Chair (name not specified) opened the July 10 City of Sweet Home Library Board work session at 3:00 p.m. to discuss options for a future library building and asked the board for direction on location and budget priorities.

The board examined five categories of properties — vacant land (including the former airport, about 23 acres), downtown parcels (including the Old City Hall lot, roughly 0.54 acre), the McCool property on Main Street (about 1 to 1.3 acres adjacent to Safeway), the Paradise Motors parcel and a cluster of downtown commercial buildings including the former pizza parlor (variously described as about 10,000–11,000 square feet combined). Staff and board members stressed tradeoffs between visibility and acreage, construction cost, parking and regulatory constraints such as wetlands and riparian-zone protections.

The meeting centered on two budget scenarios discussed repeatedly: remodeling an existing building (estimated in the meeting at roughly $3–5 million for a 10,000–15,000 square-foot project) versus constructing a new single-story facility (estimates discussed: $15–20 million). Board members and staff noted remodels attract more grant opportunities for interior, technology and energy-efficiency work, while new construction would better satisfy long-term space needs but require far larger capital campaigns or bond measures.

Board members raised practical concerns about parking and access for vulnerable users. Staff reported there are about 38–46 parking spaces in the lot across from Old City Hall and emphasized that many patrons prefer very close parking; several participants urged that any chosen site provide accessible short-term parking for parents with strollers and other visitors. Downtown options drew discussion about shared parking agreements with neighboring property owners; staff said those agreements are negotiable but would require legal work.

Wetlands and site infrastructure were discussed for the old airport parcel and a 40 Seventh site. Staff noted the former airport parcel is just over 23 acres and likely has portions identified as wetlands; they said Oregon wetland rules and state-level inventories grade that site as relatively low priority for state intervention but that wetlands issues would still require evaluation. Board members also discussed possible co-location with parkland or use of elevated boardwalks as precedents cited from other Oregon and out-of-state examples.

Board members and staff reviewed specific downtown options in detail. The Old City Hall parcel was described as about 0.54 acre with existing parking across the street but limited on-site space; an architectural rendering from 2019 showing a roughly 13,000 square-foot footprint was noted as a planning asset the board could reuse. The former pizza/parlor building (referred to in the meeting as the pizza place or T and M Pizza) was described as offering about 10,000–11,000 square feet across connected addresses but with limited allocated parking; staff noted that the building is currently not for sale and ownership is disputed in tax records.

The board also discussed operational implications of multiple branches or an annex to serve the east end of town. Staff warned that a two-site model would increase annual operating costs substantially (additional staffing, utilities, duplicated materials) and recommended confirming funding appetite — for example, a levy increase — before pursuing a branch model. Participants noted that Sweet Home’s population has grown (staff stated the city is now “over 10,000” and that growth was about 600 people in the past five years), a factor that affects long-term space needs.

After discussion the board reached a consensus direction: prioritize funding and grant-seeking that would support remodeling an existing building if a suitable structure can be acquired, while continuing to monitor vacant-land opportunities. Chair (name not specified) summarized the board’s decision: “I think we’re gonna put this on the table for 90 days and, recommend to Megan that, we’re pretty much in agreement that we want to go in the direction that we can afford, which would be remodeling a building should such a building exist.” Staff was asked to pursue preliminary conversations about parking leases for downtown options and to gather grant/funding details to present at the follow-up meeting.

Board members noted that the Library Board does not make final real-estate decisions for the city; any formal acquisition or bond proposal would be brought to the City Council for decision. The board scheduled a review of progress and property-status updates in 90 days and asked staff to report on feasible remodel targets, potential parking agreements and grant opportunities.

Ending: The work session adjourned at 4:29 p.m. with the board directing staff to focus near-term efforts on remodel funding paths and to return with updates on parking and property availability in roughly 90 days.