Letter: The Facts About the Library

The public comment about renovating and expanding the has been the occasion of some fanciful and ill-informed speculation about the probable impact of the project. The inflated estimates of operational costs and possible staff increases presented seem more like scare tactics than attempts to inform a civil civic debate.

A new, more efficiently designed, building will be easier and more economical to manage. The present library configuration is inefficient and the new design so well thought out that very little additional staff will be needed to serve the public and supervise the building. 

Today’s library inadequately houses the collections and services offered. An expanded and renovated library will offer everyone in Grafton better opportunities for lifelong learning, access online information, recorded media and printed books and magazines, and opportunities to experience together a variety of instruction, performances and presentations that will enable personal development and enrich their lives. The cost of making that possible will be more than offset by the value community members will receive in return.

Some additional staffing, about 48 additional hours per week, will be required.  The increase will be less than 15 per cent, hardly the doubling some so fancifully suggest. Amounting to 1.4 full time equivalents (FTE), additional personnel support, it will cost between $35,000 and $45,000, depending on how the time is apportioned to present and new staff. The annual cost will be only $2 to $2.50 per resident.

If business becomes brisk in the years ahead, and we expect it will, a further addition 2.0 FTE could be needed. Mostly new staff, hired at the lower ranges of the personnel schedule, the cost might range from $51,000 to $53,000. Public service and administrative personnel needed to staff a very busy new library may require no more than $111,800 (including benefits) annually. That would be a twenty-two percent increase. 

Even if increased activity should result in a larger increase of $127,400, the increase will be less than twenty-five percent of the library’s current budget, and affect the tax rate by less than a nickel.

A building four times the size of the present one will have increased maintenance costs. However, there are many energy-efficient options that will be less costly to operate than traditional alternatives. 

Low-energy use heating and lighting systems can reduce expenses by 25 percent compared to traditional systems. Conventional heating, lighting and air conditioning, it is estimated, would cost $2 per square foot, or about $58,000 annually. Adopting the most advantageous energy efficient options would lower the cost of heating, lighting, and air conditioning to $1.50 per square foot. 

The present building costs nearly $2.50 per square foot for energy annually.  The new building will require only an additional $26,500 to $41,000. Maintaining “constant” temperature and humidity throughout the building is not required, and not planned for. To suggest otherwise flies in the face reality.

Additional custodial service will be needed. Expanding the present part–time custodian’s schedule to cover all 58 hours the library is currently open would cost another $26,000. More economical arrangements, e.g. sharing time of other municipal custodians or contracting out cleaning services, could reduce that amount, however. 

Some maintenance costs will go down. A new building will not be continually in need of repair. Modern fixtures and equipment will require less frequent service and replacement of lamps reducing the cost of service calls and supplies.  Altogether maintenance cost, including custodial services, may rise by $52,500 to $67,000, a 10 to 13 per cent change from today’s budget.

Staffing and maintenance costs in an expanded library will be greater. Operating costs will increase by $164,500 to $194,500. That is about $10 per person living in Grafton. Even the costliest scenario is only thirty-eight per cent above present cost for library service.

Something opponents have failed to consider is the value of library services to Grafton. Last year the library, with a budget of less than $500,000, provided services would cost library users over $1.7 million to obtain on their own. The added value, over and above the library budget, was $1.2 million. An expanded library will potentially see twice as much activity, including lectures, meetings, training and programs the present building cannot accommodate. 

The value of service Grafton residents could receive may reasonably be expected to double in which case the value added would jump to $2.7 million. Spending $195,000 is justified when one can get an additional $1.5 million in return. 

The assertion that each circulation costs $5 is misleading. While it is true that the library budget divided by the number of circulations last year is a $4.68, the implication that each additional item loaned would add five dollars to the cost of service is false. 

Each transaction does not cost $5. The library budget reflects the cost of making library services available. Most of those costs are relatively fixed regardless of how much use patrons make of the library. Indeed, if each Grafton resident had borrowed just one additional item last year the cost per loan would have fallen to $4.01, but expenses would rise little if at all. 

What is more significant is how much the community benefits because it provides library services for its members. As pointed out previously, the value of library service greatly exceeds the cost of providing it, the added value of which does increase with each additional checkout.

Hilding Hedberg,

Director, Grafton Public Library