Public Library District Legislation 

The most recent legislation appears to be from Texas.  The state with the most districts is probably Illinois where they have special districts for many types of services.   In New York every district is a special charter and the public has an annual referendum on funding.  Michigan also provides a charter on a case by case basis, but the form is more defined by statute than is the case for New York.  

Major issues are the definition of the territory involved, methods for alteration of territory, the method of governance- whether elected or appointed, the method of setting budgets and tax rates, procedures for securing bonds, letting contracts and so forth, the relationships of the district library board to nearby libraries, other library districts, and area counties and municipalities.  

Needed Elements in a Model District Library Law

In 1993, Lee Brawner’s Library Journal article “The People’s Choice” called for the development of a model law on library districts for the 2/3 of U.S. states that have no laws on the books.    Nearly 10 years and four states with new legislation later, ALA has still not addressed the issue.  It is time that it did.

• The requirement of a clear and written plan of service for the proposed district. 
• A tax, millage, or fee that is “annually recurring,” and separate from that of other government entities, with provision for repeal as necessary.
• Provisions for a referendum to establish the library district and authorize funding by action of elected officials or by a petition process.
• A tax or rate cap that provides both room for long-range library planning and public accountability. Include provisions for both operating and capital funding. 
• A clear job description for the district library authority. Specification of appointment process or election for library board.
• Options for consolidated as opposed to federated type districts.
• Guidelines for the orderly transition of assets, staff and operations from existing library or libraries to the new district. 
• Depending on the state, clarification may be necessary regarding ability of a district to overlap existing municipal boundaries.
• Depending on the state, procedures for expansion or contraction of district boundaries by annexation and voter referendum.  

Special Library District Legislation exists in the following states:

•  AL, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, ID, IL, KS, KY, LA, MI, MT, NV, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA 

Information is available on the Web for the following:

California 

http://www.library.ca.gov/laws/b2002.html#169b

Although most California public libraries are organized as departments of general city or county government, a small number are organized as single-purpose districts. Those libraries are governed by a Board of Trustees elected for that specific purpose, and with one exception have an AB 8 property tax proration as their principal source of income.

Vacaville USD Public Library District remains organized and receives its tax rate proration, but operationally is merged with Solano County Library, to which its tax income is given. 

The Shasta County Regional Library Facilities and Services Commission was established to provide library service to that county, under 1990 special legislation enacting Government Code §§26170-26172.16. Commissioners are appointed by the board of supervisors, city councils, county board of education, and by the commission itself. Its funding is unclear. 

28 of the 48 County Libraries organized under the County Free Library Law (Education Code §§19100- 19180) have a property tax rate proration, and likely other special-purpose tax-rate entities are sometimes considered as "special districts" for revenue purposes. However, all 48 are organized under the same authority and governance.

Colorado - Boulder Public Library Master Plan.
http://www.boulder.lib.co.us/general/mplan/dist8.html

This report outlines Boulder Public Library's attempts to deal with library funding and governance issues within the context of state law. Public library governance, financial structure, and operational/administrative organization are not rigidly fixed in the Colorado Library Law, the regulating legislation that allows for the formation of public library districts. Library district formation and its governing structure are flexible and individual, within general state law guidelines. Within Colorado, and within the State Library Law, there are extensive opportunities to form governing structures to meet a variety of individual library needs.

Idaho 

http://www3.state.id.us/idstat/TOC/33027KTOC.html

Territory must be contiguous and district lines may not cross municipal jurisdictions, unlike the Illinois and New York cases.  Multi-county jurisdictions are permitted.  The district is governed by an elected board with taxing authority.  There is substantial provision for re-drawing and combining districts into even wider units.  Roughly 48% of Idaho libraries are district libraries.  They serve 38% of the state's population.  

Illinois 
http://www.legis.state.il.us/ilcs/ch75/ch75act16articles/ch75act16artstoc.htm

In Illinois, like New York, library district boundaries may be drawn along lines that do not correspond to existing municipal boundaries. Illinois, at nearly 300, has the largest number of special district libraries, but as a percent of libraries in the state, Kentucky bests the Illinois tally at 90% to Illinois’ 48%. Three out of four Illinois residents live outside of the city of Chicago.  Of those residents, 43% are served by district libraries.  

Michigan
http://www.libofmich.lib.mi.us/publications/distlibguide.html#IIA

Michigan's District Library Establishment Act, effective 22 May 1989, allows two or more municipalities to join together to form a district library. District libraries are controlled by district library boards which are taxing authorities pursuant to the Michigan Constitution, Article IX, section 6. As a taxing authority, the district library board has the power to place a districtwide library millage question on the ballot for voter approval.

New York
http://www.nysl.nysed.gov/libdev/charter/#CSPECIAL

Special library districts are created by act of the New York State Legislature. Each one is different and reflects the particular needs and needs situation of that district. There is no comprehensive legal definition of a special library district. About 20% of New York state residents are served by special or school district libraries.  Many of the special districts are concentrated in the suburban New York City area, especially on Long Island. 

Texas 
http://www.txla.org/html/legis/background.html#districts
Texas appears to have the most recently enacted district legislation.  In 1997, the 75th Texas Legislature passed SB1674 (codified as Chapter 326, Local Government Code) allowing voters in local jurisdictions to create a public library district to be funded by up to a half-cent in local option sales tax. In 1999, the 76^th Texas Legislature amended the law (HB 1618) to allow voters in counties of more than 100,000 to approve districts. There are currently nine library districts in Texas and many other communities plan to establish them According to the Texas Library Association, under current law, library districts must obtain a costly legal ruling to pledge taxes collected as collateral to further the purposes for which the district was created. Extended terms for library district trustees would further save election costs. The law does not provide for the improvement of land in the general powers of library districts. More than half of the annual library districts elections are uncontested, costing library districts unnecessary expense in time, manpower and election costs.  

The Texas Library Association recommends amending the Library District Law (Local Government Code, Title 10, Subtitle B, Chapter 326) to accomplish the following:

1. Allow library district trustees’ terms to increase from two to four years and that write-in candidacies for any district office shall be governed by provisions similar to Subchapter C, Chapter 146 of the Election Code; that is, that candidates must file at least 40 days prior to an election.

2.  Allow the acquisition or improvement to real property to be included in the district’s general powers.

3. Allow taxes collected under Subchapter 326.095 (Use of Tax) to be pledged as collateral for the borrowing of monies to further the purposes for which the district was created.

 Wisconsin 

Wisconsin does not currently have a district library  Although a draft is being considered for introduction during the 2004 session of the legislature. Draft language is not yet available, but here is an interim committee report:

Report by Thomas J. Hennen Jr. on July 24, 2002 to the  System and Resource Library Administrator's Association of Wisconsin

Committee members Sharon Winkle and Tom Hennen met to discuss progress on drafting district library legislation.  The committee, including Ron McCabe and Cal Potter and staff from DLTCL met with bill drafters earlier in the month and clarified a number of issues including:

1. Elimination of language providing state aid to library districts.
2. Clarification of the ability of municipalities to continue earning shared revenue after a district is formed.
3. Concern about language that fixed the initial district mill rate at “maintenance of effort” levels. (see below for revised recommendation.)
4. Consideration of a number of issues regarding personnel benefits moving into a district. 

Hennen, McCabe and Winkle agreed to review legislation in other states for best practices regarding library districts.  Hennen and Winkle met July 24.  McCabe could not attend.  The committee reviewed legislation in California, Illinois, Idaho, Michigan, New York, and Texas.  District library laws in Colorado and Arizona were also considered, though less carefully.  

At present the district library legislation, as drafted, will have the following characteristics. 

1. An elected 9-member board will have taxing authority for library services in the district.
2. The district may be formed only along current municipal lines but may be formed by either petition of the electorate or 2/3 vote of the governing bodies of the municipalities concerned. 
3. A library forming the district must be at least five years old.
4. The boundaries of the municipalities included must be contiguous.
5. The district must contain at least 4,000 residents.

At our meeting on 24 July, Winkle and Hennen agreed to recommend the following additions from other state’s library district laws:

1. Allow for anticipation tax loans (as in Idaho) to use anticipated district taxes to cover known and planned start up costs for initiating a district.  (Such as a transition to independent auditing and personnel administration, and so on).
2. Provide that a county board may only create a countywide library district with the consent of EACH municipality acting individually rather than by a plurality in a countywide referendum.
3. We discussed the problem that may be created if a city or village annexes territory in a town that is in a library district, especially if the territory annexed contains a main or branch library of the district. This has led to problems in Illinois as cities annexed areas containing branches of district libraries.  We did not come up with any method to prevent this outcome.
4. It is important that districts, like systems, but unlike municipal libraries, have the power to sue and be sued. 
5. The legislation should provide an orderly method for the merger of two or more districts into a single district. The committee deems that such a merger can and should be by action of the respective district boards rather than by municipality-by-municipality referendum.  We believe that other border change possibilities are adequately addressed in the current draft.
6. District formation considerations:
1. The planning committee should be given the option of preparing a plan for the ballot that allows for formation of district library board members that are elected either “at large” or by “aldermanic-like wards.”
2. Each district should be allowed to set by referendum its own maximum mill rate rather than fixing the maximum in state law.  The planning committee should be given the option of preparing a plan for the ballot that allows for the use of a fixed percent (0.1% ??) sales tax to supplement or supplant the mill rate. 
3. A petition referendum (as opposed to municipal board action only) should be allowed both for the formation of a district and for the increase of the maximum millage rate allowed. 
7. The district must go back to referendum to increase the maximum mill rate authority of the district board, just as is the case for school districts now.
8. The district board should be required to have an annual public hearing on the budget proposed by the district board. 

See also: 

• Publications

• Planning Checklist

• Wider & Wiser - home
  
  

Home    HAPLR ratings      Top 100 Libraries    Orders     Samples    Press    
Hennen Consulting      FAQ     Book     Presentation     Miscellaneous  

© 2006 haplr-index.com
Webmaster: thennen@haplr-index.com