Library Tax Debate

It's been a motto of mine for a year or two now that I will only be legitimately politically engaged once I am engaged in local politics. With that idea in mind, I have been trying to read more and more about not only Ithaca College, but also Tompkins County issues. So today, I'm going to try to look a little deeper into a pertinent local issue while adding what I can to the discussion.

Tomorrow, Feb. 7th, there is a county-wide referendum to decide whether or not to approve a new tax that would ultimately provide $540,000 in new funding for the Tompkins County Public Library. (BTW, having just read the above linked article for a second time, and for an article that claims to be looking at the spectrum of debate, it seems to lopsidedly report on the opposing viewpoint. Strangely, or not so strangely, the article appeared in the same issue as the paper's editorial against the tax. Another article that focuses more on the library's POV, and is generally more balanced, can be found here.)

When I first recieved a flier about this at the library, my initial gut reaction was "of course the library should be supported, it's a great public service that all can benefit from." But I do have to say, after reading this editorial in the Ithaca Journal, I'm not so sure anymore. The editors do make a rather compelling case against the tax, mainly due to the fact that the tax will be added onto property tax, and according to the editors:

the property tax levy carried by local households in the Ithaca school district has increased $12.54 million, about 28 percent, in the past five years. For city residents, that increase comes on top of a 75 percent jump in combined county and city property taxes for the same time.

I'm not completely convinced by the editorial, but I do have to say, if their numbers are right, they do raise some vexing questions. Another issue they bring up is the state of the library workers' labor contract. Apparently they have a pretty good deal through United Auto Workers 2300. I consider myself pretty pro-union, and don't really mind that much that library employees get paid a decent salary and a living wage (Under the recently expired contract, librarians were earning between $20.99 and $26.25 per hour; Clerks earned $13.30 an hour; and Pages earned $11.79 per hour), but some of the provisions pointed out by the Journal do seem extraneous to me. According to the Journal's editorial:

Union employees at the library work 35-hour weeks, with time between 35 and 40 hours triggering “compensatory time” or paid time off. The contracts contain seven paid holidays, five “floating holidays,” 12 personal/sick days and two weeks vacation as a starting point; meaning even without comp time, after the first year a new employee can have as many as 34 paid days off. The deals also carry over a previous arbitrator's ruling making summer Saturdays join all Sundays as workdays at time-and-a-half pay. That means, putting aside comp time again, for every weekend the library is open in the summer wages equal to the cost of another Sunday are burned in overtime.

Terry Sharpe, President of the UAW Local 2300, responded to criticism of the union's contract with a letter to the editor here.

He raised the interesting point of how focus has been on the labor contract while the library administration earns and spends a lot:

If the public somehow believes that our union workers earn too much, why is no one asking about the director's salary ($84,152 in 2004), which is significantly more than those of many county managers? What about the huge annual bonuses awarded to the director and assistant director (totaling $20,050 in 1999-2001)? Why do they spend thousands in legal and miscellaneous fees ($45,400 in 2004)? Why do they hire an expensive lawyer to negotiate the labor contracts, when traditionally the library trustees have always negotiated these themselves? Why pay a private company to water and maintain the plants?

Truthfully, after having read all of this, I don't quite know where to stand on it. The meme by most supporters is that the tax increase would come to about $25 per year for the average residential property in the Ithaca City School District. I don't know how much this will affect people in the district, especially those who come under the average. Apparently the tax works by a "rate of 17 cents per $1,000 of taxable assessed value in 2006 and will be on the same bill as school district taxes. A house assessed at $100,000 would pay about $17 for the library tax."


The Journal printed 6 letters supporting the tax (here, here, here, here, here, and here) as well as one opposing. The Ithaca Times also came out against it in an editorial as well. The Times also had an Op-Ed in favor of the tax.

It seems to me that oppositional voices have some legitimate concerns, but there also seems to be a more generalized anti-tax feeling fueling much of the opposition to this particular tax. This seems most apparent to me in the case of the so-called Students Against Library Tax (SALT), run by an Ithaca College student who is an active, and quite partisan, member of the Ithaca College Republicans. That person, Joe Brennan:



wrote an Op-Ed for the Journal that doesn't address any of the substantial issues raised by most opponents, but rather just attacks the process. His first point of contention is that the election is in February, instead of the generally accepted electoral month of November. This point seems odd to me considering Brennan just got back from a holiday season campaign in San Diego. This leads me to believe that the criticism of the timing of the election is hypocritical and likely just political.

He does also raise the legitimate question of the fact that the election and much of the pro-tax support was being funded by a philandthropist who until recently had been anonymous. This does raise some questions, but it is also a diversion from tackling the tax on its merits - whether it is the right choice for the community or not in terms of finances and services.

My instinct that Brennan is against the tax for ideological reasons stem from having had two classes with him as well as from this graf in his Op-Ed:

As it stands, New York already has the second highest combined state and local taxes. By passing this measure, not only will we further perpetuate this problem that has caused thousands of citizens and jobs to head elsewhere, but we will be publicly stating our support for such a policy. I cannot do either in good faith, and have formed Students Against the Library Tax in response to my beliefs on the issue. Our group is dedicated to informing the public on the issues raised in this article and strongly urges the defeat of the library tax.

As for SALT, I find it kind of odd that the group is being displayed as a student initiative, yet to my knowledge there has not been a single effort to engage the Ithaca College student community on this issue. I have not seen a single op-ed or letter to the editor in the Ithacan nor have I seen a single flier on campus. For a group that is purporting to speak for students it has done a piss poor job of informing students that an election is even occurring. If one of Brennan's main worries is that people won't turn out for this election because it is in February then why isn't he trying to inform his community that the election is occuring? Without these efforts, Students Against Library Tax reeks to me of a manipulative attempt to use the image of students (which can be a strong image rhetorically in a discussion about libraries) without actually engaging students.

BONUS UPDATE: A view into College Republican electoral tactics. Also, an article by Franklin Foer about the teaching of dirty tricks to Republican youth.

Now, I may end up taking the same final position on the tax as SALT, a No vote, but their tactics don't seem right to me. I'm not basing my position on ideology (or fufillment of school credit), but rather a weighing of the pros and cons of the matter. SALT however, its not clear to me what their real reasons for being against the vote is. If it's cause they're ideologically anti-tax, why don't they just come out and say it?

Hopefully I'll have made a decision by the end of the day in terms of yay or ney.

Oh, and finally, some needless libel of Mr. Brennan through his own actions and words:



Joe on a Mets message board:

There are a lot of Asians here at Ithaca, some with funny names. There' Soo Me Kim, and So Yung Ho.

On the subject of names, (and I know this is superficial, but I'm up front about it) I have a very hard time becoming attracted to girls with obscure names. Fortunately for me, I recently came by a pretty Ms. Lisa Smith.

- Glitter