02-09-2026 Agenda Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Myers noted that initially when the board began drafting the SP, there was a already discussion of what are monthly, annually, and then 5- and 10 -year goals, so that in the event of a windfall, or someone donates a building, that could be put in the 10 -year plan. Each month, we would receive metrics on the progress, if there was any. This way there was a way to track how the library was moving and the metrics made sense. Rose added that it seems the SP has three different things. The city has the Capital Improvement plan and will take care of that. Operational things are what the Library Board reviews. Then there's the concept of if there's a windfall, there's a list of what you would like to have happen. Rose also added that it's great to have big wishes for improvements to the library, but they need to be distinguished from Capital items because the taxpayers pay for those and the City Manager is responsible for that. The board then moved on to discuss the Mobile Library concept. The board generally agreed that this was a great idea, and the funding, costs, and planning were still required for future discussions. Steve asked if grants were available for a program like the Mobile Library. Connie said while there are grants out there and she is constantly looking for some, the city doesn't qualify for many rural grants because the population is too large. Myers added that the Mobile Library is a perfect example of why its on the SP; it's not something that can happen immediately but it's also not a 20 -year dream. It's worth intermittent conversation that can be brought up for progress review. Abigail suggested in lieu of placing year formatting on the SP, instead the board place topics such as In Progress, To Do, and Eventually so that there are sections that are a little bit easier to check off and gauge overtime. Jennifer asked if hard -set years is stressful to the library and Connie responded, stating that it's the layout in general. Rose suggested topics such as Finished and Currently Working On, which could be tracked by the Library Board. Steve said that the SP was meant to be a dynamic framework that prompts conversation and not static. Connie liked that concept and added that she loves brainstorming. Connie asked to move forward on the agenda, with the hope of presenting to the board her ideas in a few months of how she would like to create a feasible SP. Steve asked if there's anything that Connie wanted to remove from the SP so that everyone understands. Connie replied, stating that she would like to remove all