Library funding forum elicits some questions

By JEFF MORRIS 

On Sept. 18, the three Bedford libraries held a joint information session at the Bedford Hills Community House regarding the funding proposition they will have on the ballot Nov. 4.

The forum, attended by roughly 40 people, began with a slightly expanded version of the presentation given at the Bedford Town Board meeting of Sept. 4.

Once again, the leaders of the three libraries — Terrie Paladino, president of the Bedford Hills Free Library board of trustees; Scott Harrison, president of the Bedford Free Library board of trustees; and Ian Shaw, president of the Katonah Village Library board of trustees — stated the case for removing decisions on library funding from the purview of the town board, and instead having it voted on directly by voters.

Under the proposition, the combined amount to be raised for the three libraries is $2,628,845. The proposed 2026 budget will increase residential property tax rates by $1.39 per $1,000 of assessed value. According to the funding proposition’s proponents, that would be an increase of $97 per year for the median residential property. That median, they say, is approximately $70,000, which is equivalent to a market value of $862,100.

Of the total amount that is to be raised under the proposition, $810,058 would go to the Bedford Hills Free Library, $766,999 to the Bedford Free Library, and $1,051,788 to the Katonah Village Library. 

Currently, the three libraries receive a combined total of $1,788,845 in annual operating funds from the town’s operating budget, an amount that covers 73.5% of the libraries’ operating expenses. The proposal raises the percentage of the library budgets funded by the town to 88%, which is still significantly lower than the 94% average that all other municipalities in Westchester County provide to their libraries, the library presidents have said. 

The amount to be raised as specified in the proposition is to remain constant in future years. Should the libraries require a funding increase, they will have to come back to voters with a new request.

While those attending the session seemed overwhelmingly in support of the proposition, not everyone was in agreement. Robert and Mary Kehoe of Katonah asked a series of questions, challenging the assumptions and statements made in the presentation. They were particularly interested in obtaining more details on the individual library budgets, insisting that the figures given did not provide sufficient information on where the money was going.

The library presidents insisted that relevant information about library expenditures is readily available from each library, and that they had spent considerable time determining how much money the libraries would need to support the first year of strategic initiatives already developed with community feedback and avoid cuts in library staff, operating hours, materials and programs. Mary Kehoe wanted more transparency about how those costs were determined.

Shaw responded that they would be happy to conduct a private session with the board to answer any additional questions. But he was adamant about refusing to answer another request, to disclose the individual salaries of each library employee.

Don Scott, who had served on the Bedford Town Board and identified himself as a “recovering town board member,” observed that compared to the separate requests that each library used to make to the board, they had now somehow come up with a formula to fund all three libraries, which had previously seemed impossible. Another audience member noted that they were now using analytics to determine the level of funding needed, as opposed to just throwing numbers out there that seemed arbitrary. 

Scott asked why, if they’ve now come up with this kind of formula, they don’t try to use that approach with the Town Board and give it a chance to provide funds based on more solid requests. Shaw said even if they did that, they would still be relying on the discretion of the Town Board, whereas under this proposal they will know exactly how much they have to work with each year going forward.

One of the questions asked was subsequently added to the FAQs on the ballot website, bedfordlibrariesballotvote.info. 

“Why was the public meeting in September when you have known about the proposition for some time?” was the question. The answer given was that the process of getting a proposition on the ballot is lengthy and requires several approvals. 

“Last fall we began reviewing our needs and drafting the proposal,” said the response. “After board approval, it was reviewed by the Town Lawyer and Town Clerk, who submitted it to the County Board of Elections in June. While awaiting their decision, we prepared for a public presentation. Once we received approval in late August, we began publicizing the September meeting through newspapers, library websites, and email.” 

Another FAQ question regarded what gives the libraries the ability to request a ballot proposition for funding. The answer is Chapter 414 of New York State Education Law 259, “which was amended in 1995 to enable the citizens of a municipality served by one or more libraries to decide how much to tax themselves for library services.” It also requires that the proposition appear on the ballot in the general election in November.