Recently Asked Questions (RAQs)

I was told that when a public or association library’s charter sets a range of trustees (for instance “no less than 5, no more than 15”) the bylaws should always set out the current number. Is this true?

The expiration dates of our trustees’ terms are not properly staggered. Can this be corrected?

Background: Our Library Board has 11 trustees. When the Library was chartered in the 1950s, trustees were given 5-year terms with staggered expiration dates. Two terms expired in 1953, two in 1954, two in 1955, two in 1956, and three in 1957. In other words, there were five “classes”: four with two trustees each and one with three.

Over time, mistakes occurred and the terms are no longer balanced. Currently, four trustees’ terms expire in 2026, two in 2027, one in 2028, one in 2029, and three in 2030. While there are still five classes, they are no longer substantially equal. It may be possible to trace the errors in past records, but it is not clear that doing so would help resolve the issue.

We do not want to shorten the terms of current trustees. However, could future trustees be appointed to terms shorter than five years in order to restore the original distribution of four classes of two trustees and one class of three? Since our trustees are appointed by a municipality, we would need to coordinate with that body to make this adjustment if it’s even possible. The library’s charter and the board’s bylaws specify 5-year terms.

Any advice on how to proceed is greatly appreciated.

Our library is a school district public library. The associated school district is a central school district. The library does not hold or oversee our own elections. Library trustee elections, yearly levy, and any special ballot initiatives are held by the school district.

Our library trustee elections have become more active recently with a noticeable increase in resources being spent by candidates. Signs, mailings, political consultants, all have become common. With these changes have come more questions from the public about the elections and allowable candidate activities. Greater scrutiny of expense filings, questions about candidates’ signs, etc. have come our way.

If we received questions like these for non-district elections, I would send folks to the County Board of Elections for an authoritative answer. That is not a great resource for district elections like ours.

Is there an entity that has oversight of our elections? Is it the School District Chief Elections Inspector? Does NYSED have a role? Is it different for different types of school districts and associated school district public libraries? Are election rules for a school district public library potentially different than for the associated school district? Where can we direct questions from the public to receive solid answers?

Our public library Board of Trustees is wondering if the meetings of their committees (Personnel Committee, Finance Committee, Policy Review Committee, etc) need to adhere to the requirements of the NYS Open Meetings Law like we do with the full Board Meetings. Because ED § 260-a mentions cities with a population of over one million (we do not reach this threshold), some say that the committee meetings do not need to adhere to the requirements of the Open Meetings Law, but others argue that this part of Education Law doesn't seem to delineate between Full Board meetings and Committee meetings, so if we follow the OML requirements for one, we should follow them for all. However, this would represent a huge shift in how our Board gets its work done, as they do not currently advertise the committee meetings or post minutes, and they frequently conduct these meetings via Zoom.

We have a major building project coming up for our library. We are wondering if a committee of the board can be given the authority to make official decisions, which are then ratified by the full board at the following monthly board meeting. We expect the Building & Grounds Committee will begin to meet regularly with a newly appointed project manager to get updates and to approve decisions that can’t wait until a full meeting of the board. It would seem like there must be a means for expediting important business without trying to get a quorum of the board together to approve them every single time.