To answer further questions the community might have regarding the library levy that is on the Aug. 6 ballot, Yes for Library Levy sponsored a meeting July 25 at the Mullis Senior Community Center. Beth Helstien, with Yes for Library Levy provided background while Steve Bowman, who has mediated for League of Women Voter forums for years, directed questions. Helstien as well as Laurie Orton, Director of the Library, and Anthony Morris, Assistant Director, took turns responding.

For background, the library’s budget is approximately two million dollars. The Friends of the Library provides some financial support and additional revenue comes from grants and donations. Like other junior taxing districts, property taxes, comprise nearly 95% of the library’s budget. Thirteen years ago, the library requested and received a 39 cents-per-thousand levy. Over time, the property taxes dropped to 29 cents per thousand. To recover from that drop, the library is asking that the levy be lifted to 41 cents per thousand. According to a library’s fact sheet, this would mean an annual tax increase of approximately $113 on a $750,000 property. The levy lid cycle remains for 10 years; and the library commits to refraining from seeking a new levy lift until 2035.

Breaking down that two million budget 65 percent is personnel. The library boasts 70 volunteers and 23 staff members. Of those 23, most are part-time. Operational overhead, including the maintenance of the current building, is 16 %, collections seven, technology four and programs and programs two percent.

When asked why the library only asks for levies every 10 years rather than a shorter time frame, Helstien responded that after researching looking into whether a shorter time frame would be better, it turned out that 10 years is commonly used in junior taxing districts because a longer cycle gives more stability.

Another question came up regarding insurance funds for the Spring Street building.

“We did receive approximately and two and a half million dollars in proceeds from the insurance company… we did not put that in reserves $1,569 million was spent on work on the building after damage to it,” Orton explained, also clarifying that the levy is for the library’s general operating and maintenance not the Spring Street building.

When a member of the crowd asked if the Trustees could be trusted not to use the levy funds for the building, Morris pointed out that the Spring Street building has a separate account which is not funded by taxpayer money, but by donations and some insurance proceeds.

“The board meetings are all public. The minutes are posted online. If money was being spent [inappropriately] it would be discussed in those meetings and would show up in the budgets, also posted online. It would be very very visible,” Morris explained.

The Journal spoke with Royce Meyerott, writer of the con statement in the Voters Guide, after the meeting. Meyerott voiced concerns about at least one transaction he noticed when reviewing the library budget regarding a $1,492,395.20 transfer in December of 2023.

Orton explained the transaction saying that from March 14 of 2022 through July 11 2023, all insurance proceeds were tracked in and deposited into the Operating Fund, totaling $2,587,868.39. “This was before the board created a new Project Fund to track the receipt and expense of all building project-related funds, including insurance proceeds and expenses for the damage to the Spring Street building, separately from the Operating Fund,” she said. From January 19, 2022 through December 15, 2022, all damage-related expenses were tracked in and paid from the Operating Fund using those insurance proceeds. The total expense for that time period equaled $1,095,473.19, according to Orton.

Subtracting the $1,095,473.19 in expenses paid from the $2,587,868.39 of insurance proceeds received, left $1,492,395.20 of insurance proceeds sitting in the Operating Fund. “With the establishment of the new Project Fund, the remainder of these insurance proceeds were transferred out of the Operating Fund into the Project Fund, where all further proceeds and expenses were tracked. Only $1,491,716 was transferred. The small amount of $675.20 remained in the Operating Fund to cover Operating expenses,” she said. “No taxpayer funds were transferred to the Project Fund, and never have been.”

The Journal asked Meyerott if not a levy, what did he want the library to do. “I want them to live within their means even if that that results in cutting programs, salaries, and selling the Spring Street building,” he responded, adding that the library should also use the current building space more efficiently.

Orton explained during the July 25 meeting that selling the Spring Street building would not help due to the purchase bond. “If we sold the property we can pay off the bond, and that would leave us with a little bit of a profit but not enough for us to make ends meet for the years ahead,” Orton said. The board has stated in previous public forums about the levy that while they are focusing on the levy at the moment, they will continue to work on a viable for the Spring Street building to become the new library location.

Salaries were also brought up. While the exact salaries of all employees were not discussed, Helstien compared the 65 percent of the San Juan Island Library budget with eight comparable-sized and ranked Washington libraries. La Conner spends 90 percent of its operation budget on personnel, Burlington spends 88 percent, upper Skagit spends 73 and Lopez spends 76.

One audience member asked what cuts would be made. “We would need to consider salaries, so staffing and the number of staff which may decrease access to our resources,” Orton said. “We may have to cut the hours we are open, and we would also have to cut our collections budget. We would not be able to provide as many new items. And we would have to cut back on programming. I hate to even consider where we would cut because those programs are so well used in our community.”

The Summer Reading program, according to Morris, is currently one of the most popular. This program is geared toward keeping children reading during the summer months. Studies have shown that often children don’t read while school is out, and when they return they have gotten out of practice and their reading skills have declined. Summer reading is just one of the children’s literacy programs the library has to offer; Reading with Rover, and Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library are a few others.

One attendee asked if they partnered with other organizations, to which Helstien listed off The Joyce L. Sobel Family Resource Center, public schools, including of course the San Juan Island School District, the National State Park and Island Rec as just a few.

One attendee wondered if taxing people’s second or third homes, who may not vote in this county was similar to taxation without representation. Helstien responded, “We have higher grocery costs, we have crazy high rent. We know iits expensive to live here One of the few benefits we have is that we do collect revenue for our public services, like fire, the hospital district, and the library from people who may or may not vote, but who don’t live here [year round].”

Meyerott, when speaking to the Journal after the meeting noted that while he himself could afford the tax increase, for him it was about islanders that could not. “People are struggling right now and everyone, like the fire district, is asking for more funding,” he said.

When broached with the question how does the library justify asking struggling islanders for additional taxes. “That is on our minds. We know that raising taxes is hard on the community and we worry about that,” Orton said. The library levy request was stretched several years beyond the last 2011 request. “There are a lot in our community who it is hard to pay those taxes. But, it’s also hard to buy books, rent movies, attend educational programs, get educational materials or get literacy education for their kids.”