Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Strategic Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Surprise Library Advisory Commission reviews first draft of strategic plan
Summary
Commissioners and staff reviewed a rough first draft of a new strategic plan for the Surprise Public Library system, discussed four goals—community connection, lifelong learning, visibility and financial stability, and facilities planning—and directed staff to revise the draft based on public-survey data and commission feedback.
The Surprise Library Advisory Commission on May 8 reviewed a first draft of a strategic plan for the city’s library system and asked staff to refine the document and return with a revised draft next month.
Kelsey, a library staff member who presented the draft, told commissioners she built the plan from focus groups, staff retreats, one-on-one interviews and a survey that returned nearly 800 responses. “I will take notes on whatever feedback you have, good, bad, otherwise,” she said, asking the commission for stylistic and content guidance.
The draft organizes the library’s priorities into four strategic goals: grow community connection; develop lifelong learning through programming and collections; strengthen visibility and financial stability; and plan for facilities expansion as Surprise’s population increases. The plan ties those goals to the city’s broader strategic priorities and to national guidance from the American Library Association, the presenter said.
Commissioners and staff discussed multiple specific changes and clarifications the presenter said she would make. Suggestions included adding the dates the survey was open, showing how survey response choices are ordered (for clarity in tables), calling out that most library services are free while acknowledging resource limits, and highlighting that the community outreach and survey work was conducted in-house with staff and commission members rather than by a paid consultant. A commissioner recommended a short preface that states the plan will be used actively rather than shelved.
The discussion also addressed measurement and data. Staff reported that the three-branch Surprise system averages more than 30,000 visits per month (about 7,500 per week), and that staff track program attendance and front-desk interaction times to guide scheduling and resource allocation. Commissioners asked that the draft emphasize that evaluation and engagement are ongoing, not one-time, activities.
On facilities, commissioners encouraged the plan to include a long-term facility strategy informed by comparisons to national, Arizona and Maricopa County benchmarks for library square footage per resident; the presenter said she will try to include that comparative data in later drafts. The draft also mentions a “library of things” program and a grant application with a June 30 deadline to support lending of nonbook items.
Several commissioners suggested visual and formatting improvements for readability—sidebars showing how library work aligns with city priorities, clearer table ordering, and photo insertion—and recommended including constructive survey comments, not only positive highlights, so that the plan identifies concrete opportunities for improvement.
No formal action or vote was taken; commissioners provided direction and asked staff to incorporate the feedback. The presenter said staff would collect additional edits from internal staff reviewers and return a revised draft at the next meeting for further consideration.
