Tension ran high in the main meeting room in the Hampton Bays Public Library Tuesday night as more than 1,200 ballots were tallied on the proposed $15.8 million bond—a simple majority would have financed the demolition of the current building and the construction of a brand new facility in its place.
Following 40 minutes of waiting, library officials learned the fate of the bond.
It had failed, 719-507.
“Obviously, we’re really disappointed,” said Hampton Bays Library Board Vice President David Zimmerman immediately after learning the news. “We put up a project that the public basically told us they wanted.”
His comment was referencing the fact that the rejected project was pitched following more than a year of informational meetings in which hamlet taxpayers were asked what they want to see in a new library. The plan put forward on Tuesday would have addressed the biggest issues raised by residents: the need for more educational space and parking, and the replacement of an outdated and cramped structure that lacks basic necessities, like ample insulation.
If approved, the bond would have cleared the way for the demolition of the current library and the construction of a larger, two-story facility with a larger parking lot. The additional parking would have been made possible with the purchase of an adjoining half-acre lot; that sale is now off the table since the bond was rejected.
If the bond had been approved, the library district tax rate would have climbed from about 59 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation to 93 cents per $1,000—a 57-percent increase. Therefore, an individual whose property is assessed at $350,000 would have expected to pay about $326.80 in library taxes next year, or about $120 more than this year for the life of the 20-year bond.
While they thought they had strong community support, both Madeline O’Keefe, the president of the library board, and Mr. Zimmerman noted that the projected jump in library taxes most likely doomed their project.
“We don’t have a ‘Plan B,’” said Hampton Bays Library Director Susan LaVista on Tuesday night, adding that board members will spend the next few weeks coming up with alternate plans now that the bond was rejected.
Ms. LaVista also said that the board must also address more pressing issues, namely completing much-needed repairs to the current building, work that includes replacing its leaky roof and updating the heating and air conditioning system.
“We still have all those problems that we are dealing with,” Mr. Zimmerman added.
Ms. O’Keefe said her board still has to figure out a plan to finance those renovations.
Although they are unhappy with the results, board members agreed that they did a good job spreading the word about their project, pointing to Tuesday’s turnout as a sign that taxpayers were aware of the situation.
“The board worked really hard, and the director worked really hard,” Ms. O’Keefe said.
Board members had been discussing possible renovations to the library since the end of 2014, and first shared their idea with the public in the spring of 2015—the same time they began soliciting comments and recommendations from library users and hamlet residents. At those meetings, attendees asked that their new library offer more educational space, an upgraded heating and air conditioning system, and additional parking.
Leading up to this week’s vote, library officials estimated that they held at least 30 different presentations about their plans in order to receive feedback from the public.
“I feel we did everything we could possibly do to get the community informed,” Ms. LaVista said. “And the community has decided.”
Amanda Bernocco on Jun 15, 2016