The County Commissioner’s meeting room was filled to capacity by an audience eager to learn the findings of the “Lancaster County Public Library Task Force”, half of the crowd identifying themselves as associated with the fourteen independent libraries or the Library System. What they heard likely pleased those with the individual libraries, but not likely Susan Hauer, the Administrator of the Library System.
The paramount recommendation was that the commissioners “undertake a strategic planning process related to the libraries in Lancaster County. This study should be funded by a Commissioner grant and facilitated by an independent team of impartial representatives. The Strategic Planning process should evaluate all aspect of library services in Lancaster County but should specifically review and address:
o Whether the current facility occupied by the Library System of Lancaster County is appropriate and / or whether other options are available, specifically in the County of Lancaster offices at 1150 North Queen Street.
o Whether the Administrator of the Library System of Lancaster County should remain an employee of the system and accountable to the System Board, or should become a County employee accountable to the Count Commissioners.
The second suggestion is even more provocative: “By December 1, 2010, the County Commissioners must restructure and reappoint the Library System Board to consist of the seven-member ‘citizen’ board, whereby individual board members do not have an affiliation with a local library, but rather represent all Lancaster County libraries. Board appointments until 2013 must be selected and appointed by the County Commissioners. After 2013, County commissioners and the standing System board should collaborate to define the future nominating process.” (Editor’s note: Since the current System Board is compiled from library representatives, the board members are somewhat dependent on the System, nor are they a cross section of the community.)
Task Force Chair Terry Kauffman said there was “a need for an independent strategic review as we move forward” and urged the Commissioners to provide funds and obtain it from an institution experienced in such matters from outside the Count. When queried as to cost, he estimated $100,000.
Concerning the impact of the expense on the current county budget, Kauffman said: “Perhaps some of the work could be completed in 2011. We don’t want a Cadillac, but we want a good Buick. We need to get it right.”
The Report emphasized the important of the 2011-2012 state legislative sessions, recommending “the new System Board and the Library Directors Council should collaborate, in conjunction with Senator Smucker and Representative Sturla, to develop a group for the purposes of advocating at the local and state level…”
o Stronger partnerships between member libraries and school districts, with the goal of identifying new sources of funds education dollars…
It also called for “Legislative reform” to produce a fairer share of the state educational budget, less restrictions, and legislation what would enable, according to Kauffman, municipalities and counties to possibly impose a library per capita tax.
Lastly, the report suggested that the new System Board and local library boards consider a user fee for certain services.
Early on in the meeting Kauffman noted that a common question they heard was: “Who is in charge? We heard this from funders, from libraries, from and elected officials.” The report states: “The Lancaster County Library System needs to speak with one voice.”
Almost as if to give substance to the observation that the public has difficulty discerning between the “federation” of libraries (often referred to as small “s” system as opposed to the Library System (with a capital “S”), at times it is difficult to tell from the Report itself about which it is referring!
