Loading...
1983-04-21 City of Beverly, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board: Library Trustees Subcommittee: Date: 04/21/1983 Place: Beverly Public Library Board members present: Richard L. BuckIcy, Lester C. Ayers, Connie E. Dooling, Katherine L. Fanning, Dr. Edna M. MeGlynn, and Nancy A. White Board members absent: Nell B. Olson, Roger E. Morency, and Kevin J. Murphy Others present: Jill Baekstrom, Susan M. Salt, Laura Reilly, Judy Ogilvie, Friends of the Beverly Public Library; Elsa Forter, Frances J. McCarthy, League of Women Voters; Suzanne Niehelson, Thomas Hindman, Betty Connolly, Library staf~ Elliot Small, American Ferderation of State, County and Municipal Employees Recorder: Nancy Aberman Regular Meeting Board of Trustees-Beverly Public Library April 21, 1983 4:30 p.m. Present: Richard Buckley, Kay Fanning, Conrile Dooling, Nancy White, Les Ayers, Dr. Edna MeGlynn. Also present: Jill Backstrom, Susan Salt, Laura Reilly, Judy Ogilvie; Elsa Forter, Fran McCarthy, League of Women Voters; Suzanne Nichelson, Tom Hindman, Betty Cormoily, staff~ Elliot Small, Union; Andtea Arkins, Beverly Times. Committee Reports: There were no reports of the Administration, Personnel, or Finance Committees. Task Force: Mr Buckley reported that no votes had been taken at the meeting; the report is currently in progress. The next meeting of the Task Force Committee will be May 2 at 7:00 p.m. Report of the Librarian: Mrs. Calish noted: 1) A Will Barnet painting appeared recently on the cover of TIME magazine. 2) The Department of Public Works is currently repairing the sidewalks outside the Main Library. 3) Regarding the NOBLE consortium, a North Shore Community College Library statistical survey of member libraries' collections shows a 3% overlap between their collection and the remainder of the consortlure (This figure does not include periodicals or fiction.) She also remarked that the overlap among other consortlure libraries is approximately 30%. The next meeting will take place at the Peabody Library, April 26 at 2:00 p.m. 4) Mrs. Calish reported that a newspaper article had noted that the Aldermen voted to set up a revolving fund for library fines, with one-half of the fines to the City General Fund, and one-half to the library. 5) She also noted that the state may vote to approve an additional 31 ¢ per capita for library incentive grant funds. 6) Departmental reports include the following: The Reference Department is processing more Boston inter-library loans than ever before due to the eomputer's ability to let the staff know which books are missing from the catalog. The Circulation Department will be assisting the Technical Services librarian with maintaining the shelf list and catalog. Children's Services had to cancel their K-9 program due to poor weather; however, the veterinarian program was successful. Flyers are available to publicize their activities. The Farms Branch will be having their party for the Rainbow Reading Club next week. Tom Hindman will be assisting with entertainment. Additional items noted: 7) For a circulation of 18,000 items per month (value $180,000), the library spends approximately $300-$400 on postage for overdues. 8) On the statistics report, it should be noted that children must be 6 years of age to receive a library card, so many items on the Patron Circulation Statistics are actually children's items which have been checked out on adult cards. 9) "Undefined" on the statistics report refers to materials or patrons which are checked out "on the fly", bar-coded, but not yet entered into the computer. Mrs. Calish also noted that input from the Trustees is needed for preparation of planning and goals for next year. Communications: Two communications were placed on file: a letter from Nancy Coffey regarding support of Robin Fenn-Elbot's work; and a letter from Charles J. McCarthy, General Electric, thanking Mrs. Calish and staff for their assistance in explaining the computer system and its procedures. Unfinished Business: Regarding the dog tax, no word has yet been received from Mr. Cannon. A motion was made by Ms. White and seconded by Mr. Ayers to request that the Mayor allocate the dog tax monies, (approximately $874) for books. Motion passed. Regarding the Fisher Charitable Fund Grant, Mrs. Dooling made a motion to terminate participation in the Fisher Charitable Fund Grant at this time. Mr. Ayers seconded. Under discussion, Mrs. Dooling stated that too few people participated in this program to justify the expenditure--spending $150 to $200 to reach 8 to 10 people is a staggering amount in the days of Proposition 2 ½. The Chairman and Board invited Robin Fenn-Elbot to answer questions about the program. She referred to the written material which Board members had received and explained her feelings that the program was successful and was only one of many programs that she ran. Mrs. Calish noted that staff members receive a total salary to do a total job and that she felt that jobs should not be broken down by cost-effectiveness by the minute or some important services would be eliminated. Mr. Buckley stated that the Board did not apply for this grant and allocation of funds is an important issue. Mrs. Calish noted that she notified the Board about the grant in November 1981. Ms. White noted that no policy regarding grant applications had been in effect at that time; however, the Board has subsequently established a policy in this regard. Discussion continued regarding possible duplication of services and cost effectiveness of such a program, when the library must curtail hours and when the bookmobile also serves that particular area of the city. The question of appropriate allocation of funds was raised with respect to the priority of opening the library another evening. Mrs. Calish noted that for the library to open one additional evening per week would require 18 to 20 hours of labor (6 staff members) per week vs. Mrs. Elbot's 2 hours per week for a 10 week session. Ms. White expressed her feelings that the library should offer outreach programs for those who do not avail themselves of the library and that Mrs. Elbot should be commended for her initiative. Dr. MeGlynn agreed that the Board wants to encourage enthusiasm; however, the Trustees should investigate to avoid duplication of services in the future. On the question, the motion carded with one dissension. Mr. Buckley will invite Mr, Richard Kelley (Clerk of Committees) to attend the next Board meeting to discuss the question of postage. New Business: Mr. Ayers moved, and Mrs. Dooling seconded, to thank those responsible at the Farms Branch for the hospitality at the meeting. Motion carded. Mr. Ayers moved, and Mrs. Fanning seconded, to write a letter to commend Mrs. Elbot for her attempt to carry out the Fisher Charitable Fund Grant project. Motion carded. By unanimous consent, the next Board meeting will be Thursday, May 19 at 4:30 p.m. at the Main Library. A motion was made by Ms. White and seconded by Mr. Ayers to adjoum. Motion passed. Meeting was adjoumed at 5:55 p.m. Nancy S. Aberman Recorder 9 Crestline Circle Beverly, Ma. 01915 April 25, 1983 Dear Nancy, As you prepare the minutes of the regular meeting of the Board of Trustees for April, I wish to have the following specific information included as it pertains to me. You may quote or paraphrase my words defining my position concerning the Fisher Charitable Fund Grant to be... that too few people justify the expenditure. Spending $150.00 to 200.00 to reach eight to ten people is a staggering amount in the days of proposition 2 ¼. A newspaper article appeared containing that information. Since it is completely accurate, I think it should be recorded in the minutes of the meeting. Please, would you send me a copy of the statistical report which the North Shore Community College sent to the library regarding the survey which they conducted recently. Yours truly, Conhie Dooling FISHER CHARITABLE GRANT The first phase is completed. According to the minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting of January 21, 1983, a monthly progress report was requested. The Library Director announced at this meeting that she would be on vacation the following month; however, a written progress report was submitted at the full Board meeting in February. Mrs. Elbot was also on vacation and did not present the report in person. Mrs. Elbot's presence has been requested at the Board of Trustees' meeting of April 21, 1983. Since she will be involved with a National Library Week program, as previously announced, until 5:00 P.M., she will be attending the latter part of the meeting. Thus, in order to save time, we are enclosing Mrs. Elbot's explanation of why she embarked on this program. The library gave Mrs. Elbot support to proceed with this program because the program fell within the parameters of the library's GOALS OF SERVICE, which read: ... "to expand the horizons of library service, in the introduction of materials and their use, and in reaching out to users and non-users, both on and off the library premises"... In the 1979/80 Budget, it was planned to reach young children and parents via the Bookmobile. The description of the planned service for the Bookmobile reads: "(to) Plan story hours, film and other programs at sites away from library on or near bookmobile." However, at that time there was no staff person able to implement this program. Mrs. Elbot later proposed a program with a similar concept, which the Fisher Charitable Grant enabled her to implement. This finally brought into being a long-planned aspect of outreach. SUBURBAN OUTREACH - IS IT WORTH IT? As a former elementary school counselor, I entered the library field with a predisposition to family involvement and outreach. The public library where I serve as Children's Librarian is an active, well-utilized resource in the downtown of an older city, population approximately 38,000, about thirty miles noah of Boston. The population is, for the most part, middle class and well-educated, but there are several pockets ofmultigenerational poverty, as well as the "old money" families of Beverly Farms. The poor of such a city have quite a few resources available to them, but they also tend to be very isolated and alienated from the larger community. The children of these families are beset by the same problems which afflict so many low-income families and tend to result in their perpetuation--single parents, alcoholism, neglect and abuse, low educational attainment, low self-esteem, inability to utilize resources to make choices and increase personal options. I was well-aware that, although the library is located downtown, within two miles of most of the low-income housing areas in the city, nearly all of the families participating in preschool story hours were clearly from the middle or upper. socio-economic ranges. An article in the February 1983 issue of School Library Journal on "Parenting Programs in Libraries" reinforces the perception that library story hours are not reaching single parent, less fortunate families. I was concerned that children and parents who were, perhaps, most in need of the library's resources were least taking advantage of them. I conceived a two-pronged program for this population, intended primarily to be young, single mothers ofpreschoolers. The ten-week program included both a story hour and a child development course for the parents, to be taught by a social worker experienced in parent education. Parents would spend some time with their children listening to stories, learning finger plays, and doing eraIt activities, and some time in a discussion group with the parent educator. Each session included a crat~ project and paperback for each child to bring home. The themes of the storytimes were planned to coincide roughly with those of the discussion group; i.e., "Things You Can Do" - "Seif-Concept"; "Growing Up" - "Emotional and Physical Development"; "Playtime" - "Toys and Play"; etc. A grant of $1700. from a local private foundation covered the social worker and materials needed for two ten-week sessions. We expected a three month planning period, and counted on referrals from social service agencies and churches. So far, so good. Two social service agencies had given us letters stating their support and the need for such a program. We received expression of enthusiasm from many sources. We sent out brochures in February 1982 and follow-up letters in March. By April we had a grand total of two participants. What had gone wrong? We moved our starting date up to September. In August we began contacting fifteen agencies again. We also called the elementary school adjustment counselors, attended staff meetings at the Department of Social Services and Head Start. Individual case workers still told us that they thought it was a wonderful and needed idea, but they had no appropriate clients. At about the same time, a local paper carded an article about one of the agencies we had been contacting They announced a new innovative program, which was to combine a story/playgroup for preschoolers with a discussion group for their mothers. It sounded suspiciously familiar. The difference was that this agency had a legal hold over their clients, whereas we depended upon voluntary participation. We decided to change our approach. The referral idea began to sound patronizing and institutional. We also realized that one of the main problems of the population we were trying to reach was their isolation and lack of transportation. We put our efforts into locating some grass-roots organization which could help find space and potential participants in the neighborhoods we were targeting. By good fortune we found one a brand new center staffed mainly by divinity students and located on Bennett Street, a street known mainly for drug-trafficking and police activity, but also home to many children. The people at the center, Hypemikon House, started talking up our project and soon gave us six or seven names to contact of interested people. Only one owned a telephone, so we let~ notes and visited everyone we could. Finally the big day arrived, but only two mothers showed up with their children. Not enough for a group, but we were well-aware that we were trying to reach a very difficult-to-reach group. Slowly, the little group grew. Nothing dramatic, but soon I had five children and three mothers who attended faithfully and enthusiastically. (The remaining two mothers were either too busy or too overwhelmed to come, but one child came on his own from across the street, and the other was ready for me at her apartment.) one week, three children and two mothers drove with me to the library for their first time. Two of the younger children showed a dramatic increase in attention span. Another made the mile-and-a-half walk with her mother to a regular library story hour soon after the end of the program. By the end often weeks, I felt that I was just beginning to make inroads. By the above results, I felt successful. I felt that we had made a positive difference in the lives of some hard-to-reach families. I also felt that we had learned a great deal with which to approach the next group. I felt that it was a beginning, with significant potential for reaching non-users both directly and indirectly, through word-of-mouth. Most such programs grow through time by word-of-mouth. This population is severely restricted in terms of access to information. Few own cars or even telephones, subscribe to newspapers, or utilize community resources other than poverty programs. Most institutions are regarded negatively. Day-to-day survival generally requires most of their energy. By far the most effective means of outreach appears to be word-of-mouth. Services must be offered in a way that is accessible, but not demeaning. For a highly literate and aware population, the mere existence of a public library will pretty much insure its use by them. But I feel very strongly that we have a responsibility to those others, the disenfranchised part of our society. I feel that by including them further in the societal network represented by the public library, our society as a whole is enhanced. Any decrease in illiteracy, any improvement in family relations any increase in one individual's access to information is a positive step for the greater community - also. The public library is in an excellent position to provide many useful services for needy families -- people needy not just for material things, but also for less tangible things like literacy, information, ideas, access. We must continue to strive to find more effective ways to reach them and do what is necessary to serve them as well as the other segments of our richly diverse society. Prepared by: Robin Penn Elbot