FONT SIZE
Email this
Print this
POST A COMMENT
More on the Library levy
Just a few weeks ago, Jim Mitchell, president of the Library Board, was pushing for an “advisory ballot,” in which voters would express whether they would prefer a 22 cent levy for the Library to remain independent, or a 34 cent levy to become part of Timberland (or, presumably, no funding for the Library). This week, Mitchell told the Library Board that Mayor Garland French shared concerns over a 34 cent levy passing, in the wake of the narrow EMS victory, and a timing problem that would make it difficult (and perhaps impossible) for an August advisory ballot, followed by a November vote for the levy itself. Mitchell said the Mayor was hoping the Board would recommend a 22 cent levy, to fund the Library in 2011, and take no action at this time re Timberland.
The Board voted in favor of recommending the 22 cent levy to City Council. Monday night, council will consider what to do, regarding this. Andy Gruse was the sole Library Board member to vote against the 22 cent levy recommendation. His reason:
"My main reason for the no vote was taxpayers should decide a choice of Timberland versus the status quo, 34 cents versus 22 cents. It is not right for tax spenders to eliminate choices. We would get over 10x the library service we get now I contend. People could access from where ever they are with a Timberland ID for an additional 12 cents over the 22 cents. The mayor doesn't support a Timberland choice on the ballot. Passing 22 cents just allows that money historically spent on the library from the general fund to be spent elsewhere with no perceptible increase in library service compared to past budget years. Progress versus stagnation, high value versus mediocre value is the choice. We have had a historically expensive city cost per library open hour. Timberland is the best option. If Timberland ran the library, library taxes would not pass through the city's hands. Council/mayor would no longer be able to destabilize the library's funding. Voter choice is crucial in a town like Ocean Shores where there is little trust."
We need to get outside sourcing going on here instead of having the city have “all the control” and the library is a great way to start that!
Voting citizens not having a choice of library services is a major failure in this process. A prevailing “NO” vote on twenty-two cents could indicate a variety of things, still leaving the Library Board and the City Council without information needed to govern effectively.
I wrote that the city should go to Timberland about a year ago. This makes the most sense for the citizens here. More quality, more materials, more service. Labor costs are less and materials are more. Why pay for staff at 64K plus when you can get the same for less. I would use the library resources more because they would be available online and at the facility. Maybe our library would get more business because it offered more. Citizens would find greater value in a top notch product.
How about all the children that use the library? Should we saddle them with a sub-par library? All 533 Ocean Shores students and the 169 North Beach students that use the facility? What may be fine for you does not fly. With the number of seniors or people without children here, I wonder how the school levy for 1.00 (a 20% increase) passed? I guess people are selectively selfish.
Well, that’s all well and fine, if that’s what’s important to you. Unfortunately it’s not to me. I wonder if they could set up a subscription service like cell phones where you pay by what you use? Or, better yet, you can pay my portion of the $170/166K and I won’t use any of the special services offered.
Kind of like basic cable vs. all the bells and whistles.
The extra 166K is also for a 3 Gig network at the library and all the other databases and resourses like downloading music, video and books directly to your home computer or the library computers. They also offer research librarians that will find what you want to know about. They will even send the results to you. It would be a good thing to have a town hall were they could come and show us on the big screens at the convention center what you can do. lets have a show and tell.
The 22 cents that was being paid out of the General Fund for Library operations is gone. Face it, we will not see any reduction in our taxes even if the library is closed.
The 22 cents being asked for by the Library board would be in the form of a dedicated levy that could only be used for the library. This will be an additional 22 cents per thousand on your taxes. Just like the 34 cents per thousand for Timberland will be an additional tax. That 34 cents represents an additional $170,000 per year. Is Timberland really worth that much extra just to be able to order free inter-library loans? It would take around 5,000 orders a month tojust break even.
City Council does not deserve the 34 cents that taxpayers currently pay into the general fund that is supposed to support the library. The current amount that is collected in the general fund for the library has been mismanaged by council and used for other items with little regard on the negative impact on the library operations. I believe that the citizens of Ocean Shores want the library to remain open, I believe they will support a 34 cent levy to go to Timberland and entrust their tax dollars to Timberland to be used to specifically to keep the library open. City Council needs to put this matter to a vote of the citizens so the people can be heard. I believe that the only reason that City Council now wants to keep the library open is so they do not lose that 34 cents/$1,000 that is paid into the general fund. Any levy that does not put the tax dollars into a dedicated fund for the purpose it was intended should be voted down. I vote for Timberland – the status quo isn’t working.
“My main reason for the no vote was taxpayers should decide a choice of Timberland versus the status quo”
Mr. Gruse,
Which “status quo” are you referring to? The current one person, open half time, reduced new books, etc. or the fully staffed (maybe even overstaffed), open 6 days a week, numerous new books, children’s programs, etc. that existed on the .22 per thousand before the city shut it off?
If the former, I agree that it is intolerable and we need to do something. If the latter, why not give it a chance for 2 years at .22 to see if it can be run more efficiently. (Especially with the “unknown” cost of the street LID looming over our heads.)
In the meantime, feel free to form a PAC and really study what we would get from Timberland. Rushing in to .34 based on what their “salesman” said seems to me to be very much like some of the city projects we have already been saddled with. (think firehouse, pavement, round-about, etc. with their overruns, hidden costs and such.)
Also the .22 would be a levy that would be specifically for the library and couldn’t be touched by the city fathers for other uses.
I’m afraid that by putting three choices (.22 levy, .34 Timberland or NO) would completely split the vote and we would end up without a library at all. If the choice was either Timberland or NO, I’m afraid there are many that would choose NO because people tend to vote their pocketbook and .34 would be just too much for them. (Think the first EMS vote.)
We don’t need the “Taj Mahal” of libraries, just one that is open, functioning and serving all of the people.
i am the crabber. em me at nobeach at hot mail for some add info.
Sorry Frances, I tried three times and Tom’s blog won’t let them through. Rafael
One More try. jlynn@osgov.com,rcrummy@aol.com, pberry@osgov.com,dcreighton@osgov.com, jfarra@osgov.com,dskewis@osgov.com, gfrench@osgov.com,
One More try. jlynn@osgov.com,rcrummy@aol.com, pberry@osgov.com,dcreighton@osgov.com>, jfarra@osgov.com,dskewis@osgov.com>, gfrench@osgov.com,
Frances,Here are the 7 that are on the website. I guess they didn’t feel that Gordon Broadbent’s appointment wasn’t important enough to change the website. “john Lynn”, “Bob Crumpacker” , “Peggy Berry” , “Dave Creighton” , jfarra@osgov.com, “Dick E. Skewis” , “Garland French” ,
I think that Tom might object if I gave you Gordon’s personal address on this blog, so I didn’t list it. Rafael
Is it possible to print out the email addresses of the mayor and city council? My firewall will not let me get them from the home page. At least I think it must be my firewall!
I just don’t understand why the powers to be can not see the difference between voting no for a bloated out of control spending EMS dept. Every time I go past that new fire house I get mad all over! People want the library taken out of the city’s control and put in the hands of people who know what they are doing! This last fiasco where we were actually threatened with losing the library if we didn’t vote yes….remember that?!!
in for a penny,in for a pound. old folks need ems but kids don’t need a decent library……………..right. let the professionals (timberland) run it. to heck with the “back’d in” mayor. put it to a vote. it seems that most things around here that are done on the cheap fade into the sunset. kind of like the roundabout lane in front of iga on chance.
I made a mistake about the six years. It is two. The original intent of the Mayor was for six years. The board voted for two years. Still Timberland is the option we should be looking at. One year at contract rate of 34 cents or whatever they are willing to charge us for that year. They did say they would consider a lower rate. Then annex into Timberland.
This is not just for two years. It is for SIX years. We want a vote, not advisory, Timberland at 34 cents or Ocean Shores at 22 cents. Now, one thing needs to be made clear. The library board is NOT in control of the library. Look at the city ordinances. It can ASK for money, but that does not mean that it gets money from the city. The COUNCIL determines it’s budget. The COUNCIL determines the building care and potential expansion. That would be the same with or without Timberland. Timberland runs the library and gives us a quality product. If other library buildings are poor, it is the city that has failed to keep that building up. The materials and staff are Timberland. It is like a landlord renting to a tenant. Friends of the Library have maintained the building. They probably will still do it. Give us a choice. Let us decide how to spend OUR money.
Hat’s off to a very well thought out rebuttal by Andy Gruse! I have heard oposing comments on Timberlands ability to provide and outstanding service, you all are in a position to better judge that, but I agree with you that the choice should be left up to the voters. Could they offer the two possibilities on a ballot? Or will the fact that there are three choices cripple any possibility of it passing?
My hat’s off to Andy Gruse for being the one remaining voice of reason on the library board. When are our city officials going to stop deciding for us, what’s best for us and let us make some choices? This was the administration’s big chance to restore some confidence in our city government’s ability to give the voters a voice and so far, it looks like our Mayor and Library Board are going in the opposite direction. Let’s hope our council will set this straight at the next meeting, and give us back the advisory vote.
What was so urgent about this request that the Library Board couldn’t give 24 hours notice for the citizens to attend this meeting to voice their opinion on this issue? It has been a topic of conversation from the beginning of the year, and we now had to have an emergency meeting to decide a two year direction for our Library to proceed, in less then 24 hours? It appears like another attempt to lead the voters around by a leash.
We are for Timberland. We don’t use the library much but are willing to pay for the services Timberland will provide. We definitely want the city out of the library’s control. It’s 12 cents well spent. Thanks Andy!
This is not at all like the EMS levy. In fact, it is so fundamentally different that the mayor and council should have no fear. I think this is actually considered, to levy opponents, pretty much the opposite situation.
EMS levy opponents were not necessarily against spending more for services rendered, or even against taxes in general. They simply didn’t trust the city to manage the money. TRL, on the other hand, is a proven service provider with a known cost.
Library supporters want these state-of-the-art services, not just for our computer semi-literate selves, but also for our children. TRL will compare to the King County system, which residents from the metro area are familiar with. Our children are online. We want the best for our children.
I was elated when I heard that the city would actually give the voters a choice as to what the citizens would prefer as to the type of a library we would have in our city, with this advisory vote. I personally prefer and wouldn’t mind paying taxes for an additionally enhanced library system like Timberland. I actually thought that the issue of trust had finally been partially restored to our city.
Once again though, our Mayor is trying to outguess the voters and tell us what we do and don’t want By the way this agenda item is worded, he is trying to put the total responsibility on the library board for this decision.
Does the city administration think that voters are so totally swayed by the recent EMS levy that we are incapable of making a free choice as to what library we would prefer in town? City officials are saying “trust us” and then attempt a behind the scenes approach such as this, to make our decisions for us. Mr. Mayor and other city administrators, you must learn one lesson to regain our trust; trust is a two way street.
Wow. Andy Gruse sure articulated that well. I agree one hundred percent.
I SO want the Timberland library…just as long as we get to keep Michelle
The people should definitely have the choice to spend an extra 12 cents, everyone I have talked to said they WOULD pay more to be a part of Timberland. Even those who don’t currently use the library have told me they would vote to pay more just to have the option of using the Timberland system.