Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2026-09-30 AGENDA LIBRARY SITE REUSE TASK FORCE MEETING #2 Wednesday, September 30, 2026 7:00 – 9:00 p.m. Library 706 Fourth Street, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 The Library closes at 7pm, please arrive prior to 7pm Staff Contact: Donna Harlan, 503-697-6583, libraryvisioning@lakeoswego.city Virtual Access This meeting will be held in person. To participate remotely, please follow the link below: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/8 8058688288 ADA Accommodation Requests lakeoswego.city/accommodation 503-635-0282; Relay 711 Please allow four business days to process your request. Translation Services Traducción o interpretación 翻译或传译 통역혹은번역 503-534-5738 No public comment will be offered at this meeting. Members of the public who wish to send comments regarding issues being addressed by the Library Site Reuse Task Force are requested to email their comments to libraryvisioning@lakeoswego.city no less than 48 hours prior to the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER & WELCOME (10 min) - Ben Duncan (Kearns & West Facilitation Team) • Establish Quorum • Review Agenda • Review and Confirm Meeting Agreements 2. CHAIR AND CO-CHAIR ELECTIONS (10 min) - Ben and All • Review Chair code/role/job description • Those interested in serving as a Chair/Co-Chair share why they would like to serve in the role (2 min each) • Vote to approve Co-Chairs 3. CHARGE, GUIDELINES, AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION (30 min) - City Staff, Councilor Verdick, and All. 4. KEY THEMES AND CONSIDERATIONS (60 min) - City Staff and All • City Staff Presentation(s) on: o Facilities o Finance • Reuse Task Force Questions & Answers 5. PREPARING FOR MEETING #3 (10 MIN) – Ben and All 6. ADJOURNMENT – Ben 503-697-6583 706 4TH STREET PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 Participants • Task Force Members: See City Council Resolution 26-41 • City Staff: Madison Thesing, Deputy City Manager, Melissa Kelly, Library Director, Anna Meiners Briggs, Library Communications and Public Relations Coordinator, Donna Harlan, Library Administrative Assistant • Facilitation Team: Ben Duncan and Ruby Gonzales (Kearns & West) 503-697-6583 706 4TH STREET PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY City of Lake Oswego – Library Reuse Task Force – Meeting #1 – 8.26.26 1 Lake Oswego Library Reuse Task Force Meeting Summary Lake Oswego Library Reuse Task Force Meeting #1 Wednesday, August 26, 2026, 7:00 – 9:00 PM Lake Oswego Library, Zoom Webinar Note: The meeting was recorded via Zoom; therefore, this meeting summary will remain at a high -level overview. Please review the recording and meeting packet on the website for details and any additional materials. Participants • Reuse Task Force Members: Doug Stamm, Diana Schmidt, Ken Weber, Mo Avishan, Katherine Bair, Joy Fabos, Jay Haladay, Kathy Laws, Brayden Lee, Jaime Lemons, Karen Sampson, Jim Perris, Isa Mostachetti, Ron Walters, Mary Overgaard • City Staff: Madison Thesing, Melissa Kelly, Anna Meiners Briggs, Donna Harlan • Elected Officials: Councilor Verdick • Facilitation Team Kearns & West (KW): Ruby Gonzales • Absent: Dennis Milosky, Paul Glass, Anne Zubko, Ginny Perelson Welcome Ruby Gonzales, Kearns & West, called the meeting to order , welcomed participants, and provided an overview of the agenda topics: • Welcome • Tour of Lake Oswego Public Library • Tour Debrief • Preparing for Meeting #2 Ruby shared that written public comments received ahead of the meeting were shared with Reuse Task Force members, and comments sent to libraryvisioning@lakeoswego.city will continue to be shared with members ahead of each meeting. The group did a round of introductions, with each person sharing their name, affiliation(s) and/or neighborhood, and potential title for their autobiography. Ruby led the group in a shared agreements brainstorm, and the following agreements were proposed for consideration and adoption at Meeting #2: • One person speaks at a time; • Step up / step back; • Disagree with ideas, not people; • Assume good intent and say the hard thing anyway; City of Lake Oswego – Library Reuse Task Force – Meeting #1 – 8.26.26 2 • What's said here is public record • Stay within Council's charge • Hold a solution-oriented mindset • Transparency in all reactions • Stay open to possibilities, ideas, and outcomes • Propose and develop solutions that help/benefit the whole Lake Oswego community • Make decisions based in analysis and data Madison Thesing, Deputy City Manager, provided an overview of Oregon Public Meetings Law and answered compliance questions. Tour of Lake Oswego Public Library Melissa Kelly, Library Director, led a facility conditions tour of the Lake Oswego Public Library and highlighted areas for Reuse Task Force member consideration, such as seismic vulnerabilities, damaged areas, ADA deficiencies, and site constraints, as well as an overview of the services the Library provides, how the Library has adapted to meet changing community needs, and where staff see opportunities for improvement. Tour Debrief Members of the Reuse Task Force shared brief reflections, asked questions, and expressed desire for discussions and information on: • Seismic retrofitting, and the possibilities and limitations • Cost of re-vamping/expanding the current library and the cost of other options • How to maintain the current library’s character, beating heart, and feel • Staff and user safety at the current location • What staff dream of and wish for the Library • What maintenance is being deferred, and what are the impacts Preparing for Meeting #2 Melissa provided an overview of the Reuse Task Force Binder. She reviewed the sections- by-section, including the council’s charge and guardrails, the Chair role description, and the public meetings law handout. She confirmed that for each Reuse Task Force Meeting, Task Force members will receive a meeting packet via email one week in advance of each meeting. There will also be documents printed out and available at each meeting. During discussion in preparation for Meeting #2 and future meetings, the Reuse Task Force Members asked the following questions: City of Lake Oswego – Library Reuse Task Force – Meeting #1 – 8.26.26 3 • What is the charge from City Council? How did Council get to their charge and what informed it? o The City responded that the Library Reuse Task Force is an advisory body working to develop and evaluate scenarios for reuse of the existing library site using Council-established criteria, narrow to a top three for Council's review, and then refine Council's top two into a single final recommendation. With community input from the 2023 Library Visioning process and the 2025 Community Survey, Council adopted a 2026 goal to develop a strategy for an expanded and modern library facility and decided to convene a community task force to bring forward a recommendation on the reuse of the existing site. • If community wants to view information on this Task Force, where can they go? How do we direct the public to information? o The City responded that all information about the Task Force, including meeting agendas, materials, summaries, and recordings, is posted on the City's Library Site Reuse Task Force webpage. • What is the guidance on social media? o The City referred to Oregon Public Meetings Law, which clarifies that a series of electronic communications among members (including social media messages) may constitute a meeting even when members are not communicating at the same time. Members are encouraged to speak for themselves and to talk with neighbors and community members, but they should not respond to one another about Task Force business outside a noticed meeting, whether in a comment thread, a group chat, or direct messages. Members should also keep in mind that communications about Task Force business may be public record. • What is the guidance on how to engage/not engage with community organizing around the use of the library? o The City affirmed that Members were appointed to bring their communities into this process and talking with neighbors and organizations they represent is a part of the role. The City indicated that members should speak only for themselves and never for, or on-behalf-of, the Task Force, avoid predicting or committing to outcomes, and point people toward the project webpage and the formal comment opportunities so all input is in the public record. The following questions were noted to be further addressed in future meetings: • How did City Council determine the next steps and expectations for this Task Force? What is the objective of the Task Force? City of Lake Oswego – Library Reuse Task Force – Meeting #1 – 8.26.26 4 • What happens if the library is moved? • What is the guidance on conflict of interest? Ruby called for Chair nominations and voting to occur at Meeting #2 Closing and Next Steps Next Steps include: • Kearns & West and City of Lake Oswego to finalize Meeting Agreements for adoption at Meeting #2 • City of Lake Oswego to share Meeting #2 Agenda with Task Force Members • City of Lake Oswego affirm the charge of the Task Force at Meeting #2 Adjourn Adjourned at 9:04pm Using criteria set by Council to develop reuse scenarios for the existing site Selecting and analyzing the top three scenarios Presenting an analysis of the top three scenarios to Council Based on Council’s feedback, fine-tuning and analyzing Council’s top two scenarios Returning to Council with a final reuse recommendation The Task Force shall be charged with: RESOLUTION 26-30: Help Council in the development and analysis of reuse scenarios for the existing site, and, ultimately, would make a final reuse recommendation to the City Council, thereby suppor ting the process of relocating and expanding the librar y in the future. SITE REUSE TASK FORCE LIBRARY https://apps.lakeoswego.city/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=3333701&dbid=0&repo=CityOfLakeOswego Lake Oswego Biennial Budget in Brief 2025-27 The Lake Oswego Public Library operates out of 27,000 square feet and strives to off er the best service and collec on possible in the limited space. The library provides access to over 260,000 holdings, with an annual circula on rate of around 800,000 items borrowed each year. Per capita, the average Lake Oswego resident borrows more than 18 items each year, one of the highest rates in the na on. Library 2019-2021 2021-2023 2023-2025 2025-27 2025-27 2025-27 BN ACTUAL BN ACTUAL BN BUDGET PROPOSED APPROVED ADOPTED Resources Beginning Balance $ 1,616,014 $ 2,428,759 $ 2,451,496 $ 3,440,867 $ 3,440,867 $ 3,440,867 Department Revenues 6,640,327 7,112,208 7,461,000 8,044,000 8,044,000 8,044,000 General Revenues 3,279,000 3,509,000 3,818,000 4,132,000 4,132,000 4,132,000 Transfers 54,387 58,403 66,000 64,000 68,000 68,000 Total Resources $ 11,589,728 $ 13,108,370 $ 13,796,496 $ 15,680,867 $ 15,684,867 $ 15,684,867 Requirements Personnel Services $ 6,111,030 $ 6,452 ,302 $ 7,654,000 $ 8,498,000 $ 8,498,000 $ 8,498,000 Materials & Services 1,704,693 2,120,994 1,968,000 1,958,000 1,958,000 1,958,000 I nterna I Fees for Services 1,286,000 1,578,000 1,537,000 1,638,000 1,638,000 1,638,000 Transfers 5,350 2,000 Capital Outlay 53 ,896 720,000 720,000 720,000 Department Contingency 2,635,496 2,866,867 2,870,867 2,870,867 Total Requirements $ 9,160,969 $ 10,151,296 $ 13,796,496 $ 15,680,867 $ 15,684,867 $ 15,684,867 FTE 33.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 Key Performance Indicators 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 EST Registered Borrowers 25,547 22,907 23,805 24,187 Total Circulation 780,227 764,978 796,705 793,000 Total Hold s Filled 162,720 163,046 159,208 158,000 Total Reference Questions Answered 33,139 27,400 26,789 26,500 Total Library Program Attendance 16,485 24,319 23,164 23,500 Budget Notes • Internal fees for service is the department's cost share for administrative support services. Adopted 2025-27 • Department revenues include the levy from the County Library District of about $4 million, replacement fees, and donations . • Capital outlay items include a library bookmobile and library hold lockers and/or book vending machines. • Contingency funds may be dedicated for building maintenance and capital improvements as needed . Find additional information on the website at this link: http s/ /www.ci .oswego.or.us/library 5 Expense Fiscal Year Do l l a r s 6/30 / 1 7 6/30 / 1 8 6/30 / 1 9 6/30 / 2 0 6/30 / 2 1 6/30 / 2 2 6/30 / 2 3 6/30 / 2 4 6/30 / 2 5 6/30 / 2 6 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 Annual Maintenance Expense: 2016-2026 Facilities Maintenance $1,520,000.00 Landscape Maintenance $273,367.00 Electricity NW Nat. Gas & Propane $37,182.00 Water and Sewer $116,047.00 $305,086.00 Additional Facility Expenses: 2016-2026 Ser vice Infrastructure Investment Ser vice Infrastructure $847,054.08 Functional Upgrades (2 Floor)nd $141,827.92 $120,345.00 Roofing Repairs HVAC $520,270.00 Electrical $185,268.00 Elevator Repair $135,544.00 $74,064.00 Plumbing Repairs and Maintenance $273,913.00 503-697-6584 libraryvisioning@lakeoswego.city www.lakeoswego.city/library Additional Information: Major Facility Costs: 2016-2026 Service Infrastructure $847,054.08 HVAC $520,270.00 General Library Repairs and Maintenance $273,913.00 Electrical $185,268.00 2nd Floor Funct. Upgrades $141,827.92 Elevator Repairs $135,544.00 Roofing Repairs $120,345.00 Plumbing $74,064.00 Building Systems and Facility Costs $2.5M Librar y Building Expenses 7/1/2016 - 6/30/2026 This categor y includes a building investment made in 2017 to improve the safety, accessibility, and efficiency of librar y operations on the main floor. The project included floor repairs, redesigned ser vice desks, accessibility enhancements, improvements to the self-checkout process, and mechanical upgrades to support a safe, reliable, and accessible facility. General Librar y Repairs and Maintenance General librar y maintenance includes routine and as-needed ser vices, repairs, and replacements necessar y to keep librar y facilities safe, functional, and well-maintained. Examples include leak detection, pest control, concrete repairs, locksmith ser vices, alarm maintenance, painting, tree care, air purifier rentals, garbage collection (not included in utilities), supplemental cleaning ser vices beyond regular monthly janitorial contracts, gutter and downspout maintenance. 2016-2026 Total Facility Expense: $4.7M https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/finance/city-budget *Major Expenditures, view website for detailed reporting. Outlook FW: Library site committee perspectives From:Jay Haladay Sent:Monday, September 7, 2026 11:39 AM To:Thesing, Madison <mthesing@ci.oswego.or.us> Subject:Library site committee perspectives You don't often get email from Learn why this is important The topic we have in front of our members as to the use of the library site will present an opportunity to strengthen our community. The good news is there are many individuals with diverse backgrounds and perspectives to assist with this journey. Although this becomes part of the public record by sharing it this way, I thought it might be useful to share some early perspectives as it might save us time as we fulfill our charter. First, let me describe some of my background that might not have been evident during the introductions of our first meeting. spent over 40 years working with thousands of contractors worldwide providing them the mission critical software. They put our products into use everyday for estimating, project management, all accounting functions and post-project turnover to building owners. To make sure our products met their requirements, my management team and myself walked hundreds of their projects, understood their thinking and evaluated the many approaches that can be taken to create quality buildings and infrastructure. Our family has used some of this So with this background and experience, I read the notebook that was distributed. In short, based on my experience the current library structure has served more than its useful life and is past the point of replacement. Even with the approximately $10 million of itemized work (I am very familiar with Fortis Construction) the current library building would fall short of A few examples: The structure was built before computers and other more sophisticated knowledge appliances (overhead projectors, etc) were commonplace. As a result, there is little or no conversation in the documents provided about specialized conduit running through the building to allow for an appropriate technology hub or dedicated room to efficiently use these technology tools. Where would this be located and could conduits run appropriately through the existing structure during a renovation? This topic is not addressed. The itemized proposal left much of the HVAC ductwork, electrical and plumbing systems in place. All of these are inefficient from the standpoint of monthly operating costs and would be designed very differently in an all new construction project. Little was noted in the itemization for improved insulation or fire suppression. While the all-wood structure provides a warm and cozy look and feel, it poses significant fire risks and is inefficient to heat and/or cool. Recladding the building with a fireproof, more insulated surface would be expensive and the existing framework/foundation of the building might not support this upgrade. The itemized list provided by Fortis had a contingency associated with it, but there is a very high likelihood that surprises await when opening up the existing structure during a renovation and finding expensive problems that are not evident today. So the estimate (that is already 2 years old) could go up substantially. The itemized work take enough advantage of efficient new building materials that not only have lower operating costs but provide for a longer useful life. There were some comments in our first committee discussion about preforming deferred maintenance. It is my belief that the $10 million represents the price tag of that deferred maintenance. Even with this work, the useful life of the structure be enhanced by more than a few years. The City Council understood the shortcomings of investing in the existing structure when it gave us our the right balance by disposing of the existing library site at the highest economic value and having the site fill an appropriate need for the community in its next chapter. The visioning recommendations in Section 4 suggested a main structure with a branch as a preferred option. While other options The existing library property is very valuable. Whether its value is enhanced with the structure on it is debatable, but the land value is high. Selling it would produce significant revenue that could be put towards new library efforts. The City Council would like to see a new main library location that is more accessible from all parts of the City. The location is not within our charter but our recommendations need to recognize this potential reality. However, using the existing property and structure for the branch (or main location) underutilizes the economic value of the current property and deal effectively with the expense exposure of rehabilitating the current structure and some of the other limitations noted above A smaller branch could be created in the downtown Lake Oswego vicinity, adjoining several neighborhoods that are within walking/biking distance of the existing library site. The main library location could be placed at a site more in keeping with the City preferences. The main/branch approach may prove to be too expensive anyway, but taking an the view of the library options might put Lake Oswego on a path to provide its citizens with the library resources the community deserves. thought about the use of the existing library site could be a swap or trade with another parcel of land within the community. A swap could allow lower density use of the existing library site while providing high density development opportunity on the site that is traded for. The above two thoughts are examples of non-linear thinking. Non-linear thinking takes us outside more traditional decision processes and lets us expand the potential outcomes available. If you do a search on non-linear thinking, there are several papers/articles that provide a good explanation of the process. Here is one of them: Non-Linear Thinking: The Forbidden Path to Genius medium.com Lastly, my belief is that it is important for us to think about the community we want Lake Oswego to be in 40-50 years. The current library was opened in the early 40+ years ago. A replacement should last as long, if not longer. This raises two questions: What kind of a community will a new library be serving? And what services will the future Lake Oswego require or gain from the existing site 40+ years from now? When we raised our 4 children, all of them came back to Lake Oswego after college because they were excited about the community where they were raised. Three of them still live here with their families. Of our 9 grandchildren, I hope the Lake Oswego of 20-30-40 years into the future is an exciting forward-looking community to attract them to raise their families. yield any more valuable insights than experience-based reasoning. Groups like ours should consider the experience that committee members bring to the discussion to help guide our decisions and recommendations. Thank you in advance for considering my thoughts prior to our next meeting. Jay Haladay Committee Member Sent from my iPad PUBLIC RECORDS LAW DISCLOSURE This e-mail is a public record of the City of Lake Oswego and is subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. This email is subject to the State Retention Schedule.