Board of Trustees

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

Risk to assess	How to assess it	How to respond
Risk that federal grant contracts and funding in motion will not be available as planned.	Appoint a sub-committee of trustees to inventory all current federal grants and funding and assess its stability. Create a “Federal Funding Summary” outlining the amounts and actions at stake. NOTE: Many organizations will ask the director to create this list and Summary. That is fine, but organizations must stay in touch with their employee leadership (director, executive director, president, etc.) to make sure they have enough capacity to perform routine work AND the work created by new pressures. While boards should not micromanage, this is a time for rolling up the board’s sleeves.	If the amounts and programs identified in the Summary are significant enough AND there is an insufficient cash reserve to survive a disruption: Consult an attorney on developing a litigation plan for immediate relief; Consider if a line of credit or other temporary source of liquidity is available; or Do both of the above. If the amounts identified are within budgeted contingencies, resolve to be ready to pay out of reserve, while identifying a plan to pursue the amounts. If the amounts identified represent minimal disruption, develop a plan to track, but not take drastic action. Board minutes should reflect that the board undertook this exercise.
Risk that a critical partner’s federal funding will not be available as planned. Examples: The partner is a primary awardee of a federal contract, and you are a sub-awardee; The partner has hired your organization, and the funding source is federal; Your organizations are in on a venture 50-50, and the partner org is 100% federally funded.	This risk is different than the first, as it is due to the potential instability of critical partners, a risk which may be more difficult to assess (they should be doing the same exercise in #1). Appoint a sub-committee to inventory all collaborative initiatives and create a “Critical Partner Federal Funding Summary” outlining the amounts and actions at stake and the likelihood of disruption. Be ready to (diplomatically) approach partners for their assessment of funding stability.	If the amounts and/or actions identified are mission critical, immediately meet with the partner(s) to assess possible outcomes. In the event funding or activity could be immediately interrupted, develop your own contingency plan and make sure the partner is aligned. Document any adjustments to the current arrangement in writing. Confirm with the partner that all statements (press releases, social media, etc.) on the impacts will be joint or at least issued only after mutual approval. Board minutes should reflect that the board undertook this exercise.
Risk that federal information services (websites, databases, offices, etc.) needed to perform mission-critical functions are not available or reliable. NOTE: This is a risk to any type of business right now, but is uniquely acute to libraries, educators, and cultural organizations that are the custodians of history and our country’s collective intellectual property.	Inventory critical federal information services that your organization particularly needs. Inventory critical resources your organization may be PARTICULARLY able to supply to others. Establish a “Critical Federal Information Resources Continuity” sub-committee to work with the director or executive director and employees to assess how the gaps can be filled and if your institution can help fill them for others. The role of the committee is to help conduct the inventory and to assist with budgetary considerations. The role of the board is to review any final operational or budget adjustments and draw a firm line as to how much institutional energy should be used on this. The plan can also consider networking with aligned institutions to avoid redundant work.	It is important for a governing board to know that this risk may hit your organization’s talent pool very hard, especially if it has the capacity to fill gaps for a served community. The role of a governing board is to 1) be aware this may be a direct or collaborating agency need; and 2) help determine if contingency resources should be directed to this, including overtime and temporary re-allocation of duties or temporary additional assistance. This exercise (and many of the others) may put stress on your institution’s talent pool. The work of the board should be to help distill what is needed and to make tough calls about what will be done (and how it will be funded) and where boundaries need to be drawn. Board minutes should reflect that the board undertook this exercise.
Risk of current workforce instability due to employees impacted by legal changes, heightened investigations, and enforcement related to employee personal factors.	For a board’s standing Personnel Committee, this is your chance to shine. For a board without such a standing committee, forming an ad hoc 2025 Federal Shift Personnel Impacts Committee could be helpful. The board committee should examine how the Shift is affecting/could affect: Job applications and candidates Full-time employees generally Part-time employees generally Employees in the military and military spouses, including reservists Employees who are transgender Employees who are non-binary Employees of color Employees leading and/or participating in DEI work Employees who live in poverty Employees from families with undocumented residents Employees legally in the U.S. but with factors that may still cause fear of wrongful arrest or deportation Employees fearing workplace violence Chilling impacts on programs and collection decisions (“self-censorship”) Because your institution’ workforce is unique, this list will vary. It should be based on the overall goal of assuring employees that they are valued, respected, and important members of the team. NOTE: Boards should bear in mind that living in fear is very de-stabilizing, even if the fear is, from a different point of view, not based in reality or on something likely to occur.	This is a chance to develop short programs and actions that show employees and job candidates they are valued and that your institution respects them. This is simultaneously a retention tool, a morale-booster, and most likely also a productivity tool. Examples of such actions would be: Dusting off your institution’s “Equal Opportunity Employer” statement (New font? Larger poster? Hey, it’s still the law!) so job candidates are assured they will be welcome; Bringing in an Employee Assistance (“EAP”) Plan representative to showcase the supports they have for employees feeling stressed. For employers without an EAP, this is a good time to explore setting one up. Working with the local bar association to provide access to lawyers who your workforce may need. Some firms may even agree to a one-time consultation for a set rate that could be paid for as part of an EAP.[4] Reviewing your Code of Conduct and other rules to ensure your policies require that all employees are treated with respect by the public. Review your Workplace Violence Prevention Plan and ensure it is up to date. Review your collection management policies and ensure they are clear and current. Board minutes should reflect that the board undertook this exercise on an ongoing basis until all identified concerns are addressed.
Risk of retribution, or negative impact due to fear of retribution, for past and current diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.	The anti-DEI rhetoric in the 2025 Federal Shift is clear.[5] Any governing board concerned that past and current DEI-type initiatives could bring retribution (or even legal action) should inventory those programs so they can be systematically, tactically, and deliberately assessed for both success, ongoing viability, and legal compliance. NOTE: For institutions subject to FOIL,[6] carefully conducting this legal analysis with your attorney will keep portions of the review attorney-client privileged.	The good news is that DEI initiatives should ALWAYS be routinely reviewed for compliance and to measure outcomes. So, if not assessed before, now may be the time. When your inventory of programs is ready, review it with an attorney experienced in civil rights law (state and federal). For institutions worried that your inventory will be “discoverable” or otherwise used as evidence against you… with careful attention to the details, the “discovery” of your final analysis should be a strength. “DEI,” although not a static concept, is generally not illegal.[7] Board minutes should reflect that the board undertook this exercise.
Risk of losing normal sense of confidence due to changes and strife among federal entities.[8]	Americans are used to a certain type of stability: Niagara Falls keeps flowing, the Buffalo Bills keep losing,[9] and the federal government, while occasionally irksome, keeps on going. The 2025 Federal Shift is different. For generations, most drastic federal changes have been due to expansion, rather than the sudden possibility that the government will markedly[10] contract, leaving the country with less regulation, less centrally distributed resources, and less federal oversight. Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, the 2025 Federal Shift is manifesting that type of drastic change, creating strife in the federal government, and creating fear among members of the public. When fear is impacting one source of stability, it is wise to confirm stability in other places.	If not done before, this is the time to ensure that your institution has positive and well-established local relationships with: First responders (take your pick: police, sheriff, state troopers, ambulance, fire, etc.) Local government County government State government representatives Written cooperation agreements with or simple letters from these parties are good to have. Boards, this exercise calls for a delicate balance with your director (or executive director). Although they are generally the primary public representatives of your organizations, if your relationships need work, it might be good for the board to (carefully) provide some backup. This should be very carefully planned. Board minutes should reflect that the board maintains these relationships on an ongoing and cyclical basis.
Risk of institutional mission, vision and strategic plan being perceived as out of step with the expectations of the times; corollary risk of sudden changes to mission, vision, and strategic plan being criticized as bowing to external pressures.	Regardless of what type of organization you lead, it exists to serve a defined community. During the past few decades, many institutions have adjusted their mission, vision and strategic plan to contain commitments to serving their entire communities, and as part of that, to intentional efforts to counter the impact of past harms to parts of their communities. It is the task of your board to continually assess your institution’s mission, vision, and strategic plan. A mission that is out-of-step is a risk; a mission that is changed on a whim is also a risk. Any changes to mission, vision, and strategic planning should be done on a carefully planned and thoughtfully paced basis.	If the spirit of the times calls for examination of your institution’s mission, vision, or strategic plan, carefully design the process of evaluation. Generally, this is at least a year’s long process, with assessment, input from the community, and other carefully measured factors considered prior to any changes being made. A quick change to mission, vision, or a strategic plan based on political climate is a risk. A thoughtful evolution, informed by defined factors and based in a careful analysis, is wise. Such a process should only be via a board resolution approving a fully developed plan for assessment of the mission, vision, and/or strategic plan.
Risk of not channeling volunteers optimally	During stressful times, many people seek comfort in volunteering at a place they see as a positive asset to their community. Your institution is likely such a place. Ironically, being able to accept volunteers takes a LOT of work. On the flip side, having to deny volunteers due to lack of preparation lets an opportunity for community engagement and service pass by. As a board, ensuring your institution is ready to accept volunteers in an orderly way mitigates the risk of not being ready to accept them.	Adopt a volunteer policy; Always use a volunteer letter or sign-up sheet that confirms the terms of the volunteer service; Confine volunteering to certain well-articulated activities and ensure your institution’s insurance covers volunteers performing those activities; Develop mission-aligned group activities for volunteers to help with.[11]
Risk of missed opportunity: not hiring talent[12] made available due to federal reduction-in-force efforts; corollary risk of not supporting community members impacted by reduction-in-force and program elimination efforts.	This one is pretty grim, but I have to put it in here: unquestionably, there is going to be a wave of new talent available. If your organization has been lacking in applicants or has been considering a workforce expansion, now may be the time. The 2025 Federal Shift is going to impact many workers, and their strengths and talents may be just what your institution needs. Assessing this will require a deep review by the board (or a committee) and the director/leadership. Is there a gap or project that suddenly available talent could fill? At the same time, your community may be impacted by people harmed by the federal reductions in force and program eliminations. These people may need supports that are part of the mission of your institution to provide.	After assessment: Isolate, create, and post the opportunities at your institution; And, at the same time: Isolate, articulate and reach out with supports that can be provided by your institution to displaced workers. Board minutes need not reflect that the board undertook this exercise, but certain actions (for instance, a needs assessment, budgeting for a new position or support initiative, etc.) will be confirmed by resolution.
10. Risk of operating under the feeling of an overall Existential Threat	The reasoning, planning, and tactics of the 2025 Federal Shift are causing some educational and cultural institutions to worry about a threat to their very existence. It can be very easy to succumb to an overall feeling of dread. However, just like the preceding nine risks, an overall concern of, “Is this the end?” must be broken down into “HOW would this be the end?” Every institution has unique bedrocks, but in this environment, the three essential elements of strength are: People (community and workers); Intellectual freedom;[13] and Funding. For this reason, actively planning to offer mission-aligned services to your community, promoting intellectual freedom, and fiscal planning to secure diverse funding are the antidotes to fear of an overall Existential Threat.	To ensure 2025 Federal Shift factors cannot coalesce into an overall Existential Threat, it is important to: Remain connected to your institution’s served community and workforce; Commit to preserving intellectual freedom, which is a backbone of any library, educational institution, or cultural organization; and Track your funding, and ensure it comes from a diversity of stable sources. Relying on ONE funding source is never a good idea; using a diverse array of funders and building an appropriate fund balance[14] is the way to stay calm in the face of threats and rapid change.

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

Type of Library	Particular risk or impacts
Higher Education Libraries	Academic libraries may feel the stress on students and the workforce related to sweeping immigration enforcement. A resource for this is here: https://wnylrc.org/raq/responding-leo-others-requests-library-user-information. Academic libraries may feel the stress on students and the workforce related to efforts to reset gender and sex definitions that govern legal rights. Guidance from institutional legal counsel and HR regarding legal protections in New York State may be helpful. Academic libraries will feel the impacts of changes to U.S. Department of Education oversight (impacts FAFSA, FERPA, OCR, Clery Act compliance, VAWA compliance, and the related NCAA oversight of gender equity in sports. Academic libraries will feel the impacts of federal action that “changes” information (place names, federal definitions, etc.). Critically, academic libraries face a risk of tangential treatment during institutional assessment of risks listed in the chart above; directors, this is a good time to work closely with your provost/functional officer.
Prison libraries	Resumption of use of privately owned prisons (see Executive Order 14148) Prison libraries of all types will see impacts related to sweeping immigration enforcement. Prison librarians, particularly those in federal prisons, will feel the stresses related to federal efforts to reset gender and sex definitions that govern legal rights.
Law Libraries (Federal, State, and local)	Federal law librarians will feel the impacts of the federal worker/civil service overhaul from the 2025 Federal Shift. All law librarians in New York State will see an uptick in requests for information related to conflicts between federal and state laws.
Government Archives (Federal, State and local)	Federal archives are already experiencing the impacts of the federal worker/civil service overhaul from the 2025 Federal Shift. Federal archives will be stress-tested for how information is preserved. All government archives will see an uptick in requests for information related to the status of federal records at particular times. If your board oversees, works with, or relies on the services of a government archive, now is the time to solidify connections and pay attention to the stability and reliability of the critical resources it provides.
Municipal Libraries (and libraries serving municipal areas, i.e., all your local public libraries)	Your local government (city, town, village) may be impacted by the first nine factors in the chart above.[15] Even if your library doesn’t directly receive federal funding, your library should stay engaged in how the 2025 Federal Shift is impacting your community. When your mission, capacity, and budget allow, be ready to step into the breach if there is a reduction in services. Don’t forget to check in with your county government, which administers public health and other community-serving programs.
School District Public Libraries	Your school district may be taking numerous steps to address impacts developing due to changes in the U.S. Department of Education as well as other impacts. Even if your library is completely uncoupled from its district, awareness is important.
Cooperative Library Systems	As member libraries are impacted, it is wise to continually measure the effects on 1) library workers and served communities; 2) intellectual freedom; and 3) funding. This can be done by something as simple as a shared form or document where members are asked to describe impacts. If there are negative funding impacts, assisting with risk management efforts to bridge the gap and/or fight for funding continuity can be critical. Access to expert advice (government agencies, advocacy organizations, grant specialists, lawyers, financial planners, employee wellness, union leadership, etc.) will be essential.
Confederated and Consolidated Library Systems	The added pressure on county and municipal budgets—and the political dynamics in your region—will require continuous monitoring in addition to the factors to be considered by cooperative library systems.
Public School Libraries and Public School Library Systems	As public school boards address conflicting federal and state definitions and the impact of immigration enforcement tactics, working with school district’s board, legal counsel, and administration to keep the library a safe and steady presence is important. The school library, and the obligation to maintain the confidentiality of school library records, should be emphasized whenever possible. For more on that, see an forthcoming Ask the Lawyer submission regarding union rep advocacy for public school librarians.
Genealogical and Historical Society Libraries Preservation and Landmark Society Libraries	In recent years, many genealogical and historical societies have worked to ensure their mission is accessible to indigenous, Black diaspora, and newer immigrant people in their served communities. They have also focused on archival materials related to the history of women and LGBTQ+ people. Meanwhile, historic preservation and landmark groups have worked to ensure they are protecting properties related to these communities. Because of the important roles such organizations play in a community’s sense of self, there may be more pressure to reassess current commitments. For this reason, the assessments in 5 and 7 in the chart above are particularly important.
Museum Library	A museum may feel the same pressure as that directed at historical societies, etc. In addition, museums dedicated to a particular purpose (science, art, heritage, etc.) may feel the tension created by different federal and state definitions and protections. For this reason, attention to mission, vision, and strategic plans as outlined in the chart above may be of critical importance; the library within the organization should be ready to provide materials for that analysis.
Symphony or Philharmonic Library or Archive	A library within a music organization may feel the impact of immigration enforcement and may be able to help put the current times in context by sharing materials from past performances during turbulent times.
Hospital Libraries	It is reported that at least one hospital in New York has already denied medical treatment due to the recent executive order pertaining to care for transgender youth.[16] Hospital librarians should be ready to connect physicians and administrators with the latest information. It might also be a good time to hang out with your buddy, the local law librarian.
Religious (mosque, church, temple, etc.) libraries and archives	Leadership of religious organizations will need to assess their response to federal action related to immigration, LGBTQ+ employees and members, and the risk to collaborative initiatives. Libraries and archives within religious organizations should be there to assist leaders in appreciating how past leadership addressed times of change.
Regulatory Agency Library (State and Federal) Librarians	State and federal regulatory agency libraries (EPA, NYS DEC, etc.) perform a critical role providing access to laws, regulations, rules, policies, guidance, and investigations. As of this writing, at the federal level, these records are being removed at an unprecedented rate. State agencies who depend on and coordinate with federal regulators will need to coordinate a response; librarians and other critical record-keepers should be prepared to assist.

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.

 

NAME Library Workforce Compensation Strategy Policy	Version: TEMPLATE FOR A NON-ASSOCIATION, NON-UNION LIBRARY
Responsibility for compliance: Board, Personnel Committee	Reviewed: Annually, in MONTH, as part of budget development

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.

 

For some readers, this might require a bit of background. So, before we dive in, there are two things to know:

First thing: All public libraries (even association libraries) are subject to the “Open Meetings Law” (or the “OML”), so this question applies to all public libraries.

Second thing: “Robert’s Rules” is a common framework for running meetings, but it is not required by law[1] (although it is sometimes in a public library’s bylaws). If a public library board wants to invent a procedure using Discord and Lego to share their board packet and signify how they have voted,[2] and it results in shareable information and documented results, they can do so.

1. Are consent agendas allowed for agencies subject to OML?

A “consent agenda” (or, as defined in Robert’s Rules,[3] a “consent calendar”) is a list of “routine or noncontroversial matters” to be considered for approval all at once without discussion. It is often used by not-for-profit companies, such as libraries, to take action on things like committee reports, etc. with one resolution (“be it so moved to accept and file the reports listed on the consent agenda”).

The potential problem with this is that the OML now[4] requires a public agency to “make available” all documentation to be considered at a public meeting[5] at least twenty-four hours before the meeting, including all the items that might be lumped together in a consent agenda.

Further, there is still some “legacy guidance” out there[6] that suggests the materials related to a consent agenda don’t have to be disclosed (that is wrong). If the items are being voted on as part of the meeting, they need to be available as now required by law, but they can still be acted upon via a “consent agenda.”

2. Should public or association libraries refrain from having their Boards of Trustees accept the financials (motion, second, vote) presented by the library’s treasurer so as not to give the appearance of agreement and assurance that they are accurate and without error?

Hmm... what an interesting question.

It is the duty of a public library board to not only routinely monitor the financial status of the library but to monitor the fiscal activity of the library to ensure it complies with the law and relevant financial policies.

So, while the board should be reviewing and then (if satisfied) accepting the financial report, it is not doing so simply to check it for accuracy, but to:

• Ensure account balances are as expected (based on the budget)
• Assess what to do if balances are not as expected (perhaps due to a budgeting error)
• Make sure deposits and payables are as expected
• Ensure that investments are being managed as required
• Monitor petty cash use as required by law[7]
• Ensure any use of credit is within accepted ranges of authority.

How does a board do this? By phrasing the resolution to match their obligation. So, a resolution should never be simply to “accept the Treasurer’s Report”, but rather, something like:

WHEREAS the board has had an opportunity to review and ask any questions about the Treasurer’s Report;

BE IT RESOLVED that the board notes the Treasurer’s Report was submitted with no further action noted.[8]

On a month where something is out of whack, the resolution could be:

WHEREAS the board as had an opportunity to review and ask any questions about the Treasurer’s Report; and

WHEREAS it was noted that the board had anticipated additional revenue in the form of a grant awarded last March;

BE IT RESOLVED that the board notes that the report was submitted and requests the Finance Committee and Director to develop an alternate plan in the event that the anticipated funds are not received by month-end.

A resolution to acknowledge receiving a report is not the same as acknowledging the board has double-checked the math on every item. However, a board should not review any financial report in isolation, and if things don’t add up, address any concerns via a resolution (as shown above).

3. If there is a board committee that, per the bylaws, is not given the power to act independently o[f] the board, is it permissible for a member of such a committee to make a motion to be followed by discussion and vote without a second?

Ugh. It depends.

If a board is using the current Robert’s Rules (12th Edition) without modification for a body of fewer than 12 members, the answer is no.[9]

If the board has adopted any other standing procedure that bars such action: also no.

On the other hand, if the board is using Robert’s Rules 12th Edition, but with the modification for a body of under 12 people (which requires no seconding): sure!

Whatever rule is selected, it should be applied consistently.

4. From the perspective of OML or others that you know are relevant for the library is it legally acceptable for a board chair to make a motion?

Yes, the board chair can make a motion.

But, for boards that are super into Robert’s Rules—Section 3 sets out how a “member” can “claim the floor,” which is the first part of the intensely detailed method of making a resolution per Robert’s Rules.[10]

The floor is “claimed” when the member is acknowledged as having it by the chair. The chair then guides the process by ensuring there is a second (when required), stating the question, overseeing debate, putting the question, and announcing the result.

So, you probably see the issue: for the chair to “give the floor” to themself and then do all the refereeing for their own motion is… frowned upon.

But again, it is allowed unless the body has adopted rules that disallow it.

I see this question as coming down to common sense and courtesy.

If a motion is of sufficient interest to the board chair that they would like to bring it, it may be better for them to ask the vice chair or another officer to temporarily take over chairing the meeting.

However, if the board chair is putting the motion simply because they are the most comfortable at putting motions,[11] and the process is still being conducted with documented clarity,[12] then it is fine.

The goal—above all other things—is to have a procedure that enables the board to efficiently, clearly, and fairly get business done.

For some people, Robert’s Rules are wonderful; for others, it is just a procedural quagmire. A board should periodically evaluate what process it is using, to make sure it is helping the board be as strong as it can for the library and that the process is being used to unite leadership, not alienate those who don’t know parliamentary procedure.

More important than Robert’s Rules (or any other agreed-upon process), a library board in New York should be trained on both the Open Meetings Law and their duty to monitor fiscal matters, so the materials and mode of conducting meetings complies with the law and protects the library.

Thanks for a great series of questions! See the following page for a “Friendly Cheat Sheet” for Robert’s Rules of Order.

Robert’s Rules FRIENDLY CHEAT SHEET 

When the board needs to take action, it does so by a resolution. Resolutions can be used to request committees to investigate certain matters, to authorize the revision of policy, to exercise any of the board powers listed in the Charter or the Education Law or the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, and to express the general positions of the board.

Creating and Moving a Resolution

Any trustee with a conflict of interest or potential conflict on a particular item should declare it and recuse themselves from the vote the moment the topic is raised. Any declared conflicts of interest should be noted in the minutes by the Secretary or note-taker.

It is important that the precise wording of the resolution be confirmed prior to the resolution being “moved” forward, seconded (if you’re requiring seconding) and voted upon. To do this, the Secretary or note taker should confirm what the text of the resolution is, and it should be read aloud.

The person chairing the meeting can then say, “does someone so move?” If a member says, “so moved,” the Secretary or note taker should note who moves the resolution.

[Optional] The person chairing the meeting can then say, “does someone second the motion?” If a trustee says “yes,” the secretary or note-taker should note who seconds the resolution.

The person chairing the meeting can say, “any discussion?” Discussion can get a little unstructured, but it is wise for the meeting chair to consider monitoring the time and taking care to ensure each person who wishes to speak gets a chance—in recognized order. Discussion can result in the motion being amended (in which case there needs to be a resolution to amend the pending motion), withdrawn, or it can result in a robust discussion that leads to the final vote.

When discussion is ended (if discussion is particularly contentious and long-ranging, this is where you delve into the big book of Robert’s Rules on making amendments, withdrawing questions, and “calling” questions. However, whenever possible, it is nice to work for harmony as to when discussion is over, rather than use a procedure.) When over, the chair can confirm, “discussion is ended, and the board will now vote.”

Any trustee recusing due to a conflict of interest should make sure their abstention from voting is noted in the minutes.

The votes are noted by the note-taker, are tallied, and if the appropriate number required for it to pass is logged, it should be noted that the motion carried.

Let's begin by breaking this question down a bit and giving one-word answers.

Question 1: Is it legally possible for a municipal library to manage its own construction projects?

Answer: YES.

Question 2: Can a library board take on such a role?

YES.

Question 3: What is the legal framework for such an arrangement?

Well…

And with that, we're out of one-word answers. So, grab a relaxing beverage of choice, get comfy, and join me in fiddling with the Rubik’s Cube of New York State library law: library real estate.

Why is this issue a "Rubik's Cube"?

Well, for starters, there are SIX questions every municipal library board must always know the answer to:

1. Who owns the library building and grounds?
2. Who insures the library building and grounds?
3. Who is responsible for day-to-day maintenance of the library building and grounds?
4. Who pays for day-to-day maintenance of the library building and grounds?
5. Who pays for construction, renovation, and repair of the library building and grounds?
6. Who can sign contracts as the owner of the library building and grounds, and/or who [if anyone] can sign contracts as "tenant" of library building and grounds?

One would think there are only two possible answers to each of these questions ("the library" or "the municipality") and that those answers would have some sort of internal consistency—but that is not the case. Often, the answers are hybridized (with a third party playing a role), and what is written on paper might not be true in practice. Further, a clear answer to one question doesn't mean there is a clear answer to another. This means that the six questions of the "Cube" form scores of possible combinations.

Here are some interesting combos inspired by situations I have run into:

• The municipality owns the building, but the deed restricts use to only the library, which arranges for and pays for everything but the heat and roof repairs.
• The library owns the building and grounds, and the municipality has nothing to do with it. NOTHING.
• Everyone says the library "owns" the building, but they don't own the land; when this is found to not be the case, everyone wants to keep saying it anyway, since that helps keep things separate and emphasizes the library board's authority over the operations of the library.
• The municipality owns the building and grounds AND has custody of the library's money AND the library board can never get a clear answer on what part of the library budget is being used to maintain and insure the building.
• The municipality owns the building and grounds, but the library handles everything (with or without a lease).

These different permutations are neither "wrong" nor "right", but they do set the stage for some interesting dynamics. Here are some inspired by situations I have run into:

• The municipality owns the building, but the deed restricts use to only the library, which becomes very useful knowledge when a new mayor tries to threaten the library with eviction.
• The library owns the building and grounds, and the municipality has nothing to do with it. NOTHING. So, everyone is happy because there is no cause for friction about real estate.
• Everyone says the library "owns" the building but they don't own the land. This works well until a construction grant requires proof of ownership and the truth has to be articulated in a letter to the state.
• The municipality owns the building and grounds AND has custody of the library's money, AND the library board can never get a clear answer on what part of the library budget is being used to maintain and insure the building.  No one knows if/how it is insured. This can be a nightmare.
• The municipality owns the building and grounds, but the library handles everything (with or without a lease). When there is a lease, it should establish this level of authority: who can arrange a contractor, whose insurance covers what, etc. When there isn't a lease, the lack of clear authority can become a problem.

Because of the variety possible, no two libraries have precisely the same combination of answers to these questions. But each of these questions relates to the member's request for the "legal framework" that enables a municipal library to oversee its own construction project.

Let's examine the six questions with respect to this "framework."

1. Who owns the library building and grounds?

When the library owns the building and grounds, it is indisputably able to enter contracts for construction (site testing, general contractors, contractors).

When the library doesn't own the building and grounds, it only truly has the authority to enter contracts for construction if that authority is confirmed in writing.

This can get confusing, as anyone can hire services (such as those of an architect) for a building but might not have the authority to do so on behalf of the library.

2. Who insures the library building and grounds?

This factor is important because insurance and risk management are such a huge part of designing and building a library (whether renovating, repairing, or newly constructing). If the library isn't in a position to call the shots on insurance, it is not truly in control of the project.[1]

3. Who is responsible for ensuring day-to-day maintenance of the library building and grounds?

Very often, libraries who are not positioned to sign a contract for major construction (because they don't own the building or have a lease or municipal policy that allows them to) find themselves arranging small services such as a plumber visit or a quick repair by an electrician. From what I have seen, this seeming authority is due to one of two things; either 1) the municipality has a policy allowing "department heads" or others to sign on to smaller contracts, or 2) it is due to these smaller contracts flying under the radar of the risk management and procurement authorities.

4. Who pays for day-to-day maintenance of the library building and grounds?

Even when a library owns the building the issue of "who pays" can result in a municipality denying the library’s ability to sign a routine maintenance contract.

For example, if a municipality funds the library out of a general operations budget (no separate tax levy) and is the custodian of the funds, a municipality can functionally[2] deny the ability of the board even so much to bring in a needed cleaner, if there is not exceptional clarity.

On a more routine level, this aspect can get weird[3] when municipalities deduct or charge costs for services provided by third party contractors or facilities departments, without even alerting the library.

5. Who pays for construction, renovation and major repair of the library building and grounds?

The examples in #3, above, become more extreme once construction, renovation, and major repair come into play.

Some municipalities will accept construction funds and then try to bundle the projects, using library money to underwrite non-library projects.[4]

Some will reject architectural plans generated by a firm hired by the library, claiming the municipality must be on the contract.[5]

And some, like the member's question describes, will demand to have complete control over a project.

 6(a). Who can sign contracts as owner of the library building and grounds?

This factor is the one at the heart of the member's question.

There are two ways a municipal library can sign a contract with a general contractor for construction:

A) As owner of the building; or

B) With confirmed permission of the actual owner.

"Confirmed permission" is the key term here; the "confirmation" can be in the form of a policy, a letter of understanding, or a lease. It should be in writing, and it should be clear and unambiguous. If it doesn't exist, the library can't (or at least, shouldn't) sign the contract.

6(b). Who [if anyone] can sign contracts as "tenant" of library building and grounds?

If a library is a tenant of its municipality, the lease or license to operate the library within the building should clearly spell out this right or set out the procedures for solely or jointly arranging contracts.

And that's it.

I wish I could offer a more straightforward formula… sort of an A + B = C. But as I said, it's a Rubik's Cube, and a municipal library can have any of several combinations. The bottom line: if the library doesn't either own the building or have clearly articulated authority to sign contracts for and manage risks associated with construction, renovation, or major repair of the building, the board won't be situated to manage the project.

So, for a problem like the one described by the member, I suggest:

Step 1: Research and confirm your library's answers to all six questions.

Step 2: Assess which answers are the cause of any impediment to the library overseeing its own construction projects.

Step 3: Develop solutions to the issues.[6]

This last step is of course a vast step. What makes it extra challenging is that each library will have its own unique solutions, which take months or years to develop and actualize. But I promise there always ARE solutions.

Happy building!

There are a lot of questions packed into this submission!

Let's take them one at a time.

First question: "I have always been under the impression that it is illegal for public libraries to fundraise on their own, aside from 2 book sales per year." [1]

It is not illegal for a public library to fundraise.  It's just that, like starting sourdough[2], fundraising by a public library has many complications.

For more on that, see the analysis in the "Ask the Lawyer" answer posted here: https://wnylrc.org/raq/donations-solicitations-public-libraries.

Second question: If a school district public library no longer has a Friends Group, can it host fundraisers?

Yes, but to briefly summarize the "caveats" mentioned above: a public library should never rely on fund-raising to meet basic operational and strategic needs (that funding must come from the tax base and via established agreements for service). In addition, a public library's fund-raising must adhere to the extensive laws and regulations applying to the solicitation, accounting, use, and investment of such moneys.

Third question: For example, could the library itself host a bingo night and raise money?

Yes, but any event that involves "games of chance" should follow the state law regarding gaming.  For more on that, see the guidance at the "Ask the Lawyer" answer here: https://wnylrc.org/raq/donations-solicitations-public-libraries.

Fourth question: Can a school district public library send out a fundraising letter?

Technically, yes, but because of the caveats, I would say such a letter should go out after:

1. the fund-raising initiative was built into an established fund-raising plan passed by the board of trustees;
2. the fiscal controls for accounting for the money were reviewed and approved by the library's accountant and lawyer; and
3. the text of the letter was reviewed by the accountant and lawyer for compliance AND approved by the board of trustees for adherence to the strategic plan.[3]

Fifth question: Or is it important that all library staff and trustees refrain from fundraising efforts in order to separate public funds from fundraising?

I wish it were this simple, but it's a bit more complex.  If a public library deeply plans for and builds capacity for fund-raising for special initiatives, it is possible for paid staff to engage in what is called (in the fund-raising biz) "advancement".  However, once serious planning is happening on that scale, there are a variety of reasons for a non-association library to work with an affiliated not-for-profit (like a "Friends" or a foundation) to achieve the same objectives.

Sixth question: I am struggling because we have a lot of great ideas, but the future of our Friends Group is unclear.

To the director who submitted this question: you are not alone.  "Friends uncertainty" can happen, and when it does, it is a lousy situation for a director to be in.

Also: I am not surprised you have good ideas for fund-raising; library directors are some of the best sources for good ideas for "Friends" and other library supporters.  After all, directors are the people with the closest eye on the well-being and day-to-day needs of the library. 

But as your fourth question suggests, the energy of you and your staff is best spent focused on those day-to-day needs, which should only include fund-raising if the board has initiated a well-thought-out plan and strategic support for employees assisting with it (translation: there is a budget, wording in a job description, and at least three pages in the updated strategic plan for this, then the director can have responsibilities related to fund-raising... which should never be more than a very small fraction of their duties).

Third:  If at all possible, when a "Friends" group is rocky, this is a time for library trustees to step up and see if they can help revitalize the organization.[4] 

Seventh question: I am wondering what options are available to me as a library director, and my Board of Trustees, if the Friends Group were to dissolve.

There’s an array of options for a public library in this situation:

Option	Legal considerations of fund-raising	Practical considerations
"Friends Free Lite": A public library without an affiliated "Friends", who fund-raises for small initiatives like an added story hour or to fund contracted events and performers (only up to 1% or less of operating costs).	Fund-raising efforts, even at this small level, must be very strategic and tightly planned for compliance and to not generate operating funds.  Fiscal policies related to fund-raising must be well-developed and strictly adhered to.	Fund-raising capacity will be more constrained than that of a "Friends" (by both practical and legal considerations) and requires careful attention to fiscal policy.
"Friends Lite": A public library with an affiliated "Friends" where the "Friends" fund-raise for small special initiatives (under $50K a year).	Fund-raising by the Friends in the name of the library should be per CONTRACT[5] that makes mutual commitments of legal compliance, cooperation, and transparency.	Small Friends groups can be operationally lax, leading to the type of uncertainty in the member's question.  For this reason, a contract between a library and Friends should set the stage for good succession planning.
"Friends Powerhouse": A public library with an affiliated Friends, who fund-raise for large special initiatives (over $50K a year).	Fund-raising by the Friends in the name of the library should be per a CONTRACT that makes mutual commitments of legal compliance, cooperation, and transparency, with extra care about required financial filings to the New York State Charities Bureau and the IRS.	Very often, a group operating at this level may have employees or contracted assistance.  Such a group should be paying deep attention to and have policies regarding use of paid consultants[6], lobbyists, and accountants. Such a high-functional group will good succession planning.
"Advancement without or without Friends"   In this model, a public library makes strategic use of deeply planned fund-raising for long-range objectives, and it plans and budgets for in-house capacity to fund-raise, including planned giving and other planned solicitations.	Planning to have in-house "advancement" requires a deeply committed board who has mapped this strategy out in a well-developed strategic plan.[7]	If a public library develops a deep "reserve" fund, there is a risk the public (and the NYS Comptroller) will regard it as stockpiling surplus funds.  For this reason, if there is a decision to do this, the board must be very strategic about it.

All of this brings me to the spirit of the question, which is: if fund-raising isn't going so well, what is a director to do?

Trustees who are reading, this is your chance to shine.  If you are so fortunate to have a director with good ideas, it is a good idea to listen to those ideas and see if they can fit into fund-raising by the Friends or by the library itself.  But unless a job description is re-written to include specific responsibility for fund-raising, and such activity is supported by the library's policies and strategic plan (after being carefully reviewed by the library's accountant and lawyer), a director or other staff member should NOT be fund-raising.

In other words: no aspect of fund-raising should ever, ever, EVER be a casual add-on to a library director's list of duties.  While a director's talents can be tapped for fund-raising, if things are going beyond brainstorming, such responsibility should only be imposed to the degree there is a clear and vetted plan[8] for doing so.

I thought this reply was written for directors, but really, it is written for boards, treasurers, and finance committees: if a director is to work on any aspect of fund-raising (which if they do, should only be the merest fraction of their duties), or if a public library is going to fund-raise, make sure the right infrastructure is in place!

What an insightful question.

Here is my answer: no, "delegate" is not quite the right word in this context.  A more suitable phrase could be:

"Per library policy, the Director, or an employee designated by the Director, has authority and responsibility for the selection of library resources."

Here is why:

The word "delegate", in the context of a board operations,[1] pertains to outsourcing very precise responsibilities (such as managing investments[2]).

Many board responsibilities can't be delegated.  For instance, a library board has a legal responsibility to hire the library director,[3] and a legal responsibility to pass policy related to library operations.[4]  Neither of these can be outsourced (or "delegated").

But having responsibility to hire the library director and a legal responsibility to pass policy related to library operations is not the same as performing professional duties required of that director, per that policy.

Just as with other work performed by a credentialed professional, collection management should be governed by board-approved policy, but that policy should not "delegate", but rather authorize, those duties to the person qualified to perform them.

If this seems a little obtuse, here is a small poem to illustrate the point:

A board can hire a lawyer

But cannot practice law.

A board can hire an architect

But plans it cannot draw.

 

A board can hire a CPA

But can't audit on its own.

A board can hire a barber

But can't cut hair alone!

 

When a job requires credentials,

When it's licensed or certified,

The duty's not "delegated,"

Instead the action's "authorized."

 

So when selecting books to add

Or choosing what to weed,

The policy's set by the board,

But the director does the deed.

 

For these reasons, a collection management policy should emphasize that the board passes the policy governing the process, but the policy empowers the Director to set and apply the selection criteria.  The sample language above is not the only way to articulate this, but it is one way; to see another sample, ask your library system director for the model policy created last year by PULISDO and ESLN.

Thank you again for a thought-provoking question.

First: I'd like to thank the libraries and the library system who brought up this issue.  The questions raised in this submission only materialized because they were committed to careful reading of the law and to doing the right thing.

Second: before answering, I have to set out two caveats.

Caveat #1: before feeling constrained by Public Officers Law Section 3, a town public library should check its charter, because if it hasn't been changed since April 13, 1921[1], the library may already have an alternate method of trustee appointment.[2]

Caveat #2: prior to diving into the question as created by state law, a town public library interested in this path should check its charter and bylaws, since any residency exceptions must not only be consistent with the law, but consistent with those foundational documents.

And with that...

YES, the residency requirement created by Public Officer's Law Section 3 can be changed by local law, and yes, after careful assessment, this can be the way for a town public library to address a trustee shortage.

I put the first "YES" in caps because for the casual searcher, the answer at first appears to be "NO."  This is because back in the 1950's and into the 1970's and 1980's, towns did not have the authority to change the residency requirements for library trustee appointments, and many cases and official opinions set that out in legal stone; an example of this vehement denial is the 1985 New York State Attorney General commentary here.[3]

However, in 1991, the New York State Legislature amended Section 3 of the Public Officers Law to add sub-section 24, allowing the Town of Greenburgh to appoint any person residing in NY as any officer.

According to 1997 opinion of the New York State Attorney General found here[4], the "Greenburgh effect" means Towns may, by local law, designate any position as not requiring residency.

The Attorney General's reasoning:

"For home rule purposes, a "general law" is a State statute which in terms and in effect applies alike to all counties, all counties other than those wholly included within a city, all cities, all towns or all villages. Municipal Home Rule Law § 2(5). It is thus significant that the Legislature has amended section 3 of the Public Officers Law to establish a special residency requirement for any appointed public officer in the Town of Greenburgh. Public Officers Law § 3(24) (first subset). An appointed public officer in the Town of Greenburgh now may reside anywhere in the State of New York. This exception for the Town of Greenburgh has rendered section 3 of the Public Officers Law, in its coverage of appointed town officers, a special, rather than a general law. In establishing residency requirements for appointed town officers, section 3 no longer applies in terms and in effect alike to all towns of the State.

Under home rule authority, since section 3 no longer is a general law with respect to the residency of appointed town officers, any other town may enact a local law inconsistent with its provisions establishing a residency for an appointed town office at least as broad as the residency established for appointed officers of the Town of Greenburgh."

There has been no case law contrary to this Attorney General commentary since 1997.[5] 

Because of this, local attorneys for towns[6] across the state have been able to advise their clients to adopt local laws "establishing a residency for an appointed town office at least as broad as the residency established for appointed officers of the Town of Greenburgh."

Of course, a town public library and town board struggling to find qualified and willing trustees should thoroughly examine this option before working with the town attorney to draft the local law enabling it.  Cultivating trustees within the sponsoring municipality is a critical way to have the supporting community involved and engaged in the operations of the library.[7]  For this reason, putting parameters on who from within the state can be appointed (perhaps limiting selection to the area of service, if it exceeds the town's borders, or limiting it to the county or library system area of service) makes sense. 

And remember, before considering this option, a library should examine its charter.  If the law allows trustees who reside outside the town to be appointed, but the charter language sets stricter criteria, there could be a concern.  So before asking a town board to pass a local law[8] allowing non-resident trustees, examine the charter first![9]

Thanks again to the libraries and the cooperative library system with the tenacity and patience to closely examine the details and pose these questions.  The opportunity to do a deep dive on these issues always brings somet

Here are the questions I would explore with an association library facing this situation:

• Is the job description current?[1]
• Do the bylaws prescribe a particular method of hiring?[2]
• Does the library have a policy or employee handbook with an "internal promotion" or "search" policy?
• Has the board announced any definitive intentions to use a search process?
• Is there a conflict of interest?
• Are there any current employees who may be interested in the job?
• Does the library have a strategic plan or other initiative that clearly requires a broad search?[3]

If the answer to any of the above is "yes,"[4] it would be wise to consider a full search, or to work with a lawyer and get a written opinion before deciding not to. 

In addition to the above questions—which can all relate to legal factors—I would ask:

• Is there a risk that the library's supporting community would regard not conducting a search as a problem?

What could lead a community to see a lack of search as problematic?  A search can be structured to draw input from the community.  It can be a time to drum up interest in the library.  It can be a way to signal to a community all the things the library agrees are important... like finding the best candidate.  So, the decision not to conduct a search could—if there is no evidence otherwise—lay the board open to criticism that it isn't fulfilling its responsibilities.

The decision to not conduct a search, however, doesn't have to mean that a board took the easy way out.  Rather, it can mean that the board has considered the work of the person filling in as an interim and has decided that that person's continued service in the role is in the best interests of the library.

How can an association library board who have decided they have found the right fit, without a search, let the community know the basis of their decision? By putting that basis in a resolution.

Here is a sample:

WHEREAS it is the responsibility of the board to employ a director of suitable qualifications and experience; and

WHEREAS NAME has been serving in the capacity of Interim Library Director since [DATE]; and

WHEREAS NAME's service as Interim Library Director has provided the Board with the opportunity to assess their suitability for the position; and

WHEREAS the Board believes NAME serving as Director would be in the best interests of the Library;

BE IT RESOLVED that that Library shall offer NAME the position of Director of the Library for an annual salary of AMOUNT, with at-will terms[5] and other such conditions, including start date, to be confirmed in a hire letter[6] to be drafted and signed by the President.

AYE:

NAY:

ABSTAIN:

If the interim director's service has also brought specific achievements or noteworthy service (like getting a library through a pandemic shutdown), throw that in, too.

And that's it!  Just make sure it's documented that the decision is in the best interests of the library.

At "Ask the Lawyer" we aim to create resources that are accurate, clear, and above all... useful.

So, for accuracy and clarity, I will answer the questions briefly in the paragraphs below.

But for utility, I am including a "Library Trustee Candidate Service Readiness Checklist" which both a municipal library and municipality can adopt to assess trustee eligibility.

Here are the brief answers:

Question 1: Does an individual have to reside within the municipality in order to serve as a municipal library trustee?

There is no provision in New York's Education Law or regulations requiring this; however, residential requirements for municipal public library boards are generally found in the library's charter and/or bylaws (with the charter being the deciding factor).

Question 2: Can members of the municipal council or legislature simultaneously serve as municipal library trustees?

No, this is prohibited by Education Law Section 260(4).

Question 3: How about employees of the municipality (as opposed to library employees)?

If otherwise qualified, and not barred by the charter and/or bylaws, yes, municipal employees can serve as trustees.

Question 4: Are there prohibitions or guidelines concerning family members of municipal officers or employees?

Relatives of municipal officers or employees are not barred by state law or regulation, but may be barred by a local law or the library's bylaws.  In addition, based on the specific circumstances, such service could violate the library's Conflict of Interest Policy.

Question 5: Who can serve, and who can or should not?

Who CAN serve: Persons over 18 who meet the criteria in the charter and/or bylaws, and are not barred by law.

Who CAN NOT serve: Members of the board or governing body appointing the trustees, those not yet 18, those who don't meet the criteria in the charter and/or bylaws, and those barred by the charter and/or bylaws.

Who SHOULD NOT serve: Those with a conflict of interest that would bar them from performing routine fiduciary duties (like a spouse of a library director who had to regularly vote to accept the monthly director's report); those who can't commit to not missing three consecutive meetings without a good excuse (that is a basis for dismissal under Education Law 226); those who would serve with an intent other than the best interests of the library (which could violate fiduciary duties).

For more information and for the laws that inform the above short answers, please see the "Service Readiness Checklist" below.

Final tips:

• Municipal library boards should consider these issues when adopting or updating their charter, bylaws and their Conflicts of Interest policy. 
• Revisions that exclude specific categories (like relatives of lawmakers or municipal employees, as mentioned by the member) should be reviewed by the library's lawyer to ensure they are a) rationally related to library priorities; b) don't exclude people on the basis of a protected category; c) use up-to-date legal definitions (for instance "relative" not "family member"); and d) can be fairly, uniformly and consistently applied.

Thank you for an important question.  Thinking about eligibility early in the process prioritizes the library's attention to compliance and can enhance the trustee experience.

 

[NAME OF MUNICIPALITY] Library Trustee Candidate Service Readiness Checklist

 

Thank you for your interest in serving as a trustee of the NAME Library.

The Library's trustees are appointed by the MUNICIPAL BODY for #-year terms.

Together, the trustees operate as an autonomous "Board" that is independently responsible for the library's finances, policies, plan of service, and legal compliance.

Service as a trustee is governed by laws and regulations, as well as the Library's charter and bylaws (a copy of which are attached).

This Checklist is to help the Library and the MUNICIPAL BODY confirm that candidates meet the legal criteria for service as a trustee, and that if appointed, they are willing to serve.

Thank you for completing this important step in exploring service as a trustee.

1.  Name of potential nominee:

2.  Address:

3.  Are you at least 18 years old?

            YES    NO

This requirement is based the Education Law section s 226 and 260, and the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law Section 701(a).  If the answer above is "NO" please reach back out to us in the future.

4.  Do you live within [INSERT MUNICIPALITY or MUNICIPALITIES]?

This requirement is set by the [CHARTER and/or BYLAWS].

[INSERT ANY OTHER REQUIREMENT SET BY THE CHARTER and/or BYLAWS].

5.  Are you a member of the [INSERT MUNICIPAL ENTITY/IES [1]]?

                        YES    NO

If the answer is "YES," you are not currently eligible to serve as a trustee per Education Law 260(4), which provides "No person who is a member of any municipal council or board authorized by this section to appoint public library trustees in any municipality shall be eligible for the office of such public library trustee in such municipality."

6.  Please review the Library's Conflict of Interest Policy, then fill out and sign the attached Conflict of Interest Form and attach. 

This requirement is based on NY's 715-a(c), which requires: ...prior to the initial election of any director, and annually thereafter, such director shall complete, sign and submit ... a written statement identifying, to the best of the director's knowledge, any entity of which such director is an officer, director, trustee, member, owner (either as a sole proprietor or a partner), or employee and with which the [Library] has a relationship, and any transaction in which the [Library] is a participant and in which the director might have a conflicting interest.

NOTE: If you have a conflict, it does not automatically disqualify you from service as a trustee, but it is important that the conflict not bar a trustee from voting on routine items such as the budget, library policy, financial oversight, and employment matters, as those are the core fiduciary duties of a library.[2] We appreciate your careful consideration of the policy and your disclosures. 

7.  If appointed, are you willing to serve?  The board meets at least # times a year, in addition to special meetings as needed. 

This requirement is based on Education Law 260, which requires that the board meet no less than quarterly, and the Library's Bylaws, which require that it meet [INSERT].  Absences are only excused by the [board] in the minutes due to ADA accommodations, temporary illness, or unexpected emergency. [REMOVE IF NOT ALLOWED BY POLICY: The board allows remote attendance on the basis of [INSERT] so long as a physical quorum is present.]

            YES    NO

8.  Please sign below and turn this form into PERSON AT MUNICIPALITY and PERSON AT LIBRARY.

SIGNATURE OF POTENTIAL NOMINEE :___________________

RECEIVED BY LIBRARY ON :___________________________

CONFLICT OF INTEREST FORM RECEIVED BY SECRETARY ON ____________

NOTE: This completed form, and the completed Conflict of Interest form, may be subject to disclosure per the Freedom of Information Law.