LIBRARY  LEVY ORDINANCE must increase Library operating hours, NOT displace  current funding, and MUST have a public oversight COMMITTEE 
The  Seattle Public Library is in trouble and needs your help!  In the next  few weeks, the City Council will vote to put on the August 7 ballot a  $17 million/year, 7-year property tax levy for operations, but Council  Bill 117425  would leave the library unaccountable to voters in how it spends the  levy and vulnerable to cuts in the funds it now receives.  The Council  needs to hear about needed improvements by message (contact info below)  in the public comment periods that are at the beginning of any City  Council committee or full Council meeting when Council Bill or later  proposals are discussed.  Background.   Libraries for All, the 1998 bond issue, was in danger of failing at the  polls until the addition of ironclad numerical allocations of the  revenues and a strong, independent, geographically based oversight  committee.  Unfortunately, C.B. 117425 lacks numerical allocations or an  oversight committee.  Letters from the City Neighborhood Council and  the Seattle Community Council Federation recommend both, suggesting as a  model resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997  which created the public oversight committee for Libraries for All.  As  currently proposed, the Library levy has less accountability than any  property tax bond or levy proposed to voters in the last twenty years.   Please urge the City Council to make the following improvements: 1.     Amend  C.B. 117425 to commit that the City Council will not cut the existing  level of library support from the General Fund, and that the Library  Board will increase the hours and days of the week in which libraries  are open.  As written, the proposed levy ordinance would allow the  Council to completely displace with levy funds the current level of  General Fund support now provided to the Library, and allow the Board  not to increase the hours and days of being open.  
Without  a City Council commitment to maintain General Fund support and a  Library Board commitment to increase the hours and days of the week when  the libraries are open, passage of the levy could leave the Library  with no more funds or operating hours than it has today, plus the  possibility that funds and hours will decline when the levy runs out at  the end of seven years.  Consider that although part of the 1999 parks  levy provided operating support, when the levy ran out that funding was  not fully restored from the General Fund, leaving parks funding in worse  shape than before the levy was passed.   
2.   Add  to C.B. 117425 a strong, independent, geographically based oversight  committee like that for the 1998 Libraries for All bond measure as  created by Resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997.  Oversight committees  were in the ordinances putting before the voters the Bridging the Gap  transportation levy, the Fire Facilities and Emergency Response Levy,  the two parks levies, the series of housing levies, and the three  Families and Education levies.  The proposed Library levy includes  capital spending that needs oversight by a committee.  And contrary to  claims that the levy’s primary purpose of operations spending does not  require a public oversight committee, oversight committees cover the  Families and Education levy (entirely an operations levy) and covered  the 1999 parks levy (partially an operations levy).  
Voter-approved  funding for the Library is in particular need of a public oversight  committee because the City Council and Mayor and hence the voters have  so little power over how the Library Board would spend the levy.  A  geographic system of representation for the oversight committee is  particularly needed because of concerns that the Central Library’s  building and programs will take funds away from operations and hours of  the branch libraries.  And the committee needs to be independent -- not  with voting positions for high-ranking City officials (as with the  Bridging the Gap oversight committee) or with just one member required  to be a Seattle resident (as with the Fire Facilities and Emergency  Response Levy).
WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW
This  is urgent, and you can make a difference!  NOW, please contact all nine  Councilmembers. The message:  Amend C.B. 11745 committing to increase  hours and days of operation while holding the Library harmless from cuts  in its current General Fund allocation; and creating a strong,  independent, and geographically based oversight committee like the one  that Resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997 created for the 1998 Libraries  for All bond issue.  Below are voice mails and e-mail addresses (and/or  find the Councilmembers on Twitter and Facebook).  It’s best to write to  each separately, not address all in one message.  The fax number is (206) 684-8587. 
SEATTLE COMMUNITY COUNCIL FEDERATION
March 28, 2012
Seattle City Council
601 Fifth Avenue, Second floor
P. O. Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025
Re:   Proposed levy ordinance should hold harmless the existing funding of  the Library, commit to increased hours and days of opening, and create a  strong, independent, and geographically balanced oversight committee to  ensure accountability 
Dear City Councilmember:
Throughout  our 66 year history, the Seattle Community Council Federation has  strongly supported funding for the Seattle Public Library.  As you know,  Council Bill 117425 is a proposed ordinance that would place before the  voters a 7-year property tax levy of about $17 million/year.  
SCCF  has not yet taken a position on the proposed levy, but believes that  improvements in the levy ordinance are needed to make it most deserving  of assent from the voters.  First, we suggest that C.B. 117425 be  amended to commit the City Council not to cut the existing level of  library support from the General Fund, and to increase the hours and  days of the week in which the downtown library and the branch libraries  are open.  As currently written, the proposed levy ordinance would allow  the City Council to completely displace with levy funds the current  level of General Fund support now provided to the Library, and not to  make any increase in the hours or days of the week of being open.  
Without  a City Council commitment to maintain General Fund support and to  increase the hours and days of the week when the libraries are open,  passage of the levy could leave the Library with no more funds than it  has today, plus no assurance of continued funding when the levy runs out  at the end of seven years.  Consider that although the 1999 parks levy  provided operating support, when the levy ran out that funding was not  fully restored from the General Fund, leaving Department of Parks and  Recreation funding in worse shape than before the levy was passed.   
Our  other concern is that C.B. 117425 does not include an oversight  committee to ensure public accountability for spending of the levy  proceeds.  We urge that the levy ordinance include a strong,  independent, and geographically balanced oversight committee by use of  the same language from Resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997 that created  the oversight committee for the Libraries for All bond measure.
Accountability  for voter-approved levy and bond revenues via oversight committees has  been central to voter approval of the bond and levy measures of recent  decades.  Such committees have overseen not only the Libraries for All  bond measure, but the Bridging the Gap transportation levy, Families and  Education levy, Housing levy, and both Parks levies.  In almost all  cases, the oversight committees were created by the ordinance that put  the measure on the ballot.  Some of the committees have been more  effective than others, but none have greater power, independence, or  geographic balance than did the oversight committee for the Libraries  for All bond measure.  
Taxpayers  are more likely to approve a bond or levy measure if they know that  spending of the revenues will be overseen by an oversight committee.  A  strong, independent, and geographically balanced oversight committee is  especially needed for the Library levy as it was for the Libraries for  All bond measure because the Library Board has so much power but is not  elected, and because of concerns that branch libraries will be  sacrificed to the funding needs of the downtown library.   
The  City Council created a public oversight committee for the Libraries for  All bond issue shortly before the November 1998 election because the  bond issue was being criticized for a lack of accountability in how the  funds were to be spent.  SCCF urges the Council to be more proactive in  this case by establishing the oversight committee in the bond issue  ordinance (C.B. 117425), using the same language as was in Resolutions  29846, 29952, and 29997.  This letter was discussed, revised, and  approved at the Seattle Community Council Federation’s March 27 board  meeting.  
Sincerely,
Jeannie Hale, President
3425 West Laurelhurst Drive NE
Seattle, Washington  98105
206-525-5135 / fax 206-525-9631
jeannieh@serv.net 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment