cities to be an integral part of the recommendations with its link to regional governance over new revenues and support for a ballot measure. Under current state law any city may withdraw and the county is required to negotiate a property tax transfer agreement with the withdrawing city. There is no requirement as to what the agreement must include or a time frame within which it must be negotiated. Based on experience of other counties in the state that have negotiated property tax transfer agreements with withdrawing cities, such agreements frequently include the transfer of property tax revenues to the withdrawing city. 3. If regions can withdraw, can vote of the people be required? As the recommendation is currently written, there is no reference to a requirement for a vote of the people on withdrawal. There was no discussion during the consultant study of such a requirement. If such a requirement were included the decision would have to be made as to whether to have the vote of the people in the withdrawing region or the entire County Library service area. The addition of this requirement would have to be acceptable to all cities and the County. 4. Specifically, in the staff report's reference to "documented cost savings", who documents the savings, based on what standard, to whose satisfaction? What is the criteria for determining how each region will achieve a cost saving? What is meant by "documented cost saving" and how is this assessed long term? As noted above under the response to the Board issues, additional qualifying criteria could be added to define the documentation of cost savings, such as a specific time period, elimination of certain criteria such as shift differentials, etc. The addition of any of these specific criteria would have to be acceptable to all cities and the county. BRANCHES Board issues/questions: Issue: County contribution of $1.5 million for Concord building and $170,000 in additional operating funds including: • Source of funding • Should the County share in the ownership of the building Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 7 • Should the building be dedicated to library use • What happens if Concord decides to withdraw from the County Library The sources of the funding for both the $1.5 million for the facility expansion and renovation and the additional $170,000 in additional operating funds at the completion of the new facility have not been identified, other than they will be County funds. At the time that the funds must be provided, which will likely be within the next 2-4 years, such sources will need to be identified by the County. There has been no specific discussion of additional terms relating to the County contribution of $1.5 million for the building. The contribution of funds for the facility could be considered to place the County in a potential partial ownership position with the facility. One option would be to require that the full sum to be returned to the County if the city withdrew with 5 years, with a diminishing scale of return required for another 5 years, after which no return of funds would be required. A requirement could also be included that the building only be used for library service for a specified period of time. In its letter of March 5, 1997 to the Board of Supervisors the City of Concord recommended two changes in the proposed recommendations: • inclusion of the phrase "from funds other than those designated for libraries" in the section referring to the $1.5 million in funding for the facility • inclusion of the phrase "funds other than the existing library budget" and "This funding is not to come from future ballot issue from funds that would have been earmarked for return to source to the cities. They may come from the unincorporated areas' return to source funds. Regardless of the success or failure of a future ballot issue, the $170,000 will be guaranteed to Concord at the time of the expansion." The County must maintain the right to determine where the committed funds will come from, such as potential future revenue sources including state bond funds or additional PLF funds. There has been no discussion or intent that the additional $170,000 in operating funds for Concord would in any way be contingent on the passage of a ballot measure. Issue: Commitment of operating funds for a Hercules library The original consultant study included the recommendation that Hercules, as the only city in the County without a library facility within its boundaries, should be supported when that City builds or provides a library facility. The recommendation included the following specifics: • Funding operations at the Hercules library from the revenues of the County-wide system. Revenues would be allocated from gross property tax revenues and would involve contributions by all full branches including those in West County. • Providing direct service operations at the Hercules branch library, once built, at a level equivalent to the base service hours funded for all other branches • Allocating funds for those services equal to the average cost of base service operations at the San Pablo, EI Cerrito, [EI Sobrante], Kensington, and Pinole libraries at the time the facility is constructed and ready for operation. The City of Hercules, in their letter of March 6, 1997, requested that this specific language be included in any recommendations adopted by the Board of Supervisors. The intent of the March 11 staff recommendations was to include the above commitment and such commitment will be included in any final document. Issue: Plan for serving all underserved areas While the recommendations specifically identify and propose solutions on the issue of being underserved in Hercules and Concord, other areas of the county are also currently underserved or could be projected to be so within the near future. The average age of library facilities is 35 years old. Communities such as Oakley with a growing population base are served by a very small library outlet with the lowest square foot per capita in the county. Other built out communities have libraries that were sized for populations 20 years ago. -Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 8 In the early 90's, as part of a Master Plan development process, the library quantified and identified library facility planning needs. However, the county is no longer the prime agent in making decisions as to whether to build new library facilities as county policy charges the local community with providing the funds for library facilities. The Board could require County staff to work with cities and communities to develop facility and operational plans to meet the current and growing needs of their service areas. In addition, the County Library is currently undertaking an in-depth survey of all facilities to determine all current facility improvement needs. Issue: Projections for revenue growth for regions The original consultant study included regional property tax growth estimates extrapolated from ABAG population growth estimates. The County Library is currently working with the County Auditor and County Assessor to refine the property tax growth rate by region, utilizing both historical trend data, population growth estimates and city information. Additional issues/questions received from others: 1. What is the estimated cost for the renovation of the Concord Library? Why the $1.5 million, which implies a 50/50 match by the County, and, what if the cost is less, or more? Shouldn't there be a contract agreement with the City of Concord to guarantee a certain number of hours, as well as discussion about how the increased hours in Concord overall benefits the region [in reference to $170,000]? Why is Concord guaranteed $1.5 million up front and $170,000 per year later...? What is the $170,000 for Concord going to be spent on? Why that number? Where is that money coming from? Where is the $1.5 million for Concord coming from? Why that particular number? Who's responsible for possible cost overruns? Are there any architectural plans or other building details available? The County Architectural division did some very preliminary work on a 7,000 square foot expansion to the Concord Library and provided an estimated cost for the project of $3 million. The County's cost commitment is capped at $1.5 million and will not increase if the project cost is higher. The City of Concord will be responsible for the project and any possible cost overruns. Their cost commitment is not capped at$1.5 million. No detailed architectural plans are available. The recommendation in regard to the specific dollar amount of $170,000 was arrived at as that is approximately the amount of money currently being spent on business library services at the Central Library and the commitment of the dollar amount replaces the commitment to move the business library to Concord. The recommendation for the additional operating funds for Concord specifies that the library services to be funded with the monies be at the choice of the City of Concord. Any final agreement with Concord could contain additional information as to what services will be funded, similar to the existing agreement between the City of Concord and the County wherein the City of Concord provides pass-through funding for a specific number of hours of service weekly. The recommendation to provide funding to Concord for facility expansion and operations is in direct response to the issue identified by the City of Concord and agreed to by the PMA that they have traditionally generated significantly more property tax revenue for library service than has been spent in their city. 2. The terms "additional reallocated resources" and "current buy-up contributions" need to be specifically defined. How are additional reallocated resources distributed, by region or by the County? Are these part of the expected new regional tax revenues? The term "current buy-up contributions" refers to the City, Friends or community dollars currently paid to fund additional hours of service. Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 9 The term "additional reallocated resources" refers to the revenues that will be made available to the Central, South and East regions as a result of the financing recommendation outlined in the original consultant report. They are distributed to regions by the formula included in the report. Each regional board will then have the responsibility to decide what library services to fund with these revenues. Any new voter-approved tax revenues are not considered "additional reallocated resources." 3. When the Danville branch was expanded, who paid for increased staff (if any)? Is what was done in Danville consistent with what's being proposed here for Concord? The county's expenditure for library service in Danville remains the same in the new facility as it was in the old facility. The Town of Danville paid for the new facility and all increased costs of service. The recommendation for Concord differs from what occurred in Danville in direct response to the issue identified by the City of Concord and agreed to by the PMA that they have traditionally generated significantly more property tax revenue for library service than has been spent in their city. 4. Replace third paragraph in this section of March 11 recommendations [paragraph refers to funding commitment for Concord facility] and designate $1.5 for facilities improvement. County should adopt a short-range and long-range facilities renovation and building plan. Which facilities has the County identified for needed repairs and what are there respective costs? How will this be paid? The report states that four new additional facilities are needed, where are they located in the County and what are the projected construction and operating costs? In the context of the County staff recommendations, how will these capital and operating expenses be addressed, particularly the assurance to Hercules that they will be funded at a comparable 29 hours of service from County-wide revenue? The commitment of the $1.5 million to Concord is part of the overall package of recommendations addressing issues raised by the City of Concord and agreed to by the PMA. While undoubtedly $1.5 million could be used for other facility renovation projects in the library facilities it would have to be in addition to the Concord commitment. As noted above, the Board could require County staff to work with cities and communities to develop facility and operational plans to meet the current and growing needs of their service areas. The County Library is currently undertaking an in-depth survey of all facilities to determine all current facility improvement needs and associated costs. It is expected that the study will be completed by the end of this fiscal year. At the time it is completed the issue of funding for the needed repairs will be reviewed. The County has identified that new facilities are needed specifically in Hercules, East County, and Dougherty Valley (when built out) as well as potential other areas depending on population growth or obsolescence of current facility. There are no specific projected construction costs for new facilities. However, library construction can be conservatively estimated at $250 per square foot and new facilities would likely run in the area of 20,000 square feet for an estimate of $5 million per facility. There are no currently identified funding sources for any new capital projects. Under current County policy all capital funding must come from the local community. As noted above, the commitment to provide operational funding for a Hercules library is included as a recommendation. 5. 29 hours should not be viewed as an adequate base number of hours for library services. While likely there is no one who would disagree with this statement, current library funding sources are only adequate to fund this level of service. 6. Is there a basic 29-hour service package? If so, what is it and how is it costed out? Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda April 15, 1997 Page 10 The basic 29 hour service package consists of the current level of county funded services, hours and staffing. The cost of the package is the current cost of such services. The cost will increment annually based on increases in these operating costs. 7. NEW REVENUES Board issues/questions: Issue: Seek legislation from state to return local revenues There are number of ERAF bills currently introduced into the state legislature such as AB1, AB 95, and ACA 4. They have a variety of formulas whereby the property tax shift of the past years would be reversed and returned eventually to the local jurisdictions. Contra Costa County is working actively to support these bills. However, it is unlikely that there would be any substantial immediate impact from the passage of any of these bills. Issue: Ability to impose parcel taxes on newly created parcels While cities may have entered into developer agreements prohibiting the imposition of taxes on newly created parcels county taxes would not be subject to such agreements. The county does have some developer agreements prohibiting the imposition of taxes on specific parcels except for county or area wide taxes. The recommendation for a library service area-wide voter approved parcel tax ballot measure would not be subject to any prior developer agreements. Issue: Competing city ballot measures While the recommendation is to place a measure on the ballot through the entire library service area, individual cities or library service areas may want to place additional measures for facilities or enhanced service levels. It would be in the interests of both the entire county library service area and the individual city or service area not to have competing ballot measures on the same ballot. The recommendation could include the intent that the countywide ballot measure be placed on the ballot before any local measures. Issue: Structure of ballot measure, including assessment of local needs and specific expenditure plan To be successful, any ballot measure must address local needs for library service. In constructing a ballot measure, each regional board, working with local cities and communities, will be instrumental in the planning process by including local stakeholders such as elected officials and MAC members, library supporters and Friends group members, school officials, business officials and library staff. Meetings and a variety of methods of input from all stakeholders will need to be designed to insure that all local needs are identified. Library staff and managers can work with the regional boards to facilitate such input and then create specific expenditure plans for such services to be funded by the ballot measure revenues. The resulting ballot measure will be able to clearly and concisely identify exactly what benefits the local voter will be gain from the measure. Guarantees as to service levels can be written into the language of the ballot measure, e.g. seven day a week library service. The specific structure of the ballot measure, such the dollar amount of measure, will arise out of the local input. Additional issues/questions received from others: 1. We believe that West County and Lamorinda should contribute a proportionate share of the $250,000 which is less than the other three proposed regions. Concern has been expressed that smaller regions would be negatively impacted by a proposed equal regional spread of the $250,000 recommended to support Central Library operations, if the tax were a per parcel tax. An estimate of the percentage of parcels in each region is: East 25% Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda _April 15, 1997 Page 11 Central 26% South 25% Lamorinda 8% West 16% An alternative spread could be based on the percentage of parcels the region represented. In that case the dollar amount spread would be approximately: East $62,500 Central $65,000 South $62,500 Lamorinda $20,000 West $40,000 The original equal allocation of the $250,000 was agreed to by the PMA. Any change in the allocation would need to be agreed on by all cities and the County. 2. Any new voter-approved revenues should be voted upon by county-wide ballot. The recommendation has been to have any tax measure voted on independently in each region so that each region can have its own opportunity to succeed. Therefore, if one region is not successful in obtaining the necessary 2/3 vote, it will not negatively impact another region. The reasoning behind the recommendation is that voter support for a ballot measure will be higher if the measure is linked more closely to the community and region being benefited. 3. The County Board of Supervisors and all city councils must agree to support a ballot measure to bring more resources to the system. As part of any final agreement, strong support for and commitment to work on behalf of passage of a library ballot measure must be clearly agreed to by all cities and the County. 4. What are the projections per region as to the amount of money that can be raised for each dollar of new tax? No estimates have yet been done on revenue by region since each region or local community has not yet begun the process of defining the services to funded by a new library tax. Once those services are defined and costed, the estimate can be done as to the amount of a parcel tax necessary to generate the revenue needed to fund these services. _ TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ATTACHMENT A FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Anne Marie Gold, County Librarian DATE: March 11, 1997 SUBJECT: Library Services SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: 1. ADOPT the recommendations relating to the library. A. CENTRAL LIBRARY Retain all services and staff in current configuration at the Central Library in Pleasant Hill. The cost to retain such services and staff is estimated at $600,000 annually over the recommended funding for centralized public services in the consultant report. That cost would be jointly funded by: City of Pleasant Hill - $200,000 County - $150,000 Ballot measure revenues (shared by all regions) - $250,000 Effective date would be July 1, 1997 with a successful ballot measure no later than November 1998. If there has not been a successful ballot measure by that date, the funding would be subject to renegotiation. B. REGIONAL GOVERNANCE Regional boards would be constituted based on regional needs with one elected representative from each agency and would meet a maximum of quarterly. All staffing and costs associated with such boards would be borne by the agencies within each region and not from library resources, except to the extent that library staff are needed to assist in the meetings. There would be no technical staff committee or countywide board. The purpose of the regional boards would be to determine service needs and hours of operation to be funded by new revenues and the growth on existing revenues within the region over and above that needed to fund the base level of 29 hours per week of branch service. The function is not to manage, oversee operations or engage in labor relations. Annually, the County Administrator, County Librarian and appropriate branch librarian would meet with each city manager to review progress on services. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE UPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRE OPY OF _UNANIMOUS(A T 1 AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MIN OF THE BOARD AYES: NOE . OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED Contact: Anne Marie Gold, 646-6423 IL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR cc: County Library County Administrator ,DEPUTY County Clerk County Counsel County Auditor County Tax Collector tbosVibstudy.doc(3/04/97 8:58 AM) Library Services Board of Supervisors Agenda March 11, 1997 Page 2 C. PERFORMANCE CONTRACT It is agreed and understood by all parties that library service is today and should continue in the future to be operated in a quality manner at a competitive cost. This is now being done through a single service delivery agency, the County of Contra Costa. If it is determined in the future by a region that service delivery can be achieved at a documented cost savings of 10% or more, all parties to this contract shall meet and confer over cost of service issues. If agreement is not achieved, the region, upon unanimous vote of the regional board, may withdraw from the County Library giving one year notice at least 90 days prior to the end of the fiscal year. The region would take with it the tax revenues generated within the region. D. BRANCHES All regions are guaranteed the current county-funded levels of hours and service at all branches, e.g. 29 hours of service per week. All outlets are guaranteed their current county-funded levels of hours and service. The County and cities will work cooperatively to identify all areas currently underserved or expected to be underserved in the near future. The East, Central and South regions could utilize additional reallocated revenues to enhance services/hours or reduce current buy-up contributions. The county will fund up to $1.5 million to expand and renovate the existing Concord library. The city will fund at least $1.5 million for the same project. At the time that the facility renovation and expansion is completed, an additional $170,000 annually from existing library funds will be spent to expand hours and services at the Concord library. Such hours and services shall be determined by the City of Concord. E. NEW REVENUES Any new voter-approved revenues shall be generated on a region-specific basis and spent for services within the region. Regional ballot measures for additional library revenues shall be placed upon a ballot at an election in 1998. Each region will structure the use of the proceeds of the ballot measure based on regional needs. Within a region an individual library service area could place an additional measure on a ballot for area specific service or facility needs. As in Recommendation 1A, each region shall contribute towards a portion of funding for the Central Library from the ballot measure proceeds. NOTE: All dollar amounts are expressed in FY 1996/97 dollars and would be subject to annual incremental review.