by guest blogger Linda Baum
At last night’s Library Board meeting (6/20/12), it was
announced that the Library had received a letter from the Township claiming the
Library owed another $338,493 for its portion of pension, hospitalization, and
workers compensation expenses for budget year 2012. I was not provided a copy of the Township’s analysis, so
can’t say if those are the only categories of expenses addressed in it, but
those were the ones mentioned at the meeting.
Each year, a figure for these costs is provided by the
Township for the Library Board to use in developing its annual budget. The Township previously provided the
figure for the Library’s 2012 budget, which has already been completed and approved
by the Board after considerable discussion.
Now, the Township is saying an error was made – by the Township
– and a review of the numbers by the CFO has uncovered significant mathematical
mistakes.
Board member and Township Committeewoman Stephanie Murray
seemed to lay the blame at the Library Board’s feet, saying that these figures
had not been thoroughly reviewed by former Boards. She touted the benefits of increased board participation,
even though, as I understand it, the Township had brought this matter to the
Board, not visa versa. (Board
membership was increased from 7 to 9 this year.)
Library Director Susan O’Neal noted that the annual figure
provided by the Township had shown increases over time, in line with what would
be expected.
It seems to me that Ms. Murray was overlooking the fact that
the mistake – if that is really what this is -- was on the part of the
Township. Certainly, the Board has
a right to rely on information that the Township provides.
A move like this by the Township was not unexpected by those
of us who have been following what has been going on in the last year and a
half. While this is being “window
dressed” as just an accounting error or math mistake, it was surely undertaken
with the intent of justifying a transfer of funds. The Library Board’s new Township-installed president, Larry
Nelsen, called it “unfortunate”. I
think that is a pretty tame word for such an obvious tactic.
Board member Vivian Breen was critical of the move and questioned
how accurate the Township’s own
records can be if these kinds of mistakes are being made. Good question.
I asked the Board if they’d had a chance to thoroughly
review the numbers provided by the Township. Of course they could not have if the letter was only just
received this week, and it’s unlikely much delving will be done given the
make-up of the new Board.
So where will the money come from to the pay the $338K tab? Roughly $313K will be taken from
reserves and $25K from the materials budget. That means some materials that
were going to be purchased won’t be. There was no mention of whether the reserves are protected or
unprotected reserves, and I didn’t ask since there seems little point in making
the distinction anymore. Further,
any “protection” may not apply here because the funds are, technically, being
used rather than taken.
Remember the parking lot expansion project? That’s now off the table -- again. However, the Board – specifically a few
of the new Township appointees – said that no layoffs or branch closures are
planned. It seemed to me that the assurance
was coming from the Township to encourage cooperation.
