JCPL’s Senior Management Team has indeed done an outstanding job cutting their operating expenses down to match the projected 2012 revenue of $24,627,711, down just about $1M from the 2011 revenue of $25,647,207. These revenues represent a property tax levy of 3.225 mills and the loss of revenue from 2011 to 2012 is due entirely to lower property assessed valuations, a problem faced by all levels of county government.

I have no problem with this and I think the library management and staff as well as the patrons of JCPL are willing to tighten their belts in these tough economic times. Let’s face it – we are very lucky to have experienced only an average four percent drop in assessed values. Think about libraries in Florida and Arizona!

What I do have a problem with is that revenues in 2008 were $27,765,529 at a tax levy of 3.425 mills. What happened to THAT two million dollars? As I’m sure you know by now, that money was “shifted” out of the library’s voter-approved tax levy starting in 2010 by the Board of County Commissioners in order to plug holes in their own budget.

THAT’s what I have a problem with. Jeffco voters approved that tax levy in 1986, up to 3.5 mills to operate the library, not as a slush fund for the Commissioners to use as they see fit. In fact, that voter-approved 3.5 mills should serve as a cushion to help the library through economic hard times. But no – that cushion has been “shifted” from the library and is now comforting the heads of our County Commissioners.

Let’s be clear about why we are seeing service cuts at the library. About a third of these cuts is due to our tough economy. We can live with that. But two thirds is due to the County Commissioners blatantly taking money out of the library’s tax levy.  In my view, that is a slap at the taxpaying Jeffco voters who have said they are willing to pay for their library services.

So does JCPL have a “sustainable budget”? Sure – to the extent that ANY budget is sustainable if you cut enough services and lay off enough staff. But you can’t define sustainability for the library when you can’t depend on its revenue – while we have County Commissioners who are willing to use the library’s tax levy as a fungible source of County revenue.

In the meantime, all the library can do is cut its operating expenses, such as:

• Staff reductions of about 14 FTEs (on top of last year’s reduction of another 14)
• Hours of service reduced to 51 hours/week at full-service libraries, down from 63 hrs/wk before Mondays were closed.
• Books and Materials budget reduced
• Staff training budget slashed

These cuts strike at the core of the Library’s mission. How much will they matter to Jeffco patrons? I guess we’ll find out. At the January board meeting, the only public comment was from a woman who wanted to know whether she could make a cash contribution to help restore hours of service. It’s important to her.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. As an independent library district, the tax levy we voters approved for library services would be under control of the Library Board of Trustees and right now we wouldn’t be facing these service cuts and staff layoffs. THAT would be a sustainable budget.

 A piece of good news I have to report is that the County’s attempts to circumvent our petition by attacking the Library Law has induced other libraries to offer their support. As a result, Save Jeffco Libraries’ legal team has been bolstered with services donated by other Colorado libraries. We are extremely gratified by this assistance and it gives us confidence that we stand ready to meet any further legal challenges.

I want you all to know that we are committed to seeing JCPL’s revenue and policies protected by becoming an independent library district. That’s the only way the library will ever be able to operate on a sustainable budget. We are not giving up and we need your help. This effort may be simple but it’s not easy. Together, we can prevail.

It’s up to us!

Thank you,

Tom Atkins

The bad news is that we will have to refile our petition along with a bond and we do not have a decision on the important legal issue in our case – whether Jefferson County officials can refuse to create a library district by “opting out.” The court did not rule on the substantive issues.

The good news is that the court has ruled that our petition was properly filed, so we can refile a petition in the same way except with a bond.

I’ve quoted the important points from the court order here.

1. In our favor, the judge ruled that the county attorney was wrong in claiming we should have filed the petition with the county clerk and gotten the clerk’s approval before circulating our petition. He ruled that the Colorado Library Law (CLL) takes precedence.

“Simply, the CLL clearly governs the formation of county libraries and library districts. Had the legislature wished to extend the requirements of Title 31 to those in county library situations, they would have presumably done so by explicitly stating as much within the CLL.”

2. The court ruled that we should have posted a bond with our petition.

C.R.S. § 24-90-107(3)(c)(I) states, “at the time of filing the petition for the establishment of a library district, a bond shall be filed with the county or counties sufficient to pay all expenses connected with the organization of the library district if such organization is not affected.”

We had argued that the CLL permits us to request that the bond be waived, and we did so in writing with the petition, and because the County Commissioners “opted out” of the district and declined to set an election, a bond was not required.

The judge disagreed with us:

“The Court is not persuaded by this argument because it is clearly refuted by the above-cited, express language of the CLL. By failing to pay a bond “at the time of filing the petition,” the petitioners failed to comply with the CLL and the Petition was therefore invalid.”

3. As a result, the court declined to rule on the substantive issues:

“Additionally, because the Court finds this issue [lack of a bond] to be fatal to Plaintiff’s claims, it declines to address the remaining issues present in the parties’ briefs.”

Although it is disappointing that the county’s decision to “opt out” was not addressed in the court ruling, there are reasons for encouragement in this decision. We know all the county’s objections to our first petition and the court has provided guidelines for filing a new one.

All of the advantages of a library district identified by the joint JCPL–Jefferson County steering committee in 2007 and 2008 are still true today, and the financial advantages in particular have become painfully obvious. At that time, the Jefferson County Library Board of Trustees warned that remaining under the county could cost the Library millions of dollars by 2012. Sure enough, county officials have siphoned off nearly $6 million since then. Had the Library become a district in 2009, the staff layoffs and cuts in service and hours now being imposed would never have been necessary.

Our view remains that the Library, the Library Law, and the issue of a library district are too important to walk away from, even though we will have to post a potentially expensive bond. As you know, the county’s refusal to honor our petition is important to all library systems in Colorado because of its implications for the CLL. We are in talks with other library systems regarding their possible assistance.

We are, of course, actively in discussion with our attorneys on the process going forward. Because the judge made the effort in this order to rule that we were correct in the procedures for filing the petition except for posting a bond, the ruling has encouraged us to file a new petition in accordance with the CLL and with an appropriate bond.

We are committed, however, to doing this thoughtfully, carefully, and collaboratively with legal experts as well as the advice of our many friends in the library community throughout the state.

As soon as we’ve had a chance to meet with our attorneys to clarify our legal position and options, we will have further information to report.

In the meantime, don’t forget: converting JCPL to a library district is the only way to protect it from blatant political meddling and secure our tax money from the sticky fingers of the county commissioners,

It’s up to us!

Tom Atkins

The Atkins are founders of Save Jeffco Libraries, a citizens’ initiative created to ensure tax revenues approved for exclusively for library purposes are appropriately allocated and the work of the Jefferson County Library Board of Trustees is not influenced by County officials.

The Colorado Association of Libraries also recognized the Atkins for their support of local libraries, including working with city government to repurpose old, unused spaces for library services, endless hours collecting signatures, and speaking to the public about the importance of the public library to the community.

“I have worked side by side with Tom and Alice and they are a force to be reckoned with,” said Dodie Ownes, Colorado Association of Libraries member, Jefferson County resident, and special projects coordinator for Library Journal and School Library Journal. “I strongly believe that only through this kind of citizen participation will our libraries be allowed to endure and flourish as sources of knowledge, social support and literacy centers for our Colorado community.”

“Every day we are reminded how important libraries are and how they serve all of our citizens, regardless of age, economic, or social status,” said Tom Atkins. “That’s why it’s so important to insulate the Library from the kind of political environment that threatens its funding, policies, and even its management.”

In 1993 and 1994, Tom Atkins worked with the City of Golden, Jefferson County Public Library (JCPL) and the County to convert the old Golden Recreation Center into the current Golden Library. He was also a former chair of the Jefferson County Public Library Board of Trustees.

“Former JCPL Trustees and all Save Jeffco Libraries supporters believe that the only way to perserve and protect JCPL is through the formation of an independent library district,” said Alice Atkins.

For additional information about Save Jeffco Libraries, visit SaveJeffcoLibraries.org, or contact the group at 720.340.1707.

####

Save Jeffco Libraries
Save Jeffco Libraries is a grassroots organization formed by Jefferson County Public Library patrons, including many former Library Trustees, who are concerned about the Library’s funding and independence and believe creation of a district is the only way to preserve and protect its future. Save Jeffco Libraries is a citizens’ initiative and is not affiliated with Jefferson County Public Library, its Board of Trustees, Jefferson County Library Foundation, or Friends of the Library.

“You are being hostile to the library and it is making me hostile to you!” Another patron responded to one of the Commissioners’ erroneous statements by holding up a copy of the Library Law and quoting from it.

On several issues, the Commissioners continued their obfuscation or openly misrepresented the facts:

1. Our petition was improperly filed because it should have been approved in advance with the County Clerk and also filed with the Clerk.

STRIKE ONE. This claim is demonstrably false. Fortunately, a heads-up patron in the audience asked the County Attorney for a citation and she provided one: 30-11-103.5 CRS County petitions and referred measures. That citation supports our position because it describes procedures to be followed “to the extent no such procedures are prescribed by statute”.

The library law provides just such statutory procedures:

24-90-107(3) If establishment of a county or municipal library or a library district is by petition of registered electors, the following procedures shall be followed:

(a) The petition shall set forth:

(I) A request for the establishment of the library;

(II) The name or names of the governmental unit or units establishing the library;

(III) The name of the proposed library, and for a library district, the chosen name preceding the words “library district”;

(IV) A general description of the legal service area of the proposed public library with such certainty as to enable a property owner to determine whether or not such property owner’s property is within the proposed library’s legal service area; and

(V) Specification of the mill levy to be imposed or other type and amount of funding and that the electors must approve any amount of tax levy not previously established by resolution or ordinance nor previously approved by the electors before the county or municipal library or library district can be established.

(b) Petitions shall be addressed to the legislative body of the county or municipality, or, in the case of a library district, to the boards of county commissioners of each county having territory within the legal service area of the proposed district.

Note that paragraph (b) specifically calls for the petition to be filed with the Board of County Commissioners, not the County Clerk.

2. The Commissioners stated, both verbally and in a printed flyer (click here), “Most citizens who support a library district base their support on their assumption that a district will provide more funding for library services. This is not the case… If a district were formed, only 3.225 mills would be available to fund it”

STRIKE TWO! Please re-read paragraph (a)(V) in the procedure above from the Library Law. It says that the petition specifies the mill levy, which our petition did, at 3.5 mills, the level approved by county election in 1986. So the Library’s tax funding under a library district would be higher than what the Commissioners are currently providing by 0.275 mills, or more than $2 million.

3. In their slide presentation, the Commissioners claimed that the Library received more than $29 million in 2010 and failed to spend $2.7M of that, and therefore didn’t need to close on Mondays.

STRIKE THREE! What the Commissioners failed to explain about these numbers is that $29M was not revenue received by the library, but the Commissioners’ appropriation. That appropriation included not only tax revenues, but also money taken from the Library’s reserve fund for capital improvements and operating shortfalls.

Once the Library was told that their mill levy would be reduced from 3.425 to 3.225 mills, the Library Board wisely reduced their capital improvement plan by a total of nearly $2.7M in order to avoid depleting their reserve fund. In addition, they cut operating expenses by closing Mondays and laying off staff to balance their budget.

So what you have is a fiscally conservative and responsible Library Board cutting expenses to balance their budget as best they could and being blamed by the Commissioners for not dipping into their reserve fund to spend the Commissioners’ appropriation. It is not just bizarre; it is an unconscionable attack on the Library.

4. Blast from the past: In their printed flyer, the Commissioners asserted that the result of an extensive analysis concluded that forming a district would be “a more expensive way to provide all County services including Library services”.

What do you get after three strikes? Thrown out of the game? The study they cited was extensive and took place in 2007 and 2008. Members of the study committee included not only JCPL staff, but County staff as well. Their conclusion was reported in 2008 by then Library Board Chairman Keith Grebe:

“After more than a year of analysis, the steering committee concluded that the Jefferson County Public Library could operate effectively and efficiently as a library district, and that a library district would result in an annual savings in operating costs.”

It is clear that what galls the Commissioners about an independent library district is that they could no longer rob Peter (the Library mill levy) to pay Paul (Social Services and the County’s General Fund.)

5. Only once has the Library received 3.5 mills

WOW! This one is actually TRUE! Except for one little inconvenient fact: taxpayers were billed 3.5 mills for the Library in 2006 and 2007, but the library was paid only 3.425 mills. Look up your own tax bills – I have copies of mine. I believe this is a clear violation of the Library Law, which says that all money collected for the library can be spent only for the library. In 2008, they changed the tax bills to accurately reflect the library’s levy of 3.425 mills.

6. A district would be another layer of government

This is a tired old platitude that simply isn’t true but they are hoping will resonate with some people. Under a district, the Library would be governed by the Library Board of Trustees, just as it is now. Nothing new there. But because the County Commissioners would be removed from authority in setting the Library’s mill levy, I believe that a district would remove a layer of government from between the taxpayer and the Library.

After all of this obfuscation and outright misrepresentation, it is hard to disagree with the citizen and library patron in the room who said “You are being hostile to the Library and it’s making me hostile to you!”

Let’s face it, folks, this is all about the money. And in the state of Colorado, tax increases are supposed to be approved by the voters. We approved a tax levy for library services in an election and they are using that tax levy to raise taxes for County departments that we did not approve. I call that a sham transaction that circumvents, if not violates, the law. It certainly shows a blatant disrespect for the voters.

To compound their disrespect for voters, the Commissioners have decided not to obey the Library Law in accordance to our lawful petition and place the creation of a library district on the ballot. Instead, they think they can exclude all the voters of Jefferson County from the library district and therefore there are no voters to vote on it. If they really think our petition was improperly filed, why take this absurd and bizarre action? Just reject it and tell us we need another petition. We’ll be delighted to provide them one!

Baloney! Jeffco Commissioners: quit using taxpayer money to intimidate taxpayers. What are you afraid of? Let the voters decide!

If you missed the Commissioners’ first two at-bats and would like to throw them a pitch of your own, the County has one more scheduled:

Thurs. Oct. 20 7-8:30 p.m.
Peak Community and Wellness Center
6612 South Ward St., Littleton

Even though the Commissioners spend more than half of these “Citizen Input” meetings tooting their own horns, it is still a great opportunity for you to tell them how you feel. I urge you to do so! Tell them as a voter, you expect your tax dollars to be spent on what you voted for. Tell them to quit the shenanigans and let voters decide on a library district.

You know how I feel: if we’re going to protect the Library from blatant political meddling and protect our tax money from the sticky fingers of the County Commissioners,

it’s up to us!

Thank you,

Tom Atkins

P.S. Alice and I were honored to receive an award for “Library Advocate” of the year from the Colorado Association of Libraries at their annual convention in Loveland last week. This is a distinguished award and humbly accepted on behalf of all of you who are so passionate about library services. I’ll write more about the award later.

Even though we’re all volunteers, we can’t do this for nothing. Legal services are expensive. Please help with a donation. Go to www.savejeffcolibraries.org and click the DONATE button to make your contribution with a credit card through PayPal’s secure servers. If you would like to donate by check, please make the check payable to Save Jeffco Libraries and mail it to:

Save Jeffco Libraries
PO Box 63
Golden CO 80402-0063

PLEASE NOTE: At this time, your donation is NOT deductible for federal or state income tax purposes.

Library advocates truly WERE wonderful. You filled the room with support for the Library. More than one of you embarrassed the Commissioners with questions they couldn’t answer and forced them into outright lies.

When asked why the Library isn’t getting its full voter-approved funding level of 3.5 mills, they dodged and weaved, saying only that the Library receives all the taxes collected for it. Which, of course, is true because they have “shifted” a portion of the Library’s levy into social services – so that portion is no longer collected for the Library.

Commissioner Rosier revealed a woeful lack of understanding about library districts, claiming he has lots of experience with “special districts” like fire and recreation, but failing to understand that a library district is not governed by the state’s “special district” laws, but by the library law.

Based on this “special district” experience, Rosier claimed that the library district would add a layer of government. But because the Library is already governed by the Library Board of Trustees and the library district would also be governed by the Library Board of Trustees, there would be no new level of government. In fact, because the County would be removed from authority in setting and appropriating the Library’s tax revenues, I believe that a library district would actually remove a layer of government between the taxpayer and the Library.

The Commissioners and County Attorney Ellen Wakeman focused much of their obfuscation on our petition for creation of a library district:

• At different times they made different claims for the cost of an election, ranging from $165,000 to $600,000. They know full well that one more line item on a regular November ballot would cost far less.
• They repeated another outright lie, that the petition would have required a special election in May. They should know that the library law requires the election to be a part of the next regular November election.
• They claimed that the petition was not properly filed and should have been filed with the Clerk and Recorder. Again, the County Attorney should know that the library law requires the petition to be filed with the County Commissioners. County Clerk Pam Anderson spent several minutes describing requirements for filing initiative and candidate petitions but freely admitted she didn’t know about the library law.
• County Attorney Wakeman claimed that the City of Westminster would opt out of the library district, costing $2 million in tax revenues. In actual fact, Westminster committed in 2008 to join with the district and in discussions with former JCPL Director Marcellus Turner this year, they have indicated that they remain open to a library district in the future.
• Referring to our petition and the requirements of the Library law, both the Commissioners and the County Attorney, Ellen Wakeman, once again made the astounding declaration that they should not have to hold elections when they think it’s too expensive. I’m so very thankful that our founding fathers had a different view of democracy than Jefferson County has!

Many of these statements are so easily proven wrong that it astounds me the Commissioners repeat them. I’d blame the County Attorney for keeping the Commissioners in the dark about the library law, but she obfuscates with the best of them.

Another interesting exchange occurred after the meeting, when someone asserted that the County owns the Library’s land and buildings. The Assistant County Administrator, who was present in the group, commented that she thought this was true. The County Commissioners themselves have made this assertion in the past, claiming that our petition would require that “the County would hand over all of its library buildings and assets to the newly formed district…”.

In actual fact, the Library’s infrastructure is already owned by the Library Board of Trustees, not by Jefferson County. Upon formation of a library district, the Library’s infrastructure would continue to be owned by the Library Board of Trustees, as it is now.

Note that the three “Community Libraries”, Conifer, Wheat Ridge, and Edgewater, are owned respectively by the R-1 school district, the Seniors’ Resource Center, and the City of Edgewater.

The County Commissioners will assert that they are just balancing the needs of multiple County services, especially Human Services, in determining how to allocate the property tax mill levy. We have no problem with their responsibility to do that when it comes to their own mill levy. But unlike other County services, we voted specifically for a separate mill levy for Library services and we expect that levy to be used for the Library. If they want to raise taxes for Human Services, which they have done for the past two years, go ahead and do so. The Commissioners stated in this meeting that they have 1.6 mills available under their TABOR cap, so they have room to raise Human Services. Just don’t take it out of the taxes we voted for the Library.

All these problems would be solved by converting JCPL to a library district. And all we want to do is to vote on it – as the library law gives us the right to do. We call on the Commissioners to do the right thing – honor the petition, obey the law, and let Jeffco voters vote!

But the reality is that the Commissioners simply will not give up taking the tax revenue you voted for the Library – it’s a heck of a thing when taxpaying citizens are forced to ask the courts to affirm our rights and force the County to allow voters to vote.

If you were not able to attend this first “citizen input” meeting, the County has scheduled two more. They are:

Tues. Oct. 11 7-8:30 p.m.
Buchanan Park Recreation Center
32003 Ellingwood Trail, Evergreen

Thurs. Oct. 20 7-8:30 p.m.
Peak Community and Wellness Center
6612 South Ward St., Littleton

These meetings are expressly for the purpose of finding out “what services, programs and county issues are most important to you”, so this is our opportunity to weigh in on the importance of the Library.

If we’re going to protect the Library from blatant political meddling and protect our tax money from the sticky fingers of the County Commissioners,

it’s up to us!

Thank you,

Tom Atkins

Even though we’re all volunteers, we can’t do this for nothing. Legal help is expensive and getting more so. Please help with a donation. Click the DONATE button below to make your contribution with a credit card through PayPal’s secure servers. If you would like to donate by check, please make the check out to Save Jeffco Libraries and mail it to:

Save Jeffco Libraries
PO Box 63
Golden CO 80402-0063

PLEASE NOTE: At this time, your donation is NOT deductible for federal or state income tax purposes.

Significant cuts are looming in services and hours. Please attend one of the Jefferson County Citizen Input Meetings listed below and tell the Commissioners:

• JCPL is an essential service
• Ask them to restore JCPL’s full voter-approved funding level of 3.5 mills
• Tell them you support a Library District

Wed. Sept. 28 7-8:30 p.m.
Arbor House at Maple Grove Park
4600 W. 32nd Ave., Golden

Tues. Oct. 11 7-8:30 p.m.
Buchanan Park Recreation Center
32003 Ellingwood Trail, Evergreen

Thurs. Oct. 20 7-8:30 p.m.
Peak Community and Wellness Center
6612 South Ward St., Littleton

Eventually, we hope to solve these funding problems by making JCPL into an independent library district. But at best that will not happen until after a 2012 election. In the meantime, funding cuts will mean much deeper cuts to services. It will take all of us to ensure the Commissioners know that we need the essential services provided by JCPL.

Send email support for JCPL to commish@jeffco.us or write the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners at 100 Jefferson County Pkwy, Golden, CO 80419.

And please remember, folks: even though we’re all volunteers, we can’t do this for nothing. Legal help is expensive and getting more so. The County Attorney has filed counterclaims to our lawsuit and the Court will require that we retain a mediator even though there are no settlements to mediate. The mediator is likely to cost several thousand dollars.

If we’re going to protect the Library from blatant political meddling and protect our tax money from the sticky fingers of the County Commissioners,

it’s up to us!

Thank you,

Tom Atkins

Please help with a donation. Unless we stand up as citizens, voters, taxpayers, and library patrons, the County will take our money and leave JCPL to fend for itself on a lower budget.

Click the DONATE button below to make your contribution with a credit card through PayPal’s secure servers. If you would like to donate by check, please make the check out to Save Jeffco Libraries and mail it to:

Save Jeffco Libraries
PO Box 63
Golden CO 80402-0063

PLEASE NOTE: At this time, your donation is NOT deductible for federal or state income tax purposes.

Marcellus’ letter is pasted below.

Please help with a donation. The County Attorney is filing counterclaims in our lawsuit and the Court will require that we retain a mediator even though there are no settlements to mediate. The mediator is likely to cost several thousand dollars. Unless we stand up as citizens, voters, taxpayers, and library patrons, the County will take our money and leave JCPL to fend for itself on a lower budget. Click on the DONATE button at the top-right and help us in any way you can.

it’s up to us!

Thank you,
Tom Atkins

Here is Marcellus’ letter:

Dear Jefferson County Residents,

For the last nine years, I have had the distinct professional fulfillment and pleasure of working for Jefferson County Public Library (JCPL), six years as Director of Public Services / Deputy County Librarian and the last three years as Executive Director.  I was honored to work with a highly trained, professional staff and a dedicated Board of Library Trustees for a prominent and nationally recognized and respected library system.

For most of those years, we were consistently able to meet the growing demand for library services and maintain a high-quality program of service that benefited the citizens of Jefferson County.  In the last few years, however, JCPL experienced financial and control challenges that seriously jeopardized our continued ability to offer the program of library service that serves the needs of our communities.

I strongly believe JCPL will not be able to maintain its current level of service – much less expand services to meet ever-growing demand – unless it can establish an independent library district.  I say this for several reasons:

• Library districts, allowable under Colorado Library Law, coexist outside other county departments and agencies without diverting attention and resources from one department/sector to another.
• Library districts are more financially stable and able to weather the vagaries of financial ups and downs through long-term planning and revenue projection, development and implementation.
• Library districts have complete control and authority over their direction and existence.
• Library districts operate with a direct relationship between the library and the citizens of that district.  Agreements and promises of services exist between the library and the voters.

Under its current structure, the Jefferson County Public Library operates as a component unit of Jefferson County government. The library’s mill levy is certified by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) who set the library’s mill levy during consideration of other county departmental/agency needs, even though the 1986 voter-approved mill levy allows up to a full 3.5 mills for libraries.  Using this process, annual library revenues will always be at risk.  As a point of reference, the Library has received its full 3.5 mill levy allocation only three times in the last 25 years, and the appropriation has been as low as 2.234 mills. 

As a result of fluctuations and inconsistencies in revenue the last few years, the library has seen reductions in property-tax revenues of $1.4 million creating a significant gap between annual revenues and expenditures.  Because of this, the library instituted a number of painful measures to close that gap, including closing on Mondays, laying off employees, reducing our investment in library materials and eliminating some programs and services.   Unfortunately, this risk to revenue is likely to continue into 2012 with projected drops in assessed property valuations.  As a result, the library will be forced to make further cuts to library services if it does not receive the full 3.5 mill levy allocation. 

If JCPL operated as an independent library district, it would not be subject to ongoing changes to the library’s mill levy and other allocations, including indirect costs charged to the library from the county for services that in some instances, could be provided at lesser cost from other sources. If the Library operated as in independent district, it could better project revenues and expenses over the long term, extend its planning horizon and manage its operations much more effectively based on true long-term revenue planning. More importantly, it could focus its time and energy on delivering library services, versus scrambling to adjust to annual budget changes.

Libraries were built on foundational values that must be preserved.  Jefferson County Public Library exists to make sure that every Jefferson County resident has equal access to the American dream — through equal access to information; support for educational, social and economic inclusion; and the fierce protection of democratic ideals. Of all modern institutions, Libraries truly are “of the people, by the people and for the people” and they need to stay that way. There needs to be at least one place in every community that is exempt from personal, political, or commercial influence – where anyone can come to better him or herself and participate fully in the life of the community.    

If the Library operated as an independent district, it would put control of the Library back in the hands of the people. Residents would set the Library’s mill levy through an election — and related revenues would actually go to the Library. Residents would decide when to increase or decrease the library’s tax revenues, based on the service levels they expect. And the Library would be directly accountable to taxpayers to meet those expectations.

I am proud of JCPL’s past accomplishments and I will watch their future accomplishments with a sense of indebtedness and pride. I firmly believe it will be easier for the Library to achieve future success if it operates as an independent Library district.

Sincerely

Marcellus Turner,
Former Executive Director Jefferson County Public Library

The reporter quotes a consultant on local taxation issues, Geoff Withers, who worked in the state Department of Local Affairs for 24 years:

“if they’re going to use that increment that they’re lowering [the mill levy] by for some other purpose, it seems to me that might be precluded” by the phrase “for the establishment and maintenance of public libraries.”

Withers supports our contention that when taxpayers agree to pay a tax for a specific purpose, they expect it to be spent for that purpose, not as a “slush fund” to balance the County’s budget. I have no problem with the needs of social services. If they want to increase taxes for social services, just ask the taxpayers like they did for the library.

What wasn’t clear in the article is the impact on the library – and the taxpayers. For the past two years, Jeffco Commissioners have diverted $2 million each year. That’s forced library layoffs and closing Mondays. Next year declining assessed values will take another $1 million and some libraries may have to close.

The other fascinating thing is that the county didn’t just “decline to participate” in a library district – they physically excluded all Jeffco voters from the district, thereby denying our right to vote on it. So they’ve thwarted voters twice – once by taking the money we voted for, then by denying our right to fix that by voting for a district.

But there’s one vote they can’t thwart – next year two of them will be asking us to re-elect them. I for one will be looking for candidates who respect not just the library but the rights of voters as well.

Please feel free to forward this to any friends who may not have seen it in the Post.

Remember, folks: If we’re going to protect the Library from more political meddling and protect our tax money from the sticky fingers of the County Commissioners,

it’s up to us!

But even though we’re all volunteers, we can’t do this for nothing. Legal help is expensive, especially going to trial.

Please help us with a donation. It angers me that we are paying our tax money for a bunch of County lawyers to intimidate voters and then we have to pay our own lawyers to force the Commissioners to obey the law. But unless we stand up as citizens, voters, taxpayers, and library patrons, they will take our money and leave JCPL to fend for itself. Click on the DONATE button and help us in any way you can.

Thank you,

Tom Atkins

Jefferson County group rallies around protecting library funding – The Denver Post

http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_18678111

Amy Ikelheimer, right, and her daughter Ellie, age 6, read a book together at the Golden Library at 1019 10th Street Thursday afternoon, August 4, 2011. (Karl Gehring / The Denver Post)

The Jefferson County Public Library system has a dedicated mill levy to fund operations.

But a small — and vocal — group of residents fed up that the county can raid that pot to cover budget gaps in other departments has renewed efforts to form a special district to protect financing for the 10-branch library system.

In 1986, county residents passed a maximum 3.5 mill levy “for the establishment and maintenance” of public libraries.

Since then, county commissioners have raised and lowered the library mill as needs in other tax-collection categories have increased.

In November 2009, former library trustee Tom Atkins noticed the change for the first time, when the commissioners announced they would lower the library mill levy so they could increase the social services mill levy.

Angered by what he sees as an improper use of library funds, Atkins and his wife, Alice, founded Save Jeffco Libraries. The group of about 30 residents, including some other former library trustees, has held six public meetings this summer on the idea of creating a library district.

The group is working separately from the library and its board, and while both library executives and county commissioners say the citizens have good intentions, their work is complicating 2012 budget talks underway now and is straining relations between the library and county.

The debate over forming a district comes as libraries across the nation struggle with budget cuts, and as residents in other parts of Colorado are also considering forming separate districts.

In Denver, a proposal to ask voters to create a special library district or OK a mill levy has been tabled while the city’s Structural Financial Task Force mulls options. In Aurora, citizens pushed to put a measure on the November ballot that would create a special district for the Mission Viejo library, which closed last year.

Balancing a budget

In 2009, commission chairman Kevin McCasky sent a letter to library executives saying the commissioners were having trouble balancing the 2010 budget.

County revenues were flatlining as demand for social services increased.

“We are considering shifting a portion of the library mill levy in order to meet this increase in demand on our social services programs,” McCasky wrote.

Doing so meant that the county would collect less money for the library and more for social services while staying under the state-mandated limits on taxation set by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR.

Tom Atkins was infuriated, even though the library tax measure passed in 1986 allowed the levy to dip as low as 1.5 mills.

People who work with mill levies say the commissioners’ ability to adjust the tax rates hinges upon who’s interpreting the law.

State Department of Local Affairs manager of local government services Scott Olene and Andy Karsian, a legislative coordinator for Colorado Counties Inc., both said they thought the “not more than” wording of the mill levy gives the commissioners authority to adjust the levy, as they have been doing off and on since it passed.

Geoff Withers, who worked in the state Department of Local Affairs for 24 years and now consults on tax issues, agreed that the wording generally gives the county commissioners the authority to adjust the mill levy.

But, Withers said, “if they’re going to use that increment that they’re lowering it by for some other purpose, it seems to me that might be precluded” by the phrase “for the establishment and maintenance of public libraries.”

Three options

Olene said residents who disagree with the commissioners’ decision have three options: Work with the commissioners, attempt to recall them or sue the county.

Atkins didn’t like the idea of suing the county over one year’s tax adjustments.

“My belief is that rather than pursuing that avenue of approach, it’s far better to permanently solve the problem,” Atkins said.

Forming a library district, he said, would take some of the control “out of the commissioners’ hands.”

The Jefferson County Public Library pushed for the creation of a library district in 2008, but the commissioners denied the library’s request.

Library spokeswoman Rebecca Winning said board members are researching whether it would be prudent to create a library district now.

The library shares some services with the county that it would lose if it became a separate district.

She said the library’s board members have not formed an official opinion about Save Jeffco Libraries.

But that doesn’t keep the county commissioners from sometimes seeing the two groups as one entity.

During a public meeting between the commissioners and library executives last month, some of the commissioners said they were caught off guard by some of the attempts to create a library district.

Winning interjected, saying, “I want to confirm that the citizens’ initiative is acting independently” from the library.

And the commissioners sometimes confuse Save Jeffco Libraries with Friends of the Jefferson County Public Library, a different group of citizens that fundraises for the library.

The confusion complicates matters when Save Jeffco Libraries handed county commissioners a petition with signatures from 1,300 people supporting the creation of a library district, as it did in January.

State library law offers conflicting descriptions of what must happen after residents submit a petition.

At one point, it says the commissioners must either approve the district or allow residents to vote on it.

At another point, it says commissioners can decline to participate in the district, which is exactly what the commissioners chose to do.

Angry with the outcome, Atkins sued the county, saying the board of commissioners — then made up of chairwoman Faye Griffin, McCasky and Donald Rosier — overstepped its bounds.

The case is set to go to trial in Jefferson County District Court on Jan. 31, 2012.

In the meantime, Save Jeffco Libraries will continue to advocate for the creation of a separate library district.

Liz Navratil: 303-954-1054 or lnavratil@denverpost.com

• The Board is trying to find a new Executive Director for the Library while the Library operates under Interim Director Pam Nissler.
• The Board is short-handed after the newest member, Catherine Hildreth, resigned. The Commissioners had failed to advise her adequately of the level of commitment required for the position.
• JCPL has had to prepare a “Zero-Based Budget (ZBB) in addition to their regular budget

The funding and budgeting situation is precarious. At the Library’s current mill levy, 3.225 mills, JCPL will experience a drop in funding of about $1 million a year because of declining property assessed values. Please understand that this drop will be experienced by the whole County and the Library is more than willing to bear its fair share of this burden.

The problem is that on top of this reduction, the Library is suffering a loss of almost another $2 million because the Commissioners are already “shifting” its tax money into other departments. In other words, the burden is NOT being shared. The Library is being asked to shoulder more of the burden to balance the County’s budget.

Now that the ZBB process is under way, the Commissioners have begun to reveal their true purpose in this exercise: to set the Library Board up for a repeat of last year’s fiasco and source of the Commissioners’ ire.

You may remember that last year the Commissioners decided to continue “shifting” almost $2 million from the Library’s tax levy and instructed the Board to spend down its Reserve Fund rather than cut services. The Board decided that spending its reserves was not sustainable and to continue running as close as possible to a balanced budget. After painful analysis, the Library determined the best cost-cutting option was to close libraries on Mondays. The Commissioners were irate. Their attitude has been “we told you how to do it in your budget by spending your reserves but you wouldn’t listen.”

The Zero-Based Budget involves breaking the Library into 38 “business units” and preparing a cost justification from scratch for each unit. At their first ZBB meeting with the County on July 25, staff presented the outline of a detailed budget based on their current level of operating expenses. The Commissioners told the Library that it should not base its budget on any specific level of funding. Acting Director Pam Nissler replied that the Library’s standards are based on JCPL’s Long Range Fiscal Plan as well as the Colorado Public Library standards of service and that the current budget permits a level of service at about the 50^th percentile. “Oh No”, said County Administrator Ralph Schell. “You can’t use library standards – if you do, you’ll be asking for too much money!”

The Commissioners intend to examine each line-item of the Library’s 38 “business units” not just for justification and possible cuts, but to look for “overlapping services”, where the County thinks it is already providing similar services. Commissioner Rosier has specifically cited I.T. as an example. Once again, the County has no statutory authority for doing this.

So here’s the setup: The Commissioners will target line-by-line cuts in JCPL’s budget and reduce the Library’s funding (mill levy) accordingly. Then they’ll tell the Library Board exactly how to spend that money to achieve the Commissioners’ level of cuts. If the Library Board asserts its statutory spending authority and insists on a balanced budget requiring service cuts rather than depleting its resources, the Commissioners will be even more irate than they were last year. It’s a no-win situation for the Library. I predict the BCC will even charge the Trustees with fiscal mismanagement for ignoring their “suggestions” for how to spend the Library’s money.

This situation has some very important ramifications:

• JCPL’s funding will be slashed yet again to supplement Social Services and other County functions.
• Further cuts in services will be necessary to avoid depleting the Library’s reserve fund.
• The Commissioners effectively take over the Library Board’s statutory authority and responsibility to determine how the Library’s money is spent.
  The Library Law states plainly [C.R.S. 24-90-109(e)(I)] that the Library Board of Trustees has “exclusive control and spending authority over the disbursement of the library funds as appropriated by its legislative body, including all assets of the public library fund, as set forth in section 24-90-112 (2) (a)”

This is nothing short of an attack on the Library and the Board of Trustees. The Commissioners goal is pretty clear – to use the Library’s property tax levy as a fungible source of revenue for the County and to continue to tap it to balance their own budget. Not only is this damaging to the Library, it is an insult to the taxpayers who voted to fund JCPL twenty five years ago.

Remember, folks: If we’re going to protect the Library from this blatant political meddling and protect our tax money from the sticky fingers of the County Commissioners,

it’s up to us!

But even though we’re all volunteers, we can’t do this for nothing. Legal help is expensive even though we’ve gotten much of it pro-bono.

Please help us with a donation. It irks me that we are paying our tax money for a roomful of County lawyers to intimidate voters and now we have to pay our own lawyers to force the Commissioners to obey the law. But unless we stand up as citizens, voters, taxpayers, and library patrons, the County will take our money and leave JCPL to fend for itself. Click on the DONATE button and help us in any way you can.

Thank you,

Tom Atkins

COMMISSIONERS MAKE CASE FOR DISTRICT

The Library Board of Trustees presented its 2012 budget summary to the Jeffco Board of County Commissioners (BCC) this past Thursday, July 14. In it, they confirmed what we’ve been saying for the past couple of months – at the current funding level, they will have to:

• Cut staff
• Further reduce hours of  service and
• Close one or more libraries.

The BCC, in direct comments by Commissioners Rosier and Griffin, made it clear that they believe the Library’s property tax is a fungible source of revenue for the County and that they will continue to decide how that revenue should be split up, particularly between the JCPL and Social Services. To back up their statements, Commissioner Griffin repeatedly said that “everyone wants a piece of the pie”, pointedly including the Library’s dedicated tax revenue in the pie.

Both Rosier and Griffin made repeated comments about the needs of Social Services, as well as their opinion that the Library’s Fund Balance is still too high, sending a clear message that the Library will get none of its money back and may lose even more.

We at SJL strongly believe the Library’s tax levy is dedicated for library services only because:

1. The 1986 election approving that property tax was for “the establishment and maintenance of public libraries”
2. The Library Law C.R.S. 24-90-112 (2) (a) says that library taxes can be used only for library services

We have no quarrel with Social Services. But when voters say we’ll pay a tax specifically for library services, as we did in 1986, we expect that tax money to be used for library services, not to balance the County’s budget.

In Thursday’s meeting, the Commissioners further asserted that the Library Board should spend its revenue as directed by the County, stating that the Library Board’s refusal to do so last year, in deciding to close Mondays and refusing to spend down its cash reserves, was the cause of the Commissioners ire.

The Colorado Library Law is very explicit about the Library Board’s authority in this area:

C.R.S. 24-90-109(1)(e)(I) In county and municipal libraries, the board of trustees shall have exclusive control and spending authority over the disbursement of the library funds as appropriated by its legislative body, including all assets of the public library fund, as set forth in section 24-90-112 (2) (a).

The Jefferson County Commissioners have conclusively demonstrated that they have no intention of complying with the Library Law. In our own efforts to create a library district in full accord with the Library Law, they have refused to comply with the law by either creating the district or scheduling it for election, forcing us to sue them.

Now they are blatantly attempting to usurp the statutory rights of the Library Board of Trustees by directing them how to spend the Library’s money. When the Library Board asserts its rights and responsibilities, the Commissioners use the punitive strong-arm tactic of taking revenue out of the Library’s property tax levy. This not only punishes JCPL and all its patrons, it denies voters our right to approve taxes for specific purposes.

The Commissioners have made an iron-clad case why Jefferson County needs an independent library district. Only a LIBRARY DISTRICT will provide secure funding from the property tax approved in 1986 by Jefferson County voters and insulate JCPL from this ongoing struggle with the County Commissioners.

SJL COMMUNITY MEETINGS

Our community presentations continued this week at the Standley Lake and Evergreen libraries after last week’s events at Arvada and Golden. The reception has been outstanding. We’re getting the information out to Jeffco residents about what’s being done to the Library.

CHANNEL 4 NEWS SEGMENT COVERS SAVE JEFFCO LIBRARIES

This week, Channel 4 News ran a story about our efforts to create a library district in Jefferson County. They showed film clips of me, former Library Board Chairman Keith Grebe, and Golden scientist Elliot Brown, as well as County Attorney Ellen Wakeman.

The clips of Elliot, Keith, and me were all very good. We didn’t lay out the whole case, but it was very positive overall. The producer made a common mistake introducing the story by referring to the proposed library district as a “special taxing district”, but that’s a perception we will have to continue to battle. As you know, a library district comes under the Library Law and would be funded by the same property tax we now pay for JCPL.

But the segment I loved was of the County Attorney, Ellen Wakeman. She said, in effect, “why should we have an election? It might cost $600K.” Never mind that the cost is wrong – that would be an estimate for a single-issue special election. As the County Attorney well knows, the Library Law C.R.S. 24-90-107(d)(II) specifically requires that it be held as part of a November election, which for a single ballot item is far less expensive.

The important point is that the County government’s top lawyer is telling voters that elections are just too expensive! I realize that money rules politics these days, but WOW. Jefferson County officials are saying we shouldn’t have elections because they cost too much. What a democracy!

The Jefferson County Commissioners are getting into such deep doodoo that they are truly embarrassing themselves.

Remember, folks: If we’re going to protect the Library from this blatant political meddling and protect our tax money from the sticky fingers of the County Commissioners,

it’s up to us!

Please help us with a donation. It irks me that we are paying our tax money for a roomful of County lawyers to intimidate voters and now we have to pay our own lawyer to force them to obey the law. But unless we stand up as citizens, voters, taxpayers, and library patrons, they will take our money and leave JCPL to fend for itself. Click on the DONATE button and help us in any way you can.

Thank you,

Tom Atkins