WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=6SYMxLzafBs

Part: 1

1
00:00:04.480 --> 00:00:19.840
So, we will call to order the board of trustees monthly meeting at 6 pm on Monday, July 20th. In attendance, we have Donald, we have Emily Bruce, Matt Donahghue, Emily

2
00:00:19.840 --> 00:00:37.440
Cirten, Jennifer Lavoy, and Lee Lewis, and Green Baby G. Um, and our first order of business is minutes approval, which was emailed to everyone after being beautifully taken by Emily. Did anyone see anything

3
00:00:37.440 --> 00:00:52.640
missing or extraneous? >> Switch. I will take a motion. Was it everyone was here, right? >> Yeah. Yeah, everybody. Um, so I will take a motion to approve the minutes

4
00:00:52.640 --> 00:01:09.760
from the June What was the date? Didn't write that down. >> June 15th. >> 15th. I think it's 14th. June 15th board of trustees meeting. >> Uh, I move to approve the minutes for the June 15th board of trustes meeting. >> Second.

5
00:01:09.760 --> 00:01:28.000
>> All in favor? Excellent. And then I think we have a positions update from because he's been busy. >> Okay. Yes. So, yes. So, just some update information. So, um the head of youth services children's librarian position

6
00:01:28.000 --> 00:01:45.560
has been filled and the candidate actually um started today. Um so, not to overwhelm them um we will have them come to the next um board meeting to be introduced to the board. Um, and >> you don't want to force new people to answer questions like

7
00:01:46.799 --> 00:02:03.280
>> Yes. Yes. Yes. I've learned things. Um, so we have um so things are going well today. Um, the reference librarian position, we are still struggling for candidates for that position. um the library technician position. I

8
00:02:03.280 --> 00:02:21.360
did conduct an interview for it and we do have um more interviews scheduled in the next um over the next week or so. Um so that's where we are with the positions. >> All right. And now we have Andrew Costa

9
00:02:21.360 --> 00:02:37.920
joining the uh meeting. >> Um thanks Donald. We are thrilled to have a children's librarian. you are probably even more thrilled. >> Absolutely. Yes. Tales on the bus or any of that good stuff. >> Yeah. So wonderful.

10
00:02:37.920 --> 00:02:53.280
>> Um our next >> I could I'm not gonna >> this is karaoke. >> Yeah. >> Um our next agenda item is the courtyard policy and >> we voted at >> I was gonna say I think that was all

11
00:02:53.280 --> 00:03:09.840
>> I did send the final uh to Donald so it's all set to go. >> Yeah. So >> that that there was a um the reason why I asked for it um with it was that it was pointed out to me about one of the um items that we have in it is about no

12
00:03:09.840 --> 00:03:24.720
food shall be permitted in the courtyard um that historically when we have artists and they have their little galler opening events that they do serve food and if it is over the summer and fall spring kind of months they do like

13
00:03:24.720 --> 00:03:41.920
to have it outside. So I was trying to figure a way that we could amend that to just say so no food shall be permitted in the courtyard unless food's by the director or his or her designate to address those one day oneoffs. >> Seems reasonable. I guess a lot of

14
00:03:41.920 --> 00:04:01.159
policies should kind of be like that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Modify the wording. So do we want to revote? >> Yes. Yes. So there need be a motion to Um, let me just write this down so I save

15
00:04:05.680 --> 00:04:25.840
>> and you're four minutes and the policy discussion already begins. >> Something real. >> Exactly. >> This is This is so easy. I'm doing it right now and live time. So Emily, do you want to read the precise wording and then we'll make a

16
00:04:25.840 --> 00:04:50.720
motion to approve the amendment? >> See the way that it reads >> says no food shall be permitted in the courtyard. Drinks in closed cover containers may be consumed. So now it will say no food shall be permitted in the courtyard comma unless approved by

17
00:04:50.720 --> 00:05:08.000
the director or his designate. Right? >> His author >> his his or her. >> Excellent. Um so I will take a motion to approve the amendment that Emily read to the courtyard safety. >> A motion to approve the amendment to the

18
00:05:08.000 --> 00:05:24.560
courtyard policy. >> Second. All in favor? I. >> Excellent. Unanimous. Um, so volunteer policy is our next discussion. I shared I gave everybody a paper copy because I feel like maybe that will help. Um, this is the same

19
00:05:24.560 --> 00:05:41.360
volunteer policy that we looked at last time except that I reorganized it. So nothing was removed. Um, but I just put things in different categories, which is something we had talked about. Um, so there's sort of the general introduc introduction. There's a selection

20
00:05:41.360 --> 00:05:56.479
process that applies to everyone regardless. Then there's specific additional processes for different types of volunteers and then important details around roles and responsibilities. And I tried to do it sort of

21
00:05:56.479 --> 00:06:12.319
in terms of like in the order of like how things would happen. So like sort of like initially what would happen versus then if some things went wrong. Um, and so I think the main goal of switching things or changing things was to make

22
00:06:12.319 --> 00:06:30.319
sure that the different librarian roles were clear. And so I want to make sure that is the case. And then if anyone sees anything else that they think is unclear or should be elsewhere. >> Um under the selection process for all volunteers that all volunteers must

23
00:06:30.319 --> 00:06:46.160
complete a Corey but people under 18 don't complete a Corey. >> The process is we still they are still submitted. So our 15year-old 16y old volunteers they are still submitted. >> I know in the schools they don't Yeah. Yeah. Not for soccer either. was based

24
00:06:46.160 --> 00:07:00.240
on >> we get results back when we submit them for teenagers. >> Um we haven't yet and I don't think >> I don't think >> are they allowed to sign them with >> no the parent has to the parent has to >> even just like record-wise I can't

25
00:07:00.240 --> 00:07:16.720
imagine any body would be at liberty to share with us information about you know a juvenile's criminal record if such a record existed. we'll get an email saying um yeah it's either approved or not and

26
00:07:16.720 --> 00:07:35.599
so far we haven't gotten any negatives. So the way it works is it's not like a we get back a report. We make a determination. It's determined. >> Correct. It is it is process. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I didn't know that. >> Yeah. Too many reckless kids

27
00:07:35.599 --> 00:08:11.160
>> traumatized. If you submitted some 15year-olds thing and got a no volunteers is just like discrimination an issue with volunteers in the way that it is with like regular employment

28
00:08:12.240 --> 00:08:27.520
legally. You know >> what do you mean >> like your protected classes can't be discriminated against based on like for employment but this is not employment and I don't really see anything about like discrimination which I mean it might be fine.

29
00:08:27.520 --> 00:08:44.320
>> You mean like the sort of canned like the Kingston public library >> equal opportunity employer sort of language? >> Yeah. >> discriminate on the basis of >> classes >> those different classes. >> I don't think I've ever seen a policy policy that had that kind of language.

30
00:08:44.320 --> 00:09:01.040
>> All right. If other places don't have it >> the library. >> Exactly. Exactly. You need to open a can of worms. >> Relatedly. I think this came up last month, but the uh the if a volunteer is unable to adequately perform the duties assigned to them, da da da, and it says

31
00:09:01.040 --> 00:09:18.320
something about reassigning them to more suitable duties. I honestly forget because it's been a whole month. If that was in the language the last time we reviewed this policy, but if it wasn't, I'm glad it's added. >> I think we talked about it. We're definitely talking. >> Yeah, I think this was the language that

32
00:09:18.320 --> 00:09:36.040
>> um and I think yeah, I mean the idea being that if somebody couldn't do lifting or if a kid was too chatty or whatever, if there were somewhere else that works, great. But if not, you can't do it. You can't do it.

33
00:09:38.080 --> 00:09:54.000
>> It's good to me. >> Okay. >> All right. in the chair. >> Yeah. >> Does it meet the needs with regards to specifying >> that's the most important? >> The only thing I would say is at the bottom and I can add it if I pull up the document is usually there should be

34
00:09:54.000 --> 00:10:10.080
language such as um reviewed and accepted by the KPL board of trustees on 7 2026. So boards in the future can say when was the last time we looked at our volunteer policy? than it was last time

35
00:10:10.080 --> 00:10:26.480
>> many years after we're gone. >> Do we have describe >> like a Google doc? >> Actually, a question I had and I don't know if it best fits here or under new business of like because I don't have editable documents for any of these. So,

36
00:10:26.480 --> 00:10:42.160
I just like retyped the civility one and was like whatever. But, um >> well, you could duplic clone it, right? it wasn't letting me and I was saying I was working on a PC and I'm usually a Mac person and none of my shortcuts work anymore and so until I so I was kind of

37
00:10:42.160 --> 00:10:57.360
stuck but I do wonder if there's like a way to house these better or differently so that like the editable documents are there. I don't like does everyone have access to a to a Google would be able to see it because if we could at least over

38
00:10:57.360 --> 00:11:13.600
time migrate to that and then I'm sure it end up getting linked on the website as a PDF and things like that. Um >> currently they it is um basically it's just textual so it's just

39
00:11:13.600 --> 00:11:30.160
a run of policies. >> Correct. So it's not separate PDFs. >> Yeah. So I hypothetically but also kind of actually worried about this being an issue. If we did something like that, if there was a shared document and multiple people ended up editing the document at

40
00:11:30.160 --> 00:11:46.240
the same time, even if incidentally would that be would that be an open meeting law issue? >> My suggestion would be that it would be view only. >> Okay. So that it would just allow people to not for not for strangers to edit but like us >> stay even within here. I'm just thinking then okay

41
00:11:46.240 --> 00:12:04.640
>> whoever is editing it if it's me if you know from now it's you >> one person is the editor >> has the editing privileges >> I'd almost say like one person has editing the rest of us have comment access and then anyone with the link can view >> but comment accessing the meeting though

42
00:12:04.640 --> 00:12:20.560
>> if anyone can view anyone has visual access to would need to know when. I think there could be I think you could then depending on what we were working on theoretically open it to commenting or editing during the time frame of our meeting. Oh yeah, >> that kind of a thing which rather than

43
00:12:20.560 --> 00:12:37.200
this um >> but if four of us are just curious on a Saturday afternoon and areing the >> policies we're all commenting at the same time, >> right? So yeah, so I would say during dur you know otherwise it would just be view only. I'm just thinking so like and

44
00:12:37.200 --> 00:12:54.000
this is probably something that you and I can chat about but figuring out the best way to kind of house it. What I love about the Google is that you can then like have like that master everything can hyperlink to the right pages and all of that and it becomes really easy to >> to navigate and cut and paste from if somebody asks for something

45
00:12:54.000 --> 00:13:12.160
>> to take that chunk of text. >> Yeah. >> I was about to ask if there's any town about us allow about us being able to store policies on Google Drive. Is there anything? >> No, that's not >> I know there's a school. >> So we So we have

46
00:13:12.160 --> 00:13:26.959
>> So we have Google access through OLN and through the library itself in um the sense of

47
00:13:26.959 --> 00:13:44.160
um kingston library.org or we pay you know we pay for that and um we log in with you know the emails and stuff like that. So we do have access the town is Microsoftbased you know like the email for the town is

48
00:13:44.160 --> 00:13:58.880
out >> 365 >> um yeah so to do this through the town we can do it >> yeah correct correct so we can definitely set thing up um but we need a Google email right you have to have a

49
00:13:58.880 --> 00:14:15.839
Gmail to have Google Drive >> is one Google account >> yeah we just have we'd have to create the Google account >> I was saying it'd be great to link it up to the like the trusty email that we're setting up. But >> that might go against Google's toos though because like we wouldn't be doing

50
00:14:15.839 --> 00:14:31.760
it as an individual be doing it as an organization and that might be different from like making your own Gmail account. And that kind of leads into the second thing I was worried about is like we uh upload this to Google Drive and then for some reason we lose access to it in the

51
00:14:31.760 --> 00:14:47.120
future. It could be like whoever had that account got really mad and deleted it and we don't have access to it anymore or Google goes out of business or they just have this really long outage at a time when like we need to be editing it. >> I mean I think that the official version of it would have to be in the form of

52
00:14:47.120 --> 00:15:03.839
either a PDF or some kind of text thing. I'm just thinking more from like a logistical when people are working on it of view take you know taking it and translating it from multiple you know from a PDF into a word doc or into a Google doc bring all sorts of formatting

53
00:15:03.839 --> 00:15:20.000
issues that if there was like a working document from which then we could >> even if that happened ideally like that's not the source of truth for the public so we just like fetch down whatever is on the >> like library website and like put it back into whatever new service we decide

54
00:15:20.000 --> 00:15:35.199
to But it's a thing to consider. >> So we can kind of maybe sort that out and then figure out >> and report back Donald like best possible way of doing it. Um >> it only went to my mind only because I spent today retyping the ability policy

55
00:15:35.199 --> 00:15:51.519
because I couldn't get the PDF to cut and paste into the doc. I was able to with the volunteer one but not that. I don't know what was going on >> which was fine. >> I think that's yeah I was using these computers and >> do we all have access to a laptop? because I can I can bring mine. So like if we're all capable of doing it at

56
00:15:51.519 --> 00:16:07.600
once, it might actually be better if we have these kind of discussions in the future that we all have access to the doc and it's open for commenting only during that time and like because we all have it in front of us. It's so much more easy to collaborate and kind of reference specific things. >> I think we first have to figure out where it's going to live and we can

57
00:16:07.600 --> 00:16:22.320
figure out what people what technology would be necessary. >> Sure. But yeah, that would be lovely. But >> I think if we don't all have laptops, it's almost a moot point. >> Yeah. unless we were to all like log on to computers or something. But yeah, um

58
00:16:22.320 --> 00:16:38.079
but still I think there still has to be a way for the editable version to somewhere. >> So okay, sidebar for the time being. Um so volunteer policy if we don't have any changes our next step other than making

59
00:16:38.079 --> 00:16:54.480
sure that we add in that it has been reviewed and approved on a particular date which it might be um then we can take a motion to approve it. >> Are we taking a motion to approve with that >> with the amend with the amended additions of the date adding language that it was approved or when it was

60
00:16:54.480 --> 00:17:10.640
approved? >> Yeah. >> Um all right. I move that we approve the volunteer policy as with the addendum of uh the approval by the board of trustees on June July

61
00:17:10.640 --> 00:17:32.320
July 2026 >> a second. All in favor? >> I don't think we need the date. But >> the civility one had the date on it and I actually took it off because I was like, well, it's not going to be that date anymore.

62
00:17:32.320 --> 00:17:48.640
>> Libraries will have a succession of dates. Like they'll say, we first developed this on the uh 2011 and we looked at it in 2017 and then we amended it. and they'll keep the whole thing up there so people know that it's like a >> I actually kind of like that because then it informs you of like what

63
00:17:48.640 --> 00:18:02.240
>> well and the evolution of the document like if it was revised five years ago great 20 years ago oh boy you know like it just gives you a sense of how much work >> any indication should you happen to find because that is one of the issues that I

64
00:18:02.240 --> 00:18:18.799
find with policies internally is that I have separate files of the you know 2001 policy and the 2025 policy. So if you do a search on the you know the common drive you find those policies. So it is

65
00:18:18.799 --> 00:18:34.400
good to have that succession of dates so that you can see if it only says 2001 you know that's not the updated version. >> Yeah. >> Also if you did have like a standardized format you could have some kind of book that would alert you then like okay it's

66
00:18:34.400 --> 00:18:51.919
been seven years we've decided every seven years we want to like look at our policies. So like send an email to the director like to add it to the meeting. >> So I think that we just >> civility policy is the only one that will have this session because we just

67
00:18:51.919 --> 00:19:08.720
created it the volunteer and the courtyard. >> Yes. >> Yeah. So the civility one did have an earlier date. Forget what it was. Um >> so and I think it probably still needs some work. So, that will probably be added and I'm guessing the civility policy, although maybe everyone will

68
00:19:08.720 --> 00:19:25.679
love it as is. Um, but may need some further tweaking before we vote on it. Um, so volunteer policy finished. Civility policy is in fact our next thing. Um, and so the draft that I shared with you, um, is so the numbered

69
00:19:25.679 --> 00:19:43.360
items that are there include everything that existed in the old document. The boldface edition is me. Um, and I changed order slightly, but no language was removed or added. Um, the paragraph after the first sort of two twoline

70
00:19:43.360 --> 00:19:59.679
paragraph um, while this policy spells out was me trying to take all of the language that we had spoken about and put it there. But then I was very unsure whether we wanted to kind of stay open and vague. Whether it seems like some of the specifics of these numbered items,

71
00:19:59.679 --> 00:20:16.160
some or all should stay. Um although I don't know if the first two need I I don't know. Um so I'm curious what everybody thinks. Um I read the minutes and then watched the minutes and still didn't feel totally confident to start deleting some of the specifics in favor

72
00:20:16.160 --> 00:20:31.840
of the range unless we all looked at it together. Uh, so that that paragraph is added. The rest of it we had all looked at before. >> Uh, number five. I think we had talked about this a few months ago about patrons that were adults but were

73
00:20:31.840 --> 00:20:55.120
developmentally challenged. And we may want to extend the caregivers responsibility to uh persons in their care as opposed to just children. So, where it says parents and caregivers who are unable or unwilling to

74
00:20:55.120 --> 00:21:09.840
appropriately monitor and manage their child's behavior, it should say their um charges behavior >> or those under their care. >> Yeah, >> I think you could just say parents and caregivers who unable unable unwanted to appropriately monitor and manage

75
00:21:09.840 --> 00:21:29.600
behavior of those under their care. Yeah. >> Yeah. Have to change it a lot. >> Yeah. >> Or you could do an asterisk at the bottom and figure out a way to make it blanket language

76
00:21:29.600 --> 00:21:46.240
>> in every instance. Right. >> I have to keep in mind that like as a sub as appropriate this polic this policy also applies to what? >> Yeah. I almost feel like B5 and then add a six about

77
00:21:46.240 --> 00:22:05.679
>> caregivers of adult uh u I don't know what the terminology should be >> guardians and caregivers of adult um >> I feel like patrons >> you just use language that encompasses everything you're less likely to offend people and

78
00:22:05.679 --> 00:22:20.640
>> that's what I'm trying to make sure we're being like pointed enough that we're actually giving guidance and protection to You know, so we're not talking about a spouse not controlling their spouse like they get in trouble be specific to an adult

79
00:22:20.640 --> 00:22:44.080
>> is in need of that caregivers. Like if you're you're a spouse, you're not a caregiver. >> Yeah. >> I think a lot of that paragraph is really talking about children. >> Yeah, I feel like it should be its own little category. then it just says yeah

80
00:22:44.080 --> 00:22:59.679
um as appropriate or required I don't know yeah this policy also applies to caregivers of adult library patients patrons with u should we say developmental disabilities or

81
00:22:59.679 --> 00:23:22.840
>> require supervision >> that that leaves it yes Children automatically fall under the umbrella, right? >> For persons who require supervision, >> including but not limited children. >> My favorite phrase.

82
00:23:23.520 --> 00:23:43.360
>> Yeah, I like that. >> I promise. But >> good talk right there. >> The whole point of this is like, will it hold up in court? If you're holding this document in court, like how confident? >> Well, I I don't think many people are

83
00:23:43.360 --> 00:23:58.480
going to read this. I don't think anyone can modify their behavior. >> Right. >> Well, the point is it's written. So now if we run into any issues, we are covered because we have this clear policy that >> gave us the uh room to make these kind

84
00:23:58.480 --> 00:24:14.720
of determinations and um we don't overly restrict ourselves to only children. I feel like just due to wordiness, I kind of liked what Emily had said of just tagging on to the end like this policy also applies

85
00:24:14.720 --> 00:24:30.240
to caregivers and guardians of adult patrons in need of similar supervision. Like >> that's good, >> right? Like >> so just like this, you know, yes, we're talking about children, but we apply it might need that kind of care. >> Yeah. >> Um

86
00:24:30.240 --> 00:24:46.799
>> I personally disagree, but I'm I'm totally fine being. What would you prefer? >> I would prefer replacing all instances of children with um >> those persons requiring supervision >> in the paragraph instead of adding the addendum. >> You guys disagree.

87
00:24:46.799 --> 00:25:01.760
>> I not that big a deal. I do kind of see your vision in as much as going that route obiates the need for us to get into specifics about like adults in need of supervision or adults with a developmental disability or something

88
00:25:01.760 --> 00:25:20.080
like that. I feel like it sort of offers it does offer us like an umbrella that we can put a lot of things underneath without having to be for lack of a better word disrespectful maybe. >> Yeah. >> Or or uh I don't know. Um I I know what

89
00:25:20.080 --> 00:25:35.120
I'm trying to say, but I don't know how to say it. >> Insensitive. >> Insensitive. That's exactly it. Thank you. >> Good word. Ex. >> Yeah. I think that kind of hamps down on that concern. Maybe if we blanket it out more, if we if we sort of broaden that

90
00:25:35.120 --> 00:25:50.000
scope linguistically. >> I think so. You're saying you agree with his idea about working that language into the paragraph versus having an agenda. >> I think so. I think >> I think the reason I like the language of children though is because I can imagine a parent saying, "Well, my child

91
00:25:50.000 --> 00:26:05.520
doesn't require supervision, right?" Like so if we just say people requiring supervision and we don't say children >> for throughout the whole thing then like yes children under the age of nine can't be left unattended but if I think my seven-year-old can hang in the

92
00:26:05.520 --> 00:26:21.840
children's section while I am here there anywhere like I imagine that that actually probably happens more frequently um than the situation we're trying to encompass. I think it's a good point. I almost said argue the opposite that they would read this with that the language I suggested and they would say

93
00:26:21.840 --> 00:26:37.279
children with the age of nine. It's like okay my 10-year-old doesn't need to be supervised because we have this children under the age of nine section. >> Well, that just says they can't be left unattended, >> right? >> She says unattended. She says unattended. >> Each lay person to give you a significant difference between

94
00:26:37.279 --> 00:26:55.120
unattended and like not supervised. The distinction is kind of mean minimal. Yeah. So, >> I guess I just don't want to be so like I feel like 99 times out of a hundred what the librarians are probably dealing

95
00:26:55.120 --> 00:27:12.559
with are kids that are misbehaving and their parents aren't redirecting them >> adding the slightly encompasses right >> without having to add a whole other second paragraph. >> So, yeah. >> Yeah. I kind of coming around to the two of you about just adding it persons

96
00:27:12.559 --> 00:27:28.640
requiring supervision with the with including but not limited to children. >> Yes. >> So we specifically name the children because that's 99% of the time like you just said le what we're talking about but we leave we kind of fold in the rest. >> Yeah. >> I I I agree with that what you

97
00:27:28.640 --> 00:27:45.480
>> and I will say that like the single worst example we've had of someone who needed supervision didn't have it was an adult. Right. We talked six months ago. There was some We talked very specifically about an issue in the Plymouth Library. >> Oh, that was

98
00:27:46.000 --> 00:28:01.120
the example that I gave from the in the last meeting. Yeah. It's an adult. >> Was definitely a child. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Saying children can't cause a lot of havoc. Like when I think of worst case scenario, it's an adult. >> Yeah, that's true. And it was and nobody

99
00:28:01.120 --> 00:28:17.200
did anything. thing about if it involves an adult is then it becomes uncomfortable for everyone in that way that children don't expect adults to not be behaving or meeting expectations behaviorally.

100
00:28:17.200 --> 00:28:34.320
>> Um whereas whereas if children are misbehaving it just kind of like it's part of the >> Washington. >> Yeah. Operation. >> Well to be clear from that example that person didn't was not under the supervision of a caregiver. They were just there by themselves running around,

101
00:28:34.320 --> 00:28:50.480
>> right? >> And having that in this policy, we now have like a much more clear basis which you can ask them to leave or >> make them leave, you know, call the police, that kind of thing. There's more of a basis for that because that's explicitly laid out. >> Yeah.

102
00:28:50.480 --> 00:29:07.360
>> Now you three have to come up with the perfect wording that we can >> just going through. And I'm like, if we were to change the beginning, parents and caregivers are responsible for the behavior and supervision of persons needing supervision, including but not limited to children, period. But then we

103
00:29:07.360 --> 00:29:23.600
have one, two, three, four, five more times that we talk about children or ch or a child. That's going to get really >> You mean throughout the rest of the >> just just the fifth bullet. >> So like we can't I don't think we can repeat that m full. >> I think we need to I think you say

104
00:29:23.600 --> 00:29:38.320
persons honestly. I think it covers it quite well. Persons whose behavior become disruptive to the ability of other library uses to study uh may be spoken to by the library staff. That seems perfectly >> eventually supposed to protect the library staff who can then talk to

105
00:29:38.320 --> 00:29:54.000
someone's child, right? Like why are you talking to my child? Well, because I'm allow like because we also have been for like just your typical adult situations other bullets. >> Yeah. So this is like kind of specific

106
00:29:54.000 --> 00:30:10.799
to a child or a person with disabilities who kind of requires the same couching as a child. So I I don't think we can just replace it all with persons, right? Parents and caregivers are asked to monitor their person's behavior. What if we just say monitor behavior?

107
00:30:10.799 --> 00:30:26.799
>> So instead of having to add words, we kind of simplify the language. Monitor behavior so that staff that because now everybody knows what we're talking about. We say not just a random person behavior, it's this person's behavior. So, monitor behavior. Um, and then parents and caregivers, the last

108
00:30:26.799 --> 00:30:41.840
sentence, who are unwilling or unable to appropriately moni monitor and manage behavior may be asked to take take their child or person. That sounds weird. charges. >> That's what just popped in my head was

109
00:30:41.840 --> 00:31:03.760
charges. >> WS. I don't know if that's a word. >> Sorry. No, I'm going to try to think aloud for a second. And this might sound like nonsense. So, if it if it at any point starts sounding like nonsense, just tell me to can it. Um, I almost

110
00:31:03.760 --> 00:31:20.080
wonder if this policy would benefit more from maybe not not not quite a wholesale change obviously because we do still need to make clear that people who are caring for someone who's in the library are responsible for supervision but maybe the slightest of paradigm

111
00:31:20.080 --> 00:31:35.760
shifts like instead of framing it from the jump as maybe maybe more like reordering like instead of leading off with parents and caregivers this this this maybe starting with language about disruptive behavior in the library not

112
00:31:35.760 --> 00:31:52.080
being appropriate. And then as part of that mentioning things about how, you know, parents or caregivers are responsible for supervising those in their care, that kind of thing. >> Well, I think that second paragraph does kind of ex say that,

113
00:31:52.080 --> 00:32:06.960
>> right? Yeah. >> And then this is just the >> these are all the little nuanced moments that go beyond the sort of this >> added paragraph. >> If I if I can kind of like riff on what you're saying, it almost sounds like no

114
00:32:06.960 --> 00:32:21.840
one should be disruptive. So like just in very lame terms, people should not be disruptive. If people are disruptive, they should be asked to leave. if persons in the care of a caregiver or parent should be disruptive

115
00:32:21.840 --> 00:32:38.240
init another additional thing. >> But it sounds like >> like we're not we're not telling children they have to be especially disrupt non-disruptive or you know anything else like they're held to kind of the same behavior standard. It's more if they are disruptive the out uh the

116
00:32:38.240 --> 00:32:53.840
course of action is different. >> Right. I actually think this is has less to do with the children's behavior and more to do with the parent and caregivers's responsibilities. Right? So like the paragraph that major paragraph is that we added is sort of like here's how people ought to behave and here's what the library does when they don't

117
00:32:53.840 --> 00:33:10.000
behave this way and then number five is giving the sort of added nuance to the situation where the person who's not behaving is in the charge of somebody else. Especially in reading when you look at like uh numbers like 1 through

118
00:33:10.000 --> 00:33:27.360
4, it talks about like what kind of behavior is not acceptable, but it doesn't outline punishment. Doesn't outline what the library might be do might do in response. >> We have that in the paragraph number and it's in number one, >> right? But I'm saying five is kind of unique in that.

119
00:33:27.360 --> 00:33:43.600
>> Well, it says at the end >> in the last sentence, they may be asked to take their child out of the building until the child is able to behave appropriately. It's at the end of that paragraph, >> right? Because that is different than just like kicking the child out, >> right? Like the person who is responsible is being asked to remove the

120
00:33:43.600 --> 00:33:58.159
child >> or see standard disruption being >> Yeah. would go back policy. Yeah. I'm wondering not to further complicate

121
00:33:58.159 --> 00:34:15.119
this because what I'm hearing what what I'm hearing is this is about parents and caregivers but really this is this is the bullet that addresses disruptive behavior not threatening behavior but like you know like number three is about threaten like dangerous behavior but

122
00:34:15.119 --> 00:34:30.320
this is really addressing disruptive behavior and do we want to broaden it in a in the sense that not make it longer but in the sense that no disruptive behavior will be tolerated like making noise, being unruly etc. And this applies to everybody including kids and their parents and care you know and

123
00:34:30.320 --> 00:34:45.760
anyone under the supervision of another of a parent career. >> What I would suggest is split bullet five into two points. So we would have you know uh disruptive behavior will not be tolerated. >> Yeah, >> that's bullet five. Bullet six >> um

124
00:34:45.760 --> 00:35:02.240
>> parents and caregivers >> caregivers Yeah. and responsible for someone exhibiting disruptive behavior will be responsible for removing them from the >> Yeah. Bullet five, the disruptive behavior can unpack a tiny bit what we're talking about. Loud, rambunctious behavior, jumping, screaming, we can say

125
00:35:02.240 --> 00:35:22.400
whatever we want, >> detail as opposed to just having an endless paragraph, >> but not limited to additional language uh to be determined in a future meeting. ICBLT >> every policies has this

126
00:35:22.400 --> 00:35:42.880
>> ICBL splitting five into two parts. >> Okay. So Donald just gave me which what library was this? I think >> that's I think it was over >> a highly detailed category subcategory

127
00:35:42.880 --> 00:35:59.760
of very kind of infractions which I think at our last meeting we had said is very much not the way we want to go but it will at least give me a nice list to go on when it comes to you know um the language of including but not limited to >> I'll have some really good examples to

128
00:35:59.760 --> 00:36:22.640
be able to pull >> so much stuff document they included >> including and limited to >> so in the interest of time I will plan to draft a new five6 five looking

129
00:36:22.640 --> 00:36:39.599
specifically at disruptive behaviors and how they will be treated in the library in general and then six kind of dealing with a particular situation where that disruptive behavior is coming from somebody who themselves >> is not responsible for their behavior. >> Um are there any and I will change the

130
00:36:39.599 --> 00:36:56.480
unattending to unattended. Um but do we have any other parts of this that we would also like to >> The only quibble I have with that second big paragraph at the top that you added is the second sentence. When faced with conduct inconsistent with the operation

131
00:36:56.480 --> 00:37:13.839
of the library, staff may decide how best to correct the situation. I don't know what that means. I try I agree with you and which is why I was like good >> which I think I tried to like the next sentence was kind of like a quiet reminder or conversation is an appropriate first step but here are some

132
00:37:13.839 --> 00:37:29.520
other things that they can do asking the patron to leave suspending or revoking a patron's library privileges or calling in local law enforcement authorities >> I actually would not want to even say a quiet reminder conversation is appropriate first step I'm worried that if you know behavior is particularly disruptive and it's not appropriate for

133
00:37:29.520 --> 00:37:47.920
a quiet reminder conversation and then you have them removed and then they point to this policy in the lawsuit saying like we didn't get the prior conversation first. >> It doesn't say is the appropriate. >> Yeah, maybe it should say is often inappropriate. But in the case of continued or

134
00:37:47.920 --> 00:38:05.839
especially disruptive behavior, >> there's lots of >> and like >> so bullet point n talks about alcoholic beverages not being permitted on library property. Would it be worth or I don't know if

135
00:38:05.839 --> 00:38:21.920
this would just be covered under straight up the law trademark symbol um drug use on library property legal or illegal and and I know something like marijuana obviously would be covered under a no smoking policy

136
00:38:21.920 --> 00:38:35.680
most likely >> or edibles >> or or that's true. So basically edibles aok. Okay. >> As long as you leave before >> I'm not I'm not going into that.

137
00:38:35.680 --> 00:38:55.359
>> What the king by say? Do they address the alcohol ones? foods. >> Well, what if they take it in the car and then move? >> I mean, I don't think we would know that unless their behavior fell under one of the other drugs on library. Well, I

138
00:38:55.359 --> 00:39:12.119
guess they are in their car, but like, you know, >> right? >> They're not like, you know, taken at home and then our policy is getting really farreaching to the >> their behavior would have to somehow infringe here. >> Yeah. Um,

139
00:39:16.560 --> 00:39:32.640
>> I just want to go back though if we can to that other the paragraph at the beginning commenting on before we jump there. >> I get where you're going >> because I would love like I would love to smooth it better. Um, >> I actually might say I would do >> maybe we just get rid of the staff. Maybe if we just do when faced with

140
00:39:32.640 --> 00:39:49.119
conduct inconsistent with the operation of the library. uh >> staff has the right uh has the imperative to decide how to address >> discretion. >> Discretion. Thank you. That's the word I was thinking of. >> I I like the spirit of this. I don't like the way it's worded.

141
00:39:49.119 --> 00:40:05.359
>> I don't >> but it's important that we have to let we have to state that the library staff like someone has to determine what is what is inappropriate behavior. >> Yeah. >> Behavior and >> that determination comes from library staff. >> Yeah. they have right to determine what

142
00:40:05.359 --> 00:40:20.320
to do. >> That's Yeah, thank you. That's what I'm trying to get at. And I don't I appreciate the first half. I think the second half quite get there for my taste. So my only point I guess that

143
00:40:20.320 --> 00:40:36.800
that I think about with that is that if we are going to leave it up to staff to for their discre discretion it is going to create um discrepancies as to how people um feel that they can act you know whether it's a case of like oh this person's working at the reference desk

144
00:40:36.800 --> 00:40:53.200
so I can be using the public >> they can be you know I can have use a public computer and have the you music playing whereas somebody else may go up to them and say hey you have to plug in earbuds or headphones. Um so I think it can be that could be a challenge as far

145
00:40:53.200 --> 00:41:09.200
as being inconsistency and I think that's something that we do need is consistency in policy and procedure. Could we come up with a way perhaps to word it where basically it says that staff must this is going to be this is going to be clunky right now but like somehow

146
00:41:09.200 --> 00:41:26.400
that staff must address it but the how they approach it is up to their professional judgment like they can't just let somebody sit there and eat their McDonald's at the table that's not the option but whether they choose to you know >> like how they choose to choose to broker

147
00:41:26.400 --> 00:41:41.920
that conversation >> would be professional like it shouldn't be that they just don't enforce the rules in consultation with this policy. >> I think you have two options. You either address things in a granular way where

148
00:41:41.920 --> 00:41:58.079
you outline a whole set of behaviors like what other libraries have done or you accept that there is going to be some level of inconsistency and like I don't think that opens us up to any legal issues but I'm not a lawyer so I could be wrong. But if you know one staff member tells people to use

149
00:41:58.079 --> 00:42:14.480
headphones and one doesn't like that's not great but I think the step then would be like Donald or their sup like immediate supervisor would talk to them as opposed to you know being in court over it >> right but then they would say but the the policy says I can use my discretion and I chose to either ignore it which

150
00:42:14.480 --> 00:42:30.000
sometimes happens with situations because people don't want to engage in conflict of any level. Um, so I just think that it could create a murky situation. >> Could we have while this policy spells out some particular circumstances, all library staff

151
00:42:30.000 --> 00:42:51.920
are um charged with or are responsible for addressing patron behaviors that interfere with the primary goal of the library as a place to access resources and engage in quiet studies. So like they have to address it and then we can talk about when faced with incon with

152
00:42:51.920 --> 00:43:06.640
conduct inconsistent with the operation of the library. I think we get rid of the staff may decide. We can just say um inconsistent with the operation of library. staff

153
00:43:06.640 --> 00:43:25.599
may address or correct the situation with a quiet reminder or convers or in ways what's the language the famous language here um including but not limited to a quiet reminder

154
00:43:25.599 --> 00:43:42.000
>> asking the patron like do we >> well I have a thought here based on what Donald just said I think the first sentence might need to go completely because the first sentence is basically saying this is we've addressed some things here but it's really up to the library staff to figure out what the best practice is and

155
00:43:42.000 --> 00:43:57.200
I think what I'm hearing from you Donald is actually that you don't it's not necessarily good that that is baked into this policy that it's up to each individual to decide what to do >> correct granted we can't go through and say if this happens they must do this if this happens they must do this we can't like enumerate all of that but I'm

156
00:43:57.200 --> 00:44:12.640
wondering if we say if this paragraph says um if if We take out well let me bear with me take out the first sentence and it starts with when faced with conduct inconsistent with operation of the library of the library staff in

157
00:44:12.640 --> 00:44:33.839
consultation with this policy must address the situation or >> empowered >> or empowered >> well now empowered to address the situation doesn't address Donald's concerns >> it's they What if we switch the sentence

158
00:44:33.839 --> 00:44:50.640
and say staff are responsible when faced with conduct inconsistent with the operation of the library to address the situation to to address the situation? And then that last paragraph that last sentence I think is good and should stay >> when a choir minor while a choir yeah

159
00:44:50.640 --> 00:45:07.040
often. Yes. I I what do you think about that? >> So the first part I think is great. So the last sentence when list listing items like that okay with but not limited to asking a patron to leave for

160
00:45:07.040 --> 00:45:22.720
how long? Suspending or revoking a patron's library privileges how long or calling in local law enforcement. there, you know, needs to be something like I know that there are policies that basically when there are severe

161
00:45:22.720 --> 00:45:39.280
behavioral issues um and action has to be taken that it does does come to the board to decide. So if we say you know we if it's an issue that we have to um you know call the police on the police come they issue a no trespass that

162
00:45:39.280 --> 00:45:55.839
that's not indefinite as a you know m municipal um entity you know you can't ban someone from the building forever has to you know and they would have to come back to the board to discuss that I've actually worked at libraries where we had to go through that process um so

163
00:45:55.839 --> 00:46:12.960
I don't know how specific we want to get like you know like if somebody's is loud. We don't want to give ramifications if somebody's running. We don't want to give, you know, we don't want to get into all that, but I think that there could be more specifics given. Um, this I slid over to you is

164
00:46:12.960 --> 00:46:28.240
also the bottom part, that shot is what Andover Andover, I'm sorry, Somerville does as part of those violations. So it could give some indication as to you know um wording that we could use as far as um

165
00:46:28.240 --> 00:46:45.040
>> I feel like when we talked last month there was hesitance to go to something so structured >> some of it too it sounds like now we're we're almost we're not really differentiating the difference between a policy and staff guidelines like it

166
00:46:45.040 --> 00:47:01.280
sounds like we're talking about staff guidelines but this is a policy this is about like what patrons see and what they're expected to do and you know what what they can expect if they don't. But we don't need to outline what the responses are for bad behavior here.

167
00:47:01.280 --> 00:47:18.240
That's not the purview of the policy necessarily. Uh that could be something staff for staff guidelines >> like in an employes manbook policies whatever the employee I'm guessing the town it's a single employee is there let me back up. A is there an employee

168
00:47:18.240 --> 00:47:34.560
policy manual for the town employees that the library falls under? It's got to be separate library >> separate policies, but I don't like an employee handbook for library staff somewhere

169
00:47:34.560 --> 00:47:55.319
when you're in charge, >> right? >> And when you're not here, is there some kind of manager or design? And should we put in the policy that they need to talk to you or your design if you're not here? >> That's why we need to get an assistant director. that um

170
00:47:55.839 --> 00:48:12.400
like we we have that list and then we just add a line that in the case of a penalty um going you know that extends beyond the day of the infraction that the director of the library will collaborate

171
00:48:12.400 --> 00:48:29.119
to make sure that things that it's cons that you know that these things are being done consistently. Um so that like if if a librarian if you know one of the staff members is like we're taking your library card for eight you know >> eight months like okay well the next day when you're in the office you can say

172
00:48:29.119 --> 00:48:44.640
okay like maybe we should have a conversation um >> the library director will make a best effort to provide consistent responses >> right >> so like while all staff is empowered to

173
00:48:44.640 --> 00:49:01.040
enforce the rules sort In the moment, >> the director of the library is charged with ensuring that >> long-term penalties are issued with some form of consistency. And that way you

174
00:49:01.040 --> 00:49:16.960
can have kind of your own sort of way of thinking about these things so that you make sure and >> because I feel like there's the in the- moment penalty of like we need to end this so you need to leave the building or we're going to take your library card or we're gonna

175
00:49:16.960 --> 00:49:33.119
>> do whatever and then that has to be done by who's here because it has to be done that moment. >> Argue never taking library card. >> No, I would say temporarily suspending like it's all temporary. They're not. Yeah. They don't they don't the person behind the desk doesn't get to revoke their library card.

176
00:49:33.119 --> 00:49:50.079
>> It's more like if someone is s sufficiently disruptive, they should be removed from the property and like then their library card automatically doesn't get much value here. But they I mean there's no reason they couldn't check out stuff online, >> right? that any such action should be will

177
00:49:50.079 --> 00:50:05.920
should be reported directly to the director will ensure long-term consistency consistent information implementation of the policy >> and I have to imagine that some of the staff that you're mentioning who are uncomfortable with confrontation or who

178
00:50:05.920 --> 00:50:23.359
would be unwilling to approach disruption or misbehavior would likely get you in the first place >> so that you would be handling it from the jump um in those situations anyway unless obviously you weren't near that one. >> So if I remember from what like sparked

179
00:50:23.359 --> 00:50:39.839
a lot of this conversation last time was that we wanted to make staff more comfortable in cases where things were escalating that they they we wanted we wanted a policy that backs them when they say I need to call the police to get this

180
00:50:39.839 --> 00:50:55.599
pressure removed or something like that. But does that mean we're not going to have a policy that backs them if they say, "I'm very uncomfortable confronting this person for whatever reason?" Because what Donald is saying is that we are outlining steps that we must take if

181
00:50:55.599 --> 00:51:11.359
someone's playing music loud or something like that. >> But I don't think I think I guess the way I look at it, the option's always there to go to the director first handling the by whoever's here.

182
00:51:11.359 --> 00:51:27.520
And in the case that I'm not comfortable saying to this person because I find them threatening or intimidating, then that would be a time to either get a colleague, a director, or if there's a real reason for finding them threatening or >> Right. >> And I don't think we can dictate staff

183
00:51:27.520 --> 00:51:43.040
behavior in this policy anyway, >> right? Trying to >> Well, we're saying what their responsibilities are. We're not saying that they'll be penalized if >> they, you know, in a certain circumstance are like, "That guy is, you know, huge and intimidating, and I don't really want to walk over and tell him

184
00:51:43.040 --> 00:52:01.359
that he's talking on the cell phone too loud." You know, there's no like penalty, but it is their responsibility to somehow address. And maybe they address it by going and getting support by another staff member or something. >> Yeah, that's Yeah, that's a good point. So if we add so for this first paragraph

185
00:52:01.359 --> 00:52:16.880
we get rid of the first sentence. We start with staff are responsible for addressing conduct inconsistent with the operation of the library. Period. While a quiet reminder or conversation is often an appropriate first step, continued or especially disruptive

186
00:52:16.880 --> 00:52:31.119
behavior may require a range of responses including but not limited to asking a patron to leave, suspending or revoking a patron's library privileges or calling in local law enforcement authorities. Any such action shall be reported to the director of library who

187
00:52:31.119 --> 00:52:47.520
will ensure long-term consistency. >> I think the biggest problem here is we have things with like disruptive behavior a subjective thing. >> Well, we're going to define that though in the new number five. >> Yeah, we're not voting because she's gonna because we have to write a new number.

188
00:52:47.520 --> 00:53:03.119
>> Yeah, but my understanding is the number five was kind of saying disruptive behavior is not okay. It wasn't so much outlining specifics >> which I mean I guess we can do but I thought >> I mean I think that's >> any policy of any universe everyone the

189
00:53:03.119 --> 00:53:20.079
person deciding gets to decide what destructive is I don't know if we can address that with this policy >> my point is opening paragraph that uh we laid out did not have up to the discretion of the uh library staff

190
00:53:20.079 --> 00:53:36.640
and that I think that needs to be a core component of determining what is disruptive behavior. It needs to be up to the discretion of the library staff. I think that's actually how we cover ourselves legally. >> Well, and that's but that's problematic based on what we've talked about here,

191
00:53:36.640 --> 00:53:51.520
>> right? I think the alternative is we open ourselves up legally that you know someone they can argue, oh, I wasn't being disruptive and then they get to argue what disruptive is in court. But if our policy says that it's up to our staff, >> well, I think if in that disruptive

192
00:53:51.520 --> 00:54:07.599
behavior part, we give some examples and then we say that like it is like staff's responsibility to determine if a behavior is interf I mean I think that the we do define it as like although we got rid of it, but like patron behaviors that interfere with the primary goal of

193
00:54:07.599 --> 00:54:22.000
the library as a place to access resources and engage in quiet study. Like I do think that language actually needs to make its way back somewhere. >> Um Yeah, because if I was sitting if I was sitting and studying and someone next at the table next to me was, you know,

194
00:54:22.000 --> 00:54:37.920
continually popping gum, you know, no one has, you know, I mean, that might be a school policy that you have on the book somewhere, but, you know, for the public library, but that's disrupting me. I'm trying to make use of the facility, >> but it might not be disrupting someone else. And like >> and that's where it comes down to

195
00:54:37.920 --> 00:54:54.720
discretion of the librarian behavior as ultimately preventing >> interfering with the goal of the library as a place to access resources and engage in quiet study. >> Staff needs to be in here. the responsibility of the staff and my

196
00:54:54.720 --> 00:55:10.240
interpretation of that is that they must do something like now we're telling them they need to do something but we're also not giving them the discretion to determine what level certain behaviors rise to that if it is >> I hear I hear that I guess I don't I

197
00:55:10.240 --> 00:55:26.240
don't see this as an ironclad hey staff member you have to go do something about this right now or you're going to get fired like I don't see it as a directive in that sense I see it as they're working here so they and they're staff I'm not seeing it as the >> do something. >> But I think that they're responsible is

198
00:55:26.240 --> 00:55:42.880
a protection to them though that they like now it's a part of their job that if they see conduct that for their professional discretion and they are professional librarians >> is inconsistent with what's going on that they now should address it.

199
00:55:42.880 --> 00:55:58.240
>> Right. But if they're not responsible that means they don't have to ever do anything and someone can sit there and be just like and no one's going to do anything about it. Like I don't understand the flip side of not responsible does not make sense to me. >> I'm not saying that responsible can't be

200
00:55:58.240 --> 00:56:14.640
in there. It's more like the discretion part is in my opinion absolutely critical. And it sounded like we didn't want to make them responsible. We didn't want to say like you must do this because in my opinion you can't divorce those two. If someone's responsible for that kind of thing it means they must do it. The job they might not actually get

201
00:56:14.640 --> 00:56:29.920
fired for it but if they keep not doing it they'll get fired for it. I think that we have to allow interpret staff the discretion to firstly be able to determine in custoy situations whether something's really dis disruptive. So if they can make a professional judgment

202
00:56:29.920 --> 00:56:45.119
that the person tapping their pencil isn't actually disruptive even though it's driving that person insane then that's their professional judgment. On the other hand I don't think that like you know if a kid is tearing pages out of a book I think it would be very difficult to say well within my professional judgment I didn't think it

203
00:56:45.119 --> 00:57:01.200
was disruptive. So like they can use their prof professional judgment to determine if something rises to that level and then they certainly have the professional judgment to figure out what the best way is to address it in the moment. Right. >> Yeah. For example, if if nobody's here and someone's listening to music, is

204
00:57:01.200 --> 00:57:17.280
that disruptive behavior? >> Right. So they need that discretion to be able to say well at this hour and they can use discretion too between perhaps like a person with disabilities who is stemming and a person who's just being really erratic in their behavior

205
00:57:17.280 --> 00:57:35.200
by based on the reactions of the other patrons and the needs of that particular person. >> Yes. >> Right. So I will >> in the weeds. >> Yes. So I will try

206
00:57:35.200 --> 00:57:51.040
>> yeah I will try to do some improvement of the wording. Um I will avoid the like listing of like tears but give some examples couched in the including but not limited to language. um keep the idea that staff are responsible for

207
00:57:51.040 --> 00:58:07.040
addressing the conduct, but I will make sure to talk about their professional judgment being used in determining what actually rises to the level and what the appropriate response is. >> I would really like to see staff guidelines as a separate document. I think that solves a lot of these problems.

208
00:58:07.040 --> 00:58:30.079
>> I'm not sure it's an to create staff. I don't think we do that. >> I know that it was putting up One additional thing though, um, just as a housekeeping thing, number 17, >> um, numbering users who trigger library theft detection systems,

209
00:58:30.079 --> 00:58:45.040
>> we don't have one. >> Okay. >> Well, we might in the future >> for the tens of thousands of dollars. It's going to cost you to do that. No, no, no. We have a backtory for our project. Let's be positive. Do we want to exclude it and add it in

210
00:58:45.040 --> 00:59:00.240
the situation where we were to acquire one? >> Yes. >> Alternatively, could we reward it so it's not just systems but also if someone is spotted? >> Yeah. >> Seeing you take something be considered

211
00:59:00.240 --> 00:59:21.280
the library. >> Actually, I feel like that's almost a good kind of good point. Like if the Arian sees someone put a book in their bag and then leave. >> I feel like number 17 should cover that. It I don't think it currently does system is not interpreted to mean person but

212
00:59:21.280 --> 00:59:37.200
>> yeah I think >> I do think that would be reasonable policy. I don't know what other library policies might be like this is this is now like getting into law. So to feel like from a sort of legal standpoint, if some librarian comes up to me and says like, "You need to open

213
00:59:37.200 --> 00:59:53.040
your purse and show me what's in it." I'd be like, "Yeah, no." Because if a police officer comes up to me, I'm gonna say, "Yeah, no." >> Right. >> Well, so necessarily give them more. >> I think the assumption is you see you see this, you can either abide by this or leave.

214
00:59:53.040 --> 01:00:11.280
>> Well, so in the case of what you're talking about, you are like that is perfectly within the view of this. Yes. 16 it says it is an act of larseny to remove library material from the library without having checked them out and then at the end theft of library you know

215
01:00:11.280 --> 01:00:28.480
it's a it's against state law so I don't think we have to state that we have the you know because if they take a book and try to walk out of the library they're committing a crime >> we're going to make the librarians be cops >> that >> is what it boils down to kid that does it I think like the line

216
01:00:28.480 --> 01:00:44.559
is actually a little more blurred The parent says, "I'm so sorry. My kid took this book and I didn't realize it." They bring it back. Fine. >> They didn't see it. The librarian did. And the librarian instead of calling the cops says like, "Hey, we saw that." >> Yeah. >> You have anything in your bag you want to tell me about? >> But that's different than saying that

217
01:00:44.559 --> 01:01:00.240
they're required when they're >> like if the parents like, "Nope." Then like I don't know that >> they get to force the child. >> Again, you don't get to force. The the options are you follow this or you leave. So they could say no

218
01:01:00.240 --> 01:01:17.599
>> public place. I don't know that they like necessarily their constitutional rights at the door to like >> and then >> I mean when it's up against the law >> I have to set policies where we do

219
01:01:17.599 --> 01:01:34.319
temporarily like we we set rules that people have to follow or they'll be asked to leave >> but doesn't mean we can open their pockets. I think experience have language about something like this while also understanding the limits of enforcement. Yeah. If if there is really

220
01:01:34.319 --> 01:01:50.240
suspected theft going on in an absolute worstc case scenario, you call Kingston police non-emergency and it gets handled by authorities who are not librarians. Worst case scenario, they're stealing the constitution. You don't call the non emergency.

221
01:01:50.240 --> 01:02:09.040
>> Okay. >> Rip the item away from them. >> Well, I can imagine like especially like in the archives and things like that that it could be something of value could be totally you know we're not talking about like curious George and some kids backpack

222
01:02:09.040 --> 01:02:31.040
>> into two. >> Okay. taking this and making sense of >> I will make slightly more sense of it and >> if I may cycle back to item number nine

223
01:02:31.040 --> 01:02:47.359
you mentioned edibles marijuana product consumption of any kind on municipal property is prohibited in the town of Kingston general bylaws chapter 6 article 7 don't know if that's something mentioned I don't think we have the power to do anything about that.

224
01:02:47.359 --> 01:03:04.559
>> You either that should be here as well or we can remove number nine entirely because it's already against the law. It's one of those two. Like part of this is we're kind of like reiterating what is already there. >> I wonder if it would be worth keeping there just be for anyone out there who theoretically may not register that the

225
01:03:04.559 --> 01:03:21.039
library is municipal property. You might think of it in a different vein than like the townhouse. >> I agree. But I'm saying like they are function the same thing here, right? Alcohol and edibles are functionally the same thing under the light. >> They should be functionally the same thing. Yeah. >> Right. >> Saying the same thing two different

226
01:03:21.039 --> 01:03:42.480
ways. They should both be covered. >> Okay. Okay. I I thought you were saying >> much alcohol for events here. And do we want to? >> So I will say that it says at least for the marijuana one and I assume it's similar language for alcohol that it is

227
01:03:42.480 --> 01:03:58.000
prohibited and I quote without consent of the board of selection. So I think in in an event like I I assume correct me if I'm wrong an event like live brewery we would presumably have permission from the select board

228
01:03:58.000 --> 01:04:14.079
and that would allow that kind of thing to go forward. Yeah, that's what we had to do to have the 42nd brew beer tent at this day event. >> Yeah, exactly. So, I think >> already in the town would be fine with that. But then obviously if somebody just walks in

229
01:04:14.079 --> 01:04:32.720
and decides it's Miller time in the middle of a regular library day, not so cool. >> Yeah, mostly because of bad taste now. uh that case do we want to add uh with except for discretion by the town select or >> I think if it's in town bylaws I don't

230
01:04:32.720 --> 01:04:51.920
think you could put it in there >> all right >> because that overrides this >> yeah and you're they're directed to the town of Kingston by that >> so our next topic and this is sort of I think in the very early phases is the

231
01:04:51.920 --> 01:05:07.760
photography policy Um, I almost want to say we >> table that in the interest of time and just say perhaps if by our next meeting if people can review the ones that were provided and I think Emily might have

232
01:05:07.760 --> 01:05:26.400
>> I shot out some right before the meeting. Um, I did not realize that we have these lengthy conversations about the ones that were already in the agenda. That was ambitious. >> Yeah. >> But you have it for future reference. And so perhaps if people have a chance just to come to the next meeting kind of knowing what they like and don't like in

233
01:05:26.400 --> 01:05:57.440
the other policies since we're starting from scratch that would be helpful. >> There was one that was extremely brief so I'm already >> Yes. >> There we go. That's the one. That's us. So we'll table that and that moves us to the back room project update.

234
01:05:57.440 --> 01:06:12.319
>> So so with the backroom project update, I had a zoom meeting or teams meeting with the architect and one other um person from the agency. Um we went over some details

235
01:06:12.319 --> 01:06:29.039
about the project. um working on some timelines and so they will be on site I believe it's on the 29th to do a walkthrough and to take measurements. Um we are waiting for I don't know if the town planner has sent them additional

236
01:06:29.039 --> 01:06:46.000
plans the plumbing, electrical and HVAC system plans um for that area yet. >> Does it need plumbing? >> Well, potentially if we put a bathroom in there. >> All right. Um there is running water and there is a drain in the floor. So

237
01:06:46.000 --> 01:07:02.640
potentially we would have the drainage for sewer and water you know um but the so they'll be here on the 2 I think it was the 27th 29th that they'll be here. Um they'll do the walkthrough for measurements. Once that is done um

238
01:07:02.640 --> 01:07:18.640
they're expecting probably in midepptember that they'll be able to provide a schematic design. At that point, we'll have the numbers. Um they'll be able to do like a cost um analysis for that. Um at that point, then obviously we'll have the continued

239
01:07:18.640 --> 01:07:35.200
discussion about you know getting the project funded. Um I do have a meeting scheduled for next week to speak to um to meet with Representative Linatra about getting a legislative airmark for the pro towards the project. um they're

240
01:07:35.200 --> 01:07:54.960
generally not, you know, super super large ones, but it will help um in some way if we are able to get it. Um but that's the update with that. >> All right. And next is you again with your director.

241
01:07:54.960 --> 01:08:10.559
>> Yes. All right. Um and I did, you know, mention some of that. Um so a building issue at the Atom Center which was that um there wasn't any air conditioning. The HVAC system for the upper level um

242
01:08:10.559 --> 01:08:27.359
had basically died. Um thankfully it actually was repaired today. A whole new unit went in. They found a they're working with a new vendor who found a project in Rhode Island that they had

243
01:08:27.359 --> 01:08:43.920
basically overordered units. So they had extras. So they were able So instead of the project to replace it costing $36,000, it's only costing $8,000 coming from facilities, not it's not out

244
01:08:43.920 --> 01:08:59.920
of the library budget. Um, and so they were able to get that done. And the good thing is is that because this particular unit was comparable to the existing system, that's great. But if we were to get a newer system, that would involve

245
01:08:59.920 --> 01:09:16.319
all new piping because the existing piping system doesn't meet the the codes. Like I think I don't know if the pipes are too small or if what they're made of, they need to be made of something else. I think was some different type of PVC. >> This system's grandfathered in.

246
01:09:16.319 --> 01:09:35.359
>> Correct. Correct. Because it's a system, you know, like we went to get a >> incredible. >> It was extremely affordable and grandfathered in. >> Exactly. Exactly. And it got installed in one day. >> Only four figures. >> Yeah. Yeah.

247
01:09:35.359 --> 01:09:51.440
>> It's like a a sabb after the policy talk. >> Yeah. So that's great. Um so I did attend a um library director roundt in um Quinsey the other day. We discussed the ARIS um training that has been

248
01:09:51.440 --> 01:10:10.159
provided um by the MLC as well as um concerns that we have with the current ILS system and some of the ongoing challenges that we're having with it. Um there will be additional meetings and discussions about some of the topics that were brought up. Um, we

249
01:10:10.159 --> 01:10:25.520
have been having ongoing issues with some of the computers here for the staff side. Um, we have ordered three. They will be the reference computer, the one at the circ desk and one at Jen's desk will be replaced. We're having issues

250
01:10:25.520 --> 01:10:41.679
with these current things. For example, that there's not enough memory to do anything. Today, I was working with at the reference computer. Opened up an email. I could put the person's email in. I filled in the subject line and it just did not have the bandwidth for me to type in an email.

251
01:10:41.679 --> 01:10:58.640
>> Um, you know, low disc space issues came up. The former IT person came in, you know, did whatever he did to clear things out or what have you and we're still having the issues. Um, and other staff computers have begun showing the same symptoms.

252
01:10:58.640 --> 01:11:14.239
And so recently we had a department head meeting where um, the new there was a new IT person. Um it's the same consulting firm but it's a different person and um I did um ask at that meeting that they you know that they will be helping us with a technology

253
01:11:14.239 --> 01:11:30.719
plan to um you know come up with a replacement schedule. So hopefully in the future that it won't be coming from state aid but will be coming from the technology budget which currently the technology line does not have replacement funds. um it is based it's

254
01:11:30.719 --> 01:11:45.600
basically dependent on the departments to come up with that um and I was assured that this will be something that they work with us on um there you know I created prior to having the children's librarian who started

255
01:11:45.600 --> 01:12:00.800
today first day it was great um I worked on creating some passive crafts and activities we did have a petting zoo here the other day um >> I drove by it >> yes it looked very I got play with baby goats. It's all about the baby goats.

256
01:12:00.800 --> 01:12:16.400
That's all it's about. Um and for the, you know, at real admins stuff, um you know, I've begun working on the fiscal 28 budget. Um as they've opened it up, which is really early. Normally we don't talk budgets until

257
01:12:16.400 --> 01:12:34.080
like end of September, early October. Um but in order to get ahead of the curve for next year, um they've actually opened it up for us to, you know, work on those things now. Um I did work with um Karen the admin on the NDF financials. We don't have any

258
01:12:34.080 --> 01:12:49.120
bills or anything that had to be encumbered. Um we did successfully um eat away at the materials budget so that there wasn't any um you know concern about you know having money left over that um we wouldn't meet the um

259
01:12:49.120 --> 01:13:05.120
guidelines for the um MBLC. Um I've held a couple of programs. We did have a um a cactus rock painting program which was quite successful and we do have a couple more um craft

260
01:13:05.120 --> 01:13:21.040
programs that coming up. A um felted apple as well as a watercolor um hibiscus painting. These are actually going to be done by the popup art um school. Um it's a vendor that goes to different libraries and does you know

261
01:13:21.040 --> 01:13:38.000
various levels of um programming. Um I have spoken to the police chief in the past. The library did attend the um national night out event and so um I couple of librarians had interest in you

262
01:13:38.000 --> 01:13:54.640
know renewing that. Um so I did speak to um the police chief and um his assistant and so we are on the calendar to attend that. So I don't have the specific date in mind. I want to say it was like August 11th I think. Um, so we will have

263
01:13:54.640 --> 01:14:09.760
a ta table, we'll have giveaways. We do have um some police book giveaways items um and some other novelties that we're giving um giving out. Um we made some sub

264
01:14:09.760 --> 01:14:24.560
substantial purchases for the archives collection um a lot of paper documents um postcards um cabinet cards and things like that. There is an ongoing issue at the atom

265
01:14:24.560 --> 01:14:42.719
center concerning the people counter. Um we're now that it is you know has the new person in we're trying to resolve that. Um basically it it needs to be um recycled which means that it has to the

266
01:14:42.719 --> 01:14:57.440
power has to be shut off but unfortunately when you walk into the it's not really the server room over there. um you don't know which cable that's coming from the ceiling is specific to the people counter. Um so I have to work with it in you know

267
01:14:57.440 --> 01:15:13.960
addressing that. Um the good thing is is that right now that we don't have programming over there so we're not losing any stats from that. >> Um >> can I ask a question? >> May I ask a question?

268
01:15:14.960 --> 01:15:30.960
>> I say you can ask many questions. Uh so now that the air conditioning is restored, are they going to entertain having exhibits and programming? >> That's correct. That is correct. So we had um what we had originally we were coming up with some backup plans

269
01:15:30.960 --> 01:15:47.040
um because the end of middle of July to end of July, there was an exhibit that was going to be scheduled. With that, we were pushing it back to August. Not knowing when that project was getting done, we were actually making plans to

270
01:15:47.040 --> 01:16:05.679
have exhibits over here. We were going to take the the audiovisisual section, clear out some of the furniture that's over there, have tables set up with display cases and things like that, as well as utilize the lobby display case. Um so now that we know that the HVAC

271
01:16:05.679 --> 01:16:20.239
system will be operational um we'll be re um confirming what dates we're going to have. Um but it will probably still be in August but probably more towards um the middle of it or you know possibly the second weekend or something like

272
01:16:20.239 --> 01:16:37.920
that. Um but that's still under um discussion. Uh let's see. And at one point we had a lot of heavy rain. Um, and what that did was flooded the entrance area resulting in wet carpeting behind the circulation desk and in the teen room. There's a

273
01:16:37.920 --> 01:16:53.520
bookcase that's in one of the closet spaces we had to pull out in order to allow to dry out. Um, facility staff were very responsive in coming down to um, >> migate. >> Yes. Yes. They did a wonderful job with that. Um

274
01:16:53.520 --> 01:17:11.040
and those are the big kind of highlights. I did complete my evaluation and set goals. Um and then we have the financial not financials I'm sorry the statistical data which looks different and so we are still in limbo from OLN

275
01:17:11.040 --> 01:17:29.120
pertaining to the reports that we we're getting from the ILS system. And so when you look at our statistics for physical items, that data is actually from currently from Evergreen,

276
01:17:29.120 --> 01:17:46.159
the current ILOS system. And that we get from, you know, the end of April to June 30th. And that's all the data that we have for that. So, we don't have the data yet from July 1st of last

277
01:17:46.159 --> 01:18:05.520
year till April 26th, I think it was. Um, and reports are they haven't offered training. Basically, a lot of things are locked down until training is done. And since the training hasn't been offered, we can't really run reports. This d the

278
01:18:05.520 --> 01:18:22.239
these two charts that I um sent you actually was something that OCLN created that is now going to be used for the ARIS report. Um so his historically we would get data from um workflows. We would get monthly

279
01:18:22.239 --> 01:18:38.880
reports with the figures. This is now going to be a live document that will autopop populate with updates. And so at any time we'll be able to and I don't remember what the v what the software is that they're using for that but moving

280
01:18:38.880 --> 01:18:52.719
forward this is what we'll use for ARIS which will make our life so much easier for for reporting. So we just have the first one is for May and June and then this next um section

281
01:18:52.719 --> 01:19:10.480
is the June statistics only. Um so then the next one is for the overdrive average report. So these are the items that we um borrowed from Overdrive. The next section was what we lent

282
01:19:10.480 --> 01:19:23.600
um the number of registered borrowers and then the next two charts are for Hoopler which is the full fiscal year statistics for both circulation and for

283
01:19:23.600 --> 01:19:40.239
um the cost of um the um the circs. So, we did have um over 8,800 um circulations which resulted in over $21,000

284
01:19:40.239 --> 01:19:56.480
um paid to them. Originally, when we set the budget, what we're now doing is do we're doing thing called content credits where we know that, for example, our book vendor, they're going to get a majority of our budget. So we're sending them large sums so that internally we're

285
01:19:56.480 --> 01:20:13.360
not handling necessarily um invoices for 564 and $13. It's like the money is already been accounted for with that. And so we basically had originally established

286
01:20:13.360 --> 01:20:30.080
$1,200 a month um which obviously then we had to up it by like $9,000 um or so. um because Hoopla usage has drastically um you know gone up with that >> um >> suffering from success.

287
01:20:30.080 --> 01:20:45.199
>> Yeah. Yeah. It comes with a cost. Yeah. Um so yeah. So that is the um director's report and the statistics. >> I have a curious question about the physical item statistics. What is thing one?

288
01:20:45.199 --> 01:21:03.280
So the terminology that evergreen uses some of it is extremely odd. So thing one is library of things. >> Oh >> that's what I was thinking it might be. >> That makes sense but I saw and couldn't

289
01:21:03.280 --> 01:21:18.640
put that together. >> Yes. There there is a lot of quirky so >> techical language. >> Yeah. Um, I'm trying to remember when bill like if you have an overdue bill, for example, because you're you have

290
01:21:18.640 --> 01:21:34.080
overdue books or whatever and you owe $3 or something, it's actually called groceries. >> Oh, really? >> Yes. Yeah, there's there's a lot. So, um, there's a huge learning curve with

291
01:21:34.080 --> 01:21:50.080
terminology. I mean, I was working the circ desk today covering um lunches and there were things that were popping up and I'm like, let me sit and think about this for a second. What are they referring to? And >> I mustered through. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, they have their own, you

292
01:21:50.080 --> 01:22:08.960
know, kind of ways, but yeah. So, thing one, but I immediately think of Dr. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, that might I don't know if that's why what they went with, but because somebody thought it was cute. Yeah, it is cute. >> I'm going to withhold judgment is the

293
01:22:08.960 --> 01:22:29.360
system, I guess. >> Um, there are limited staff reports because there was limited staff this past month, but any questions or thoughts on um it was the teen and that was it.

294
01:22:29.360 --> 01:22:46.400
>> Oh, I missed. What am I missing? I would like to give a shout out to Parker just because it has been a lot to be Yeah. to be working in the summer when they're we're on the hunt for a head of youth services and he's totally stepped up and also I really admire his artwork as

295
01:22:46.400 --> 01:23:07.760
well. >> Excellent. >> Anything else? Do they have any updates um from the foundation or friends? >> They did get their approval for the liquor license for the October trivia

296
01:23:07.760 --> 01:23:23.600
event for the Adams Center. Um they are currently meeting in the children's room. Um so I don't have any other updates. >> Makes sense. Have they opened registration for that October event yet or is it just like a coming soon? >> I think it's at this point it's coming

297
01:23:23.600 --> 01:23:40.000
soon. Um, do you have any bills to pay? >> No. >> Excellent. Um, I think under old business is where we would just place the reminder about we have Donald's evaluation to do.

298
01:23:40.000 --> 01:23:56.639
>> Um, and so I have shared with you his self-evaluation. I believe Emily is going to share out the paperwork for you all to evaluate. Um, and then that will come to me and I will coalate it for our next meeting. And I can't remember, do we normally still meet at 6, but the

299
01:23:56.639 --> 01:24:11.280
public meeting starts at 6:30 or did we meet? >> 6:15. So it's a it's a short executive session that we've done in the past at your discretion if you want to make it to 6:30. Um, but generally you'll get the same form that Donald filled out for

300
01:24:11.280 --> 01:24:28.639
himself and you'll fill it out as um a trustee evaluating Donald only >> you'll be an observer this first round. Um, and then as Lee said, she'll compile them and she'll write up the official um, evaluation and that is given to Donald's. It's not

301
01:24:28.639 --> 01:24:43.760
like a surprise in that 15-inute session. It's given to Donald before that 15-minute session and it can also be distributed to um, the rest of the board before then, but that 15 minutes is when it's officially presented. And then I think just along with that

302
01:24:43.760 --> 01:25:00.000
reminder for the paper of his self-evaluation and then when that's distributed just to make sure you dispose of it in a private fashion. >> So just sort of toss it here, there, and everywhere. >> Put it up on a bullet board. Um, excellent. And so our next meeting is on

303
01:25:00.000 --> 01:25:15.920
um August 17th. So we'll meet at 6, but the public meeting will start at 6:15, giving us 15 minutes to do that. Um, we also have 9:21 on the books. I don't know if we want to schedule our meetings for I don't even know. Are we supposed

304
01:25:15.920 --> 01:25:30.320
to do two months? >> No, it's actually six months. So, it would be good to >> definitely need to schedule out. I went as far as December just kind of doing the three the third Monday thing. And that would be um October 19th, November

305
01:25:30.320 --> 01:25:47.199
16th, and December 1st. I didn't look at January. That seemed a little >> I don't want to think about those months, right? I was going to say that even going to December was a little horrifying, but January would be one, two, well the 3rd would be the 18th, which is Martin Luther King, so it would

306
01:25:47.199 --> 01:26:05.600
probably be the 25th would be the date. >> So you can tell me later how to actually schedule that >> in some kind of a world. >> So to do and I just folder on the

307
01:26:05.600 --> 01:26:23.360
calendar. >> Yeah. And then when we right so that's what I do and then once we do the agendas I just attach the agenda to each of the meeting dates. >> So that's old business unless anyone else has anything to follow up on. I

308
01:26:23.360 --> 01:26:39.040
just have a question about the parking. How's it going with this? >> Um so we've had some issues with the parking. Um, I did speak to um I did send I did speak to the town administrator

309
01:26:39.040 --> 01:26:55.600
um concerning it because like last Monday um I came in and there were four spots available and um I actually had an interview right at 10 over at the Adam Center and I went over there and threearters of their lot was empty.

310
01:26:55.600 --> 01:27:12.560
>> Yes, you sent me those pictures in my wow. >> Yes. Yeah, I took pictures. Um and it's a situation where they've been instructed um not to park over there due to the basically the chaos of the family the child drop off.

311
01:27:12.560 --> 01:27:29.360
>> And so because of that, you know, they've kind of, you know, come over here and what have you, but they need to actually be at um you know, the the playground. That's really where they need to be. I did speak to So I did show the photos to the town administrator. um

312
01:27:29.360 --> 01:27:43.520
just because obviously that this is going to be a further discussion. Um we were hoping to speak to the wreck um department head after last Tuesday's department head meeting, but she was in attendance. She did respond and say that

313
01:27:43.520 --> 01:28:00.639
she would speak to member her staff um and that if need be that she would stand out there and you know direct them. Um there is a little bit of improvement but still the challenges are there. Um, so I

314
01:28:00.639 --> 01:28:16.880
kind of wanted to have the conversation with her before I said, "By the way, we're getting these, um, library signs put up." Um, you know, as professional courtesy. Um, you know, so that is still in the works as to, you know, getting the chance to, you know,

315
01:28:16.880 --> 01:28:33.600
talk about that. But it is still a challenge. Um thankfully because we haven't had any largecale programs um you know it hasn't been too too bad other than you know a lot of our seniors who have come in unfortunately end up parking all the way down and it's an

316
01:28:33.600 --> 01:28:52.320
issue um you know for them to to get in and stuff. So um hopefully we can get this resolved sooner than later. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Any new business? All right, then I will take a motion to end our

317
01:28:52.320 --> 01:29:02.760
meeting. >> End it. My motion. >> 7:29. All in favor? I