Our opinion: Library’s tax extension proposal is too big; voters should reject this version

Some Cape Girardeau voters will consider a measure on the Tuesday, April 8, ballot to permanently extend a property tax for the public library.

Specifically, the proposal pertains to 13 cents of the library district’s 31-cent per $100 of assessed value property tax rate.

Originally passed in 2007 as a 15-cent increase to basically reconstruct the library, with 2 cents to remain permanently for maintenance and other purposes, the 13-cent portion of the tax came with a 20-year sunset, meaning it would go away in 2027, coinciding with the debt retirement for the construction project.

Library officials are getting a head start on trying to keep the funding. Good for them, although it would be better for the community if they pared down the request. In fact, library director Katie Earnhart has said if the proposal isn’t approved this time, the board will revisit the issue and return to the voters before the tax sunsets.

Their stated rationale for extending the 13 cents includes a number of needed projects — eventually, but not immediately, replacing the facility’s roof at a cost of about $500,000 (after it has been patched along the way as necessary) and constructing a maintenance shed for lawn equipment — and aspirational ones — purchasing and outfitting a bookmobile to serve South Cape and the Red Star area and constructing an outdoor performance space at an estimated cost of $1.5 million.

Were we on the Cape Girardeau Public Library board, some of us, too, might ask district voters to permanently extend the 13 cents. You seldom receive what you don’t ask for. And as far as public investments go, a well-funded library is one most of us can enthusiastically endorse. Public libraries serve all ages, and they provide more than books — internet access, meeting spaces, loans of household and hobby items. And a close look at the library’s financial condition indicates that folks overseeing the library have been excellent stewards of the tax dollars they’ve received. In recent years, they have managed to sock away about $100,000 per year in a capital improvements fund, which now exceeds $500,000.

But here’s the thing: The annual debt service on the construction project is about the same amount as the 13 cents brings in each year.

If the library’s property tax rate stays at 31 cents, when the debt service goes away in two years, the system would be awash in extra cash, to the tune of about $700,000 per year. That is a lot of extra money — too much. Even a $1.5-million outdoor auditorium — which isn’t clearly needed — will take only a fraction of the funds over time. What happens with the rest?

Because of those reasons, this measure is a bit premature.

There aren’t enough concrete spending plans that will require hundreds of thousands of dollars each year, especially since officials have — rightly, in our estimation — decided against brick and mortar expansion of the system. The bookmobile (at a projected cost of $200,000) is a better and smarter solution. Also, since the existing property tax rate won’t sunset for two years, there is an opportunity to develop a more comprehensive plan down the line.

We urge voters to vote against the tax extension as written and encourage the library’s leaders to regroup, firm up a long-term plan that is sunsetted and then ask voters to provide funding for that plan, rather than a light-on-details idea that basically creates a huge slush fund.