The URL can be used to link to this page

04/08/1999 - Packet AGENDA TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD THURSDAY, APRIL 8, 1999 - 7:00 P.M. TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY— PUETT ROOM 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 1. CALL TO ORDER Beck 2. ROLL CALL: BECK_ CHAPMAN_ GUSTIN_ HARPER_ HOKLIN IRWIN KASSON 3. Approve Minutes for March 11, 1999. Beck 4. Agenda Additions& Deletions. Beck 5. Call to the Public. Beck 6. Joint City Council/Library Board Meeting (4/20). Beck 7. Adoption of the Collection Development Policy. Beck/Sisson 8. Long-Range Planning Committee Assignments. Beck/Sisson 9. Draft Food&Beverage Policy Discussion. Sisson 10. Friends of the Library Report. Burgess 11. Monthly Report for March 1999. Sisson 12. Cooperative Library Advisory Board Report. Sisson 13. Other Business. 14. Adjournment. TO ENSURE A QUORUM TO CONDUCT BUSINESS,PLEASE CALL CONNIE MARTIN OR MELINDA SISSON AT THE LIBRARY(684-6537), IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. Agenda items for future meetings: i r TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD March 11, 1999 MINUTES Call to Order: 7:00 p.m., by Vice-Chair Tammy Gustin. Roll Call: David Chapman, Tammy Gustin, Pat Harper, Lonn Hoklin, Nancy Irwin, and Sue Kasson. Staff: Melinda Sisson. Minutes: Hoklin moved to approve minutes of February 11, 1999, seconded by Harper. Motion passed unanimously. Agenda Additions/Deletions: Agenda was adjusted to shift the Water Solution for Tigard Presentation to the beginning of the meeting. Call to the Public: None. Water Solution for Tigard Presentation: Director introduced Mike Miller, Utilities Manager, for the City of Tigard. Miller gave brief introduction of water issues facing Tigard, King City, Durham, and the unincorporated areas. Because the City of Tigard water supply contract with the City of Portland expires in 2007, and the City of Lake Oswego cannot always supply Tigard's water needs during the summer months, the City is reviewing its water needs and sources for the next 20 years. The City has looked at several cities to supply Tigard's water needs. The two proposals being compared for Tigard are working with the City of Portland to expand its supply system plan, or obtaining water from a Willamette River plant. The City of Portland water is generated from Bull Run and the Columbia SouthShore WellField. Miller reviewed raw water characteristics for the Willamette River, treatment process selection and recommendation, water filtration, meeting current regulations, and finished water product. Miller reviewed the evaluation of costs for both initial construction and ongoing operation and maintenance of the Portiand/Willamette River proposals including: • Assumptions for Comparison • Construction Costs • Repayment of Borrowed Funds • Operation and Maintenance Costs • Consolidated Net Rate per CCF Comparison The total cost for the City of Portland proposal is $139,417,182 (includes an overhaul and expansion of the current treatment plant) and the total cost for the Willamette River proposal is $72,970,787. Both of these proposals do not include the purchase of water. Whatever proposal is selected, repayment of funds will be carried over a 50 year period. More discussion and public meetings are planned before a decision is made. Collection Development Policy Discussion: The Board made suggestions to the policy at the last meeting. These changes were incorporated in the current draft of the policy as well as removing the appendices from the policy. The Board reviewed the second draft and after some discussion made some minor wording changes to the policy. Board will revisit and adopt at their April meeting. Joint City County/Library Board Meeting (4/20): The joint City Council and Library Board meeting is scheduled for April 20'. The Board discussed possible topics of discussion to present to City Council: 1) A potential expansion, 2) A tour of the library, and 3) Addressing issues surrounding the Internet. More in-depth discussion will be held at their regularly scheduled meeting on April 8t'. Reports: CLAB/WCCLS Funding Formula Decision: No formal report was given this month. A final decision was made on WCCLS reimbursement funding for the new contract year beginning February 1999. The Tigard Public Library will receive a 6.8 percent increase in funds over last years reimbursement; totaling $1,224,691. Friends of the Tigard Library: No report was given this month. February Monthly Report: In preparation for the Polaris version 1.3 upgrade, a re-indexing of the database began early in the month. There was significant instability in the system throughout the month, limiting staff in accessing Polaris. Polaris version 1.3 came up on March 4 h and it was noted there was increase in stabilization. Due to the hour of the meeting, it was suggested the Board read the remaining information of the report and if they had questions to contact the Director. Other handouts with the monthly report included a report on the Ready to Read Grant Program from the State Library in Salem, and articles from the Oregonian, MetroWest section on Internet filters in libraries. Adjournment: It was moved by Chapman, and seconded by Harper to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. h:\docs\connie\board\brdmin.doc MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Melinda Sisson, Library Director 0>4jRE: Monthly Report, A#F 999 DATE: April 8, 1999 • Polaris: Eva Calcagno reported at the CLAB meeting, April 7, that the independent consultant, Joseph Ford and Associates, Inc., had completed their report for WCCLS. The report identifies and discusses WCCLS' experience in purchasing, installing and operating a computer system provided by Gaylord Information Systems (GIS), (see attached). Barb Kesel, WCCLS, submitted a written report on the activities surrounding Polaris and the TCI network (see attached). Polaris General Release 1.3 is scheduled for installation by the end of April. This should resolve the last of the holds issues, such as hold notices by mail. Other fixes include collection codes that identify which collection items are located in Quvenile, mystery, etc.) and full MARC bibliographic records for those bibliographic short entries (BSE) that migrated from the Dynix system. • Circulation Statistics: We have received cursory circulation statistics during the last six months, but believe the March statistics to be accurate. WCCLS provided the March stats. In a county-wide report (see attached). Tigard is nearing the cires for 1998 that were 57,999. Total cires for March 1999 were 46,828. As of March 5 the renewal function worked correctly. We did, however, experience down time on March 22-23 that would affect circulation negatively. • Personnel: Cassie Maringer, Circulation Library Assistant (part-time) left the employment of the Library as of March 21. There are now two vacancies in the weekend shift. Existing staff has filled in some of the hours, but they are still short full coverage. Paula is working on ways to improve opportunities for entry level staff to increase retention for these positions. • Reference: Reference Services continue to grow to meet demand. The library is open 65 hours each week and Mara reports that the desk is covered by two librarians 45 hours each week and one librarian the other 20 hours. The Electronic Reference Center usage has seen the greatest increase in activity. Most high school and middle school students consider their homework completed only if it includes information from an electronic resource. • Mystery Night: Sneaky Sleuths and Nasty Ne'er-do-Wells, a night fun and crime, is scheduled for Tuesday, April 13. Paula, Kate, Erik and Diana will book talk their mystery selections. Trish has lined up additional volunteers to help the "Stage Manager." • Youth Services: The theme for the Summer Reading Program is ReadQuest. Staff is busy developing their plans for reading clubs, posters, bookmarks, handouts and booklists. Marin is also actively working on the SRP for teens and has begun development of a YA WEB page for teens. • Technical Services: During the second week of March, Technical Services downloaded MARC records from Baker& Taylor Title Source 11. If bibliographic records are not currently in the catalog, they are imported from B&T Title Source 11. Diana reports that over 80% of the needed records have been successfully imported. Our mending volunteer has resigned, but will be available to train one or two new volunteers to take over the responsibility. Marge Haglund provided a very unique service for the Library and will be missed. • Staff Development Day: The Staff Development Day Committee is planning an exciting and fun day for staff to rest, rejuvenate and rejoice. The day will begin with a facilitated program on communication as requested by staff. Lunch will be provided with some fun activities interspersed followed by an afternoon of hands-on demonstrations in the Electronic Resource Center and in Circulation. The Committee promises to end with a bang! • Spotlight on..... Marin's Homework Center is being studied at the national level and will appear in a forthcoming issue of American Libraries published by the American Library Association. Kate has been asked to work on an Essay, "The Heart of a Librarian" for the Oregon Library Association Quarterly. There were four presentations by staff at the Oregon Library Association annual conference in Seaside, March 31-April 2. Teresa Laubach spoke on collection development for children's collections, resources, reviews and vendors. Tony Greiner gave two presentations, one on the use of Value Line for investment information and non- fiction publications where Oregon is featured as a subject. Kate Miller contributed to the "two Minute Reviews of Oregon Authors" with book talks. Dianne Byrne identified an important processing oversight in a new shipment of materials from the Brodart collection development project and recommended we work with the vendor to correct the mylar jacket shortcoming. Circulation Staff were observed by all smiling and keeping patrons happy despite the seesaw in the weather, oops, Polaris, oops, windows contractors. : ) • Volunteers: Volunteer Type Number Hours Regular Volunteers* 84 783.00 Youth Services* 9 46.50 Local/Oral History 3 54.00 Adopt-a-Shelf 2 5.00 Library Board 6 15.00 Community Service 1 2.50 Friendly Visitors 4 30.00 Homework Center* 7 38.00 Teen Idea Group** 6 6.00 Total 122 980.00 = 5.70 FTE * These types of volunteers were formerly reported using different names: - "Regular Volunteers"were "Adult" - "Youth Services"were "Young Adult" - "Homework Center"were "Tutors" ** This is a new category of volunteers. Marin Younker gathers a casual group once per month to brainstorm Youth Services programs, events. Polaris Circulation Statistics: Since coming online with Polaris in February 1999, figures are more accurate. Checkouts Renewals Total Sept. 1998 40,023 666 40,689 Oct. 1998 34,660 853 35,513 Nov. 1998 38,717 953 39,670 Dec. 1998 33,172 923 34,095 Jan. 1999 42,032 1,261 43,293 Feb. 1999 37,710 1,501 39,211 Registered Patrons (February 1999) 401 WORK INDICATORS MARCH 1999 MARCH 199 MARCH 1997 Circulation Adult Materials 27,404 27,109 Juvenile Materials 30,595 26.223 Total 57,999 53,332 Days of Service 29 28.5 28 Average Daily Circulation 2,035 1,905 Hours of Service 295 287 279 Materials Circulated per Hour. 202 191 Increase in Circulation 8.8% 13.4% Materials Materials added for Added sow 1,565 March 1999 now Withdrawn 431 685 reflect serials added totaling'instead of Borrowers Registered 341 the originally reported 1,175. Adult Programs 111 178 N/A (Number of sessions) (16) (19) Story Time 39 0 0 (Number of Sessions) (2) (0) (0) Toddler Time 70 0 0 (Number of Sessions) (4) (0) (0) Special Programs 420 202 179 (Number of Sessions) (24) (4) (5) Children's Computer 64 N/A N/A Word Processor 197 N/A N/A Internet Users 1,782 1,121 0 Visitors (Gate count divided by 2) 22,461 23,888 18,036 Increase in Visitors -1.67% 32% -1.09% Fines/Fees Collected $1,025.08 $5,449.67 $5,357.41 Gifts Received $ 6.60 $ 21.25 $ 0.00 No statistical report from WCCLS was generated. March 1999 Management Overview - Circulation Overdue Total Total Library CheckIn CheckIn CheckIn CheckOut Renewal CheckOut Banks Public Library 2,397 708 3,105 1,039 185 1,224 Beaverton City Library 90,089 28,626 118,715 75,930 13,834 89,764 Cedar Mill Community Library 56,842 15,456 72,298 46,982 5,082 52,064 Cooperative Administrative Office 343 19 362 229 226 455 Cornelius Public Library 4,492 1,246 5,738 2,826 418 3,244 • Forest Grove City Library 19,323 5,886 25,209 14,720 1,603 16,323 Garden Home Community Library 4,762 1,246 6,008 2,204 578 2,782 Hillsboro Libraries: 0 Books By Rail 1,804 364 2,168 1,250 330 1,580 Shute Park 46,308 14,713 61,021 36,566 10,059 46,625 Tanasbourne Branch 56,545 23,077 79,622 41,234 3,952 45,186 Library Express 351 23 374 130 93 223 Library Outreach Services 2,024 432 2,456 1,173 96 1,269 Oregon College of Art and Craft 591 124 715 347 119 466 Sherwood Public Library 10,383 2,747 13,130 7,305 796 8,101 Tigard Public Library 49,345 15,664 65,009 39,811 7,017 46,828 Tualatin Public Library 17,362 4,282 21,644 13,392 2,171 15,563 Tuality Health Information Resource Centet 197 14 211 122 1 123 • West Slope Community Library 12,932 3,576 16,508 10,378 1,543 11,921 Grand Totals 376,090 118,203 494,293 295,638 48,103 343,741 F:\WILI\Wilireports\Managment Overview- March.xls\4/7/99 Automation Project Report for March 1999 CLAB Meeting 4/7/99 Barbara Kesel Software • 1.3 beta installation: Polaris 1.3 beta software was installed on the main Alpha server in early March. The installation involved table conversions, testing client software and distribution. Library staff was given the green light to install the 1.3 beta client software for OPAC and staff clients Thursday afternoon, March 4. Library staff accomplished the upgrades over the next few days.. By the end of the first week in March, the Cooperative was up on Polaris beta release 1.3. Functional improvements were made in saving item records, renewals, claims, titles on receipts, staff ability to view a hold queue, staff ability to place item level holds, balance on patron Fines & Fees, and a more user friendly HTML OPAC among other things. • On-Site Support: Courtney McEvoy, Supervisor of the GIS Quality Assurance Group, was on site in Aloha for the 1.3 installation project. Courtney coordinated the installation with GIS technical personnel in Syracuse, assisted in testing the installation procedures, took phone calls from member libraries, and worked with WILI staff to troubleshoot, report and resolve issues encountered in the cutover. Courtney returned to Syracuse March 6`h. It was very effective to have her on site. • Post 1.3 Developments: Initially there were problems with OPAC installations and holds placement as well as numerous errors. Many of these were resolved quickly. The bindings conversion resulted in a myriad of holds related problems and code errors. These were tracked and reported to GIS. A number of cleanup scripts were run throughout the month as we worked with GIS to isolate specific problems. In addition, WILI staff completed manual holds cleanup. We continue to work on these problems and had a breakthrough when GIS identified a bug related to holds near the end of the month. Additional fixes will be contained in the general release software targeted for late April release. • Time Trials: WILI staff conducted time trials on PCs connected directly to the Polaris server. Trials included functions specified in the Gaylord contract. Results indicate that Polaris performed within contract specifications for most patron services and public access functions. Cataloging functions require serious improvement. t • Fines: Library Directors decided not to resume charging fines and to discuss the matter again at the April meeting. Discussions with GIS resulted in a series of positive responses to the fines software needs of WCCLS. A procedure was installed to properly calculate closed days at libraries that are not open 7 days a week. The maximum fine of$5.00 for videos and $2.50 for other material types was tested successfully at GIS. In addition, the general release of 1.3 will contain a change so that "owning library" will determine whether or not a fine is charged. This will allow us to maintain the FGL, OUTR, and THC policy of not charging fines on materials owned by these locations. • Operating System Problem: WILI was down on the 22nd until the afternoon of the 23`d because of an NT operating system problem. Microsoft support assisted in resolving the problem. WILI staff had to uninstall and reinstall operating system components to resolve the problem. A corrupt file caused the RPC (remote call procedure) services to go into a state of constant activity that brought the NT operating system down on the main server. This problem did not involve the Polaris software. Hardware • WCCLS received additional hardware for the main server on the 17th. GIS paid for the hardware and installation by a DEC engineer for a total of approximately $10,000.00. The hardware consists of(5) 9.1 gigabyte drives, a 3 channel RAID controller and shelf rack. This standardizes the WCCLS hardware platform with those of new Polaris installations. GIS believes this upgrade improves system design and may positively impact performance. The next step requires GIS staff to distribute data across the drives. Then the DEC engineer will return to activate the hardware. Network • PCN and TCI: We continue to struggle with the PCN. Cooperative staff met with TCI and MACC to again discuss our serious concerns about network performance. TCI put a packet analyzer at Beaverton and Aloha and confirmed our findings that the network and the bridges are not over-utilized. TCI rewired Beaverton and is in the process of tuning the rest of the network. They are working to find solutions but have not been able to alleviate the problem thus far. The Cooperative is proceeding with a plan to install a point to point T1 telephone line to Beaverton for a 30 day test period. The Cooperative can lease equipment needed for the test and will pay the bandwidth costs. • CBSI: The Cooperative contracted with an independent local network consulting firm CBSI. CBSI engineers are charged with performing a network analysis and making recommendations. We purchased a managed communications switch to replace the current switch in the Aloha computer room. CBSI spent time on site in Aloha, at Cedar Mill, and at Tanasbourne. They will report to the Cooperative in April. • Monitoring: WILI staff continues to increase and improve the tools available to monitor network performance in order to pinpoint problems. 2 Training • JT White is registered for PCC's Cisco Certified Network Associate Level 1 course. This course of study will greatly increase the staff knowledge of wiring, network protocol, network design, and hardware configuration. Carolyn Vanderzanden has now completed 3 of the Microsoft Certified Software Engineer program classes. These were recommended for Polaris system administration. Lynn Patterson, Carolyn Vanderzanden, and Barbara Yasson attended Crystal Reports and Crystal Information training. Work on report creation is ongoing. Basja Samuelson, Gordon Shawhan, and Rosemary Mitchell are self-studying books on web design as well as getting familiar with web editing software called Homesite. Administration is committed to training WILI staff in order to better manage the system and offer a high level of support to member libraries. 3 Joseph Ford and Associates, Inc. 209 E. Fourth Avenue, Suite 201 Phone (360) 352-4434 Olympia, Washington 98501 Fax (360) 352-4712 Internet jbford@jbford.com Library Automation, Networking, and Data Communications Consulting April 5, 1999 Eva Calcagno Manager Washington County Cooperative Library Services P. O. Box 5129 Aloha, OR 97006 Dear Eva: I am writing to you to provide a copy of a confidential report my firm has prepared for the Washington County Cooperative Library System (WCCLS). The report identifies and discusses WCCLS's experience in purchasing, installing, and operating a computer system provided by Gaylord Information Systems (GIS). In reading the report, you will note my deep concern regarding the success of the Polaris implementation. While the Polaris implementation has been a difficult one, I do not believe that it is irrevocably a failure. The report proposes an extraordinary acceptance process, with a finite period in which WCCLS and Gaylord must succeed in making Polaris operate acceptably in Washington County. The report also states that only Gaylord can ultimately make Polaris successful. Failing such success, I recommend an amicable conclusion to the project, leaving WCCLS able to begin anew its procurement process. In making the report available Michael Skiles, President of Gaylord Information Systems, I invited his response to the report. From my contacts with Mr. Skiles, I believe that GIS comprehends the seriousness of the circumstances in which we all find ourselves. I understand that Mr. Skiles has been in contact with you. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you or your staff require any clarification. Sincerely Joseph B. Ford President Findings and Conclusions Related to the Washington County (Oregon) Cooperative Library Services (WCCLS) Contract and System Purchase of the Gaylord Information System Polaris Product Background In July 1997, Washington County, Oregon, issued a Request for Proposals for a new automated library system for the Washington County Cooperative Library Services (WCCLS), and began a competitive evaluation and selection process. In 1998, as the result of the competitive process, WCCLS acquired a license to install the Gaylord Information Systems Polaris library information system. The selection process involved participation by representatives from five WCCLS member libraries, and all procurement processes were conducted in compliance with stringent Washington County purchasing regulations. The evaluation team also included a technical advisor from the County MIS department. Following a recommendation from the evaluation team to WCCLS, and subsequently conveyed to Washington County Purchasing, Washington County entered into contract negotiations with Gaylord Information Systems. All contract language was examined by Washington County legal counsel, and a demanding system purchase, implementation, and maintenance agreement emerged from the negotiations. The Gaylord Polaris selection included development and use of a detailed Request for Proposals, a one-day scripted demonstration of system features on site in Aloha, interviews with principals and technical staff involved in system development, and interviews with Gaylord customers. WCCLS sought a leading-edge automated system with these features: • Provides an all-graphical user interface (GUI). • Incorporates Internet access and connectivity, including TCP/IP. • Is based on an operating system that is in widespread use, preferably Unix or Microsoft NT. • Employs standard programming languages in its design and software. • Is based on Structured Query Language (SQL) data base management. • Supports and operates all relevant library protocols associated with both information technology and service to customers. • Is feature-rich in its breadth of application support, so that all staff and customer service functions benefit directly from the automated library system. Joseph Ford &Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential—WCCLS: Findingst Conclusions re: Gaylord Information S oms' Polaris Page 2 Y Y b i With these parameters outlined in abundant detail in the WCCLS RFP, the evaluation team received and reviewed nine proposals, and created a"short list" of four vendors. One of the vendors was Ameritech Library Systems, the supplier of the Dynix automated library system then in use at WCCLS. The other vendors were Data Research Associates, Innovative Interfaces, and Gaylord. Subsequent to the demonstrations, a group selection and scoring process made Gaylord a unanimous choice. As one participant noted, "We were bedazzled." The Gaylord selection was based on the following selection factors: • The Polaris functionality was superior to the other shortlisted vendors as shown in demonstrations. • The hardware, software, database management system, and operating system were all well within the technical parameters expressed as preferences in the RFP. • The screen designs, interfaces, and user accessibility features were more nearly similar to WCCLS requirements than any other vendor's features. • Gaylord as a company promised the corporate stability of a 100-year old firm. • The technical personnel involved in Polaris design and development showed a high degree of knowledge about library requirements and systems. • The cost of the system was within the budget developed by WCCLS. WCCLS and its evaluation team took some risk in selecting a new product that had not been fully implemented in any library at that time. The evaluation team understood the nature of this risk, but made this decision because only the Polaris product offered to meet all the leading-edge criteria recounted on page one of this report. The risk that would have been inherent in selecting a different product was the perception that WCCLS might install a product that was tending toward obsolescence by not incorporating these features. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential—WCCLS: Findiond Conclusions re: Gaylord Informatio►•stems' Polaris Page 3 Conducting the Evaluation Of the Polaris Implementation Because of persistent and ongoing problems in the implementation of the Polaris system within WCCLS, Joseph B. Ford has been engaged as an outside consultant to evaluate the likely outcome of the implementation and to identify potential remediation for the current state of implementation. Joseph B. Ford is president and principal consultant of Joseph Ford and Associates, Inc., a firm specializing in technology and networking as they are deployed in libraries. In evaluating the Polaris implementation at WCCLS, the consultant drew on or employed the following methods and contacts: • Visited WCCLS and interviewed senior management, technical, and operations personnel within WCCLS, on March 8 and 9, in person and subsequently by telephone. • Discussed network findings and concerns with WCCLS's network technical consultants. • Observed Polaris online operations and processes from within WCCLS. • Observed Polaris public access operations from within the consultant's offices via the Internet. • Visited three WCCLS member libraries and interviewed senior managers and directors of those three libraries, as well as operations employees. • Observed operations in a non-intrusive manner in the three WCCLS member libraries. • Examined a large number of documents, included highly detailed logs of activities and communications passing between WCCLS and GIS. • Assembled some interim findings and discussed them with WCCLS senior managers during a March 9 visit to WCCLS's offices. • Contacted GIS and discussed the interim findings with GIS's President and Vice President. Consultant's General Observations of Current Climate The consultant believes that the WCCLS's Polaris implementation and stem performance P Y problems have attracted the attention of the public, of WCCLS and member library staff, and of County administrators. The attention now focused on Polaris and WCCLS has taken an unfortunate but predictable turn: a search for guilty parties, with WCCLS Manager Eva Calcagno named in some letters as if she were personally responsible for bad system performance. There appears to be a sentiment among some WCCLS member library staff and the public that the difficulties of the Polaris implementation are prima facie evidence of a"bad decision" in selecting Polaris. In fact, WCCLS had several paths open to it as it sought a new system, and all Joseph Ford& Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 • Confidential—WCCLS: Findings Wonclusions re: Gaylord Information Sy&s' Polaris Page 4 courses of action involved risks. Informed decisions were made about which risks to assume, but in fact all courses of action had the potential for some failures. The consultant, from a thorough knowledge of the library systems market and products, is well aware that no "perfect solution" was available to WCCLS in purchasing a system. A decision to purchase a more tested, but less leading-edge, system could easily have resulted in eventual loss of product value as technology left that system "in the dust." Further, the move to acquire a new system was given impetus by library staff and public complaints about the antiquated nature of the Dynix system: character-based displays; lack of Windows-style interfaces; lack of Internet connectivity. Now other members of the public complain of the loss of exactly those features that were formerly the source of complaints. All this proves to the consultant that a public agency never pleases everyone, and that decision- making should be based on objective criteria which have been defined and can be measured. In fact, prior to entering into a purchase process, WCCLS defined the criteria of its new system (as recounted on page one of this report), and these criteria are industry-standard within the computing industry at this time. About this Report This document is not intended to analyze all technical problems that have occurred in the Polaris implementation at WCCLS, nor does it attempt to recreate every step of the implementation and every effort to achieve success. Rather, the report will summarize the current state of the implementation, and identify some potential methods for remediating the problems, as well as outlining the potential for a failed implementation. The intent of this report is to place responsibility for the implementation problems where that responsibility belongs: On poor hardware and software performance, not on individuals. Further, the report notes that GIS has contracted for system performance that is not yet available, and the report proposes a process of either moving toward successful implementation or negotiating an amicable disengagement between WCCLS and GIS. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential-WCCLS: Findiond Conclusions re: Gaylord Informationotems' Polaris Page 5 History of the Polaris Implementation WCCLS and Gaylord undertook implementation in late August 1998, approximately four months later than the initial project implementation plan, with the delays largely related to completion of initial software development and to WCCLS' interest in implementing the most complete version of the system possible. While it is common for newly implemented systems to suffer performance problems while they are configured and tested, WCCLS has had a particularly bad experience. Subsequent to implementation, a disastrous period for WCCLS and GIS ensued, with these characteristics: • Approximately two months(mid-September to early November) of dismal system performance. WCCLS and its member libraries suffered through recurring system problems that began to cause loss of confidence in GIS and WCCLS. • System response time problems. Among the problems were system response times that for some functions require five or more minutes to return a screen or a notice that a process has successfully concluded. • System stability and reliability problems. The early days of Polaris implementation were marked by instability in the NT operating system, the SQL Server database manager, and in the various applications used by WCCLS member libraries. Many WCCLS member library,staff and WCCLS staff felt that the Polaris system was being"beta" tested in its first real high-volume installation. • Loss of key functionality available in the older Dynix system. An early and still recurring reaction was that Polaris did less for WCCLS library customers than the Dynix system it replaced, with Circulation Control functions being the primary losses the WCCLS member libraries identify. Gaylord Response to Early Implementation Problems GIS worked to understand and repair problems occurring, and eventually provided a number of support and financial considerations to alleviate WCCLS problems. The response included the following: • Brought a series of GIS technical personnel on site to assist with problem resolution. • Revised Polaris system code to make more efficient use of the SQL server software stability. Y • Recognized the WCCLS "beta" testing status, including agreeing to reduce costs to WCCLS. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 • Confidential—WCCLS: Findings*Conclusions re: Gaylord Information SOns' Polaris Page 6 • Engaged a third-party consulting firm to examine internal data management procedures and advise on how those might be optimized for better system performance. Current Status of the Implementation At the time of this report in late March 1999, the implementation of the Polaris system at WCCLS is still in peril, for most of the same reasons noted in the section "History of the Implementation." These reasons are as follows: • Delays in the implementation: While GIS has upgraded software, the release currently installed is an early version of Level 1.3, which was originally to be installed in late December 1998 or early January 1999. Since 1.3 includes some key functionalities (technical processing features important to WCCLS member libraries) the delays in implementing key requirements has cost WCCLS and GIS by creating an unfavorable perception among WCCLS member libraries. At least some of the delays in implementation almost certainly result from GIS's emphasis on repairing system performance problems. That priority matter properly received the greatest attention, and with some improvements resulting in system performance, GIS appears to have focused again on product enhancement and implementation. • Absence of some key functionality: As noted, Circulation Control functions are key components for WCCLS libraries, as they are for any public library. Several key circulation processes have not functioned well or at all on Polaris, with unfortunate results. For example, because of an inability to send paper hold notices, and because renewals were not properly functioning, WCCLS member library managers decided not to levy fines. As a consequence, WCCLS member libraries also lost the revenues from fines. In addition, the inability to manage holds effectively in a library organization that sends materials all over the county, regardless of the owning library location, was and is a major problem for WCCLS member libraries. • Poor response time: This issue has been described elsewhere in this report, and is a major problem for GIS and for WCCLS. • Unreliable functional processing: In addition to some functions not being available, some functions that are putatively available are unreliable and cause problems for staff and customers. In particular, editing and managing bibliographic records is a major problem, since the save functions are not always timely and sometimes "time out." Circulation Control functions are reportedly not reliable, and some status designations on materials cannot be reversed or overridden without convoluted, time consuming, and ultimately expensive efforts. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential-WCCLS: Fince and Conclusions re: Gaylord Informatiowstems' Polaris Page 7 . Poor public and staff perception: This last issue is one that greatly troubles the consultant, because it appears to be both applicable and wrong-headed. The applicable perception, that Polaris is slow and less functional in some respects than the Dynix system it replaced is largely true. The perception that WCCLS and GIS are unresponsive, not professionally skilled, and not working hard enough or not focusing on problem repair is clearly not accurate. Finally, the frustrations with Windows-based software, while soliciting sympathy, have little to do with either GIS or WCCLS. In fact, the entire computing industry is racing to employ Windows interfaces and Web solutions to virtually all computing and communications. Impacts of Polaris Problems on WCCLS Member Libraries and the Public As the voluminous documentation made available to the consultant indicates, as well as interviews with WCCLS member libraries' staff, the impacts on libraries and their customers have been substantial and painful. Some specific summary examples follow: • Increased stress on library staff: All the member libraries' managers with whom the consultant spoke identified a common theme: that staff feel the burden of poor system performance keenly, and that the burden has increased stress, impacted staff performance and behavior, and caused a loss of staff support as volunteers decline to continue to serve. While any change may cause staff concern and impact performance, WCCLS member libraries report stress-related problems beyond the routine. • Increased complaints from customers about system problems: Another common thread among library managers was that customers now complain about system performance in ways that were unfamiliar when the Dynix system was in operation. The litany of complaints is much too voluminous and detailed to review in this report, but it is important to note that the great majority of the complaints are valid and that library staff can only acknowledge the problems without being able to offer reassurance. • Reduced service for customers: As noted throughout this report, the problems that customers experienced were related to system performance, and the result was reduced service. The problems are outlined more extensively in other parts of this report, but they include virtually all aspects of library services that depend on computer systems for support. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential—WCCLS: Findings Conclusions re: Gaylord Information Sys' Polaris Page 8 • Increased workload for staff: Universally, library staff report that the amount of time and effort to accomplish routine and recurring work is much greater with Polaris than with Dynix. Circulation Control functions were the greatest reported source of workload increases, but not the only ones. Some examples include needing to handle some types of circulation transactions twice or three times, essentially by creating"dummy" transactions to be able to clear an item of a status. The consultant observed in one library that customer circulation transactions were not occurring as expected, and that staff resorted to hand recording transactions for subsequent entry into the system. Other evidence of workload increases were the "workaround" documentation that one enterprising library staff member had created, which identified the undocumented processes needed to achieve successful materials handling in Polaris. • Backlogs of materials unprocessed: As a result of the response time and increased efforts needed to conduct normal library business, libraries have forgone processing some recently purchased materials, because the response times would overwhelm staff. One manager provided the consultant an estimate of the number of employee workdays that would be needed to process new materials, based solely on poor response times. Materials purchased and remaining in storage are materials not being made available to customers, and therefore have diminished sharply in value. Further, materials that are returned after use by customers that require days to process and make ready for use by other customers also have diminished value. • Loss of revenue: As noted elsewhere in this report, the WCCLS library managers' decision to forego fines levies because of an absence of some circulation features meant that WCCLS libraries lost a source of revenue estimated to equal five percent of operating budget for some individual libraries. Gaylord Response to Current Polaris Problems GIS has continued to exert efforts to understand and repair system performance problems occurring subsequent to initial installation. The recent GIS responses have included the following: • Brought a GIS employee to Washington County to oversee installation of the most recent release (early version of 1.3) of the Polaris software (week of March 1, 1999). • Have shipped, and WCCLS has received, some central site disk drive hardware that should improve disk drive performance and thus response time. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential-WCCLS: Findiland Conclusions re: Gaylord In formatioestems' Polaris Page 9 • Acknowledged the response time and time-out problems with the bibliographic record edit and save processes, and have promised that work is underway to repair the problem. GIS's estimated time to provide the software is about April 5-9. • Continue to monitor and repair data indexing and display problems that have occurred as a result of the 1.3 installation. Conclusion and Proposed Next Steps As must be evident to all who read this report, WCCLS has a serious problem with the current Polaris system implementation. At the same time that the consultant notes that such problems exist, it is important to recognize that some improvements have occurred and are continuing to occur. Further, it is important to note that any new system suffers some initial performance problems inherent in installing and implementing complex new technology. It is in no one's best interest to terminate the current contract without a serious and concerted effort to make Polaris operate successfully, as defined in the purchase and service contract that binds the parties. WCCLS would face another purchasing process, with delays, costs, customer service problems and disruption, and no doubt a growing dissatisfaction with the WCCLS organization. To prevent an outcome that would damage all the parties, i.e., Washington County immediately declaring GIS in breach of the contract with the County due to implementation delays, performance problems, and a likely failure of acceptance testing, the consultant recommends that WCCLS and GIS agree to an extraordinary implementation process. These are the key elements in the extraordinary process: 1. A duration of not more than 120 days for GIS and WCCLS to either move toward acceptance, or to begin orderly termination of the contract. The Polaris implementation began in August 1998, and a one-year effort that does not return acceptable results should be concluded expeditiously so that WCCLS could move to another vendor. 2. Cessation of WCCLS member library staff external communications regarding GIS. Both GIS and WCCLS note that some WCCLS member libraries have voiced their concerns in public forums, to the detriment of GIS business. Contract matters under dispute should be handled by the contracting parties. Commentary, no matter how well intentioned, nor how much it is based on concern for customer service, should be routed through WCCLS, and if appropriate, through purchasing and legal channels. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential—WCCLS: Findings INConclusions re: Gaylord Information Syss' Polaris Page 10 3. WCCLS member libraries to continue to focus on identifying and reporting problems, as well as reporting any performance and service improvements. The member libraries have been excellent sources of information regarding system performance problems. Their work must continue during the extraordinary process, and if performance improvements occur, WCCLS and its members need to continue to exchange information on what has happened that benefits libraries and their customers. 4. WCCLS to focus on internal system and network management, with GIS assistance and with assistance and advice from technical consultants, to eliminate all potential sources of performance problems. WCCLS has engaged a technical consulting firm to provide advice and assistance in regard to broadband Ethernet. Such technical consultation must continue. In addition, ongoing contact with TCI and the Metropolitan Area Cable Commission would be very valuable, as TCI and MACC work to ensure broadband Ethernet reliability and high throughput. In addition, to validate response times, adding a separate Ethernet port to the central Polaris server as recommended by GIS might help isolate response time problems arising from the network from those response time problems that are related to hardware, software, operating system, or database manager. 5. WCCLS and GIS to continue to document, analyze, and fix"bugs,"problems, parameter settings, or other barriers to acceptable system performance. WCCLS and GIS have been actively working to capture, document, report, consult regarding, and repair all Polaris system-related problems causing performance problems. All evidence points to a high level of effort, to professional behavior and involvement of the best resources available to both parties, to a willingness for both parties to extend themselves, and to modest ongoing improvements in system performance. Without this continued high level of effort, the extraordinary process cannot succeed. 6. WCCLS to continue routine response time testing, system performance testing, and provision of operating support to WCCLS member libraries. In addition to the continued interaction with GIS regarding performance problems and repairs, WCCLS must continue to provide service and support for its member libraries. 7. WCCLS to continue and expand its communications with member library staff and the public regarding the WCCLS-GIS efforts to improve performance. The unhappy reaction of WCCLS member library customers and many member library staff to Polaris has begun to take on a life of its own. Increasing the level, frequency, and location of communication sessions may act to reassure unhappy parties. Some potential opportunities are as follows: Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 Confidential-WCCLS: Findil&and Conclusions re: Gaylord Informatioostems' Polaris Page 11 - A brief descriptive report that identifies the goals of WCCLS automation. If library customers and staff understand WCCLS issues and directions, there might be less concern about use of current computer environments, as were expressed to the consultant. In this example, a self-described "disgruntled patron" complained in part about use of Windows-based technology and their impacts on older customers. - Additional training in use of Polaris and its underlying technology. Some of the frustration that relates to Polaris might be relieved by better knowledge of the system. - Status reports to WCCLS member libraries on a recurring basis. WCCLS has been doing so, and should continue. - An update column in local newspapers. Since some members of both the public and library staff have expressed their frustration regarding Polaris via newspapers, a recurring status report made available in the Oregonian or local Washington County newspapers may reach and reassure library customers. Further, if GIS and WCCLS cannot arrive at a successful conclusion, it will be important that the public understand the level of effort that WCCLS and the County have mounted. - Recurring meetings with library staff to explain the process, identify the level of effort underway, and seek to reassure staff that WCCLS is working very hard to make Polaris successful. - Public forums to focus on customer needs and frustrations and on WCCLS and member libraries' efforts to deal with those frustrations. 8. GIS to continue to apply its very best efforts; providing repairs, hardware upgrades, software development, or other means necessary may achieve acceptable system performance. The efforts should focus on the following issues in priority sequence, supported by all of the WCCLS library managers who spoke with the consultant. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 . Confidential—WCCLS: Findings Conclusions re: Gaylord Information S*ns' Polaris Page 12 Proposed Priority Focus Consultation with some WCCLS member libraries identified a priority sequence that would likely satisfy member libraries if the efforts identified were successful within 90 to 120 days. No. Title Description of Goal 1. Improve Response Time Usable responses within contract limits for all system screens and transactions,with an emphasis on Circulation Control and the OPAC 2. Improve System System performance is reliable in regard to data integrity, Performance& Reliability indexing, and storage and display of data already entered into the system 3. Improve Functional Components of the system, particularly Circulation Control, Components' Operations function as described; emphasis on processing holds and managing automatic change of hold status without record loss, status change,or difficulty for staff in using Circulation Control. Additional emphasis on efficient bibliographic and item record processing. Ultimately, only GIS can solve the issues identified in this report. That is, WCCLS and member libraries can report problems, can consult and interact with GIS and each other, can configure Polaris as directed by GIS, and can manage and modify networks and workstations. Without GIS's technical assistance and development of problem resolutions, no amount of WCCLS effort will yield a successful Polaris implementation. Should the effort not be successful by August 1999, the consultant recommends that WCCLS and GIS amicably terminate the unsuccessful Polaris implementation and agree to a division of resources and assets acquired during the failed project. Joseph Ford&Associates, Inc. March 29, 1999 DRAFT FOOD AND BEVERAGE POLICY The Tigard Public Library will allow food and beverages in the Library under the conditions noted in this policy. This policy applies to staff and patrons alike. • Consumption of beverages will be limited to the Library lobby and areas of the Library where tables are available, including the Puett Room. At no time will beverages be allowed in or near the book stacks or computer areas. Beverages may be served during Library sponsored events and programs. Every precaution will be made to avoid leaving liquid or empty beverage containers where they might attract insects or cause damage to library floor coverings, furnishings, equipment and materials. • Consumption of food will be allowed in the Library Lobby and during Library sponsored programs and events. Every precaution will be made to avoid leaving traces of food that might attract insects or cause damage to library floor coverings, furnishings, equipment and materials. • All beverages must have lids. • Food and beverages will not be allowed near computers for any reason. • Patrons with food or beverages in areas not designated by this policy will be asked to move to an authorized area of the Library. • Beverages left unattended for an extended period of time will be thrown away. • All Library staff will enforce this policy with both patrons and staff. Adopted , by the Tigard Library Board. \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LIB\MELINDA\FOOD AND BEVERAGE POLICY.doc 3/10/99 12:41 PM • • T1�`_AD11 DIIQI It'' 1 IQDADV (Library logo or standard heading throughout all policies) COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY I. Mission Statement II. Purpose of the Collection Development Policy III. Responsibility for Collection Development IV. General Principles of Selection V. Collection Maintenance VI. -Gifts VII. Reconsideration of Library Materials VIII. Limits on the Collection IX. Policy Implementation, Evaluation and Revision I. MISSION STATEMENT: To provide a current collection of library materials to meet the needs and interests of a diverse, growing community. To preserve and enhance the intellectual freedoms of Tigard's citizens. II. PURPOSE OF THE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY: The purpose of this collection development policy is to establish the guidelines for the selection of materials in the Library's collection. Its intent is to develop the collection to reflect the needs and interests of a diverse community and to establish a plan for, the selection of materials. The policy establishes selection guidelines that have been developed after assessing the demand for informational, recreational, and historical items and anticipating the future needs of patrons. III. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT: The Library Board has the authority to determine the selection and acquisition policy. Final responsibility for selection of materials rests with the Library Director, with responsibility delegated to professional staff. Any staff member or citizen may submit suggestions for purchase of materials and professional staff will consider these suggestions on a regular basis according to the selection criteria. IV. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF SELECTION: Professional staff will, within practical limitations of budget and space, use the following principles as guidelines for selecting of library materials: A. Contemporary significance or permanent value B. Accuracy C. Authority of author D. Relationship of the work to the existing collection E. Price,format and ease of use F. Availability of materials elsewhere in the local area G. Popular demand In selecting materials to meet the needs of the community, librarians will attempt to find critical reviews, which are the best source for evaluating an author's expertise on the subject, as well as the content, style, format, and value of the work. Professional staff selects library materials based on their knowledge of Tigard citizens' interests, and librarian's professional knowledge. However, if a title appears on &bestseller list and there is substantial citizen demand, the book may be selected without a favorable review. Bestsellers and books anticipated to be bestsellers can be purchased in multiple copies as determined by popular demand and advance publicity. Additionally, Librarians may consider prepublication recommendations in deciding which materials to acquire. . se that librarians may take adye0age ef print runs by publishers and meet en�ieipe�ed demend by *-e eerA unity. These selection standards also apply to materials received as gifts or donations. The Tigard Public Library endorses the material selection principles contained in the following statements of principles adopted by the American Library Association: A. The Library Bill of Rights B. The Freedom to Read statement C. The Freedom to View statement D. Free Access to Libraries by Minors E. Economic Barriers to Information Access V. COLLECTION MAINTENANCE: While a solid core collection in all areas is a given, currency is a major challenge in maintaining an effective and useful collection. Towards that end, the Library maintains an active policy of withdrawals based on the elimination of outdated material (items no longer needed or of interest as evidenced by circulation records; unneeded duplicates, and worn or mutilated copies). Frequency of circulation, community interests, and availability of more current materials is a prime consideration. Materials focusing on the Pacific Northwest and by local authors are an exception as are classics, award winners and items that have received recurrent interest over the years. Withdrawn items will be disposed of by one of the following means: A. Gifts to other libraries B. Book sales for Friends of the Library C. Recycling D. Discarding VI. GIFTS: The Library will accept monetary donations and gifts of materials with the understanding that gifts of materials will be added to the collection only if they meet the same standards of value required of materials purchased by the Library. Gift materials not meeting those standards, i.e., those that are out of date, unneeded duplicates of items already owned, or those in a form unsuitable for library use, may be given to other organizations, sold, exchanged, or discarded. When a monetary donation for materials is made, it will be determined whether the gift is designated for a certain item or general category. The funds will be used accordingly within the guidelines in the Collection Development Policy and the needs of the Library collection. VII. RECONSIDERATION OF LIBRARY MATERIALS: As the Library strives to provide books and other materials for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people in the community, there may be disagreements on the merit of various items. Therefore,the following procedures will apply in responding to complaints: A. Recognizing that citizens have the right to question Library decisions, the Library staff first will try to determine the basis of the individual's request. 1. If the individual is seeking information about why the item has been selected, the matter will be handled informally by a professional librarian. Such a request is an opportunity to explain the mission of the Library and the guarantee of our freedom to read under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 2. If the individual objects to the material being available and wishes to have the material removed from the Library or relocated within the Library, then he or she will be ftimished with the "Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials" Form, which must be filled out completely before the item will be reconsidered. B. A committee consisting of one member of the Tigard Library Board, one staff member from Reader's Services, and one staff member from Library Administration will then consider the comments on the form and examine the item in question. The committee will seek reviews of the item in question and determine whether it conforms to the policy as stated in the "Descriptions of the Collection and Guidelines for Selection, by Area" in the "Tigard A 4e. T :b,..,..., Collection Development Procedures" section of the Tigard Public Library Policies and Procedures Manual. This review will be initiated within 10 days of the_receipt of the Reconsideration Form and must be completed within 60 days. Based on the written recommendation of the committee, the Library Director will decide whether to retain, withdraw, of restrict or relocate the material in question and will provide a written response giving the reasons for the decision. 1. If the individual inquiring wishes to contest the Library Director's decision, the Library Director will forward the "Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials" Form to the Tigard Library Board as an agenda item for its next regularly scheduled meeting. The Library Director will also arrange for the questioner to be invited to attend the meeting. The Board will consider the requester's statement and the Library Director's recommendations. The Library Board will make its decision based on the policy as stated in "Selection of Library Materials" in the Tigard Public Library Policiest and Procedures Manual, page and the "Descriptions of the Collection and Guidelines for Selection, by Area" in the Collection Development Procedures, section 4. 2. If the questioner contests the Library Board's decision, the Library Director will forward the "Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials" Form to the Tigard City Manager. VIII. LIMITS ON THE COLLECTION: Due to various constraints of budget, space, limited audience, and other limitations, the Library is not able to collect many of the following items: . A. Textbooks: Elementary through college,unless the title fills a need, and information on a particular subject is not otherwise available. B. Microform formats: Exceptions include a limited number of high demand magazine titles,and the Tigard Times backfile. C. Government documents: Exceptions include Tigard City Council proceedings, the Oregon Revised Statutes,and similar items of high demand or importance. D. In-depth research and/or retrospective works. E. Foreign languages: Except for items such as instructional materials and cassettes, texts, and dictionaries,which may be collected. F. Videos with the NC-17 or X rating. IX. POLICY IMPLEMENTATION, EVALUATION AND REVISION: yeei- by the 6-brery Dip-eeter and 6ibrery Beard merAbers beginning in the year 2091. The Library Director and the Library Board members will review the Tigard Public Library Collection Development Policy every other year beginning in the year 2001. APPENDIXES: A. Library Bill of Rights B. The Freedom to Read statement C. The Freedom to View statement D. Free Access to Libraries by Minors E. Economic Barriers to Information Access F. Request for Library Material Reconsideration Form Adopted by the Library Board 01999. SECTION II REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF MATERIALS FORM TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY In order to give your request the fullest and most careful consideration, please answer every question completely and return this form to the librarian. (For complete explanation of the process, please see Reconsideration of Library Materials, Section VII of this document. Date: Author: Title: Publisher: Copyright Date: Library Call No.: Number of Pages: Internet Site: Full Name (please print) Address City Phone Number Occupation School—if attending school Signature Complaint represents: Self: Organization: Address: SECTION II (Cont.) REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF MATERIALS FORM 1. What brought this material to your attention? (Please explain): 2. What are your general objections to this library material/service? (Please explain): 3. What do you object to specifically? (Please explain fully and in detail, include page numbers, scenes or sites if possible): 4. What do you feel might be the result of reading/viewing/listening to this library material/service for the following categories of readers? a. For an adult? b. For an adolescent? (12-18 yrs.) C. For a child? (under 12 yrs.) 5. For what age group would you recommend this library material? Please explain why? 6. What do you feel were the good features of this library material? 7. What do you believe to be the central theme of this library material? (Please answer specifically and in detail): J 8. Do you believe that this particular subject matter, handled differently would be acceptable reading/viewing/listening? 9. Are you aware of any judgment of this library material/service by professional critics and reviewers? If so, what was the consensus of their judgment? 10. What reviews of this library material/service have you read? (If possible, where and when did they appear, and by whom?) 11. Have you read/viewed/listened to this material in its entirety? 12. Have you read/viewed/listened to any other works by this author? If yes, what were the titles? 13. How do you suggest the Library handle this material/service? 14. Have you read the Tigard Public Library Collection Development and Selection of Library Materials Policiesy? 15. Do you believe that anyone else might, for any reason, find value or merit in this library material/service? f APPENDIX A LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services: I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation. II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment. IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas. V. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views. VI. Libraries that make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use. Adopted June 18, 1948. Amended February 2, 1961, and January 23, 1980, inclusion of"age"reaffirmed January 23, 1996, by the American Library Association Council. APPENDIX B THE FREEDOM TO READ The freedom to read is essential to our democracy. It is continuously under attack. Private groups and public authorities in various parts of the country are working to remove books from sale, to censor textbooks, to label "controversial" books, to distribute lists of "objectionable" books or authors, and to purge libraries. These actions apparently rise from a view that our national tradition of free expression is no longer valid; that censorship and suppression are needed to avoid the subversion of politics and the corruption of morals. We, as citizens devoted to the use of books and as librarians and publishers responsible for disseminating them, wish to assert the public interest in the preservation of the freedom to read. We are deeply concerned about these attempts at suppression. Most such attempts rest on a denial of the fundamental premise of democracy: that the ordinary citizen, by exercising critical judgment, will accept the good and reject the bad. The censors, public and private, assume that they should determine what is good and what is bad for their fellow-citizens. We trust Americans to recognize propaganda, and to reject it. We do not believe they need the help of censors to assist them in this task. We do not believe they are prepared to sacrifice their heritage of a free press in order to be "protected" against what others think may be bad for them. We believe they still favor free enterprise in ideas and expression. We are aware, of course, that books are not alone in being subjected to efforts at suppression. We are aware that these efforts are related to a larger pattern of pressures being brought against education, the press, films, radio and television. The problem is not only one of actual censorship. The shadow of fear cast by these pressures leads, we suspect, to an even larger voluntary curtailment of expression by those who seek to avoid controversy. Such pressure toward conformity is perhaps natural to a time of uneasy change and pervading fear. Especially when so many of our apprehensions are directed against an ideology, the expression of a dissident idea becomes a thing feared in itself, and we tend to move against it as against a hostile deed, with suppression. And yet suppression is never more dangerous than in such a time of social tension. Freedom has given the United States the elasticity to endure strain. Freedom keeps open the path of novel and creative solutions and enables change to come by choice. Every silencing of a heresy, every enforcement of an orthodoxy, diminishes the toughness and resilience of our society and leaves it the less able to deal with stress. Now as always in our history, books are among our greatest instruments of freedom. They are almost the only means for making generally available ideas or manners of expression that can initially command only a small audience. They are the natural medium for the new idea and the untried voice from which come the original contributions to social growth. They are essential to • • the extended discussion which serious thought requires, and to the accumulation of knowledge and ideas into organized collections. We believe that free communication is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture. We believe that these pressures towards conformity present the danger of limiting the range and variety of inquiry and expression on which our democracy and our culture depend. We believe that every American community must jealously guard the freedom to publish and to circulate, in order to preserve its own freedom to read. We believe that publishers and librarians have a profound responsibility to give validity to that freedom to read by making it possible for the readers to choose freely from a variety of offerings. The freedom to read is guaranteed by the Constitution. Those with faith in free people will stand firm on these constitutional guarantees of essential rights and will exercise the responsibilities that accompany these rights. We therefore affirm these propositions: 1. It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those which are unorthodox or unpopular with the majority. Creative thought is by definition new, and what is new is different. The bearer of every new thought is a rebel until that idea is refined and tested. Totalitarian systems attempt to maintain themselves in power by the ruthless suppression of any concept which challenges the established orthodoxy. The power of a democratic system to adapt to change is vastly strengthened by the freedom of its citizens to choose widely from among conflicting opinions offered freely to them. To stifle every nonconformist idea at birth would mark the end of the democratic process. Furthermore, only through the constant activity of weighing and selecting can the democratic mind attain the strength demanded by times like these. We need to know not only what we believe but why we believe it. 2. Publishers, librarians and booksellers do not need to endorse every idea or presentation contained in the books they make available. It would conflict with the public interest for them to establish their own political, moral or aesthetic views as a standard for determining what books should be published or circulated. Publishers and librarians serve the educational process by helping to make available knowledge and ideas required for the growth of the mind and the increase of learning. They do not foster education by imposing as mentors the patterns of their own thought. The people should have the freedom to read and consider a broader range of ideas than those that may be held by any single librarian or publisher or government or church. It is wrong that what one can read should be confined to what another thinks proper. 3. It is contrary to the public interest for publishers or librarians to determine the acceptability of a book on the basis of the personal history or political affiliations of the author. A book should be judged as a book. No art or literature can flourish if it is to be measured by the political views or private lives of its creators. No society of free people can flourish which draws up lists of writers to whom it will not listen, whatever they may have to say. 4. There is no place in our society for efforts to coerce the taste of others, to confine adults to the reading matter deemed suitable for adolescents, or to inhibit the efforts of writers to achieve artistic expression. To some, much of modern literature is shocking. But is not much of life itself shocking? We cut off literature at the source if we prevent writers from dealing with the stuff of life. Parents and teachers have a responsibility to prepare the young to meet the diversity of experiences in life to which they will be exposed, as they have a responsibility to help them learn to think critically for themselves. These are affirmative responsibilities, not to be discharged simply by preventing them from reading works for which they are not yet prepared. In these matters taste differs, and taste cannot be legislated; nor can machinery be devised which will suit the demands of one group without limiting the freedom of others. 5. It is not in the public interest to force a reader to accept with any book the prejudgment of a label characterizing the book or author as subversive or dangerous. The ideal of labeling presupposes the existence of individuals or groups with wisdom to determine by authority what is good or bad for the citizen. It presupposes that individuals must be directed in making up their minds about the ideas they examine. But Americans do not need others to do their thinking for them. 6. It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians, as guardians of the people's freedom to read, to contest encroachments upon that freedom by individuals or groups seeking to impose their own standards or tastes upon the community at large. It is inevitable in the give and take of the democratic process that the political, the moral, or the aesthetic concepts of an individual or group will occasionally collide with those of another individual or group. In a free society individuals are free to determine for themselves what they wish to read, and each group is free to determine what.it will recommend to its freely associated members. But no group has the right to take the law into its own hands, and to impose its own concept of politics or morality upon other members of a democratic society. Freedom is no freedom if it is accorded only to the accepted and the inoffensive. 7. It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians to give full meaning to the freedom to read by providing books that enrich the quality and diversity of thought and expression. By the exercise of this affirmative responsibility, they can demonstrate that the answer to a bad book is a good one, the answer to a bad idea is a good one. The freedom to read is of little consequence when expended on the trivial; it is frustrated when the reader cannot obtain matter fit for that reader's purpose. What is needed is not only the absence of restraint, but the positive provision of opportunity for the people to read the best that has been thought and said. Books are the major channel by which the intellectual inheritance is handed down, and the principal means of its testing and growth. The defense of their freedom and integrity, and the enlargement of their service to society, requires of all publishers and librarians the utmost of their faculties, and deserves of all citizens the fullest of their support. We state these propositions neither lightly nor as easy generalizations. We here stake out a lofty claim for the value of books. We do so because we believe that they are good, possessed of enormous variety and usefulness, worthy of cherishing and keeping free. We realize that the application of these propositions may mean the dissemination of ideas and manners of expression that are repugnant to many persons. We do not state these propositions in the comfortable belief that what people read is unimportant. We believe rather that what people read is deeply important; that ideas can be dangerous; but that the suppression of ideas.is fatal to a democratic society. Freedom itself is a dangerous way of life, but it is ours. This statement was originally issued in May of 1953 by the Westchester Conference of the American Library Association and the American Book Publishers Council, which in 1970 consolidated with the American Educational Publishers Institute to become the Association of American Publishers. Adopted June 25, 1953; revised January 28, 1972, January 16, 1991, by the ALA Council and the AAP Freedom to Read Committee. A Joint Statement by: American Librga Association&Association of American Publishers APPENDIX C FREEDOM TO VIEW The Freedom to View, along with the freedom to speak, to hear, and to read, is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. In a free society, there is no place for censorship of any medium of expression. Therefore, we affirm these principles: 1. It is in the public interest to provide the broadest possible access to films and other audiovisual materials because they have proven to be among the most effective means for the communication of ideas. Liberty of circulation is essential to ensure the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression. 2. It is in the public interest to provide for our audiences films and other audiovisual materials which represent a diversity of views and expression. Selection of a work does not constitute or imply agreement with or approval of the content. 3. It is our professional responsibility to resist the constraint of labeling or pre judging a film on the basis of the moral, religious, or political beliefs of the producer or filmmaker or on the basis of controversial content. 4. It is our professional responsibility to contest vigorously, by all lawful means, every encroachment upon the public's freedom to view. Adopted by the Council, American Library Association, June 1979. Adepted by the gta4e r ibr-afy Oete .e.. 19 APPENDIX D FREE ACCESS TO LIBRARIES FOR MINORS An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights Library policies and procedures which effectively deny minors equal access to all library resources available to other users violate the Library Bill of Rights. The American Library Association opposes all attempts to restrict access to library services, materials, and facilities based on the age of library users. Article V of the Library Bill of Rights states, "A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views." The "right to use a library" includes free access to, and unrestricted use of, all the services, materials, and facilities the library has to offer. Every restriction on access to, and use of, library resources, based solely on the chronological age, educational level; or legal emancipation of users violates Article V. Libraries are charged with the mission of developing resources to meet the diverse information needs and interests of the communities they serve. Services, materials, and facilities which fulfill the needs and interests of library users at different stages in their personal development are a necessary part of library resources. The needs and interests of each library user, and resources appropriate to meet those needs and interests, must be determined on an individual basis. Librarians cannot predict what resources will best fulfill the needs and interests of any individual user based on a single criterion such as chronological age, level of education, or legal emancipation. The selection and development of library resources should not be diluted because of minors having the same access to library resources as adult users. Institutional self-censorship diminishes the credibility of the library in the community, and restricts access for all library users. Librarians and governing bodies should not resort to age restrictions on access to library resources in an effort to avoid actual or anticipated objections from parents or anyone else. The mission, goals, and objectives of libraries do not authorize librarians or governing bodies to assume, abrogate, or overrule the rights and responsibilities of parents or legal guardians. Librarians and governing bodies should maintain that parents - and only parents - have the right and the responsibility to restrict access of their children - and only their children - to library resources. Parents or legal guardians who do not want their children to have access to certain library services, materials or facilities, should so advise their children. Librarians and governing bodies cannot assume the role of parents or the functions of parental authority in the private relationship between parent and child. Librarians and governing bodies have a public and professional obligation to provide equal access to all library resources for all library users. Librarians have a professional commitment to ensure that all members of the community they serve have free and equal access to the entire range of library resources regardless of content, approach, format, or amount of detail. This principle of library service applies equally to all users, minors as well as adults. Librarians and governing bodies must uphold this principle in order to provide adequate and effective service to minors. Adopted June 30, 1972; amended July 1, 1981; July 3, 1991, by the ALA Council. APPENDIX E ECONOMIC BARRIERS TO INFORMATION ACCESS An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights A democracy presupposes an informed citizenry. The First Amendment mandates the right of all persons to free expression, and the corollary right to receive the constitutionally protected expression of others. The publicly supported library provides free and equal access to information for all people of the community the library serves. While the roles, goals and objectives of publicly supported libraries may differ, they share this common mission. The library's essential mission must remain the first consideration for librarians and governing bodies faced with economic pressures and competition for funding. In support of this mission, the American Library Association has enumerated certain principles of library services in the Library Bill of Rights. PRINCIPLES GOVERNING FINES, FEES AND USER CHARGES Article I of the Library Bill of Rights states: "Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library services." Article V of the Library Bill of Rights states" "A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views." The American Library Association opposes the charging of user fees for the provision of information by all libraries and information services that receive their major support from public funds. All information resources that are provided directly or indirectly by the library, regardless of technology, format, or methods of delivery, should be readily, equally and equitably accessible to all library users. Libraries that adhere to these principles systematically monitor their programs of service for potential barriers to access and strive to eliminate such barriers when they occur. All library policies and procedures, particularly those involving fines, fees, or other user charges, should be scrutinized for potential barriers to access. All services should be designed and implemented with care, so as not to infringe on or interfere with the provision or delivery of information and resources for all users. Services should be re-evaluated on a regular basis to ensure that the library's basic mission remains uncompromised. Librarians and governing bodies should look for alternative models and methods of library administration that minimize distinctions among users based on their economic status or financial condition. They should resist the temptation to impose user fees to alleviate financial pressures, at long term cost to institutional integrity and public confidence in libraries. Library services that involved the provision of information, regardless of format, technology, or method of delivery, should be made available to all library users on an equal and equitable basis. Charging fees for the use of library collections, services, programs, or facilities that were purchased with public funds raises barriers to access. Such fees effectively abridge or deny access for some members of the community because they reinforce distinctions among users based on their ability and willingness to pay. PRINCIPLES GOVERNING CONDITIONS OF FUNDING Article II of the Library Bill of Rights states: "Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval." Article III of the Library Bill of Rights states: "Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment. Article IV of the Library Bill of Rights states: "Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas." The American Library Association opposes any legislative or regulatory attempt to impose content restrictions on library resources, or to limit user access to information, as a condition of funding for publicly supported libraries and information services. The First Amendment guarantee of freedom of expression is violated when the right to receive that expression is subject to arbitrary restrictions based on content. Librarians and governing bodies should examine carefully any terms or conditions attached to library funding and should oppose attempts to limit through such conditions full and equal access to information because of content. This principle applies equally to private gifts or bequests and to public funds. In particular, librarians and governing bodies have an obligation to reject such restrictions when the effect of the restriction is to limit equal and equitable access to information. Librarians and governing bodies should cooperate with all efforts to create a community consensus that publicly supported libraries require funding unfettered by restrictions. Such a consensus supports the library mission to provide the free and unrestricted exchange of information and ideas necessary to a functioning democracy. The Association's historic position in this regard is stated clearly in a number of Association policies: 50.4 Free Access to Information, 50.9 Financing of Libraries, 51.2 Equal Access to Library Service, 51.3 Intellectual Freedom, 53 Intellectual Freedom Policies, 59.1 Policy Objectives, and 60 Library Services for the Poor. Adopted by the ALA Council, June 30, 1993.