“Moving forward with a formal library campaign at the present time would be detrimental to the future of the library and to the greater good of the community.”
That was the Grand Rapids-based Breton Group’s main message to the Addison Township Public Library Board of Trustees Tuesday night.
Douglas VanderLaan and Mark Morrow, of the consulting firm, presented the results, conclusions and recommendations of its “Campaign Planning Study Report” concerning the proposed $2.9 million, 9,000-square-foot new public library.
The proposed plan calls for financing the project through $750,000 in private donations, a 0.717-mill tax levy to finance a capital bond over the next 20 years and a 0.692-mill levy to cover additional operating expenses.
In addition to the completed 9,000 square feet, the proposal calls for another 4,000 square feet of unfinished basement for future expansion.
Representatives from The Breton Group interviewed 39 Addison residents (see shaded box below to find out who participated) to gather their input about the community, present library facility and the proposed project including its cost and funding plan.
One hundred residents were originally asked to participate in the interview process. However, many failed to repond to the request, some told interviewers they weren’t interested in participating and others scheduled interviews, but then failed to show up.
Based on its findings, the consulting firm advised library officials to postpone campaign plans for a new library by “three to six months” in order to begin an “intense information effort” to “educate and connect township residents to the value of the library as a community resource” and allow the library leadership to “form the partnerships and the collaborations needed for an eventual successful capital campaign.”
“Following that (three to six month) period, the library board and the community may be in a position to launch a successful library expansion campaign,” the report stated.
(See side-bar story to the lower right for officials’ reactions to the report.)
Here’s a breakdown of the Breton Group’s report.
The Findings: Favorable and Unfavorable
Community:
Concerning the community, the report stated that “interviewees were resoundingly positive about” Addison, “describing it as ‘rural, peaceful and safe.’”
A “strong number” (25 percent) of the interviewees have lived in Addison for less than 15 years, “an indication that the community is changing and growing.”
Many of those interview comments on the “willingness of neighbors to come to each other’s aid in times of hardship,” citing stories from the April 2003 ice storms as examples of “how the community draws together during times of need.”
Despite these “favorable” factors about the community, the report noted some “unfavorable” ones as well.
There’s a “disagreement over community service issues. . .between longtime residents and newcomers.”
“Many longtime residents are not interested in more services such as water and sewer services, garbage pickup and road maintenance. Preserving the township’s rural nature seems to be the pervasive interest. A library of 9,000 square feet seems too big to preserve the area’s rural feel. Newcomers, on the other hand, appreciate the township’s rural nature, but expect that community services will one day be available,” the report stated.
Addison’s development into a “bedroom community” with “little supporting business or industry” was also cited as an unfavorable factor by those interviewed.
“Sole proprietor businesses have been a mainstay, but lately, even their health seems suspect. In the strip mall neighboring the library, recent business departures have involved a delicatessen and a chiropractic practice, leaving empty storefronts and worried residents,” the report stated.
Though many of the interviewees “enjoy their own residence in the township,” they “worry about the conservative and independent nature that defines the area.”
“Though many stated that the township’s master plan emphasizes the maintaining of a ‘rural’ feel to the community, they also see disagreement and discord in how to ensure the planning path,” the report stated.
Library:
Concerning the current 1,300-square-foot library facility, 97 percent of the interviewees felt it is “in need of greater space, but emphasized that, even in sometimes-strained conditions, library services have been exemplary.”
Interviewees considered the library staff to be “welcoming, helpful and friendly,” with the willingness to “go the extra mile to fill a patron’s request.”
Children’s programming is “highly regarded and admired, especially by parents of young children who use the library extensively.”
As for “unfavorable factors” concerning the current library, “all interviewees concede that the space is too small.” “Many expressed frustration with the facility, the ability to access desire resources, and the lack of seating and program space,” the report stated.
Nearly half (49 percent) of those interviewed rated library programming as “not adequate,” which “suggests that, as strong as children’s programming may be, it comes at the expense of adult patrons.”
“The use of space has focused on children rather than adults. Children’s services and programs have discouraged adult use of the library. Lack of seating space and distractions coming from children’s programs cause many users to check out library materials and immediately leave,” the report stated.
“A lack of cooperation between community groups” was mentioned by “several interviewees.”
“The apparent absence of a common agenda causes concern on the part of those who question the support of township leaders and groups such as the (Addison) Friends of the Library. Many of those familiar with the differences between the library board and the Friends of the Library view the library board as a discordant group with little community respect,” the report stated.
Proposed Project:
Concerning the proposed new library project, a “large majority” of interviewees “expressed favorable feelings regarding the general plan for the new library, especially the site itself.”
The proposed new library would be located on a 3.85-acre parcel on the north side of Rochester Rd., between Milmine to the west and Cantley to the east. The property is being donated by a party who wishes to remain anonymous. The transaction is still be negotiated.
“People like the location and the fact that it many spur further development leading toward a ‘community center.’ The fact that the site may be donated to the library produced strong expressions of support,” the report stated.
However, many interviewees “questioned the site’s capability for future expansion – especially additional parking and the varying levels of the site.”
As for the building design, interviewees’ “reactions. . .were mixed, but predominantly in favor.”
“Those who commented favorably pointed out the beauty of the building matching the natural attraction of the site and the effort to retain as much existing vegetation as possible,” the report stated.
However, “several objections were voiced regarding the design and worry was expressed that it may seem too extravagant.”
The report stated that “many fear that the design will not inspire community development and will not provide the template for the direction in which community planning must go. Identified among these areas of concern were: the design’s flat roof; the design’s choice of building materials i.e. cedar shake siding; the lack of sophistication; a look of utilitarianism, more typical of institutions such as a VFW Hall or health care facility.”
Interviews expressed “several positive comments” about the plans for a community meeting room in the proposed new library, “given the perception that the community does not currently have a public meeting facility for large groups.”
However, a “small number” of interviewees oppose including such a room because “they question the fact that community meeting room activities do not, in most cases, focus on library activities.”
Cost and Funding Plan:
Interviewees “generally” viewed the project costs as “appropriate for what is being considered.”
“Even those who question the design and project itself, concede that costs for the design proposed seem fair and in line,” the report stated.
Those interviewed expressed “nearly unanimous support” for the funding plan in which a private fund-raising campaign precedes a bond issue/millage vote.
Library officials originally proposed raising $750,000 in private donations.
Specific project costs, such as site preparation ($242,850) and campaign costs ($93,500), were questioned by “several interviewees.”
“Site preparation costs are considered too high to ‘recover.’ Campaign costs were also questioned as representing a large amount of early gifts needed to cover the costs of the fund-raising campaign,” the report stated.
The total expense of the project was questioned by “many” interviewees who stated that the design was “too opulent” and that the funds “should go to what’s inside the building rather than outside appearance.”
“Many” interviewees “worry about increased operating costs” for this proposed library, “doubting that preliminary approximations will cover operating needs for the 20-year planning period.”
The “jump” from the current 1,300-square-foot library to a 9,000-square-foot facility was considered by a “large number of interviewees” to be “too big a leap.”
“Those concerned feel the community will consider the library board’s plan too extravagant an improvement,” the report stated.
Many of those interviewed expressed concern that “competing millage needs on the horizon. . .could interfere with the library’s request for funds.”
“Some also question the financial capability of the township to support its mandates – meaning, perhaps, another possible millage request,” the report stated.
Despite the fact that 70 percent of the interviewees expressed intentions of supporting a private fund-raising campaign with a financial gift, 75 percent indicated their gifts “would fall at the lowest giving level (less than $1,000).”
The Breton Group’s Conclusions
Based on the above favorable and unfavorable factors identified during the interview process, the consulting firm made the following conclusions:
n “A sense of community is lacking in the Addison Township area, a critically needed quality for cooperative projects such as the library board’s proposal. A variety of factors may account for this absence such as the township’s large and rural area; lack of a central meeting place or common means of communication; large home sites that keep neighbors distant from each other; the disparity between longtime residents and newcomers; or the division of the township by three separate school districts. All point to the fact that there are few unifying forces within the township and that people who chose Addison Township as their residence may have done so to minimize responsibilities to or contact with community.”
n “Library patrons vary in their assessment of the library. Virtually all interviewees rated staff and children’s programming highly, but also stated that the facility is far too small – resulting in too few programs, resources, and technology.”
n “The library carries a low-profile in the community and does not rank highly as a community asset. Community residents appreciate library services, but are not overly concerned about the need to improve the quality of those services. If considering community needs, residents rank the library behind other concerns – and place the library lower still on community needs they would be willing to fund.”
n “The potential for raising $750,000 is highly doubtful. Although many residents who understand the need for and the value of the project are willing to support it, there is not the depth of support to realize a fund raising goal of $750,000. Even among those who use and value the library the most, there is not the urgency needed to accomplish the stated goal. And, without unified board leadership, the campaign would appear to lack the person or group needed to ‘carry the torch.’”
n “The plan, as proposed, lacks the support of key township officials. Because the plan would appear to them to be more than what the township requires and more expensive than needed, key township officials oppose the plan and will not work to support it – due to both personal concerns and those expressed to them by constituents. Without the endorsement, the support, and the advocacy of their township leaders, residents will not be inspired to embrace the library board’s proposal and potential for success is very limited.”
n “The vision of a new library and the role it could play as a community focal point and as a stimulus for further community development is not recognized or understood, not supported or appreciated. Resources in which communities share with each other enrich and enhance the social structure. The township lacks consensus on future community development. Because of it, a library plan to build a new facility is not seen as a positive forward movement and the stimulus to subsequent community resource projects that will enhance – rather than detract – from the quality of life that all residents seek in Addison Township.”
The Breton Group’s Recommendations
n “Communicate the results of the campaign planning study and the library board’s plan to address its recommendations. By emphasizing its accountability to the community, the library board demonstrates its intent to listen and to act on the input it received from its community.”
n “Engage township leadership in discussion and input regarding the township’s master plan. Using the township’s and planning commission’s vision for future development, library leadership must participate in developing and prioritizing the addition of a new library to the community. By working with the community and its planners, the library board can garner support for a plan that – with township endorsement – will build confidence in the community to move forward in an effort enhance a community of quality.”
n “Mount an intense public relations campaign to inform, to educate, and to connect residents to their library. Users and nonusers alike must be made aware of the direct and indirect benefits that the library offers the community. Communication should be disseminated through collaborative relationships built with the schools, service organizations, and other community organizations. Liaisons built for foundational communication purposes should be long-lasting and part of an eventual campaign effort.”
n “The library board must continue to involve many new people in its mission, very possibly starting with this communications effort. In addition, a strong collaboration with the existing Friends of the Library group — in a spirit of shared interest — could be a worthy vehicle to assist in communicating the library’s vision and to building the community support needed.”
n “Identify and cultivate major donors. From those who see a new library facility as part of the larger community, a leadership group made up of key community and financial leaders could be formed to lay the groundwork for an eventual formal campaign. With the securing of lead gift pledges and the credibility to the effort that it would bring, the leadership group could offer significant momentum to an eventual library construction plan.”
n “Revisit the design plan in an effort to allay concerns that the project overwhelms current needs. Because the library’s needs are so drastically under-met, according to national planning standards, the effort to bring the library in line with a 20-year future planning window appears to many as too big a leap forward. Reducing project costs and/or proceeding with the project in phased construction steps may offer the opportunity to ease residents into the acceptance of what the library can and should be in the Addison Township community.”
n “After a period of three to six months, assess the progress made in education and support cultivation efforts. Determine at that time the potential for mounting successful capital fund-raising and bond issue/millage campaigns.”