The Community Library Network trustees met for a special meeting last Friday. 105 minutes of the meeting was scheduled for discussing the library system’s budget. A smaller amount of time was devoted to more hot-button issues such as the American Library Association (ALA) and materials selection policy.
Chair Rachelle Ottosen moved to amend the Network’s Material Selection Policy that reads in part as follows: “The responsibility for the selection of library materials rests ultimately with the Library Director.” Additionally, Ottosen wanted to remove most of the “Intellectual Freedom” section from the Material Selection Policy so that it would read as follows: “The choice of library materials is an individual matter for adults.”
The remaining paragraphs and sentences would be removed. Those sentences include a policy which provide for a balanced selection of books as well as an alignment with the ALA’s “Freedom to Read Statement” and the “Library Bill of Rights” which claim that the freedom to read, hear, and view are protected by the First Amendment.
Former Chair Katie Blank took umbrage with the proposed change, saying that intellectual freedom is a “core value of public libraries.”
Tom Hanley expressed concern that Public Library money is going to the ALA. He said he thought the money shouldn’t be going to the organization due to their going in the wrong direction. Blank pushed back on the newly elected trustee, saying that the board shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater: “I would also like to hope that we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater; that we don’t throw out things that are very beneficial for this Library without looking at them carefully.“Library staff presented a proposed budget that was $200,000 short of the library system’s expected income. The budget assumes a tax rate hike. Members Blank and Vanessa Robinson agreed that a tax hike would be necessary due to rising costs over the last couple years. However, more conservative members—especially Hanley seemed firm against raising taxes: “I would rather reduce hours if there’s a tangible dollar value in that before I raise taxes if that’s an option. So a small population, not really small, but the library population that uses It suffers a little bit by having a fewer hours, but the taxpayers as a whole will benefit by not having increases in their taxes. So I really feel very strongly I would like to see a zero increase. I’m not looking for a decrease because we’ve got a really tough year here. I just feel strongly: I don’t want to increase taxes if there’s any way possible.”
Library staff presented a number of proposals that they said would help lower the budget amount. Library staff seemed to think the best budgetary solution would be consolidating schedules and increasing hours for employees. For example, all libraries could operate on the same simple schedule and could be open less days of the week.
Hanley and Plass argued that various smaller budget items such as putting off upgrading the technology should be eliminated. However, library Director Alexa Eccles and Blank pushed back. Eccles argued that the technology was already behind the industry standard timeline, while Blank argued that the budget could not be nickled and dimed to a balanced position.
