Cranbury Library Short on Money: Cutting Hours-really!!??

[guest22-617n]

SEE ARTICLE BELOW FROM EW PATCH.

IS THIS THE SAME LIBRARY BOARD THAT WANTS A BRAND NEW STAND ALONE LIBRARY??

Cutting hours is apparently needed because of decreased funding. A new Library, even if built with 100% donated money, is certainly going to cost more to operate then the current one. With such decreases in funding, where will we get the money to operate this new library much less build it?

What good is a new stand alone library if we cannot afford to keep it open?

Time to re-think this whole thing!!

____________________________________


Cranbury Public Library Cuts Hours to Save Money
Beginning Feb. 1 the Cranbury Public Library will be open fewer hours per week.

Cranbury Public Library will be open fewer hours per week starting on Feb. 1. The Library Board of Trustees voted to save costs by closing the library on Sundays and one hour earlier on Monday through Thursday. These changes were prompted by a decrease in library funding.

“These times have the least use, so we hope to minimize the impact to our library patrons,” Library Board President Kirstie Venanzi said. “The library’s friendly and knowledgeable staff will still continue to provide the same great library services you have come to expect.”

The new library hours are as follows:

•Monday to Thursday - 10 a.m. – 8 p.m.
•Friday and Saturday - 10 a.m. – 5 p.m.
•Sunday - Closed
All municipal libraries are funded by tax dollars. Therefore, Cranbury must fund their public library at a rate of “1/3 of a mil”, or 33 cents for every $1,000 of equalized property value.

Because Cranbury's total assessed property value, including both residential and commercial, has decreased, the municipal funding for the library is down more than 10 percent, or $58,775 less to operate the library.

Being fiscally responsible, the Library Board of Trustees acted to balance the budget by reducing costs and increasing revenue. To increase revenue, the cost to make a black and white copy is increasing by 5¢ to 15¢ per page.

“This increase will help offset toner and paper costs,” Library Director Marilynn Mullen said.

Despite the decrease in funds, the library is ensuring that a healthy budget for books, magazines and DVDs will continue to be maintained, according to Mullen.

To discuss this change, or anything else related to the library, please contact Mullen at 609-655-0555.

[publius-109q]

I would be all for a new stand-alone library if we had the finances to handle it. Obviously, we don't. Therefore, it's probably not such a good idea to do at this time. Should've made it bigger last time construction was done on it.

[Kirstie Venanzi-1254]

Municipal Public Libraries are funded based upon EV (equalized evaluation) of a town. Cranbury's EV is lower again this year due to the recent economic downturn. To be fiscally responsible, the library board has voted to match our current funds to our current budget. Cranbury EV is very strong - the residential sector is already recovering. The library funding is sustainable - economically, socially, and the new library will be environmentally sustainable as well. The Cranbury Public Library has over 1.1 million dollars raised and saved for a our new home.
Please contact me or the library if you have any concerns, or questions. Our next library board meeting is February 14th 7:30 p.m. (we love our library).
Kirstie Venanzi, President, Cranbury Public Library Board of Trustees
609-655-8250
kvenanzi@ias.edu

[a long time ago-8p94]

[anon-1254]

Good point, Long Time Ago...
1967 - town population was about 2200, and school was about 400 (and number was a bubble in the numbers).
Today - town popular close to 4000, and school over 600

[anon-97on]

[anon-1254]

i would suggest you attend the library board meetings.

[Kirstie Venanzi-1254]

1. How much of the $1.1M has been raised by the fundraising drive versus the surplus that had been built up due to the previously higher EV exceeding operating expenses? As of date, we have about $600.00 in saved money - over many years - for the sole purpose of having a home for the public library, and allowing the school to have their library. We have $500 plus in raised money and this is growing quickly

2. If you were not saving the surplus to try and raise money to build the new library, couldn't it have been used to it to keep the existing hours? In fact, isn't not using it for this purpose primary to preserve the surplus for the construction project?

The library board feels very strongly that we need match the current budget to the current expenses and keep the saved surplus, that has been set aside by resolution for the sole purpose of having a home for the public library. saved for that purpose.

If people object to the new hours, please let us know. We will do the best to serve the community.

3. Even if you raise enough money for the construction of the library, that doesn't answer the previous poster's question about how you'd sustain operating it long term if we can't count on growth or even flat preservation of the go-forward annual EV assessment?

Municipal library funding is by law 1/3 of mil EV (equalize evaluation). This is stable funding. Our value as a township may be at a temporary low, but it is stable and growing for the future.
So, in other words, library funding is sustainable. If you need further particular please contact me.

4. Does your budget for the new library include enough endowment to cover incremental maintenance of the facility indefinitely or is the savings from not paying rent to the school going to 100% cover these incremental operating expenses?

Yes, our ongoing budget contains amounts for maintenance.

Also, once we leave the school they will not have the expense that the basis for our rent. In other words, there will be no increased costs when we leave. The school will immediately have a better school library and a safer school.

[anon-97on]

Thanks for the responses.

Regarding point #3, I understood how the EV works. But by definition it is based on aggregate property values. You call it a temporary low, but why do you assume that? What if home values continue to decline or do not materially grow for a long time? As it stands, the assessment is based on assessed values not actual values and the average assessments still exceeds current fair market value which means its reasonable to assume the aggregate values may continue to decline in the coming years as the assessments correct to market value. It's certainly possible housing and commercial properties values will appreciate again in the future, but when and how much is very uncertain.

Regarding point #4, just to be clear, I referenced the reduced cost for not paying rent to the school but the aggregate operating costs of the new building are not just your current operating expenses plus rent. The new library would have a host of expenses as the building owner it doesn't currently. Utilities, cost of scheduled and unscheduled maintenance. Every so many years you will need to do capital repairs and improvements and most of those can be predicted. So if you have a 15 year roof, you logically amortize the cost of the roof over 15 years and your operating budget assumes that expense over time. I was just checking that the amount being raised plus the rent savings are enough to indefinitely handle the long term incremental costs associated with building ownership.

Thanks again.

[anon-1254]

Regarding point #3, I understood how the EV works. But by definition it is based on aggregate property values. You call it a temporary low, but why do you assume that? What if home values continue to decline or do not materially grow for a long time? As it stands, the assessment is based on assessed values not actual values and the average assessments still exceeds current fair market value which means its reasonable to assume the aggregate values may continue to decline in the coming years as the assessments correct to market value. It's certainly possible housing and commercial properties values will appreciate again in the future, but when and how much is very uncertain.

I recently met with Steve Benner, Cranbury Township Tax Assessor.
Cranbury's long term EV is strong. The residential portion, about 50% of our tax basis, is already recovering from the economic downturn. Cranbury aggressively strives to keep assessed values equal to real values. The portion that is keeping EV low is the commercial portion, which again is 50% of the tax basis. That is in his words, "still settling out".


Regarding point #4, just to be clear, I referenced the reduced cost for not paying rent to the school but the aggregate operating costs of the new building are not just your current operating expenses plus rent. The new library would have a host of expenses as the building owner it doesn't currently. Utilities, cost of scheduled and unscheduled maintenance. Every so many years you will need to do capital repairs and improvements and most of those can be predicted. So if you have a 15 year roof, you logically amortize the cost of the roof over 15 years and your operating budget assumes that expense over time. I was just checking that the amount being raised plus the rent savings are enough to indefinitely handle the long term incremental costs associated with building ownership.
We have examined our expense going forward and our current rent will more than cover our future cost in an energy efficient building. As I stated, we include maintenance in our budgets.
Please contact me for further details.

[guest22-617n]

Unfortunately, we could spend all day poking holes in the claims of the library board. the above poster makes some execellent points about where will we get the money going forward? The Library Board responds-come to a meeting. lets face it, the library board has decided that they MUST have a new building-its for the safety of the children, etc etc. The Town is playing along and giving them the land to do it. meanwhile our student popluation is shrinking and the school is no longer short on space. the whole thing starts to sound a lot like our Field of Dreams baseball field-speaking of which, does anyone even use that field? Its time to start thinking about long term fiscal responsibility.

[anon-0n08]

[anon-ppq3]

[anon-40r5]

600k of the money is tax money the library lovers kept instead of using the money to run the library. Now we have to suffer with less hours of operation while they keep the tax money collected in their piggy bank. So it appears to me they have only raided 500k and held the taxes they collected hostage and cose to give us less service.

[anon-qq82]

So the library has decided to use $600K of taxpayer money for a stand-alone library and cut service.

Hasn't the proposition been if a new library was built, it would be with private donations?

How can the library be allowed to cut service in order to fund a new library that has not been approved?

[Kirstie Venanzi-0o99]