Dearborn Library to Propose Some Staff Cuts
Should Library Consider a Property Tax Levy for Direct Funding?
With our economy still sputtering and unemployment still rising, libraries are noticing a surge in business. This is good news for Dearborn libraries but higher usage doesn’t guarantee protection from the city’s budget cutting axe.
One of the current proposals being discussed would see the elimination of seven full-time library positions, leaving each of the city’s three branch libraries with just one full-time librarian and a host of part-time workers.
The good news is that the branch libraries would at least remain open, albeit with the same current short business hours — but at least open — under this proposal. The collection of the Dearborn library system contains 297,070 volumes and circulates about 954,785 items per year, according to lib-web-cats.
This brings us to another idea on the best ways to keep our library system intact.
Other communities have floated library millages for the sole purpose of having proper funding for what is one of the single most important items for a city and its residents. Nearby communities in metro Detroit operate their libraries this way and it appears to be an effective way to ensure that libraries don’t end up with table scraps when it comes city budget time, which likely could happen to our libraries here in Dearborn when the budget slashing is done.
But millages can be double-edged sword as one can never predict how a community will vote, particularly in today’s economy. That said Jennifer Brash, a staff writer at the entertainment blog thecounterproject, raises some interesting points, comparing how West Bloomfield Township was able to levy a property tax for direct funding of its library services and it has never looked back. You can read that history HERE.
Could something like that work in Dearborn? Hard to say but the idea is an intriguing one.
April 12th, 2010 at 9:19 am
When city employees and retirees consider a special tax to fund their (unlimited) retirement plans, I will definitely consider a tax to directly fund our libraries or other services. Until then, not a chance.
April 12th, 2010 at 9:21 am
What I don’t understand is the way the library handles media donations. I tried to donate a book, for which they already had a copy of (so I would think it’s an “acceptable” book and having two copies means one can be lost) and they refused it. They said they must buy books from a certain distributor. Isn’t that odd?
April 12th, 2010 at 11:00 am
Great story by Ms Brash. Seems like this should be the type of thing city leaders should be announcing, not the closure and demolition of our pools.
April 12th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
No way would the people vote for a millage for libraries — not at this time — forget it big guy.
April 13th, 2010 at 10:04 am
Libraries are not “for profit” entities. In Dearborn, we throw many other services into that same category. Why aren’t Camp Dearborn, the golf course and the rec center being operated as “for profit” or at least self- sustaining programs under the control of the City of Dearborn? Can you imagine a “fee for service” public library? I can’t. There are many other services which we must rethink and reinvent to either pay for themselves or be sold of so someone else can make a profit from them. Libraries are not one of them.
April 13th, 2010 at 10:42 pm
A few years ago, the Dearborn voters established hard staffing numbers for the police and fire departments. We said we wanted that security of numbers. The politicians told us at the time that we were tying their hands in budget matters, and they were right.
If we directly funded the libraries and some other projects, it would mean an increase in taxes. But how much money are we talking about? In other places in this blog, Mr. Albano calculated that saving the pools would require a $100 per HOUSEHOLD payment once, then approximately $10 per year in the future, again per household. What would it take to run the libraries?
Fifty dollars per year times 40,000 households equals 2 million dollars. Is that what we are talking about? Would you, OLDALLDAYSCHOOLMOM, say goodbye to the libraries to save fifty dollars?
April 14th, 2010 at 6:42 am
The minimum staffing of police and firefighters is a separate issue from the recent substantial and unsolicited payraises given to both departments, at a time when city leaders are repeatedly wringing their hands and telling taxpayers that we are going broke.
I also understand city employees have been given an additional money in some sort of a matching fund for their health care when they retire.
How about another idea—how about if everyone who works for the city, even those who don’t live here, kick in $50 a year to keep Dearborn libraries open.
April 14th, 2010 at 8:44 am
No offense, Mom, but why should the rank and file city employees pay for the libraries? There is absolutely no rational reason for such a separate tax, and I would suspect you would run into legal troubles if you even proposed such thing. How about a city income tax or city sales tax? I don’t think that would be popular, either, but at least it would ‘spread the pain’ more equally, and it would probably meet legal challenges!
And, no offense to the pools folks, but libraries are more important than the pools. They benefit far more people and most people would argue it is more of the type of service which citizens expect the government to provide. With that said, I would be billing to support a separate millage for both, even though neither I nor my family use the pools. Hey, for several years, Detroit had a library millage, and I thought, wow, if the folks in Detroit supported it, why wouldn’t Dearborn? I would like to see our libraries gain more independence like those in West Bloomfield, but I am not holding my breath. For this Mayor and the previous one, it is a control issue, and we all know he does not want to give up any control.
April 14th, 2010 at 10:25 am
The former city I lived in used an increased sales tax to fund libraries. It was supposed to be temporary, but ended up being voted on again and was kept permanent. Does Michigan allow cities to increase sales taxes somewhat to cover funding like libraries? If so, this is an easy one because it is a consumption tax and I hardly think it will stop the people shopping here from still shopping in Dearborn.
April 14th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
We don’t need more taxes.
We need city leaders who are willing to “think outside of the box” (as suggested by Mayor O’Reilly) to find funding vis a vis grants/federal stimulus funds/foundation funds–in a nutshell, money that already is out there to finance libraries and other essential neighborhood services.
It is not the responsibility of taxpayers who are funding city employees— elected, appointed, or otherwise hired— to lay out a blueprint for them to do their jobs.
April 14th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
There was a discussion about a city sales tax on the Counter Project recently. Someone suggested implementing a .5% sales tax as a way to pay for the parking downtown, replacing the current paid parking system.
It was never settled in that discussion whether a city-instituted sales tax is even legal in Michigan. Does anyone know?
April 14th, 2010 at 7:33 pm
The main reason for an estimated $20 million shortage in the Dearborn budget is because the past few years assessed property values have shrunk the amount of property taxes people pay on their homes. Our home alone for 2010 had a $422 reduction in our property tax. Even if one averages that to $300 per residence, with almost 40,000 residences in Dearborn that comes to $12 million dollars. That does not include the decline in business property values, which most likely brings it up to an estimated $20 million dollar budget shortage.
I agree leaders should think out of the box and find more creative ways to cut expenses and increase revenues, but it is almost impossible to replace $12-$20 million dollars without either cutting some services or amenities if we’re not willing to fund it.
April 15th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
A detailed look at Dearborn Heights’ city budget–more than 50% goes to police and fire—how does Dearborn compare? Anyone know?
http://dearbornheights.wordpress.com/2010/04/14/some-city-budget-for-you/
April 18th, 2010 at 9:45 am
At the last meeting I attended, Mayor O’Reilly stated that Dearborn’s public safety departments – police and fire expense is 50% of the budget.
April 20th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Dearborn residents/business owners pay the 2nd highest tax rates in Wayne County.
To suggest that Dearborn taxpayers need to pay extra for libraries is absurd and unacceptable.
April 21st, 2010 at 10:14 am
Dearborn might have the 2nd highest tax rate in Wayne County, but we also have the most amenities and services of any city in Wayne County and very likely the most amenities and services of any city our size or larger. These services and amenities cost a fortune to operate and are services and amenities that most cities come nowhere near offering.
Some cities have no ice rinks or perhaps one – we have two top rated rinks at the DISC. No other city I know of has the Ford Performing Arts Center, 4 libraries, 8 outdoor pools, 43 parks with bundles of amenities, city funded Henry Ford Community College, Camp Dearborn and 2 public golf courses (including Mystic Creek in Camp Dearborn).
Dearborn also offers side street snow removal, leaf removal and large item trash removal at no additional fee. We have Homecoming and many city sponsored events, 2 city operated historical libraries, an animal shelter, 4 fire stations and per capita, one of the largest staffed police department around, which is required by city charter. These are just some of what Dearborn offers.
All of this takes money to run and with an estimated $20 million dollar budget shortage for the 2010 fiscal year, there is no way increasing revenues will pay to maintain all of it. If we’re not willing to fund all or some of it in some way with combined raised user fees, taxes, special millage fees, bonds or whatever, we will lose all or some of it, plain and simple.
Even though our public schools test scores are increasing, our schools still are not competitive with many other communities, therefore I’d bet most desirable families do not consider moving to Dearborn because of our schools. In fact, I know of some that have moved out due to our schools. With the abundant retail vacancies and lack of variety in our once highly patronized business districts, with neighboring communities building up their business districts with many desirable stores and choices, I’d be most people don’t move to Dearborn due to our business districts either.
Even though most of our housing stock is better maintained than most cities and out building codes are the strictest around, due to Dearborn having so many smaller, older homes with small lots, many people who desire a large home or lot also do not move here for our housing choices.
In my opinion, the most valuable assets Dearborn still possesses is that is offers far more services and amenities than any other city I know of, including more than some higher social strata cities. If we lose things that make us unique, like our 8 outdoor public pools, 4 libraries and more, then it will make Dearborn far less attractive to existing residents and possible new residents.
Despite not being personally rich, since we’ve received property tax reductions in the amount of approximately $600 the past few years, I have no personal issue with a special millage to at least pay to keep our pools and libraries, as even giving back a few hundred of the six hundred is a small price to pay to maintain special benefits of living in Dearborn and to maintain healthy body and mind building activities. These property tax reductions are the main reason the city is now projecting a $20 million dollar deficit.
I also would have no issue with the city selling some assets or farming out their management if they are money losing ventures which would save us in the short and long term. I also believe the city should look at all areas to see where more savings can come from and they appear to be doing this with their task force or blue ribbon committee. Despite what some may think of our city leaders, the job they have ahead of them is not one I envy because the city is in a financial crisis it has never seen and no matter what they reduce or eliminate, someone or some large group will complain.
Sadly, based upon what I’ve read and heard, there are far more residents not willing to pay more to save some of our wonderful services and amenities, and it this is the case, we’re just going to have to get used to having less and I believe this is going to cost us dearly in the long run…