Board of Trustees

WARNING! This answer applies only to school district public libraries.[1]

In addition: Caveat…[2] this answer will apply differently to different school district public libraries.

As fans of library law know,[3] school district public libraries have their own special subsections of New York State Education Law Section 260 regarding election of trustees and occasionally have to follow the practices of their sponsoring district.

The subsection relevant to this question is (8), which provides:

Candidates for the office of trustee of a public library established and supported by a school district shall be nominated by petition which shall meet the requirements of subdivision a of section two thousand eighteen of this chapter, except that such candidates shall be elected in the manner specified in subdivision b of such section except that the nominating petition filed pursuant to subdivision a or b of such section shall be signed by a least twenty-five qualified voters of the library district, or two percent of the voters who voted in the last previous annual election of members of the library board of trustees, whichever is greater. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to a charter granted prior to April thirtieth, nineteen hundred seventy-one that provides for a different procedure. [emphasis added]

Because of the clause in bold, when I get a question like the one above, I first ask if the Library was chartered before April 14, 1971. If it was, I check to see if the charter says something else about the method of electing trustees.[4] If it does, we follow what the charter says.

Presuming a library’s charter doesn’t pre-date President Nixon’s ending of the blockade of China[5] and provide for another process, I then look to the relevant law, which is “subdivision a of section two thousand eighteen of this chapter.” This section requires:

Each petition shall be filed in the office of the clerk of the district between the hours of nine a.m. and five p.m., not later than the thirtieth day preceding the school meeting or election at which the candidates nominated are to be elected. No person shall be nominated by petition for more than one separate office.

Which brings us to the member’s question: what if the “thirtieth day” falls on a Sunday?

Although there is no statute or case law on this point regarding a school district public library, the New York State Education Commissioner wrote in Decision No. 17238 that the state’s “General Construction Law” provides:[6]

§ 25-a. Public holiday, Saturday or Sunday in statutes; extension of time where performance of act is due on Saturday, Sunday or public holiday

1. When any period of time, computed from a certain day, within which or after which or before which an act is authorized or required to be done, ends on a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday, such act may be done on the next succeeding business day and if the period ends at a specified hour, such act may be done at or before the same hour of such next succeeding business day…

So, there you have it! The due date will be the next business day (which could be a Tuesday, if the Monday after the Sunday is also a holiday).

That said, even if this all checks out for you, it is wise to confirm this with the school district—especially if the district is conducting your library’s elections.

If you would like to memorize a summary of this answer to dazzle people at board meetings, here it is:

Barring a charter provision providing otherwise, if the deadline for nominating petitions for school district public library candidates falls on a Sunday, petitions are due the next business day, as provided by General Construction Law Section 25-a.

Thank you for a great question!

In legalese, this question is: Does the Early Mail Voting Act apply to special legislative district libraries?

The answer is: NO.

The Early Mail Voting Act applies to elections conducted by the following entities:

• County Boards of Elections (Election Law Section 8-700)
• New York City (City Charter Section 1053)
• School Districts (Education Law)
• Special Elections by Towns and Villages (Town Law, Village Law)

By including County Boards of Elections and New York City, the Early Mail Voting Act covered all municipal entities, so municipal library votes conducted by a municipality are covered.[1]

By including school districts, the Early Mail Voting Act indirectly covered school district public libraries, because they must conduct their proceedings in the same manner as their school district. So, school district public library votes are (mostly) covered.[2]

Notably, the Early Mail Voting Act did NOT include language covering other public libraries conducting their own elections and budget votes.[3]

This means that a special district public library conducting an election and/or budget vote does not have to offer early mail voting unless its enabling legislation requires it.

Every special legislative district library will have to check its legislation on that, because every special legislative district library is different. Hopefully, that check will calm all concerns, because most enabling legislation has something like this:

Section 2. Election.

1. The trustees of the existing [name] library shall give notice of such election by the publication of a notice in one or more newspapers having a general circulation in the district to be served [and the vote shall be conducted at the library and counted]…
2. In the event that the district is created, there shall be an annual election conducted by the board of trustees of the [name] library district in accordance with the provisions of subdivision one of this section, at a time to be set by the board…

This typical language contains no mention of absentee ballots, early voting, or early mail voting, and—just as important—no requirement that the process follow the Election Law. Instead, the process set out (generally requiring one day of voting at the library) must simply be replicated, year after year.

So, special legislative district libraries, to be 100% certain, check your enabling legislation, but chances are you don’t have to offer early mail voting.

How can a library explain this to a public that might expect to have the early mail voting option?

As the member points out, communication with the voters is key.

A special legislative district public library is wise to have a written policy governing elections and voting. This policy can ensure that every aspect of the enabling legislation’s requirements is followed and can also help explain to the public why the process isn’t the same as voting in a municipal or school election.

The policy can then be used to develop a plain-language explanation to voters. For example:

The process for election of trustees and approval of the library’s tax levy is set by special state legislation that required votes be conducted by the Library. Because our legislation doesn’t provide for it, we cannot offer [absentee ballots, early voting, or early mail voting].

If you have an accessibility concern about reaching the Library on the day of the vote, please contact the Library at least three days prior, and we will arrange accommodations in advance.

You may hear of other libraries offering early mail voting. This is because different types of libraries have to follow different rules! If you have suggestions for improvements to our voting process, please send them to INSERT. A copy of the legislation governing our process is here.[4]

It is important for the public to know that you have done enough!

Thank you for a thoughtful question.

For those of you who can’t wait: the answer is YES! A committee can be set up to approve construction project-related decisions between regular meetings of a public library’s full board.

BUT how this authority is set up is critical, so please keep reading.

A public library board’s ability to delegate this type of authority varies based on the type of library, as well as what is in the library’s charter, bylaws, and policies. For construction projects funded by grants and conditional donations, it is possible that grant terms may also impact how authorizations flow, too.

So how does a library set up a committee to get the efficiency described the member’s question?

Let’s break all that down in a fun and literary way.

While day-to-day coordination with a contractor may be assigned to the library’s director (or, at a larger library, a facilities manager[1]) a major construction[2] project requires extra capacity.[3] Even on a smallish project,[4] a library will need people keeping an eye on the overall picture, or things can go askew quickly. We’ll call this the “Dune Factor.”[5]

Another key element in a major construction project is maintaining a tight and trusting relationship with the architect. We’ll call that the “Fountainhead Factor.”[6]

A huge element is that no matter how great a contractor might be, it is vital to keep an eye on them. While a client’s instinct may be “we’re going to trust they are doing it right and give them their space,” that is NOT how to do it… instead, at regular intervals, the work must be inspected for conformity with plans and specs. This can be done by an “owner’s rep,” a “clerk of the works,” or even a properly experienced trustee.[7] We’ll call this is the “le Carré Factor.”[8]

Short note on timing: it is important to consider these factors, plan for them, and budget for them, BEFORE the job is bid out.

Why is that? Because how these roles become part of the toolbox that the library board (and any committee or person with delegated authority) will use to address issues requiring quick action (by the full board, or a special committee).

Here are common construction issues that may require quick action:

• Change orders (for example, the specified door model isn’t available, and the next best thing is $5,000 dollars more);[9]
• Design changes, which also lead to change orders (for example, if the tie-in to an addition needs to change because the old building is deteriorating);
• Discovery of unforeseen conditions (for example, it is discovered that a load-bearing wall is slated for demolition as part of an open floor plan);[10]
• Environmental concerns (for example, uncovering friable asbestos);[11]
• Onsite injury (for example, a worker is injured);[12]
• Negative public relations (for example, if the contractor’s crew is smoking on the library’s property during a break);[13] and
• Bees![14]

For all of this, a library is wise to do exactly as the member describes and designate a committee or person to make decisions.

Here is where things get tricky. Because all public libraries[15] are subject to the Open Meetings Law, the meetings of a committee empowered to take action need to be publicized and open to the public. However, many of the scenarios depicted above will provide little to no time for advance notice, and some actions may require executive sessions due to confidentiality (for example, matters that could be in litigation).

To keep things more streamlined, some libraries will hire an “owner’s rep” who will be at the project (Dune Factor), chum up with the architect (Fountainhead Factor), keep an eye on things (le Carré Factor), and have a certain amount of delegated authority to issue change orders that are within the bounds of a pre-approved budget. The best owner’s reps will have serious experience with similar projects and owe 100% of their loyalty to the library.[16]

For economy, some libraries will have the library director fill this “owner’s rep” role. Many library directors, being detail-oriented folks who are passionate about what’s best for their libraries, are well suited to it, particularly if they have already lived through a construction project or two. However, if a library is going to do this, they must plan for the library director not to be able to perform other functions at the same time; in fact, at least 30% of the library director’s time should be assumed as being spent on the project.

From the legal perspective, using the library director for this role is risky. This is because if something is missed, the liability for the mistake comes back on the library, rather than a contractor. The same concern applies if the library decides to use a trustee to play this role informally. So, whenever possible, budgeting for a contracted and professional “owner’s rep” is wise.

Regardless of the model chosen to address the Dune, Fountainhead, and le Carré factors, a library board committee empowered to call a special meeting to approve items over and above budgeted factors—or to amend contracts—can be formed to take quick action, so long as the library’s charter,[17] bylaws, and policies do not prohibit giving a committee such authority.[18]

Here is a model resolution for setting up such a committee, and it includes consideration of the Open Meetings Law requirements:

WHEREAS the Library is planning to undertake a project to [INSERT DESCRIPTION] (“the Project”);

WHEREAS the Project’s contracted cost is $[INSERT COST] (“Project Budget”);

WHEREAS the Library has authorized an amount of [INSERT PERCENT]% of the Project Budget, for a total of [INSERT AMOUNT], as a “Contingency Budget,” to address emergent project costs, such as change orders; and

WHEREAS the Library wishes to avoid costs and delays related to approving use of the Contingency Budget;

BE IT RESOLVED that [INSERT NAMES] are appointed as a “Project Committee” authorized to call special meetings to address the sudden need for change orders and to authorize via a unanimous vote contract changes for amounts not exceeding the Contingency Budget;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that [INSERT NAME] shall have the authority to sign documents related to approvals granted by the Project Committee;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Project Committee is also authorized to timely raise concerns related to construction and construction contracts with the Library’s contractors, insurance carriers, and attorney;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that to ensure Open Meetings Law compliance, the Project Committee shall provide the public 48-hour notice of its meetings whenever possible but shall not delay immediate action to do so, shall maintain minutes of its proceedings together with copies of any change orders or expenditures authorized, and such minutes and documentation shall be reviewed and adopted into the record of the next regular board meeting;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Project Committee meets via videoconferencing as allowed by the Library Board’s policy, the information to attend the public meeting will be publicized on the Library’s webpage, if time allows;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Project Committee has the authority to call a special meeting of the full board, if a matter of immediate concern requires approval in excess of its authority or of the authorized Contingency Budget; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Project Committee shall only be dissolved after the expiration of the warrantee period of the Project, which shall be [INSERT NUMBER] years after the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.

The reason to keep the committee operating after completion of the project is that if anything goes awry (like the new wing begins sinking six months after completion), the group is still empowered to take quick action (like calling an attorney and an engineer).

Hopefully, of course, every major construction project goes smoothly, and the committee’s work will be over as soon as the ribbon is cut on the new project!

Thank you for an important question.

It’s true that for all libraries and library systems in New York State cities with more than one million people (currently and for the foreseeable future, just New York City[1]), all committees of library boards of trustees must comply with the Open Meetings Law (OML), pursuant to Education Law Section 260-a.[2]

However, for libraries in New York State cities with less than one million people (all New York cities other than the City of New York), as well as libraries in towns[3] and on Indian reservations,[4] there are a couple other factors that determine whether committees have to follow the OML.

First, outside New York City, a committee of an association library’s board does not have to follow the OML, because while Education Law Section 260-a applies to the boards of association libraries and to committees of association library boards in cities with more than one million people (New York City’s libraries are association libraries), it does not apply to association library board committees in cities with less than one million people, in towns, or on Indian reservations.

Second, as stated in the recent answer for Using a Board Committee to Authorize Changes During Library Construction Project, a committee that has the power to make decisions on behalf of a public library must follow the OML. This is because the OML applies to:

… any entity, for which a quorum is required in order to conduct public business and which consists of two or more members, performing a governmental function for the state or for an agency or department thereof, or for a public corporation as defined in section sixty-six of the general construction law, or committee or subcommittee or other similar body consisting of members of such public body or an entity created or appointed to perform a necessary function in the decision-making process for which a quorum is required in order to conduct public business and which consists of two or more members. [OML § 102(2), emphasis added]

A committee that includes members of the public as voting members does not have to follow the OML, because such a committee cannot make decisions on behalf of its library (“perform a necessary function in the decision-making process”).

The OML clarifies that a “necessary function in the decision-making process shall not include the provision of recommendations or guidance which is purely advisory and which does not require further action by the state or agency or department thereof or public corporation as defined in section sixty-six of the general construction law.”

In short, association library committees outside New York City and “purely advisory” committees do not currently have to follow the OML, while all other committees do.[5]

This answer was guest-written by paralegal Nathan Feist, who specializes in municipal law and open government matters including compliance with the Open Meetings Law and the Freedom of Information Law.

There are five types of people I imagine avidly reading this answer:

1. Leaders of school district public libraries;
2. Leaders of school districts with a school district public library;
3. Attorneys serving such leaders;
4. Journalists assigned to the rough-and-tumble school district election beat;[1] and
5. Library nerds.[2]

Considering the audience, I will answer the questions plainly and thoroughly.

But first, some background.

When it comes to elections and voting, a school district public library has several paths it can take:

• It can hold its own election and initial budget vote or have its district hold the election and initial budget vote;
• If a budget is defeated, it can conduct a re-vote (there is no option to force the district to hold a re-vote); and
• It can have its district conduct a vote to provide land and/or issue bonds for acquisition and construction of library facilities (the library cannot hold this vote itself).

This answer is not going to map out all of those paths, because that would turn this answer into a manual (and there’s already a manual[3]). We’re just going to answer the member’s questions as they relate to the paths.

Is there an entity that has oversight of our elections?

For school district public libraries, the ultimate decision-maker regarding contested elections and school district budget votes is the New York State Commissioner of Education.[4]

Where can we direct questions from the public to receive solid answers?

There are three resources to refer people to.

The first is the excellent body of searchable decisions by the Commissioner of Education.[5] People with questions should check this searchable resource to see if their questions have already been addressed by the Commissioner.

The second is the New York State Education Department (NYSED) “Formal Opinions of Counsel.”[6] In this resource, the NYSED Office of Counsel answers questions submitted (ideally before there is a dispute requiring a decision by the Commissioner).

The most recent “Opinion of Counsel,” issued on October 16, 2024, shows the minute and exacting level of detail that NYSED lawyers are willing to provide guidance on:

Given the board’s interpretation, I find that it would be anomalous to impose a notarization requirement for school board elections. As such, voters who complete affidavit ballots in a school election cannot be required to have their signatures notarized. Any Departmental guidance to the contrary should no longer be relied upon.

Be warned that this is not the most easily searched resource, so if you’re a librarian, be ready to help people seeking these kinds of answers.

The third resource is through writing to the NYSED Office of Counsel at legal@nysed.gov to ask a question. As you can tell by the above quotation, they don’t mind getting into the weeds, so don’t be afraid to ask questions!

A big part of the reason people will have questions (and maybe even concerns) is because one school district public library may do something different from another. This brings us to the next question:

Is [what is required] different for different types of school districts and associated school district public libraries?

Yes. As provided by Education Law Article 41, different district types have different elections requirements, and as required by Education Law Section 260(2), school district public libraries must handle elections and vote “in the same manner” as their district.[7] This means the practice will vary from district to district.

So, when a school district public library is conducting a vote, who is responsible for compliance? As the member asked: Is it the School District Chief Elections Inspector?

Not necessarily. If the library opts to conduct its own election and initial budget vote, or a re-vote, the library must appoint inspectors to oversee compliance, just like the school board of their district does. This obligation includes conducting, calculating, and keeping the records of the votes as required by the law that pertains to the district.

This is why many school district public libraries simply defer to their districts. There are a lot of compliance obligations for libraries that conduct their own vote.

That said, the reward of developing a compliant procedure and conducting a vote that is separate from that of the school district may be worth it, especially in places where the school budget is contentious and the library budget is less so.[8]

School district public libraries that conduct their own votes should periodically ensure that their procedures match what is being done by their school district. Further, such libraries should have written procedures setting out their process for assessing petitions and conducting, certifying, and keeping the record of votes. Finally, the procedures should be reviewed from time to time by a lawyer, who should provide the board with a written assurance of compliance.

Thank you for a thoughtful array of questions! School district boards, school district library boards, their attorneys, and reporters on the school district election beat will hopefully find this to be a good starting place for confirming what is required.

This is an important question. While the legitimacy of trustees (and not-for-profit directors) is rarely challenged, when it is, the validity of their term is one of the reasons. Of course, properly staggered terms give a board stability, with only a few new members having to learn the ropes annually.

“Trustee drift” happens when the original staggered terms (as depicted in the member’s question) get out of whack, and terms expire unevenly.

There are many reasons for trustee drift, and they vary from library to library and from library type to library type.

At a municipal public library,[1] the drift can occur if there is a disconnect between the appointing board and the library. The disconnect can be caused or exacerbated by:

• The library board not appointing replacements for trustees who leave the board early;[2]
• The municipal board not appointing new trustees in a timely manner;
• The library board not keeping its bylaws in synch with its charter;[3] and/or
• The lack of a defined process for the library to nominate new candidates or to confirm that current trustees are interested in re-upping.

So, to address the member’s question: once drift happens, how can it be fixed?

While I appreciate that the member doesn’t want to check the minutes of every meeting for the last twenty years, some documentation is needed.

First, it is important to check the charter, which may have some clues or a scheme to inspire the fix. For instance, in the member’s question, their library started with a clear pattern for the expiration of the eleven trustee slots: 2-2-2-2-3. So even if the final resolution doesn’t track all the way back to the original terms, using that pattern is sensible.[4]

Next, it is important to check the local laws, because some municipalities do have laws pertaining to the local library. A quick search in the village/town/city/county law for “library” can rule this in or out.[5]

Next, check the bylaws. Are they consistent with the charter? Do they have any provisions that speak to this situation?

Next, check the relationship with the municipality. Is there a memorandum of understanding, letter, or correspondence that confirms how the library and municipality jointly handles nominations and appointments? If there isn’t, it might be good to develop one while handling the situation.

And finally, create a chart of the current trustees and their terms, so whatever the resolution is, no trustee is short-changed for their current term, and the library can select the most elegant way forward.

When the chart is ready, identify how many future “special terms” (of one year, or two, or three, or four) are needed to restart the stagger, and then propose the special terms to the municipality.

Here is a template letter:

RE: Library trustee terms

Dear members of the [municipal body],

The Library is grateful to the [municipal body] for appointing trustees.

As you know, the Library has # trustees who serve #-year terms.

Originally, these terms were staggered to ensure an even pace of terminations. Over time, however, the terms have drifted, and we now have the undesirable impact of too many trustees expiring at once (for instance, # set to expire in YEAR).

To address this while also ensuring our current trustees serve their full #-year terms, the library proposes # “special terms” to help us reset the expiration times.

To do that, we will send a request for a special term every November until YEAR, with suggested language for the appointment. When a current trustee is willing and able to continue service for another year to accomplish this, we will let you know.

The proposed resolution language for this is:

WHEREAS the Library has requested the use of a limited number of special terms to achieve the important goal of restoring the staggered expiration of terms of library trustee service; and

WHEREAS NAME has expressed a willingness to serve such a special term,

BE IT RESOLVED that NAME is appointed to a special term of one year, starting on January 1, YEAR, and ending on December 31, YEAR, with the understanding that such special term does not count towards any cap on terms or years of service.

With this approach, we will be back to staggered terms by YEAR.

Thank you for considering this approach! If agreeable, we will send a letter with regular nominations and a nomination for the special term.

Thank you,

So long as all parties (the library board, the trustee, the appointing board) are in agreement, and no regular terms are short-changed, this approach should enable the library and municipality to eliminate the drift.

I like to tag the different board seats with a rota and seat number, like this: Y1/1, Y1/2, Y2/1, etc. But whatever internal tracking system (“Slot 1” or “Seat Alpha”) works for you is just fine.

And now for an important caveat: because this is an ad hoc, common-sense solution and not enabled specifically by law, it is wise for the municipality’s attorney to preview this approach and deem it sensible. If any municipal attorney out there disagrees with this and wants to give me a call with a better solution,[6] you are welcome to do so!

Thank you for an important question!

Rule #1 in library law: there is never an “always.”[1]

In this case, the question has a correct premise: a library’s charter will often set a range of trustees, after which the bylaws or an action of the board can set the number.

But do the bylaws “always” have to do this?

No, they don’t have to, and sometimes, they can’t.

This is because a charter might set another way of confirming the number. For example, at least one charter I have seen requires that the number be set by a resolution passed by a three-fourths majority vote of the board. Take that, bylaws![2]

Still other charters could require the number be set in the bylaws, or by a vote of a library’s membership,[3] or by a throw of a ceremonial dart every Leap Year.[4] With over seven hundred chartered libraries in New York State, there are lot of possibilities.[5]

This is why any bylaws changes—and any action that affects the number and terms of trustees—should always start with a quick look at a library’s charter. Who knows what’s hiding in there?

Thank you for a niche but important question!

2025 has INDEED started off with a great deal of instability to federal programs, funding, and governance. In this answer, we’ll call this phenomenon the “2025 Federal Shift.”[1]

During such times as the 2025 Federal Shift, it is the role of a governing board to assess factors that could risk the achievement of an institution’s mission and develop plans to address them. This is a process called “enterprise risk management.”[2]

While confronting risk can be intimidating, it can also be empowering. And while not every risk can be avoided, it can often be mitigated.[3]

So, whether you’re on the board of a small public library or helping to lead a library within a large institution, now is a good time to inventory newly emerging risks and develop a response plan.

While the array of risks may seem infinite, below please find a chart of risks created by the 2025 Federal Shift. Following that is a chart of institution-specific risks.

Neither chart lists everything facing your institution, but these charts are provided to inspire the start of an orderly, meaningful, and impactful risk management strategy to assist governing boards in performing their fiduciary duties to their institutions.

Top Ten Risk Management Exercises

For Governing Boards of

Libraries and Cultural Institutions

During the 2025 Federal Shift

In addition to the above, below is a chart of specific considerations of the 2025 Federal Shift for library entities:

If you are leading a board and thinking: THIS IS JUST TOO MUCH, don’t worry. Pick the most important one and start there. Then your board can work its way through the others it deems most important.

As leaders, yours is a task of discernment and prioritization. You cannot do it all, but you can do what needs to be done.

Finally, for boards embarking on this type of risk management, a word of caution…

Talking about risk means having a frank discussion about worst-case scenarios. That is not something everyone is comfortable with.[17]

For that reason, it is wise for a board to carefully plan and put in place rules before engaging in the risk management process. Examples of such rules are: set and keep an agenda, set and keep time limits, carefully define what is being discussed, stay on topic, stay solution-oriented, and by the end of the meeting, identify clear actions to take based on your analysis.

In addition, it is wise to consider the possible toll on the humans participating in and potentially impacted by the exercise. To do that, as part of the plan, a board may want to appoint a person (not a board member or the director, nor an employee) to serve as an “human impact observer.” This is a person responsible for noting and then reciting, before the end of the meeting, the human impacts that were raised but not finalized during the discussion, so they can be addressed. This is a way to get things done in “efficiency mode,” while making sure your board can still place a priority on your library’s workers and served community.

And with that, I wish your board good courage, a stout heart, and clear heads for the work to come. Thank you for your service.

Before I answer, I have to put in this obnoxious disclaimer: THIS ANSWER IS ONLY FOR ASSOCIATION LIBRARIES.

I’m sorry. I know using ALL CAPS means I’m YELLING. But the distinction is important for these questions, so it warrants boosted volume.

Okay, with that obnoxious disclaimer out there, let’s get to the questions and answers.

QUESTION: Are there any legal restrictions or guidelines that would limit or prohibit our library staff from directly or indirectly assisting in fundraising efforts organized by the library board?

ANSWER: Yes, there are many, but most are surmountable with careful planning. To illustrate both the issues and the careful planning that can surmount them, here are two short stories. [Readers who don’t want to wade through two faux fairy tales to get to an answer can skip to “THE (BETTER) END.”]

Story #1: The Three Friends

Once upon a time, three friends worked at an association library: a library page, a library clerk, and a library director. The three friends didn’t let their differential power dynamic interfere with their friendship and were happy as they put away books, helped patrons, and directed day-to-day operations at the library (respectively).

One day, however, things changed. Out of the blue, the page was directed to make phone calls to all patrons who had borrowed books within the last year to ask for donations to the summer reading program. The clerk was told they would have to work that Friday night, paid, at the “Pizza for Pages” fundraising dinner. The library director was told to write and practice delivering a pitch to seek a large donation from a major regional philanthropic organization.

The three friends’ peaceful[1] work life came to a screeching end. The page worried that the calls to patrons were an invasion of privacy.[2] The clerk did not regard selling pizza as part of his job description. And the library director—while an excellent library director—had never been trained in seeking or managing charitable contributions.

It was all very stressful, and the three friends started looking for new jobs.

THE (CAUTIONARY) END

Story #2: The Three Other Friends

Once upon a time, there were three other friends at an association library: a library page, a library clerk, and a library director. Their differential power dynamic was occasionally an issue in their friendship, but they were united by their love of textiles and trivia.

The three friends were happy as they put away books, helped patrons, and directed day-to-day operations at the library (respectively). They also felt very accomplished in their careers, because in addition to their regular duties, each had specific language in their job description that made them an integral part of the library’s fundraising.

Part of the page’s formal duties were to “help maintain a donor database”—separate and apart from patron records—of people who had expressed interest in donating to the library. The page also sent out regular, scheduled donation solicitations that had been reviewed by the library’s accountant and fundraising counsel, making sure people understood how to make a tax-deductible donation to the library.

Part of the clerk’s formal duties were to “assist with fundraising, event planning, and presentations,” and the clerk’s regular hours were sometimes adjusted (or the clerk was paid overtime) to assist with fundraising events. As the clerk performed this duty, they often had to consult the library’s policies and procedures for working with the volunteers who helped with the events.

The library director felt particularly accomplished, because even though she didn’t have any experience with grants and grant management when she started, the library paid for her to attend training sessions until she was confident about applying for grants and managing them. As the director built these skills, the library board developed and passed policies on managing grants and soliciting/accepting donations, while the library’s treasurer took the time to understand the regulatory requirements of managing donations and grants.

It was occasionally stressful, but the three friends felt supported and confident in their jobs and didn’t spend a lot of time looking through job listings.

THE (BETTER) END

The take-away from these two tales is simple. At an association library, employees should not assist with fundraising unless:

• To comply with both governing ethics and laws pertaining to patron confidentiality, there is great care to not use library patron information to solicit donations. Instead, a completely separate database built using direct expressions of donor interest should be used; frequency of use or borrowing habits should not be referenced in solicitations;
• Fundraising duties are in the employee’s job description[3] (not just “additional duties as assigned”);
• The employees performing fundraising duties are still being supervised by their supervisor,[4] not a trustee, contractor, or volunteer;
• The library has a full array of policies governing gift/donation solicitation and acceptance;[5]
• If seeking grants (governmental or private) is part of the effort, the library has a full array of grant management policies;[6]
• If volunteers are also helping with fundraising, there is a volunteer policy that includes confirming volunteer service by letter, and the volunteers are covered by insurance;[7]
• The library is providing employees required to solicit gifts with appropriate on-the-job training;
• If the library is using a paid consultant or external fundraiser to help with fund-raising, that person or company’s service should be confirmed with a written contract.

Basically, like all things, fundraising by employees at an association library should be planned and overseen with care.

Thank you for giving me a reason to get all that out there!

NEXT QUESTION: Can the library board legally use the library’s official website and existing Facebook account to promote or facilitate board-led fundraising campaigns?

ANSWER: Yes, as long as the library has a full array of policies governing gift/donation solicitation and acceptance, and the policy includes solicitation via social media.[8]

QUESTION: If the above is permissible, is it also acceptable for the board to establish a separate Facebook account specifically for fundraising purposes on behalf of the library?

ANSWER: Yes, as long as the library has a full array of policies governing gift/donation solicitation and acceptance, and the policy includes solicitation via social media.

Unlike other public libraries, an association library is not subject to FOIL, so the considerations about record-keeping that sometimes arise when quasi-governmental entities use social media are not present here. However, a board should take great care to make sure solicitations on the library’s social media account do not distract from the primary purpose of the account, and if the solicitations are on a separate account, that the separate account is still owned by the library.

The member’s careful questions are the right approach this issue. Fundraising by a library—association or otherwise—should never be a spontaneous activity. An association library engaging in fundraising should have a well-developed array of policies, and if library employees have fundraising responsibilities, those responsibilities should be clearly stated. If the library is using volunteers and/or paid consultants to help fundraise, that service should also be governed by policy and with attention to compliance (including a written contract for all external services).

The policies needed to make informed, compliant decisions about your association library’s fundraising strategies and staff involvement are bolded in this answer, and where there are templates or other relevant information, this answer includes them in the footnotes.

Thank you for a serious and important array of questions.

Before I answer, let’s confirm: sometimes, base pay (hourly wage or salary) is the only compensation an employee gets, while sometimes, compensation is base pay plus a robust combination of benefits.

For example, a person earning $20 dollars per hour with no benefits might not be better compensated than a person who earns $17 dollars per hour but also gets on-site childcare, sick leave beyond what is required by law, a family health insurance plan, 21 days a year of paid vacation, and tuition assistance for professional development.

How does a public library, with an obligation to properly steward use of taxpayer funds and a fiduciary duty to make decisions based on the best interests of the library, decide what to offer as compensation?

The answer is this: a public library’s approach to compensation should always be based on a library board’s “compensation strategy”—the approach the board takes to using compensation and benefits to achieve the library’s mission.

When developing a compensation strategy, a library board should be thinking:

• What type of workforce does our library need?
• What combination of base pay and benefits will attract, retain, and develop that workforce?
• What key performance indicators show our compensation strategy is working?
• What external baseline and best practice data should we be gathering to periodically evaluate our compensation strategy?
• How can we demonstrate the value of these costs to the public?

A public library’s compensation strategy should not be a stand-alone resolution or isolated policy. Signs of it should be seen in budgets, annual reports, committee work, and reports to the community—all signs that a library is thinking about how to nurture its most important resource: people.

Which brings us to the member’s question: “Can you also speak to the potential downsides of choosing to pay less than the NYS minimum wage and minimum exempt salary if you discover you are allowed to do so?”

Yes, I can, and my answer is rooted in what can happen when a public library makes decisions about compensation strategy based on a “how low can we go?” approach, rather than the above-listed factors.

We won’t get into all the downsides, but here are the legal risks posed by paying as little as you can legally get away with:

1. Discrimination claims

When people are not paid what they are demonstrably worth, there is an elevated risk that they will have a credible claim that their underpayment in comparison to others is the result of illegal discrimination.

2. Only otherwise affluent people will be able to work at such a library

If someone can’t make a living wage[1] working at a library, only people who have another source of income will be able to work there. This means working at that library will be off-limits to any person who has been impacted by poverty, creating evidence that could support claims for risk #1, above, and for every other reason on this list.

3. Not aligning with industry standards

Many organizations track employment data[2] to show what the baseline compensation is in different regions, by profession, at different-sized institutions. Having a number that significantly departs from the average can be a factor in every other item on this list, as well as many non-legal concerns such as morale, reputation, and strategic planning.

4. Trouble recruiting and retaining qualified employees

A library is just a room full of books without its employees. If compensation does not attract, retain, and develop a workforce that can achieve the objectives in the strategic plan, budget, or annual report to the community, the board is engineering future failure.[3]

5. Diminished ability to forge relationships with community partners and external funding sources

Other not-for-profit organizations know how to read budgets, and they know the difference between frugality and parsimony.[4] Public libraries who are demonstrably choosing to reduce investment in their workforce impede their own ability to partner with mission-aligned groups and undercut their ability to attract external funding. After all, if an organization doesn’t believe in itself, why should an external partner invest in it?

6. Ongoing impacts

Once a public institution establishes a willingness to reduce itself to the bare minimum, even its allies and advocates will have a tough time arguing for more.

I say this, knowing (and having seen firsthand) that library boards face ENORMOUS pressures to cut budgets whenever they can. And—from the perspective of good governance—they should.

The trick is to be ready to show that a budget that invests in a strong workforce is not wasteful, imprudent, or foolish. By developing and continually re-evaluating its compensation strategy, a board is ready to take on all those who would argue they should pay as little as possible. By giving in to pressure and simply slashing compensation, a board is creating an ongoing cycle of austerity.

7. Increased likelihood of employees needing a union to ensure positive working conditions

Unions are powerful mechanisms for employees to advocate for what they need and SHOULD NEVER BE RESISTED.[5] It is nice if they are brought into the equation as the result of workers feeling empowered, rather than feeling misused.

8. Trouble meeting regulatory requirements

A public library must meet certain regulatory requirements; these requirements vary from library to library. A compensation strategy should be based in part on meeting these requirements, as well as other mission and strategic plan-related objectives set by the board.

Below this answer, we are putting a simple template for developing a compensation strategy. Using this, a library can start to resist external (and internal) pressures to simply slash-and-burn the budget—including pressure to offer minimal wages.

Thank you for an excellent question.

Policy

It is the policy of the NAME Library to use a strategic approach to compensation and benefits to achieve the library’s mission.

In developing this Compensation Strategy, the board will continually address:

• What type of workforce does our library need?
• What combination of base pay and benefits will attract, retain, and develop that workforce?
• What key performance indicators show our compensation strategy is working?
• What external baseline and best practice data should we be gathering to periodically evaluate our compensation strategy?
• How can we demonstrate the value of these costs to the public?

The board and director will use the below worksheet to answer these questions on a no-less-than-annual basis. This work will be used as the board develops the annual budget, as the board conducts the annual evaluation of the director, as the director conducts the annual evaluation of staff, and as the board and director work to affirm a staffing plan that meets the current and contemplated needs of the library.

WORKSHEET

1. What are our minimum regulatory requirements for operation?

INSERT

2. What are our additional operational commitments?

INSERT

3. What workforce does our library need to meet these requirements and commitments?

Sample answer:

[NOTE: Really, this is just a sample! Every library should have a different answer here, and the person who best knows the answer is the director, informed by the strategic vision of the board. Some libraries need more part-time folks. Others want mostly full-time. Some want new people and new ideas and community connections, while others want to emphasize long-term folks committed to innovation. Make sure your answers meet the need of YOUR library!]

Sample answer:

The Library needs a workforce that meets not only basic requirements but is quantifiably skilled in the “soft skills” of patron service, outreach, and community partnerships.

The Library needs a workforce that is stable, with full-time employees incentivized to stay long-term.

The Library needs a workforce that is able to provide consistent service without too much backup or assistance from part-time or temp workers.

4. What combination of base pay and benefits will attract, retain, and develop that workforce?

Sample answer:

[NOTE: Really, this is just a sample! Every library should have a different answer here, and the person who best knows the answer is the director, informed by the strategic vision of the board. Some libraries will want to take a completely different approach than what is below. Make sure your answers meet the need of YOUR library!]

Because the Library wants to attract a highly qualified applicant pool, it generally starts its pay range at the baseline established by ALA-APA for our type/size/region of library. The top of the range is then set by our reliance on the attributes of the position, with the baseline being increased by up to twenty percent if merited by the position’s impact on Key Performance Indicators.

Because the Library wants to incentivize long-term employment and continuous improvement, it uses a system of percentage increases and merit pay, in addition to cost-of-living adjustments, to effect raises.

Because the Library wants to remain competitive with private organizations that must offer paid sick leave, we offer twelve days of paid sick leave a year to full-time employees, with the amount pro-rated for part-time employees.

Because the Library wants to remain competitive with private organizations that must offer paid family medical leave, we have opted in to New York State’s Paid Family Medical Leave and pay the premiums.

Because the Library wants to remain competitive with governmental organizations offering retirement pensions, we offer and contribute a set percentage to New York State Retirement for all employees.

Because the Library wants to remain competitive with all organizations and incentivize the retention of employees, we offer a baseline of 10 days of paid vacation per year to full-time employees, with one day added for each year of employment.

Because the Library wants to incentivize retention, we offer a bonus at every 5-year mark.

Because the Library wants to ensure that our incentives to remain are earned, we are rigorous about annual performance reviews.

5. What key performance indicators (“KPI’s”) show our compensation strategy is working?

Sample answer:

KPI #1: Community input shows that our community wants more in-person events for children and seniors. We will ensure that employee competencies/experience and duties related to such programming are part of our workforce recruitment and that the experience of those workers is adding value to programs.

>KPI #2: Community input shows that our reference services and assistance identifying reliable sources of information are very valuable. We will ensure employee competencies/experience and duties related to such services are part of our workforce recruitment and track (without patron identification) instances related to this service.

KPI #3: Our strategic plan commits us to building a new library building by 2027. We will ensure that attracting candidates with experience related to moving a library is part of our ongoing workforce recruitment, so that we have those competencies when needed.

6. What external baseline and best practice data should we be gathering to periodically evaluate our compensation strategy?

Sample answer: The Library will use data from ALA-APA to show what similar organizations in similar regions are paying for qualified library professionals and workers, and the Library will identify reasons to justify significant deviations.

When there is a significant deviation showing we pay at least 10% more than baseline, we will identify why this deviation from baseline is important to our obligations, objectives and/or community. When there is a deviation below baseline, we will identify and confirm why this isn’t important to our obligations, objectives and/or community.

7. How can we demonstrate the value of these costs to the public?

Sample answer: The Library will track our programs and KPI’s and highlight the work of our workforce in the annual report to the community, noting when a worker’s experience and commitment has helped make an initiative successful.