Niles-Maine District Library trustees approved a $5 million tax levy for the coming year on Nov. 16 — higher than Treasurer Joe Makula’s opening proposal of $4 million but almost $900,000 lower than the previous year’s levy of $5,888,132.
The discussion around the levy, which refers to how much money a taxing body asks for from the residents who fund it, showcased the political chasm that animates the conflict between the two factions of the board.
Over the last 18 months, President Carolyn Drblik, Treasurer Joe Makula and Secretary Suzanne Schoenfeldt have deferred preventive and regular maintenance on the library building and frozen in place what was originally a temporary hiring freeze that has left the library staff depleted to two-thirds of its original size, among other cuts.
Vice President Patti Rozanski and Trustees Diane Olson and Becky Keane have opposed the cuts, saying they have harmed library services for patrons.
Trustees discussed and approved the levy in about 90 minutes. In past years, the levy discussion and decision has been split into two separate meetings.
Brian LeFevre of Sikich LLP, a tax consultancy, presented the board with scenarios that would result from three options: a 5% decrease from last year’s levy of $5.89 million, keeping the levy flat and increasing it by 5%.
The board recently approved a spending plan of about $6.6 million for the institution over protests from citizens who thought it should be much higher to account for the staff vacancies or even lower, to further reduce property tax bills.
Levying less money than the library plans to spend next year will force the library to use some of its cash reserves to cover the difference between its budget and tax revenue, former Library Assistant Director and Business Director Greg Pritz said.
“If you have a budget of $6.6 million and you only levy $5 million, ignoring for a moment the other sources of revenue, the reserves are going to go down,” he said.
Pritz added that if a future library board opts to raise the budget to account for the current vacancies on staff, the drag on reserves from a $5 million levy would be more dramatic.
Makula’s initial proposal would have represented a 32% decrease in the tax levy from last year, library leadership calculated.
Olson countered that dramatic cuts harm the library and the residents it serves.
“Our current cash balances are excessive,” Makula said. “As prudent guardians of public funds, it is our fiduciary responsibility to levy only what we need and not hoard excessive funds.”
“It’s also our responsibility to take care of our library,” Olson said. “I think we have been deficient in taking care of our library.”
Rozanski said the large reduction in the levy was excessive, and said she would have been more comfortable with a smaller reduction.
“I’m not saying I’m against a decrease, but I am against going that much of a decrease. If we’re going to decrease it, I think the 5% is sufficient,” Rozanski said.
Trustees also took a vote on the lower-levy option LeFevre presented, which would have put the levy at $5,593,725. That vote, and the vote on Makula’s suggested $4 million levy, both failed.