Trustee McKenney read the
motion as presented: (distributed to the Board prior to the meeting)
WHEREAS, the Ottawa Public Library
Board on July 12, 2016 approved the site evaluation criteria, including
associated weightings for the Central Library Development Project; and
WHEREAS staff were authorized to
commence the site evaluation process on the Candidate Sites; and
WHEREAS the results of the
ranking were reported to and confirmed with the Board in-camera in August,
including a short-list for both the OPL stand-alone Central Library and
OPL-LAC Joint Facility; and
WHEREAS staff are in the process
of a detailed due diligence on the sites that were short-listed; and
WHEREAS the output of this
exercise will be a recommendation on the preferred site(s) for the OPL
stand-alone facility and potential OPL-LAC joint facility in December,
providing no opportunity for the public to weigh in on the short-list of
properties prior to a final recommendation coming to the OPL Board; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the short-list be made
public at the November OPL Board meeting prior to a final recommendation on
the recommended site(s) in December.
Ms. McKenney thanked the
Board for waiving the Rules of Procedure to bring forward the motion. She said
the Board is hearing from residents asking that the short-list be made public
to give some additional time between the report being tabled and the vote
being taken. She went on to say that there is no legal or procedural reason
not to release the short list in November. She noted that at no time at the
July meeting did staff say that the short-list wouldn’t be reported out at
the August meeting following the in camera session. Ms. McKenney mentioned
that the public is calling for the Board to be open and transparent. She
said the public have a right to know what those sites are in advance; to have
time to consider and comment before the December meeting.
Trustee Moffatt asked for
a clarification on the motion versus the current process as described by the
Chair in his opening remarks. Trustee McKenney advised that the difference
in the two processes is that she is requesting the short-list be made public
in November rather than December.
Following the approval of
the Board, the Board heard from the following delegation :
Yves Potvin referenced the June 9 2015
Board meeting document (Ottawa Central Library Program Framework - Library
Strategies International, Kathryn Taylor Design). He said the framework
identifies space requirements of approximately 131,702 square feet, which
includes 36,323 square feet for adult public spaces; distributed as such:
reading spaces: 11, 295; learning commons: 16,695; business hub: 3,595. Mr.
Potvin noted that of those spaces, a total of 15,600 square feet is for the
collection display areas of adult material, which is equivalent to half of
one floor of the current library. He had concerns with the proposal for
adult collection space being reduced for a new library for the next 30 to 50
years and didn’t think it was anywhere near enough. He would like to see
100,000 square feet of display space, 2M books, including 1M circulating and
1M in the reference section.
Mr. Potvin added that the new library needs a collection
worthy of the city.
Trustee McKenney asked the delegation whether the Board could have
a copy of his speaking notes. Mr. Potvin advised that he hadn’t prepared a
written document but would be most happy if staff would transcribe it for the
Board.
Chair Tierney asked staff to give more detailed notes for that
specific component of the meeting to the Board.
Direction to staff:
That staff provide detailed notes of speaker Yves Potvin to the
Board.
Questions from the Board
were then put to staff.
Vice-Chair Bergeron noted that the proposed motion from Trustee McKenney
would be looking at changing the process of what was approved. He asked the
CEO to provide an overview on the advice given, if any from Mr. Rick
O’Connor, City Clerk and Solicitor, and Mr. Peter Woods, Fairness
Commissioner. Ms. McDonald mentioned that she had the opportunity to consult
with both individuals. She advised that the Fairness Commissioner was also
present to answer any specific questions the Board may have. Ms. McDonald
explained that in speaking with both individuals, three things were
highlighted in terms of the process: 1. The process, as communicated in July,
was informed by the City’s Legal and Real Estate teams, the Fairness
Commissioner, and the Evaluation Committee; 2. The Board approved the July
2016 report which directed staff to
report back to the Board on the results of Stage 1 of the Site Evaluation
Process at a Board meeting to be held in August as an in camera item with a
reporting out date of December 2016; and, 3. The process is ongoing - Stage
1 is a ranking of the 12 sites and Stage 2 is further due diligence and
monetizing the risk.
She said the
Fairness Commissioner and the City Clerk and Solicitor had similar views and concerns
with any deviation of a Board-approved process particularly in the middle of
the process; and specifically, prematurely releasing any information in
advance of the December timeframe. Ms. McDonald noted the short-list is an
interim result of Stage 1, followed by Stage 2 which may alter the results. She
said it is not standard procurement practice to deviate from the process, and
reiterated that the recommendation will be released in December followed by a
public Board meeting in January, and then to City Council for approval.
Trustee
McKenney disagreed with the advice provided saying that in her view the presented
motion does not speak to changing the process. She asked staff to provide in
writing the advice from both individuals to the Board.
Direction
to staff:
That staff
provide, in writing to the Board, the advice from the Fairness Commissioner
and the Clerk and City Solicitor given to the CEO with respect to not
releasing the short-listed sites prior to December.
Trustee
Wilkinson sympathized with Trustee McKenney in moving the motion but would
not be supporting it. She agreed that it is important to let the public know
what is happening, such as is the case for the hospital sites that are owned
by the National Capital Commission. She said in this case, the 12 properties
that are located in all parts of the downtown are publically and privately
owned, which makes it extremely difficult to talk about in public as it can
create tensions during the process. Trustee Wilkinson advised that there
isn’t any hidden agenda and indicated she was supportive of the public
getting a full month to look at the package, including the criteria and how
it was weighted. She said she had much respect for the Evaluation Committee
with the different backgrounds and expertise, which does not include anyone
from the Board. Trustee Wilkinson reiterated that the Board has not approved
a site; staff will be recommending one, and the Board does not have to accept
that, as the decision lies with the Board. She mentioned that the short-list
will be released somewhat during Christmas but was comfortable with the
timeframe given by the Chair. She noted that in Halifax, that site was
chosen for the City, and that the public didn’t have a say in the site
location. However, the public did voice their views on what was going on the
site, which is most crucial in her opinion. Trustee Wilkinson referenced the
Beaverbrook branch site location where there was minimal input from the
community. She explained how she chairs the Community Lands Development
Corporation and how land dealings meetings are held in private. She looked
forward to the public coming forward when the matter was before the Board and
suggested that they provide concrete suggestions at that time. She
encouraged staff to book two days if required. Chair Tierney mentioned that
staff will take that into account.
Trustee Fisher
agreed to the importance of providing the public with sufficient time to
provide input and agreed with the Chair’s timeframe as it is a good measure
which adds flexibility in the process.
Chair Tierney
called the vote on Trustee McKenney’s motion, advising that a yes vote would
be supporting the release of the short-list in November and a no vote would
be supporting the current approved process.
There being no further discussion, the following motion was put
before the Board:
MOTION OPL 20161011/7
WHEREAS, the Ottawa Public Library
Board on July 12, 2016 approved the site evaluation criteria, including
associated weightings for the Central Library Development Project; and
WHEREAS staff were authorized to
commence the site evaluation process on the Candidate Sites; and
WHEREAS the results of the
ranking were reported to and confirmed with the Board in-camera in August,
including a short-list for both the OPL stand-alone Central Library and
OPL-LAC Joint Facility; and
WHEREAS staff are in the process
of a detailed due diligence on the sites that were short-listed; and
WHEREAS the output of this
exercise will be a recommendation on the preferred site(s) for the OPL
stand-alone facility and potential OPL-LAC joint facility in December,
providing no opportunity for the public to weigh in on the short-list of
properties prior to a final recommendation coming to the OPL Board; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the short-list be made
public at the November OPL Board meeting prior to a final recommendation on
the recommended site(s) in December.
LOST on a division of 1
YEA to 8 NAYS, as follows:
YEAS (1): Trustee McKenney
NAYS
(8): Trustees: Begg, Fisher, Higdon, Moffatt, Sweet, Wilkinson,
Vice-Chair
Bergeron, Chair Tierney
In
response to a December-January timeline concern from Trustee McKenney and
whether an extension may be considered, Chair Tierney pointed out that the Ad-Hoc
Committee will be meeting shortly to discuss the next steps and staff will
provide a high-level timeline at the November meeting as directed in the
Chair’s Verbal Update.
|