Score: +2 (2/0/0)
Sonoma County Grand Jury • 2011-2012

Whose Library is It?

Published: October 05, 2011 9 pages
Ver PDF original

Findings and Recommendations 10 findings

F1
The Joint Powers Agreement appears to be outdated and needs to be revised.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Board of Supervisors evaluate the library’s leadership structure, including the JPA, and write a report suggesting ways to improve collaboration.
F2
The Joint Powers Agreement states that the individual library branches have input in major decisions; however, it appears that they are not heard and basically ignored.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Board of Supervisors establish an education and training process, including budget analysis, for current and future library commissioners.
F3
Having an unresponsive library director undermines the spirit of the JPA.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Library Commission establish a method to facilitate communication between the LABs and Library Commission.
F4
Library Advisory Boards are not functioning as per the original intent of the JPA.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Library Commission establish a regular monthly schedule for LAB meetings with the library patrons and then monthly with the Library Commission to discuss findings.
F5
The Library Commission seems unclear as to their duties and function.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The Library Commission instruct the director to cease editing meeting minutes. Any corrections or edits should be brought up at the subsequent Library Commission meeting when minutes are approved.
F6
The Library Commission appears to have no formal training sessions to assist them.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
The library director bring all employee job descriptions up to date, with the approval of the Library Commission.
F7
The library director is inappropriately editing meeting minutes.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
The library director revise the Performance Management Program work plan performance review template to make it a workable document and institute its usage.
F8
The majority of employee performance reviews are not being completed on a regular basis. There appeared to be no urgency at the library director level to get reviews up to date. 18
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
The library director advise all managers of the past due employee performance reviews and get them up to date.
F9
The absence of written policies and procedures is causing a lack of follow-through on the expenditure of funds received from the FOL.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
The library director develop a follow-up method to ensure that reviews are done on time.
F10
Furniture orders for some branches are unnecessarily held up at the library director’s level.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10
The library director report to the Library Commission the status of library employee reviews on a monthly basis to ensure compliance with library policies and procedures for reviewing all employees in a timely fashion.

Additional Recommendations 4

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Sonoma County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office