Memorandum:
From: Mark Arend, Interim Assistant
Director
Subject: Report of System Activities
The following is a list of current activities. Feel free to give me a call or send an email if you have any questions or would like further information.
Wireless Internet Access: 23
of our libraries are offering wireless internet access for the public and WALS
staff will be installing it in other libraries soon. Users can have internet access using their
own laptops. This service has been very
popular, especially in communities with many summer visitors.
Library
Legislation Day: Included in
your board packet is a registration form for Library Legislation Day in
There are several bills affecting libraries & systems making their way through the
legislature and information on them follows my report.
Staff
Developments: ILL page Abbey Ziebell has found full-time employment
and is resigning. And both our print
shop assistants, Hue Vang and Yengleng Vang have resigned. In the past we’ve hired printers assistants
through the school’s youth apprenticeship program and will be contacting that
program again.
Library News: The Endeavor Public Library has moved to temporary quarters in a remodeled storefront. The library and village offices have been housed in an old school and the village board has decided that the building will be too expensive to heat this winter. They will probably either build a new building or renovate the old one. The Redgranite Public Library will be closing for the month of December because of budget shortfalls. Work is progressing on the expansion and remodeling at the Patterson Memorial Library in Wild Rose and they hope to be done fairly soon.
To: Winnefox System Board
From: Mark W. Arend, Interim Assistant Director
Re: Legislative activity—AB 146 (public construction contracts)
Date: 11 November 2005
Under current law, before a contract for public construction with a value that exceeds $5,000 but does not exceed $15,000 may be let by some public bodies, including library systems, the board must give a class 1 notice of the proposed construction. Also, before a contract for public construction with a value that exceeds $15,000 may be let certain other requirements, such as a lowest responsible bidder requirement, must be met.
Under this bill, for cities, villages, towns, technical college district boards, town sanitary district commissions, and federated public library systems the minimum bid amount of $15,000 that triggers requirements such as a lowest responsible bidder requirement is increased to $25,000.
This bill should have no effect on Winnefox operations.
To: Winnefox Library System Trustees
From: Mark W. Arend, Interim Assistant Director
Re: AB 483 (Bill to eliminate Maintenance of Effort requirement)
Date: 11 November 2005
AB 483 was introduced by Rep. Gottlieb in June and referred to the committee on Urban and Local Affairs. This bill would eliminate the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirement that to be a library system member a municipality or county must fund the library at a rate no lower than the average of the past 3 years. In August Rep. Gottlieb introduced an amendment to this bill. The bill would now: · Allow a system to reduce services or expel a library that fails to meet minimum standards for library service, if the county has adopted standards. There must be a public hearing before standards are adopted, the standards may not include a minimum funding level, and they must be approved by the county and by the library boards of at least 50% of libraries that contain 80% of the municipal population. The standards could not include a minimum funding level.
As of this writing a hearing has not been scheduled on the amended bill.
To: Winnefox System Board
From: Mark W. Arend, Interim Assistant Director
Re: Legislative activity—SB 258 (‘R’-rated videos)
Date: 11 November 2005
As originally written, this bill would have prohibited a public library from loaning or renting to a minor an“R”−rated (restricted) movie without parental permission. It was introduced by Senators Reynolds, Grothman, and Roessler and cosponsored by several Assembly Representatives.
On 8 November Sen. Reynolds
introduced a revised wording of the bill.
It now requires libraries to ask each adult who asks for a card if they
will allow their minor children to borrow “R”-rated movies. If the parent does not consent the library
may not loan or rent those videos to their children.
In its original form this bill was opposed by the Motion Picture Association of American (MPAA) which oversees the movie rating system. They state that keeping the ratings voluntary is part of their usefulness and that government involvement would lead to film makers opting to leave their films unrated. They also say that attempts to incorporate voluntary ratings into state and local law have been consistently found unconstitutional because "they unlawfully delegate legislative power to a private association." The MPAA has warned that they would file suit against the state if the bill, as originally written, was enacted. As of this writing they have not commented on the revised bill.
Librarians generally do not support this bill for several reasons:
To: Winnefox System Board
From: Mark W. Arend, Interim Assistant Director
Re: Legislative activity—SB 272 (The ‘Reform Bill’)
Date: 11 November 2005
This bill is one of a pair of bills based on recommendations that came out of the State Superintendent's Task Force on Public Library Legislation and Funding which met several years ago. Their recommendations were divided into two categories, non-controversial items that had broad general support and agreement and/or cleaned up inconsistencies in the statutory language (referred to as the “Language Bill”) and items on which there was less agreement or which might prove to be controversial (referred to as the “Reform Bill”). SB-272 is the “Reform Bill”. These bills were introduced by Senators Leibham (R) and Breske (D) and were cosponsored by Assembly Representatives from both parties. Both bills were passed by the Senate on 9 November and have been referred to the Assembly.
The list below outlines the major provisions of this bill and their potential impact on Winnefox and its members. John and I are available to clarify this information or to answer additional questions.
Provision 1: Currently, if the territory within a public library system has a population of less than 100,000 as a result of the withdrawal or realignment of participating municipalities or counties, the system must realign with an existing system within two years. This bill provides that, if a system has fewer than three participating counties and a population of less than 200,000 as a result of the withdrawal or realignment of participating counties, the system must realign with an existing system within two years.
Effect: If two or more Winnefox member counties would decide to withdraw from the system causing our service population to go below 200,000 and our member counties to drop below 3, the remaining counties would have to realign with another system within two years. If this happened in a neighboring system we might be asked to allow an additional county(ies) to join Winnefox.
Provision 2: This bill adds several new system membership requirements.
Effect: Based on information in the 2004 annual reports all Winnefox directors work in their libraries at least 10 hours a week and all Winnefox member libraries were open at least 20 hours per week. One library spent slightly less than $2,500 on materials in 2004.
Provision 3: The bill allows a system to adopt a plan requiring member libraries to compensate other libraries for crossover borrowing (when residents of one community use a library in another community).
Effect: One Winnefox member county, Winnebago, has a provision in the county agreement regarding compensation for crossover borrowing but Winnefox has no enforcement power if a library would refuse to comply. This provision would allow Winnefox to adopt a plan to require such payment in one or more counties.
Several Senators, including Carol Roessler, introduced an amendment to delete this provision. The amendment was tabled and is not part of the bill as passed by the Senate and forwarded to the Assembly.
Provision 4: Under current law, two library systems intending to merge require the approval of each system board, the county boards of all participating counties, and 51% of the member libraries in each system. This bill removes the requirement that library approval be acquired.
Effect: This provision would make it easier for two systems to merge.
Provision 5: The
bill prohibits a public library system from being established if its
establishment would cause the number of systems to exceed the number in
existence on the bill’s effective date.
There are currently 17 library systems in
Effect: This should have no effect on Winnefox or its members.
Provision 6: Under this bill, if a municipality located in a county that maintains a consolidated county library wishes to establish a new library or participate in a joint library, it must, in addition to the existing requirements, obtain the approval of the county library board and the county board of supervisors.
Effect: This will have no effect at this time, because none of our member counties maintains a county library.
Provision 7: Under this bill, joint library agreements must:
a. Include a procedure for adjusting the membership of the board to ensure that it remains representative of the populations of the participating municipalities.
b. Name one of the participants as the library’s fiscal agent.
c. Include a procedure for the distribution of the library’s assets and liabilities if the library is dissolved.
Effect: Two Winnefox member
libraries are joint libraries:
Provision 8: The bill provides that, if a joint library is created on or after the bill’s effective date, each municipality participating in the joint library must levy a tax for public library service at the same rate.
Effect: This would not affect our current joint libraries.
Provision 9: Under current law, a county must pay to each library in the county an amount equal to at least 70 percent of the cost of library use by rural residents. This bill would extend this requirement across county lines.
Effect: This would require additional statistical reporting by Winnefox and its members. At this time we do not have the statistics necessary to estimate the fiscal effect on member counties & libraries. As this bill progresses we will gather and try to analyze the statistical information necessary to make such an estimate.
To: Winnefox Library System Trustees
From: Mark W. Arend, Interim Assistant Director
Re: Legislative activity—SB 273 (The ‘Language Bill’)
Date: 11 November 2005
This bill is one of a pair of bills based on recommendations that came out of the State Superintendent's Task Force on Public Library Legislation and Funding which met several years ago. Their recommendations were divided into two categories, non-controversial items that had broad general support and agreement and/or cleaned up inconsistencies in the statutory language (referred to as the “Language Bill”) and items on which there was less agreement or which might prove to be controversial (referred to as the “Reform Bill”). SB-273 is the “Language Bill”. These bills were introduced by Senators Leibham (R) and Breske (D) and were cosponsored by Assembly Representatives from both parties. Both bills were passed by the Senate on 9 November and have been referred to the Assembly.
The list below outlines the provisions of this bill and their potential impact on Winnefox and its members. John and I are available to clarify this information or to answer additional questions.
Provision 1: Under
current law a municipality may exempt itself from the county library tax if it
levies a tax for library services at a rate that is equal to or greater than
the county library tax rate. The county
library tax includes all taxes raised by the county for library purposes,
including taxes for library capital outlays.
In contrast, municipalities often fund major library capital outlays
through borrowing with repayment through a debt retirement fund, a fund separate
from the library fund. Therefore, the
exemption test includes capital outlay funds (if any) on the county side, but
not always on the municipal side. Where
municipal library funding rates are near county library funding rates, a sudden
jump in the county library rate due to capital outlays can have a dramatic
impact on the level required for municipal exemption.
This bill would exclude the amount levied by a county for capital expenditures when determining whether a municipality is exempt.
Effect: Municipalities in 3
counties,