Last Wednesday’s contentious meeting of the Jefferson County Public Library Board did not appear to solve any problems, despite verbal statements made to the board by eight members of the community, including Old Corporal. The seven-member board and the library director listened to all the statements in what seemed to me like stony-faced silence, with their only comments being to tell a couple of speakers that they had “only one minute left” of their allotted time.
The library board and director are facing an embarrassing and — potentially — expensive dilemma. Expensive for the taxpayers of Jefferson County, that is. They fired two long-time employees for reasons that still seem obscure and cloudy, even after the public meeting, in which citizens filled the library auditorium and voiced almost unanimous support for the two fired employees and disapproval of the library administration’s actions. One dismissed employee has filed a lawsuit against the board. The other has retained an attorney and pleaded with the board at the meeting to give her her job back. If the board stonewalls, then they could well be looking at yet another lawsuit. What if, ultimately, judges find in favor of the plaintiffs in both lawsuits? Could this cause the library’s insurance rates to go up? Possibly. And whose pocket will that come out of? Yours.
In addition, other speakers voiced criticisms of the way the library is being run day to day. The board did not respond at the meeting to any of these comments, either.
The library board is an appointed one — seven members, all of whom serve on a “Thank you” basis. That is, they aren’t paid. Of the present members, Terry Phillips and Dana Riddle were appointed by the Jefferson County Commissioners; Mary Kay Butler and Walter D. Morrill, chosen by the Jefferson County Council; Delores M. Jackson and Julie Sparks, both appointed by the Madison Consolidated Schools; and Margaret Seifert, appointed by the Southwestern Consolidated Schools.
And of course the library director is hired by the board.
Now, I’m sure that all of these people are honorable, and are doing what they think is best for the library and its patrons. And many would say, when told that they serve without compensation, “My goodness, what public-spirited people!” OK, I won’t question that.
But here’s the thing: The library board members are appointed by various public bodies that are elected by the people. That puts the board once removed from the taxpayers. The members serve for free; they don’t stand to lose any income if they leave the board. That’s twice removed from the taxpayers. The director is hired by the board, and serves at their pleasure. That puts her three times removed from the taxpayers. If the board and director are conducting the library’s business in a way that displeases the taxpayers who pay a big chunk of the library’s budget, then the taxpayers don’t seem to have a way to do anything about it — except gather at regular board meetings, voice their concerns (only five minutes, please, and make sure you get onto the agenda ahead of time), and maybe write letters of protest to The Madison Courier, which has failed to take any editorial stand that I’ve noticed on this matter.
Thirty-five or so years ago, when local residents felt the Madison School Board was not representing their educational interests in its appointive incarnation, they passed a referendum changing the board’s status to an elected one. I don’t advocate trying to start a petition drive to do that with the library board; our ballots are too cluttered as it is, and “elected” equals “paid,” at a time when all agencies of our government are cash-strapped.
But here’s a compromise that was suggested in a posting by someone calling themselves “Old Seabee” on this website: How about a petition drive for the election of a library “ombudsman”? Someone who wouldn’t be a member of the board, who would be a part-time county employee, but who would be empowered to hear complaints from the public, take them up with the board, and, if necessary, take steps to focus the light of public opinion on library issues.
The Scandinavian term “ombudsman” has become a popular one in the U.S. in recent years; newspapers and TV stations have them, as well as many other agencies which deal with the public. They are, in effect, a “taxpayer advocate” or, at least, an elected voice for those same taxpayers — someone who wasn’t hired by somebody who was appointed by somebody else. An ombudsman who didn’t do his or her job, could be voted out at the next election.
So, what do you think, folks? Let’s hear some comments — pro or con, at least I’ll know you’re reading Corporal’s Corner.
6 comments for “How about a library ombudsman?”