1. The CAO’s Report CAOR-CS-01-14

2. “Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success.” - Henry Ford

3.  Not to proceed with a county library feasibility study  Encourage local councils and their public library boards to work together towards improving the scope of and access to library services available to residents across the county.

4. West Grey Council asked the County to study the feasibility of implementing a county-wide public library system or county-wide public library reciprocal card system

5. County Policy for engaging with local municipalities wishing to explore a shared approach to service delivery.

6.  This is Step 1 of Collaborative Framework only  Consultation with CEOs, Board Chairs, CAOs, SOLS, other counties  High level assessment  Did not involve library users

7.  Preliminary assessment only  Is this an issue the County should involve itself in?  To educate and inform about libraries

8.  Trust  Fear of losing authority  Fear of losing identity  Fear of the unknown  What’s in it for me?

9. Governance  Public Library Board  Union Public Library Board  Purchase of Service  County Library Board

11. Library Board Municipalities Served Branch Locations Reciprocal Service Agreements Contracted Service The Blue Mountains Thornbury Meaford, Grey Highlands nil Grey Highlands Flesherton, Kimberley, Markdale Meaford, Blue Mountains To West Grey and Chatsworth; From Collingwood: Hanover nil Meaford Blue Mountains, Grey Highlands, From Owen Sound & North Grey for former Sydenham Tsp. Owen Sound & North Grey Union Owen Sound, Georgian Bluffs, Chatsworth Owen Sound nil To Meaford for former Sydenham Tsp. only Southgate Dundalk nil Service to Melancthon Township; Service from Wellington County West Grey Durham, Neustadt, Elmwood, Ayton nilFrom Grey Highlands

12. Measure (2010 Data)HighLowAverage Median Population Served by Library Board40,000+7,50012,900 8,405 Card Holders (households)15,0001,6005,000 4,228 Weekly Hours of Operation/Branch711843 39 Expenditures per Capita$69.28$14.02$36.50 $33.97 Annual Library Transactions300,000+26,000113,000 88,574 In-Person Visits241,60021,00072,050 46,650 Electronic Visits83,0000n.a. 9,650 Total Staff (FTE)15.01.176.0 5.14 Annual Operating Expenditures (rounded)$1.3 M$100K$700K$494K

13. Library BoardType of ILS Open Source (OS) or Proprietary (P) Information Consortia Blue MountainsKOHAOSn.a. MeafordMandarin OasisPn.a. Grey HighlandsKOHAOSSaugeen Consortium West GreyKOHAOSSaugeen Consortium HanoverKOHAOSSaugeen Consortium SouthgateLibraryWorldPn.a. Owen Sound & North Grey Union Sirsi/DynixPOntario Library Consortium

14. 1. The County Library 2. The County Co-operative (Simcoe County) 3. County-wide ILS (Perth County) 4. County support to local library boards 5. Purchase of Service from neighbouring counties 6. Joint County Library Board 7. Expanded Union Library Board

15.  6 municipalities (minimum)  County Library Board  Minimum 5 members  Bare majority of county councillors  County levy to participating municipalities  Branch in each participating municipality

16. AdvantagesDisadvantages Centralized governance Common decision-making for entire system One integrated library system (ILS) County library card Economies of scale for training, labour management, asset management, core service supports More consistency in planning, policy and programming Strengthening of staff expertise, scope and capacity, and core services such as IT Loss of local governance Higher operating costs expected Significant Transition costs Significant shift in municipalities’ relative cost shares – perceived “winners” and “losers” Loss of local autonomy in programming decisions Cuts to service and service locations to mitigate higher system costs Service is not within current scope of Grey County suite of services

17. Facilitates a County library card Equitable access to and availability of services/programs Integrated shared information system Seamless service between libraries Local autonomy and service/programming decisions preserved No County involvement Cost and time to agree on selection and implementation of a common ILS Governance of an ILS consortia could be a challenge Implementation costs would be expected to be appreciable Increased ongoing operating costs would be expected particularly inter-library loan costs of transporting documents between branches. Lack of consistently available, reliable ultra-high speed, high capacity Internet connectivity across the county may prove a barrier to implementation AdvantagesDisadvantages

20. Municipality2012 Library Operating Expenditure 2013 County Levy % Blue Mountains $ 590,729 13,092,1284.5 Chatsworth $ 128,665 2,611,8925.0 Georgian Bluffs$ 273,728 5,555,5724.9 Grey Highlands $ 376,772 5,815,3616.5 Hanover $ 542,477 2,699,09320.0 Meaford $ 564,187 5,917,8529.5 Southgate$ 116,771 2,537,6244.6 West Grey $ 249,230 4,768,4745.2 Owen Sound$ 744,238 7,924,1839.4 Total$ 3,586,797 50,922,1797.0

22. Municipality Column A 2012 Operating Expenditure Column B % of Total Column C % of 2013 County Tax Levy Column D Operating Expenditure if Based on 2013 County Levy Column E % Change in Expenditure Blue Mountains $ 590,72916.525.7$921,807+56% Chatsworth $ 128,6653.65.1$182,927+42% Georgian Bluffs$ 273,7287.610.9$390,961+43% Grey Highlands $ 376,77210.511.4$376,614No change Hanover $ 542,47715.15.3$190,100 -65% Meaford $ 564,18715.711.6$416,069-26% Southgate$ 116,7713.35.0$179,340+54% West Grey $ 249,2307.09.4$337,159+35% Owen Sound$ 744,23820.815.6$559,540-25% Total$ 3,586,797100.0 $3,586,797No change

23. 1. Local libraries do an admirable job 2. Communities are proud and protective 3. County wide card requires shared ILS 4. Replacement of OS&NG ILS an opportunity 5. There are options available + and – 6. Good examples close by

24. IF THE GOAL IS: uniformly available, equitably accessible service county wide THEN WE NEED: 1. Local Leadership to drive the change agenda 2. Investment in common ILS technology 3. Local commitment to ILS implementation 4. Shared governance and maintenance of ILS

25.  No local consensus on need for or desire to embrace county-wide system  Cost of a common ILS is a barrier  County is not in a position to lead change process

26. County Council may: a) Refer the matter back to Committee with direction as to further review, or b) Agree to engage in a detailed review of service subject to conditions it may deem appropriate and necessary, or c) Decline further consideration of the matter

27. 1. NOT to proceed further with more detailed collaborative review 2. To encourage local councils and their public library boards to work together towards improving library services across the County 3. Directed CAO to report on how to facilitate the conversation between lower tier municipalities and public library boards as well as projected costs of such facilitation

28. Thank you