Loading...
Library Transition - 07/09/2002 r Honorable City Council Members, It is the report of the Library Transition. Committee, that the best possible and most seamless transition, for our library services, would be the cities annexation to the Spokane County Library District. This process would require an ordinance drafting and a public vote. Because of timeline requirements this would have to be done promptly. If this timeline cannot be met, we would then recommend contracting with the District until such time as annexation is possible. By annexation or contracting with the district, the citizens of our new city will have access to all the libraries within the district. Without this annexation or contracting, the residents of the valley may be required to pay a non-resident fee to the district. This includes the one branch that is located within the new city boundaries. The Library Transition. Committee also researched the possibility of forming our own library. The committee found that to establish just one branch, that would be comparable to the existing library at Main and Pines would be cost prohibitive. At this time, there is also the consideration of public interest in forming our own library services. We have found that there is currently no organization, such as a "Friends of the Library", that could take on this endeavor. Respectfully submitted, DeeDee Loberg Library Transition Chairman Library,Arts&Culture committee meeting-Minutes-July 9,2002. 7:00 p.m. • Argonne Library Branch; Attendee's; DeeDee Loberg ,Chairman Mike Wirt,Director of Spokane County Library District(SCLD) David Sani, Chairman, SCJJ)Board of Trustees Jim Sloan,Former Spokane City Attorney Jan Munson Lynn&Jim Tobert Anne Shcrrodd Leonard Byrne Juanita Johnson Shirley Ennis Jennie Wilardson This meeting was devoted to the issue of library services.Mike Wirt gave those attending a very comprehensive hand-out of 25 pages. Since he had recently assisted Liberty Lake in their pursuance of library options, he had the information readily available. In reviewing the Overview hand-out,Mike pointed out that only one of the existing libraries is within our new city boundaries and is considered a Resource Library. To access the Spokane Library services it now requires a$45.00 annual fee for non-city residents. Due to small city affiliations and geography,they have more libraries to service then would be ideal. Currently there are 10 libraries in the district and Liberty Lake will soon become their 11th..Liberty Lake is now contracting with them.Library finances are directed by the Board of Trustees of the SCLD. Options for Library Services are as follow;First, is no service. Second,establishment of our own city library. Third, contract with the SCLD or Spokane Public Library.Fourth, annexation with SCLD. Library services will still be available thru 12/31/03 ,as property taxes collected in 2003 are for the fiscal year 2002. If annexation is the choice selected,an ordinance would need to be drafted,voted on,certified and approved by the SOLD Board of Trustees prior to June 1,2003, to be effective by 2004. If these requirements are not attainable by the necessary dates then a contract with SCLD would be needed until such requirements are met. The cost of our Valley Library Branch is approximately$2,000,000.00 per year which breaks down to 50cents per$1,000.00 of assessed value, (refer to hand-out). A larger branch for the valley is also being looked into by the SOLD as the current one is to small for the population and parking space is a problem. A building about twice the size would be ideal. Cost wise, purchasing a new building is preferable to leasing. Direct costs of our library service is normally about the same as indirect costs. All information on the Library Service Options are accessible in a bound volume at the Valley Library Branch. Finally, if our new city government annexes to the SCLD and later decides to go with another option,they may withdraw from annexation after 3 years. • Mike Wirt has agreed to attend more meetings if questions do arise. Jim Sloan has offered pro bono services to our committee. • • - From: janmunson - Page 1 of 3 . 1r 3s From: "janmunson" <janmunson @gwest.net> To: <shag-o @att.net> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11 :07 :25 -0700 Dear Dee Dee, This is what I came up with for the new library report. I won't be there tonight because Richard will be in the forum at the Valley Mall tonight. See you soon. Keep in touch. Let me know if you get this. Jan New Spokane Valley Library • The task of this research is to provide information concerning building a library for our new city. "A library may be established in any county, city, or town either (1) by its legislative body of its own initiative: or (2) upon the petition of one hundred taxpayers of such a governmental unit, the legislative body shall submit to a vote of the qualified electors thereof, at the next municipal or special election held therein. (RCW 27.12.030) The initial costs would be to buy and equip a building. An appropriate building site has not been found. However, we will need at least a 25, 000 square foot building. The cost of an appropriate building will be between $6 and $10 per square outfit the library with books, tables, chairs, computers will cost between $250-$300 per- square foot or $6,250, 000 and $7,500, 000. The total estimated cost to set up a furnished building would be between $6, 400,000-$7, 750, 000. The yearly operating cost based on current valley library statistics would be approximately $1,706, 000. Income from property tax is $.50 per $1, 000 of assessed value, or about $2, 000,000. New Spokane Valley Library The task of this research is to provide information concerning building a library for our new city. "A library may be established in any county, city, or town either (1) by its legislative body of its own initiative: or (2) upon the petition of one hundred taxpayers of such a governmental unit, the legislative body shall submit to a vote of the qualified electors thereof, at the next municipal or special election held therein. (RCW 27.12.030) The initial costs would be to buy and equip a building. An appropriate building http: //webmail.att. net/wnc/v/wm?cmd=Print&no=2&sid=c0 8/21/2002 CO * kvi Spokane County Library District ROI k-11 U Overview Pull Lilig -Ell &'(I1,`'EcaNn, Spokane County Library District's mission it to connect community _ L1BR1ifir DIS1IUCT members with the library resources they seek,promote the value and pleasure of reading, and support lifelong learning. • • (2002-2004 Strategic Plan) SERVICES Materials: Books,audiobooks, periodicals, cassette tapes, videos, CDs, DVDs, and CD-ROM . software available for checkout: access to specialized licensed information databases Staff expertise: Reference assistance, Web searching assistance, readers' advising K-12 support: Homework support,class visits to libraries, staff classroom visits Programs: - Stoiytimes,-youth reading programs,puppet shows Outreach: Visits to adult care facilities, storytimes at child care facilities. services to homebound customers wwtiv.scld.org. Catalog. materials requests, customer account information,online reference, licensed information databases, reading lists, suggested Web sites,'library events calendar; branch locations. District information AREA SERVED Unincorporated Spokane County and the affiliated cities and towns of Cheney, Latah, Medical Lake. Millwood,Rockford,and Waverly(annexed to District): Deer Park and Fairfield (contracting with an- . nexation effective in 2003);and Airway Heights and Liberty Lake(contractine.with District). Service areapapulation: 229,810 including201,453 in the unincorporated county and 28.357 in affiliated cities and towns. (State of Washington OFM.,2002 estimate) Population growth: 1992-2002: 18.7% Land area: Approximately 1.700 square miles LIBRARY BRANCHES 10 libraries and outreach services. Branches are located as follows: Resource Libraries: Cheney.North Spokane, Valley Community Libraries: Airway Heights.Argonne, Deer Park, Fairfield, Medical Lake, Moran Prairie, Otis Orchards SERVICE STATISTICS 2001 %Change, 1991-2001 Materials borrowed: 1,869,068 --4.0°/a Reference questions: 251,015 (est) - 128.3% Internet workstation bookings: 77,973 n /a Library cards: 110,581 - 4.6%* Door count: 860,335 -r 1.3% Library Materials: Approx.4 10,000 items Stag Approx. 105 full-time equivalents; 147 full and part-time positions 'Reduction in City of Spokane cardholders with 1996 termination of reciprocal borrowing. (aver) . , - I • 2. FUNDING . A dedicated property tax levy of 500 per$1,000 of assessed valuation in the unincorporated county and annexed municipalities accounts for over 90%of annual funding. Annual revenue increases are limited by Initiative 747. Municipalities''contract.fees are calculated,at the same rate as the unincorporated county. Less than 10% is derived from other fees, charges, and interest earnings. • . . Budgeted 2002 revenue is S6,393,570. Property taxes&contract fees total $5,982,205 and other revenue is $411,365. Budgeted expenditures are$6,298,381. Unrestricted operating reserves total $981,497. Reserves designated for future capital expenditures total $942,126.- • • :INFRASTRUCTURE EXPANSION AND UPKEEP • , Between 1986 and 2000 all facilities were expanded, totally renovated, or replaced and two new branches were opened. Computer systems and library materials were upgraded and new materials formats intro- duced. Two voter-approved District ten-year bond.issucs (1988 and 1996). combined with District operat- ' . . - ing funds, two city bond issues, and two federal grants provided over$16.5 million in capital funding. To- tal current debt•service for the remaining bonds is a property tax of only 9¢ per$1,000 of assessed valua- tion. .. - • • Upkeep of these taxpayer investments is assured through a rolling'5-year maintenance plan funded through • . a revolving reserve fund.. . . . . • FUTURE CHALLENGE . Customers expect the newest library and information technologies in addition to"traditional"library serv- ices. However, property tax limitations resulting from a stagnant local economy and lnitiative747—and potential reductions in the District's tax base from City of Spokane annexations—will make it increasingly . difficult to meet those expectations.. . • GOVERNANCE • . Spokane County Library District is a municipal corporation established by voters in 1942 under provisions . of RCW 27.12.040. An independent special purpose district, its sole purpose is providing public library services to the unincorporated county and affiliated municipalities. A five-member Board of Trustees ap- ' pointed by Spokane County Commissioners governs the District. A Board-appointed library director serves as chief administrator: . - . BOARD OF TRUSTEES • Chair:E.David Sani; Vice Chair: Frank W. Payne;Trustees: Vick Myers-Canfield,Claudia A.'Parkins,Jacob Laete LIBRARY DIRECTOR ' . • Mike Wirt • • • - . • • . Library Districts::There are 24 library districts in Washington State,.some only part of a .single county and others serving up to five counties. Three are individual islands in San • . Juan County. Nine counties have no countywide library district, including Lincoln and ' Adams in this area. All serve the unincorporated area and any municipality choosing to contract or annex to the library district for services. All have the same property tax _ funding authority and limitations. ' . ' - Spokane County Library District • 4322 North Argonne Road • Spokane, WA 99212-1868 . • • . 509/924-4122 • fax 509/928-4157 • TTY 509/927-4126 • www.scld.org . • 07/03/02 ' Pend Oreille County Spokane County Library District Deer lark © Resource Library *C'ommunit' Branch • Other affiliated town US 395 us V3 m . -orth Spokane Otis Orchards Argonne . City of * Spokane • Millwood US 2 Airway Heights Valley Medical Lake * Moran Prairie 0 '-`C C'heney Rockford • US 195 Fairfield • Waverly • Latah Whitman County oxoct City of Spokane Valley: Options for Public Library Service Arts, Libraries, Culture Transition Committee 017/09/02 Meeting S I XF UTOR Y LJ T IO 1Tt Pu i is Ln r ti _ I Chapter 27.12 Revised Code of Washington (Handout: Cary of statutes) • 27.12.025: Authorization to establish a library f 27.11030: Library establishment ■ 27.12.180: Contracts for library service • 27.219395:Annexation of cities into library district Chapter 27.15 Revised Code of Washington [Handout.Copy f statutes; • 27.15.005-060: Library capital facility areas Overview [Handout:2002 Overview) ■ Service area [Handout:Map) ! City affiliations • Branches • Services and use • Governance Library services a From 10 SCLD branches:Checkout database use,Internet access,reference, readers advisory,children's programs [Handout: Welcome and Hoursj �1 1ATWW access: Search catalog, request materials,check account, database use, reading lists,suggested Web links,5CLD info,book Internet workstation !Handout Online boabriarki • 2001 use statistics - Circulation: 1,569,068 — Meeting room bookings: — Door count 850,335 1,339 — Program attendance: 48,137 -- Materials requests:174,193 - Eeference:251,015 Database use:91,1%l hrt — Internet bookings: 77,973 — Web site use: 223,050 page views; 189,064 user sessions ()vera 1 support and branch operations • Can't provide government services on just a residential tax base; commercial tax base, which isn't-evenly spread throughout the District, is required. CIF t►i SPOKANE VAI.I 1-y" Current library service use by City of Spokane Valley residents (2001 statistics) • Valley Branch (E. 12004 Main Ave.) is within city — Circulation 579,636 (31.0% of total) — Reference: 79,236(31.6% of total) — Programs/group visits: 382(20.5% of total) — Program attendance: 11,252 (23.4% of total) — Internet bookings:25,719(33.0% of total) — Meeting room bookings:209 (15.3% of total) — Door count: 247,505 (28.8% of total) — Registration:40,020(36.2% of total) • Argonne Branch (4322 N. Argonne)is outside city but used by West Valley area residents. — Circulation 146,419 (7.8%of total) — Reference: 13,698 (5.5% of total) — Programs/group visits: 69 (3.7% of total) — Program attendance: 1962 (4.1% of total) — Internet bookings: 8,165 (10.5% of total) — Meeting room bookings: 224 (16.4% of total) — Door count 80,344 (93% of total) — Registration:11,442 (103% of total) • Otis Orchards Branch probably not used too much by residents of the new city. Library service: 2003 • Spokane County Library District will continue to serve the city through December 31, 2003 Library service options: During 2004 and beyond • No library service • Establish independent city library • Contract with Spokane Cotmty Library District or another library • Annex to Spokane County Library District (can be effective January 1,2004 if election held no later than the April 42003 special election date;otherwise, effective January 1, 2005 or later) Independent city Library • Funded by city council appropriation • Full local control • No access to SCLD library materials and services • High one-time costs;no economies of scale for ongoing costs PAGE 3 of 5 • Library Capital Facility Area • Any future branch construction in city would probably be through the formation of a Library Capital Facility Area (LCFA) • • Use pre-existing boundaries that approximate branch service area to define Library Capital Facility Area (such as City of Spokane Valley or Fire District#1 boundaries) • • Ballot issues • — Establish the LCFA (simple majority) — Sell General Obligation Bonds to fund construction (60% approval with 40% validation) • Only residents of LCFA vote the issues and pay the debt service' . ■ Three county commissioners become LCFA governing board • Title to facility may be transferred to city or to library district • • LCFA may be dissolved when bonds and other contractual obligations discharged - • Michael J. Wirt,Director Spokane County Library District • July 9,2002 • • • • • • • • • • PAGE 5 OF 5 • • • • • Revised Code of Washineton 2000 RCW 27.1.2.025 Authorization. Any governmental unit has power to establish and maintain a library, either by itself or in cooperation with one or more other governmental units. [1941 c 65 § 2; 1935 c 119 §3; Rem. Supp. 1941 § 8226-3. Formerly RCW 27.12.020, part.] • • RCW 27.12.030 Libraries, how established. • A. library may be established in any county, city, or town either (1) by its legislative body of its,own initiative; or (2) upon the petition of one hundred taxpayers of such a governmental unit,. the legislative body shall submit to a vote of the qualified electors thereof, at the next • municipal or special election held therein (in the case of a city or town) or the next general election or special election held therein (in the case of a county), the question whether a library • shall be established; and if a majority of the electors voting on the question vote in favor of the establishment of a library, the legislative body shall forthwith establish one. [1965 c 122 § 2; 1941 c 65 § 3; 1935 c 119 § 4; Rem. Supp. 1941 § 8226-4. Prior: 1915 c 12 § 1; 1913 c 123 § 1; 1909 c 116 § 1; 1901 c 166 § 1.] • RCW 27.1.2.180 Contracts for library service. • Instead of establishing or maintaining an independent library, the legislative body of any governmental unit authorized to maintain a library shall have power to contract to receive library service from an existing library, the board of trustees of which shall have reciprocal power to contract to render the service with the consent of the legislative body of its governmental unit. Such a contract shall require that the existing library perform all the functions of a library within the governmental unit wanting service. In like manner a legislative body may contract for library ' service from a library not owned by a public corporation but maintained for free public use: PROVIDED, That such a library be subject to inspection by the state librarian and be certified by him as maintaining a proper standard. Any school district may contract for school library service from any existing library, such service to be paid for from funds available to the school district for library purposes. • • [1941 c 65§ 6; 1935 c 119§7;Rem. Supp. 1941 § 8226-7.] RCW 27.12.360 Annexation of city or town into rural county library district, island -library district, or intercounty rural library district--Initiation procedure. Any city or town.with a population of one hundred thousand or less at the time of annexation may become a part of any rural county library district, island.library district, or intercounty rural library district lying contiguous thereto by annexation in the following manner: The inclusion of such a city or town may be initiated by the adoption of an ordinance by the legislative authority thereof stating its intent to join the library district and finding that the public interest will be served thereby. Before adoption, the ordinance shall be submitted to.the library Page 1 Printed on 7/9/02 • • Revised Code of Washington 2000 board of the city or town for its review and recommendations. If no library board exists in the city or town, the state librarian shall be notified of the proposed ordinance. If the board of trustees of the library district concurs in the annexation, notification thereof shall be transmitted to the legislative authority or authorities of the counties in which the city or town is situated. [1982 c 123 § 13; 1981 c 26§ 3; 1977 ex.s.c 353 § 1.] • RCW 27.12.370 Annexation of city or town into library district--Special election procedure. _ The county legislative authority or authorities shall by resolution call a special election to be held in such city or town at the next date provided in RCW 29.13.010 but not less than forty-five days from the date of the declaration of such finding, and shall cause notice of such election to be given as provided for in RCW 29.27.080. The election on the annexation of the city or town into the library district shall be conducted by the auditor of the cbunty or counties in which the city or town is located in accordance with the general election laws of the state and the results thereof shall he canvassed by the canvassing board of the county or counties. No person shall be entitled to vote at such . election unless he or she is registered to vote in said city or town for at least thirty days preceding the date of the election. The ballot proposition shall be in substantially the following form: "Shall the city or town of be annexed to and be • a part of library district? YES ❑ • NO 0" • If a majority of the persons voting on the proposition shall vote in favor thereof, the city or town shall thereupon be annexed and shall be a part of such library district. [1982 c 123 § 14; 1977 ex.s. c 353 §2.] • • • RCW 27.12.380 Annexation of city or town into library district--Withdrawal of annexed city or town. ' • The legislative body of such a city or town which has annexed to such•a library district, may, by resolution, present to the voters of such city or town a proposition to withdraw from said library district at any general election held at least three years following the annexation to the ' library district. • [1982 c 123 § 15; 1977 ex.s. c 353 §3.] • RCW 27.12.390 Annexation of city or town into library district--Tax levies. The annual fax levy authorized by ROW 27.12.050, 27.12.150, and 27.12.420 shall be Page 2 Printed on 7/9/02 • • • • • Revised Code of Washington 2000 imposed throughout the library district, including any city or town annexed thereto. Any city or town annexed to a rural library district, island library district, or intercounty rural library district shall be entitled to levy up to three dollars and sixty cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation less any regular levy made by such library district in the incorporated area, notwithstanding any other provision of law: PROVIDED, That the limitations upon regular property taxes imposed by chapter 84.55 RCW shall apply. • [1982 c 123 § 16; 1977 ex.s. c 353 §4.] RCW 27.12.395 Annexation of city or town into library district--Assumption of liabilities. (l) All liabilities of a city or town that is annexed to a rural county library district or intercounty rural library district, which liabilities were incurred'for the purpose of or in the course of acquiring, operating, or maintaining a library or libraries, May, if provided for in the ordinance providing for annexation and.in the resolution of the district consenting to annexation, pass to and be assumed by the rural county library district or intercounty rural library district. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the city or town has incurred any voted bonded indebtedness for the purpose of acquiring, operating, or maintaining a library or libraries, and if the indebtedness is outstanding at the time of the annexation, the voted bonded indebtedness shall not be assumed by the annexing district. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (I) of this section, if the annexed city or town has outstanding at the time of the annexation any voted bonded indebtedness incurred.for the purpose of acquiring,'operating, or'maintaining a library or libraries, a special election may be called by the board of trustees of the rural county library district or intercounty rural library district, to be . held at the next general or special election held in-the applicable county or counties, for the purpose of affording the voters residing within the area of the district outside the annexed city or town an opportunity to assume the voted bonded indebtedness of the annexed city or town upon the assent of three-fifths of the voters. [1985e392 § 1.] • • Page 3 Printed on 7/9102 • • • Spokane County Library District Annexation vs. Contracting with Spokane County Library District • A l.i.brary district consists of the unincorporated area of one or more counties and any incorporated area (city or town) that has annexed to the district. Cities and towns may also contract with a library district for library services. • Cities and towns that have annexed to the Spokane County Library District are Cheney, Deer • Park(effective 01/01/03),Fairfield (effective 01/01/03), Latah,Medical Lake Millwood,- - Rockford, and Waverly. Cities and towns contracting with SCLD are Airway Heights and • Liberty Lake. ANNEXATION • •When a city annexes to a library'district the city becomes part of the district for library purposes; - on the same basis as the unincorporated area. The effect is that the library district's property tai • is also levied directly on the property within the annexed area. Residents of the annexed area then pay the same library district property taxes as those in the unincorporated area. Residents are also able to vote in any library district election. The-city or town government pays nothing to the,district from its budget. . The Spokane County Library District's property tax levy is currently 50e per. $1000 of assessed valuation. A home assessed at$100,000, for example, would have a $50.00 per year library district tax. • • • CONTRACTING FOR LIBRARY SERVICES • When a city or town contracts with a library district it is purchasing a service on an annual basis. The district and the city or town agree on contract terms and the district bills the city each year for the contract fee. The contract fee is paid by the city or town from its regular budget and regular revenue stiurces just like any other billing. • A city or town has no legislative authority to establish an ongoing tax or fee specifically for the • library service contract payment. Residents of a contracting city or town may not vote in library district elections. • The Spokane County Library District's contract fee is calculated on the same basis as its property tax levy, up to 50a per$1000 of assessed valuation, based on the total assessed valuation of the • city or town. • 'DIFFERENCE IN COSTS TO THE TAXPAYER When residents of a city or town vote to annex to a library district, they are voting to add the . district's property tax levy to their current property taxes. Their property taxes will increase . between 22.5a and 50a per$1000of assessed valuation, depending upon the city's levy rate at the time. If there had previously been a contract for.l.ibrary services, the funds budgeted for the contract - fee are then available for whatever other purpose the City Council decides. • , Revised Code of Washington 2000 as are delegated by the governing body, may be appointed to serve only until the official date of incorporation. After the official date of incorporation the governing body of such a new city organized under the council manager form of government may extend the appointment of such an interim manager or administrator with such limited powers as the governing body determines, for up to ninety days. This governing body may submit ballot propositions to the voters ofthe city or town to authorize taxes to be collected on or after the official date of incorporation, or authorize • an annexation of the city or town by a fire protection district or library district to be effective 'immediately upon the effective date of the incorporation as a city or town. The boundaries of a newly incorporated city or town shall be deemed to be established for purposes of ROW 84.09.030 on the date that the results of the initial election on the question of incorporation are certified or the first day of January following the date of this election if the newly incorporated city or town does not impose property taxes in the same year that the voters approve the incorporation. The newly elected officials shall take office immediately 'upon 'their election and qualification with limited powers during this interim period as provided in this Section. They shall acquire their full powers as of the official date of incorporation and shall continue in office until their successors are elected and qualified at the next general municipal election after the official date of incorporation: PROVIDED, That if the date of the next general municipal - election is less than twelve months after the date of the first election of councilmembers, those initially elected councilmembers shall serve until their successors are elected and qualified at the • next following general municipal election as provided in RCW 29.04.170. For purposes of this• section, the general municipal election shall be the date on which city and town general elections are held throughout the state of Washington, pursuant to RCW 29:13.020. • In any newly incorporated city that has adopted the council-manager form of government, the term of office of the mayor, during the interim period only, shall be set by the council, and. -thereafter shall be as provided by law. The official date of incorporation shall be on a date from one hundred eighty to three • hundred sixty days after the date of the election on the question of incorporation, as specified in a resolution adopted by the governing body during this interim period. A copy of the resolution shall be filed with the county legislative authority of the county in which all or the major portion of.the newly incorporated city or town is located. If the governing body fails to adopt such a • resolution, the official date of incorporation shall be three hundred sixty days after the date of the election on the question of incorporation. The county legislative authority of the county in which all or the major portion of the newly incorporated city or town is located shall file a notice with the county assessor that the city or town has been'authorized to be incorporated immediately after the favorable results of the election on the question of incorporation have been certified. The county legislative authority shall file a notice with the secretary of state that the city or town is incorporated as of the official date of incorporation. • [1997 c 361 § 11; 1994 c 154 §.308; 1991 c 360 § 3; 1986 c 234 § 16; 1965 c 7 § 35.02.130. Prior: 1953 c 219 § 7; 1890 p 133.* 3,part; RRS § 8885,part.) • Page 2 Printed on 7/9/02 • • • Revised Code of Washington 2000 Notes: _ Parts and captions not law--Effective date--Severability--1994 c 154: See RCW 42.52.902,42.52.904, and 42.52.905. Times for holding elections: Chapter 29.13 RCW. RCIV 35.02.220 Duty of county and road, library, and fire districts to continue services during transition period--Road maintenance and law enforcement services. The approval of an incorporation by the voters of a proposed city or town, and the existence of a transition period to become a city or town, shall not remove the responsibility of any county, road district, library district, or fire district, within which the area is located, to continue providing services to the area until the official date of the incorporation. A county shall continue to provide the following services to a newly incorporated city or town, or that portion of the county within which the newly incorporated city or town is located, at the preincorporation level as follows: (1) Law enforcement services shall be provided for a period not to exceed sixty days from the official date of the incorporation or until the city or town is receiving or could have begun receiving sales tax distributions under RCW 82.14.030(1), whichever is the shortest time period. (2) Road maintenance shall be fora period not to exceed sixty days from the official date of the incorporation or until forty percent of the anticipated annual tax distribution from the road district tax*levy is made to the newly incorporated city or town pursuantf to RCW 35.02.140, whichever is the shorter time period. 0901 a 360 §9; 1986 c.234 §22; 1985 c 143 § 1. Formerly RCW 35.21.763.] • • • • • • Page 3 • Printed on 7/9/02 • • Spokane County Library District • City Annexation to a Library District • • ENABLING STATUTE •_ • • Revised Code of Washington 27.11360-27.12.395. PURPOSE Annexation removes the obligation of a city from paying for library service from its general operating fund and allows the library district to levy property taxes within the boundaries of a city at the same rate and on the same basis that the library district property tax is levied in surrounding unincorporated areas. IMPACT ON CITY/TOWN TAXES • , • Library district annexation legislation allows a city to increase its maximum property tax levy amount from $3.375 to$3.60 per$1,000, less the regular levy rate for the library district. If a Library district's rate were set at$0.50 per$1,000, the maximum a city could levy would be$3.10. ($3.60-$0.50= $3.10) • The above figures disregard the impact of any statutory property tax levy limits which . restrict increases in taxing district collections under certain conditions to the-rate of inflation or 1%, whichever is lower. • • By way of example, a city whose levy rate was $2.50/$1,000 would continue to collect at the . $2.50 rate if it annexed to the library district. The assessment for library service would be levied separately, in addition, by the library district, therefore relieving the city of having to pay the library fee out of its general operating fund. COST TO THE TAXPAYER • • • Spokane County Library District's regular property tax levy rate in 2002 is$0.50 per $1,000 of • assessed property valuation. Residents of annexed cities arid the unincorporated areas of the county with property valued at$100,000, for example, pay $50.00 in annual property taxes to the Library District. Under state law the maximum allowable regular levy rate for library districts is$.50 per$1,000. Voter-approved levies, such as for bonds, are in addition to the regular levy. The current levy rate for debt service on the District's 1996 General Obligation Bonds is approximately$0.09 per$1,000 of assessed valuation. ANNEXATION PROCEDURE • A city council submits a proposed ordinance to its local library board for review and recommendation. if no local library board exists,,the State Librarian is to be notified of the .proposed ordinance. • • The council adopts an ordinance stating its intent to join the library district through annexation and submits the request to the library district board. • The library district board acts on the city's request. • If approved, the city's request is submitted to county commissioners along with a supporting • • resolution from the library district board asking that a special election be called for the city's registered voters in accordance with dates provided for in RCW 29.13.010,but not less than 45 days before the election is scheduled. Cities assume.all costs related to an annexation election. • • Only city residents vote on the annexation proposal; a simple majority of the persons voting on the proposition determines the outcome of the election. There is no election in the library district as a whole. • Election results must be certified by the county auditor's office before June 1 for the annexation to take effect in the following year. • The annexation may be reversed by a city council-initiated special election any time three years or more after the annexation. DEADLINES FOR CONSIDERING A NNEXA TION REQUESTS • The Spokane County Library District Board meets monthly on the third Tuesday. To allow adequate time for Board action and action of the County Commissioners,'an annexation request must be considered by the District's Board no later than a meeting held at least one month before the election filing deadline,which is 45 days before the election date. Filing dates for future elections are available from the county Elections Office. • A request for Board action on an annexation request should be made no later than one week • prior to the scheduled Board meeting. • The Board of Trustees may consider holding a special meeting to act on an annexation . request, if necessary. • Election results must be certified by the county auditor's office before June 1 for annexation to take effect on January 1 of the following year. If the annexation issue is on the September or November ballots,it will not take effect until January 1. of the second year following. • LIBRARY DISTRICT POLICY RELATED TO ANNEXATION REQUESTS • If the city currently has a service contract with the District, all financial responsibilities for facilities will remain identical to those in the existing contract. • If the city.has no service contract with the District, annexation will obligate neither the District nor the incorporated area to provide a facility. ANNEXATIONS TO DATE • Cheney, Deer Park (effective 01/01/03), Fairfield (effective 01/01/03), Latah,Medical Lake, Millwood, Rockford, and Waverly have annexed to Spokane County Library District. Airway Heights and Liberty Lake have not. Almost 100 other Washington.citi_es have annexed to other library districts, including virtually all newly-incorporated cities. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. • Mike Wirt, Director,Spokane County Library District(924-4122) • Municipal Research &Services Center The New City Guide (available on the Web at www.rnrsc.org/textncg.htm, Providing Municipal Services & Library Services links). • • 05/15/02 • SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT 2001 ANNUAL REPORT: VALLEY BRANCH • Branch Information Valley %of District Total District Total Building size(s.f.) - 22,100 26.9 82,100 Weekly open hours 54 14.0 387 Collection size(items) 135,473 28.8 470,969 Public computers 29 30.5 95 Catalog/databases 16 34.0 r 47 Internet 13 ' 27.1 48 Branch Use Valley % of District Total District Total Registered borrowers 31,448 34.9 I 90,031 Library visits • 247,505 • 28.8 860,335 Circulation 579,636 31.0 1,869,068 Reference 79,236 31.6 251,015 • Program attendance 11,252 23.4 48,137 - Meetin;room bookings 209 :1.5.3 1,369 • Expenditures • • Direct costs 1 Indirect costs Q 30.7%2 Total costs Total $883,788 $976,910 $1,860,698 Salaries/benefits $568,979 $630,483 $1,199,462 Supplies 19,777 24,438 44,215 Services 80,044 167,142 247,1.87 Capital 0 142,925 142,925 Library Materials . 214,987 0 214,987 • Misc 0 I. 11,922 11,922 Direct Costs: All expenditures directly attributable to the Valley branch 2 indirect Costs: Expenditures for central support functions (e.g.materials selection, ordering processing;computer support;payroll, purchasing,accounting;personnel;graphics; administration)are allocated as a percentage based on several activity factors. . • ' Local Revenue Branch revenue(overdue fines,lost/damage fees,etc.) $86,386 Property taxes from unincorporated service area N/A 3 3 Property taxes: It is difficult to define branch service area boundaries because many customers • use more than one library and not necessarily the one closest to their home;even if boundaries could be defined, property tax information isn't readily available except within established taxing district boundaries. • 04/0S/02rev mjw SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT . 2001 ANNUAL REPORT: ARGONNE BRANCH Branch Information . • Argonne °/n of District Total District Total 1 • Building size (s.f.) 8,000 9.7 82,1.00 Weekly open hours 40 10.3 ( 387 Collection size(items) 52,960 11.3 470,969 Public computers I 8 8.4 1 95 Catalog/databases 3 6.4 47 Internet 5 10.4 48 I Branch Use • Argonne %of District Total District Total Registered borrowers 8,904 9.9 90,031 Library visits 80,344 9.3 ' 860,335 Circulation 146,419 7.8 1,869,068 Reference 13,698 5.5 251,015 • Program attendance 1,962 4.1 48,137 Meeting room bookings 224 16.4 1,369 Expenditures - - • Direct costs 1 Indirect costs Q 6.9 2 Total costs Total $237,944 $218,749 $456,692 Salaries/benefits $119,773, $132,719 $252,492 Supplies 3,188 6,069 9,257 . Services 46,212 ' 41,507 87,725 • Capital • 0 35,493 35,493 Library Materials 68,764 0 68,764 Misc 0 2,961 1 2,961 1 Direct Costs: All expenditures directly attributable to the Argonne branch . 2Indirect Costs: Expenditures for central support functions(e.g. materials selection,ordering processing;computer support;payroll,purchasing,accounting;personnel;graphics; administration) are allocated as a percentage based on several activity factors. Local Revenue • Branch revenue(overdue fines, lost/damage fees,etc.) $16,526 Property taxes from unincorporated service area N/A 3 3Property taxes: Tt is difficult to define branch service area boundaries because many customers use more than one library and not necessarily the one closest to their home;even if boundaries could be defined, property tax information isn't readily available except • within established taxing district boundaries. 04/03/02 mjw • • SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT POLICY: ANNEXATION OF CITIES AND TOWNS TO THE LIBRARY DISTRICT • The Spokane County Library District Board of Trustees recognizes that cities and towns may wish to annex to the Library District, as provided for in 27.12 RCW, rather than contract for library services. Therefore, the Board of Trustees will concur with-requests from cities and towns to annex to the District under the following conditions: • 1. If the city or town has an interlocal cooperation agreement with the District, the city or town agrees that if the annexation is approved: a. all financial responsibilities related to library facilities shall remain identical to those in the interlocal cooperation agreement; b. a new interlocal cooperation agreement shall be executed, reflecting the change in contracting status and including the financial responsibilities related to library facilities. 2. If the city or town has no interlocal cooperation agreement with the District, annexation will not obligate the District to provide a library facility in that city or town. • 3. The annexation will not cause a reduction in the District's regular property tax levy rate, either immediately or in future years, based upon reasonable projections. Further, to extend public library services to all residents within Spokane County, the District encourages annexation of non-contracting cities and towns to the District. ADOPTED BY THE SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT . BOARD OF TRUSTEES: JUNE_17, 1982 LAST REVIEWED AND REAFFIRMED: JULY 17, 2001 • • • • • Y • Revised Code of Washington 2000 • Chapter 27.15 RCW LIBRARY CAPITAL FA.CILITY AREAS • - Sections 27.15.005 Findings. 27.15.010 Definitions.. 27.15.020 Request to establish library capita] facility area--Ballot propositions. 27.15.030 Governing body. 27.15.040 Authority to construct;acquire,maintain, and remodel facilities--Interlocal agreements—Legal title. • 27.15.050 Financing—Bonds authorised. 27.15.060 Dissolution of library capital facility area. • RCW 27.15.005 Findings. • • . The legislature finds that it is in the interests of the people of the state of Washington to be able to establish library capital facility areas as quasi-municipal corporations and independent • taxing units existing within the boundaries of existing rural county library districts, rural intercounty.library districts, rural partial-county library districts, or island library districts, for the purpose of financing the construction of capital library facilities. • [1995 c 368 6 RCW 27.15.010. Definitions. • • Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply ' throughout this chapter, • • • • (I) "Library'district" means rural county library district, rural intercounty library district, • rural partial-county library district, or'island libraiy district. . - . (2) "Library capital facility area" means a quasi mitnicipal..corporation and independent taxing authority•within the meaning of-Article. VII, section 1 of the state Constitution, and a taxing'district within the meaning Of Article VII, section 2 of the state Constitution, created by as county legislative.authority of one or several counties. A.library capital facility area may include • all or a portion of a city or town. (3) "Library capital.facilities" includes both real aid personal property including, but not • limited to, land, buildings, site improvements, equipment, furnishings, collections, and all necessary costs related to acquisition, financing, design, construction, equipping, and remodeling. • [1995c368 §2.] • • RCW 27.15.020 Request to establish library capital facility area--Ballot propositions. Upon receipt of a completed written request to both establish a library capital facility area and submit a ballot proposition under RCW 27.15.050 to finance library capital facilities, that is Page 1 Printed on 7/9/02 • • • • J I • • Revised Code of Washington 2000 signed by a majority of the members of the board of trustees of a library district or board of ' trustees of a city or town library, the county legislative authority or county legislative authorities for the county or counties in which a proposed library capital facility area is to be established shall submit separate ballot propositions to voters-to authorize establishing the proposed library capital facility area and authorizing the library capital facility area if established, to finance • library capital facilities by issuing general indebtedness and imposing excess levies to retire the indebtedness. The ballot propositions shall be submitted to voters at a general or special election. If the proposed election date is not a general election, the county legislative authority is encouraged to request an election when.another unit of local government with territory located in • the proposed library capital facility area is already holding a special election under RCW 29.13.020. Approval of the ballot proposition to create a library capital facility area shall be by a simple majority vote. A completed request submitted under this section 'shall include: (1) A description of the boundaries of the library capital facility area; and (2)'a'copy of the resolution of the legislative authority of each city or town, and board of trustees of each library district, with territory . included within the proposed library capital facility area indicating both; (a) Its approval of the creation of the proposed library capital facility area; and (b) agreement on bow election costs will' ' be paid for submitting ballot propositions to voters that authorize the library capital facility area to incur general indebtedness and impose excess levies to retire the general indebtedness. [1996c258 § 1; 1995c368 § 3.] RCW 27.15.030 Governing body. The governing body of the library capital facility area shall be three members Of the county legislative authority from each county in which the library capital facility area is located. In counties that have:more than three members of their legislative body, the three members who . • shall serve on the governing body of the library capital facility area shall be chosen by the full membership of the county legislative authority'. Where the library capital facility area is located • . in more than one county, a county may be represented by less than three members by mutual agreement of the legislative authorities of the participating counties. . [1995 c 368 §4.] . • RCW 27.15.040 Authority to construct, acquire, maintain, and remodel facilities--lnterlocal agreements--Legal title. • A. library capital facilities [facility] area may construct,, acquire, maintain, and remodel library capital facilities and the governing body of the library capital facility area may, by • interlocal agreement or otherwise, contract with a county, city, town, or library district to design, administer the construction of, operate, or maintain a library capital facility financed pursuant to this'chapter. Legal title to library capital facilities acquired or constructed pursuant to this chapter may be transferred, acquired, or held by the library capital facility area or by a county, city,.town, Page 2 Printed on 7/9/02 • • • • • • Revised Code of'Washington 2000 • or library district in which the facility is located. [1995 c.368 §5.] • RCW 27.15.050 Financing--Bonds authorized. . • (1) A. library capital facility area may contract indebtedness or borrow money-to finance library capital facilities and may issue general obligation bonds for such purpose not exceeding an amount, together with any existing indebtedness of the library capital facility area? equal to one and one-quarter percent of the value of the taxable property in the district and impose excess property tax levies to retire the general•indebtedness as provided in.RCW 39.36.050 if a ballot . proposition authorizing both the indebtedness and excess levies is approved by at least three-fifths of the voters of the library capital facility area.voting on the proposition, and the total number of voters voting on the proposition constitutes not less than forty percent of the total number of voters in the library capital.facility area voting at the last preceding general election. The term "value of the taxable property" has, the meaning set forth in. RCW 39.36.015. Such a • proposition shall.be submitted to voters at a general or special election and may be submitted to voters at the same election as the election when the ballot proposition authorizing the establishing of the library capital facility area is submitted. If the proposed election date is not a general election, the county legislative authority is encouraged to request an election when 'another unit of local.government with territory located in the proposed library capital facility area -is already holding a special election under RCW 29.13.020. •- (2) A library capital facility area may accept gifts or grants of money or property of any kind for the same purposes for which it is authorized to borrow money in subsection (l) of this . section. - [1996c258 § 2; 1995c368 §6.] . • • RCW 27.15.06.0 Dissolution of library-capital facility area; • : • (1) A library capital facility area may be dissolved by a majority vote of the governing body when all obligations under any general obligation bonds issued by the,library capital facility . • area have been discharged and any other contractual obligations of the library capital facility area' have either been discharged or assumed by another governmental entity. (2) A library capital facility area shall be dissolved by the governing body if the first two' ballot propositions under RCW 27.15.050 that are-submitted to voters are not approved. - - [1995 c 368 § 7.] - • RC''35.02.220 Duty of county and road, library, and fire districts to continue sere=ices during transition period--Road maintenance and law enforcement services. The.approval of an incorporation by the voters of a proposed city or town, and the existence of a transition period to become a city or town, shall not remove the responsibility of Page 3 Printed on 7/9/02 • • • • Revised Codo'of washinzton 2060 • any county; road district; library district, or fire district, within which the area is located, to continue providing services to the area until the official date of the incorporation. A county shall continue to provide the following services to a newly incorporated city or town. or that portion of the county within which the newly incorporated city or town is located, at the preincorporation level as follows: (I) Law enforcement services shall be provided for a period not to exceed sixty days from the official date of the incorporation or until the city or town is receiving or could have begun receiving sales tax distributions under RCW 82.14.030(1), whichever is the shortest time period- ( ) Road maintenance shall be for a period not to exceed sixty days from the official date of the incorporation or until forty percent of the anticipated annual tax. 'distribution from the road district tax le i is made to the newly incorporated city or town pursuant to R 35.02.140, whichever is the shorter time period- (1991 c.360 §9; 1986 c 234 § 22; 1955 c 143 § 1. Formerly. RCW 3511.763-] • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Page 4 1'3iE1Dcd oa 7/9/02 • • • Interlocal Agreement Between • King County Rural Library District And the City of-K-en ire Sam redt/lm tSk Relating to Library Services during 2000 • • Whereas, the City of Sammamish incorporated on DATE; and Whereas, the City desires to.maintain library services for City residents during 2000; and • Whereas, the Library District wishes to provide those services to the City of • Sammamish; and Whereas, the City has the authority to levy a property tax for library services which enables the Library District to provide the citizens of Sammamish with library services during 2000; Now it is agreed between the City of Sammamish, Washington, and the King County Rural Library District as follows: Section 1. Obligation to ProvideiLibrary Services. The Library District agrees to provide the same library services to the residents of the City of Sammamish as are provided to all other residents of the King County Rural Library District. • Section 2. City's Obligation to Levy a Property Tax for. Library Services.The City agrees to set its property tax levy for 2000 to include up to $0.50 per thousand dollars of • valuation to provide library services during 2000. Section 3. City's Obligation to Pay Library District for Services, From the amount • billed from the City's property tax levy, the City agrees to pay to the District a sum equal • to that which the Library District would have billed had it levied on property within the City at the same levy rate as the Library District levies on other property in the District during 2000. The City shall pay this sum to the District in two payments.The first payment shall be made by July 1, 2000. The second payment shall be made by December 1, 2000. In no event shall the City's obligation to the Library District exceed-$0.50 per thousand dollars of the City's assessed valuation. • • • • Section 4. Local Library Board;In the event the City chooses to appoint a Library Board during any time period when the City is annexed or contracting with the Library District, the Library District shall regularly solicit input from the Board on issues relating to library services and facilities for the residents of Sammamish. Section 6. Effective Date. This Interlocal Agreement shall become effective upon execution of both parties. Agreed to this clay of , 1999. City of Shoreline: King County Rural Library District: William Ptacek, Director City Manager Approved as to form: • • City Attorney • • • • 7 From: Cary P. Driskell Page 1 of 2 From: "Cary P. Driskell" <driskell @worldshare.net> To: <Shag-o @att.net> Subject : document review Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 23: 41 :21 -0700 I reviewed the documents you provided for me two weeks ago. I actually had it done a week ago, but could not locate your e-mail until two days ago. I apologize for that. Anyway, my thoughts are as follows: 1. We are only talking about one branch, that at Main near Pines. 2. Starting with what I think may be the biggest issue, finances. In reviewing the 2001 Annual Report, the direct costs of operating one building are $884,000. These are set forth in a straightfoward manner. I am having a difficult time understanding the allocation for indirect costs. They are about 15% higher than direct costs. The explanation for their breakdown is brief to the point of being not helpful. Footnote 2 mentions an allocation based upon "several activity factors, " but does not apparently define what those are. I very strongly suggest that you rrequest much more detailed breakdowns on this to determine cost-effectiveness. Without a detailed knowledge of how the district works, but being able to see that many of the small, outlying towns have annexed to the District, it would seem logical that the heavy urban area of the Valley is subsidizing the more rural libraries. I could be wrong in that assumption, but it makes sense though. Anyway, I think we need to take a very close look at whether it makes sense to take on such high indirect costs for only one library building. 3. It appears to me that the materials provided by the District are, for lack of a better phrase, "pro-annexation" rather than the other two options. I recognize annexation to the district would be best for the district, but our purpose is to determine, from a cost-effective and service standpoint, what is best for the new city. The document entitled City Annexation to a Library District makes quite clear that we are currently being taxed at the maximum rate, 50 cents per $1, 000 of assessed value. As such, the amount would not go up. More on the taxation issue below. 4 . I think it is unlikely the new city would start its own library in the short term (although an attempt to pass on indirect costs of $977, 00 could force the issue) , the more likely option if not annexation for the first several years would be to contract through interlocal agreement with the District. The cost would be identical to taxpayers, 50 cents per $1,000 of assessed value. 5. Although the materials did not mention it much, the third option of forming our own library should be given a closer look. I need to research the issue of what immediate costs would be incurred in this choice. The most important one would be whether the new city would be required to purchase the facility and books from the District. I anticipate the District will say yes, but that would result in the taxpayers paying for it twice. I assume this issue has come up on the other side of the state with the 14 incorporations over there, so I will be looking there for answers. • If this does not need to be paid for, that could greatly influence the decision on whether or not to form a new city library. Again, the indirect costs associated with being part of the larger district appear to be disproportionate to the benefit received. We will know more after seeing a more detailed analysis of what those indirect costs entail. http: //webmail .att.net/wmc/v/wm?cmd=Print&no=5&sid=c0 8/5/2002 From: Cary P. Driskell Page 2 of 2 6. In terms of paying for a new city library, the materials you provided seem to state that the new city would have to pay for the library out of its- general budget, without the ability to charge the 50 cents per $1, 000 the District does. That makes no sense, and gives the District greater authority than the city would have, for no apparent reason. I researched this issue, and was unable to find anything precluding a city from levying its own library tax at the allowable rate. In fact, I believe the RCW does allow it. Additional support for this is found in the agreement between Sammamish and King County. Although this is an interlocal agreement, it is illogical that a city could levy such taxes to pay a district through an agreement, but could not levy them to run the library itself. I would suggest you request from the District copies of any materials they have that specifically state a city cannot levy a special library tax to runts own library. 7. In reviewing RCW 27. 15, this deals with formation of a library capital facility area. I believe this would apply to an entity such as the District, but not to any library formed by the new city. This would only come into play if the city annexed to the District, or formed an interlocal agreement for services. Your materials make it quite clear that existing revenues are not only insufficient to expand current operations, existing funds are insufficient to maintain current facilities. As such, a captial facility area would need to be formed to request a special bond levy. I think this particular financial problem requires us to give careful thought as to whether we want to annex to the District at this time. At the very least, we should contract with the District until we get satisfactory answers to the questions contained herein. I hope you find this helpful. Cary - it[Message List[Compose I Address Rook I Mailboxes I Options I Original Vtev,t Help I Feedback I Logaut I AT T WoridNet Home • • rittp: //webmail. att . net/wmc/v/wm?cmd=Print&no=5&sid=c0 8/5/2002 From: Mike Wirt -. Page 1 of 3 .=prom: "Mike Wirt" <mwirt @scld.lib.wa.us> • To: <shag-o @att.net> Subject : Re: document review (fwd) Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 11 :57 :39 -0700 =OeeDee- 'Here are my comments. I can provide you with more in-depth info if you want it. What is Mr. Driskell's role in doing this review? Mike > '1. We are only talking about one branch, that at Main near Pines. 'Comment: This is true, but the Argonne branch is used by many residents of the West portion of the Valley. > 2. Starting with what I think may be the biggest issue, finances. In > reviewing the 2001 Annual Report, the direct costs of operating one building > are $884,000. These are set forth in a straightfoward manner. I am .having > a difficult time understanding the allocation for indirect costs. They are > about 15% higher than direct costs. The explanation for their breakdown is > brief to the point of being not helpful. Footnote 2 mentions an allocation > based upon "several activity factors, " but does not apparently define what > those are. I very strongly suggest that you rrequest much more detailed > breakdowns on this to determine cost-effectiveness. Without a detailed > knowledge of how the district works, but being able to see that many of the > small, outlying towns have annexed to the District, it would seem logical > that the heavy urban area of the Valley is subsidizing the more rural > libraries. I could be wrong in that assumption, but it makes sense though. > Anyway, I think we need to take a very close look at whether it makes sense > to take on such high indirect costs for only one library building. •comment: I can supply the methodogy of determining indirect costs. • > > 3. It appears to me that the materials provided by the District are, for > lack of a better phrase, "pro-annexation" rather than the other two options. > I recognize annexation to the district would be best for the district, but > our purpose is to determine, from a cost-effective and service standpoint, > what is best for the new city. The document entitled City Annexation to a > Library District makes quite clear that we are currently being taxed at the > maximum rate, 50 cents per $1, 000 of assessed value. As such, the amount > would not go up. More on the taxation issue below. 'omment: The annexation materials I gave you were those that I've prepared =ttp: //webmail .att.net/wmc/v/wan?cmd=Print&no=7&sid=c0 7/30/2002 - I'torn: Mike Wirt - Page 2 of 3 lior cities requesting info on annexation because they had requested it. I suppose that 's the reason for the '"pro-annexation" gist . > 4 . I think it is unlikely the new city would start its own library in the • short term (although an attempt to pass on indirect costs of $977, 00 could > force the issue) , the more likely option if not annexation for the first • several years would be to contract through interiocal agreement with the • District. The cost would be identical to taxpayers, 50 cents per $1, 000 .of 1 7 as-P .-ed value. torment;: No comment. > 5 . Although the materials did not mention it much, the third option of > forming our own library should be given a closer look. I need to research > the issue of what immediate costs would be incurred in this choice. The > most important one would be whether the new city would be required tc • purchase the facility and books from the District. I anticipate the > District will say yes, but that would result in the taxpayers paying for it 5. twice. I assume this issue has come up on the other side of the state with • the 14 incorporations over there., so I will be looking there for answers. 5 If this does not need to be paid for, that could greatly influence the > decision on whether or not to form a new city library. Again, the indirect > costs associated with being part of the larger district appear to be > disproportionate to the benefit received. We will know more after seeing a • more detailed analysis of what those indirect costs entail . :Comment: The majority of West side cities have annexed to a library district, A couple may still be contracting. None have opted out and developed their own library system. The question of the District turning over assets at no cost to a new city is both a legal and policy issue that the Board of Trustees would need to address. Perhaps with a better ,understanding of all Of the "behind the scenes" activity that indirect costs account for, Mr. Driskell would feel more comfortable with the costs. In terms of paying for a new city library, the materials you provided • seem to state that the new city would have to pay for the library out of its 5 general budget, without the ability to charge the 50 cents per $1, 000 the > District does. That makes no sense, and gives the District greater > authority than the city would have, for no apparent reason. I researched > this issue, and was unable to 'find anything precluding a city from levying > its own library tax at the allowable rate. In fact, I believe the RCc does > allow it . Additional support for this is found in the agreement between > Samata.mish and King County. Although this is an irterlocal agreement, it is illogical that a city could levy such taxes to pay a district through an > agreement, but could not levy them to run the library itself. I would > suggest you request from the District copies of any materials they have that > specifically state a city cannot levy a special library tax to run its own • 1Dorarv, aament! I respectfully disagree with fir. Driskell about cities levying a specific library tax, RCN 89 .52 .043 states the maximum property tax levy of http: //webMail . att . net/WMC/V/WM?CM.d=Piintea10=74iSid=C0 7/30/2002 From: Mike Wirt - Page 3 of 3 a city: $3.375 per $1000 if not annexed to a fire or library district and $3. 60 per $1000 if annexed to a library or fire district. A city can use part of that amount for library services if it wishes, but it cannot levy more than $3.375 per $1000 unless it 's annexed to a fire district, then it's the $3.60.• Having worked with the state's property tax system for the past 23 years, I'm sure that a city cannot levy a specific library tax outside it's regular authority. If he would like additional corroboration, the county assessors office and/or the State Department of Revenue can provide it. I believe what the Sammamish agreeement was attempting to do was to guarantee that the city would levy sufficient taxes to pay the contract fee. > 7. In reviewing RCW 27.15, this deals with formation of a library capital > facility area. I believe this would apply to an entity such as the > District, but not to any library formed by the new city. This would only •> come into play if the city annexed to the District, or formed an interlocal > agreement for services. Your materials make it quite clear that existing > revenues are not only insufficient to expand current operations, existing > funds are insufficient to maintain current facilities. As such, a captial > facility area would need to be formed to request a special bond levy. I > think this particular financial problem requires us to give careful thought > as to Whether we want to annex to the District at this time. At the very > least, we should contract with the District until we get satisfactory > answers to the questions contained herein. Comment: It is correct that library capital facility areas apply only to library districts. This is the method we would probably use for any future construction. I'm not sure where Mr. Driskell got the idea that current funds are insufficient to maintain current facilities. We have a rolling 5-year facilities maintenance plan with funding contained in our capital reserve fund and an annual general operating fund appropriation. As I described in my presentation, the District could propose a District-wide bond issue for capital purposes without the use of a library capital facility area, as we did successfully in 1988 and 1996. The advantage of the ',CFA is that it can be proposed for a specific area that will have the direct benefit rather than District-wide. • :Got_E-mail"Message Lig Comnose;AddimsiotLk Mailboxes r Options! g i1a1 View ellp Feedback. out AT&T Wor{dNet Home •