Waco-McLennan County Library asks county for 20% share, requests $1.35 million for FY26

5112408 ยท July 1, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Sign Up Free
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Waco McLennan County Library officials presented circulation and budget data and asked McLennan County to increase its contribution to a 20% baseline, requesting $1,350,000 for fiscal year 2026 to reflect county residents' usage of library services.

Library leaders told the McLennan County commissioners court on July 1 that county residents account for a substantial share of library use and asked the county to fund 20% of the library system's operating budget, including cost allocations, a request they calculated at $1,350,000 for fiscal 2026.

Roberto Zapata, director of library and culture enrichment for the City of Waco, joined by Deputy City Manager Deidre Emerson, told commissioners the Waco McLennan County Library System operates four public branches and provides digital and in-person services across the county. Zapata presented circulation data showing county residents make up nearly 30% of active cardholders and about 40% of total checkouts outside the city's own share, and argued the county's contribution should reflect that usage.

Zapata outlined FY26 budget pressures: the city asked departments to reduce expenses and the library was asked to cut about $464,000; library management said it had closed part of that gap but still faces an $88,000 shortfall. Proposed mitigations include reduced operating hours systemwide, elimination of three vacant full-time positions and modest fee changes for nonresident cards and meeting-room rentals projected to generate about $32,000 annually. He said the proposed FY26 budget for the library is just under $6.8 million and noted collections spending is a substantial line item.

Commissioners asked for more detail on cost allocations the city includes in its budget, and one commissioner expressed concern that some allocations in the city's budget appeared to route funds through unrelated municipal departments. Zapata acknowledged county and city budgeting differ and said staff could discuss alternative scenarios that reduce internal cost allocations in the county request. The court did not vote on funding but approved receipt of the report for budgetary consideration.

Zapata also asked the court to consider updating the parties' 1978 interlocal agreement to reflect modern library services such as computers, Wi-Fi and digital collections; court members said they would take that up in follow-up discussions tied to the budget process.

The presentation will be used by county staff as part of the FY26 budget process; no formal appropriation was made at the session.