Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Library Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Mount Pleasant holds public hearing on proposed library property tax increase

5694508 · August 26, 2025
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

Mount Pleasant held a public hearing Aug. 26 on a proposed property tax increase to raise about $50,416 a year for the city library. Library staff described usage and budget shortfalls; residents urged alternatives including expanding the tax base, raising nonresident fees, seeking grants and cutting other city spending.

Mount Pleasant City held a public hearing Aug. 26 on a proposed notice of property tax increase intended to raise roughly $50,416 a year for the city library, officials said.

Library Director Don told the council the increase would help cover a budget shortfall and building maintenance. Don said last fiscal year (2024–25) the library logged about 47,000 physical checkouts and about 20,000 electronic checkouts through Libby; from January through the date of the hearing the library had recorded roughly 28,000 physical and 12,500 electronic checkouts. Don also said the library currently has 2,988 active cards, of which 1,855 are Mount Pleasant addresses, with the rest from the wider north-side service district that includes Fairview and Spring City.

The hearing drew residents who questioned timing, equity and alternatives. One resident said, "Do not do this tax increase" and warned the increase would hurt elderly residents who already face school-district and other tax increases. Another resident urged the council to approach neighboring municipalities and the county for contributions because the library serves a broader service district. Several speakers suggested increasing nonresident card fees (currently $10 per year as described during the hearing), seeking grants (referenced sources included the Walmart Foundation and the American Library Association), fundraising and identifying savings elsewhere in the city budget.

Why it matters: city staff estimated the proposed increase would raise property tax budget revenue by about 13.6% above last year’s property tax budget revenue excluding eligible new growth. Officials said the increase would produce roughly $50,416 annually for the library; opponents and some council supporters said the timing is difficult because of other recent tax increases in the area and concern about the effect on low-income and elderly households.

Details presented at the hearing included a library budget line showing about $141,000 in property-tax–sourced revenue for the library and roughly $6,300 budgeted from library card service fees. Don said program spending is small: the library ran 155 programs last year with about 4,500 total participants and had a programs budget of about $2,000; the summer reading program had 357 sign-ups. Officials and residents quoted a library shortfall in the range of $20,000–$25,000 this year and mentioned anticipated building maintenance needs that could require additional funds.

Speakers discussed the service-district arrangement several times. Don described the library’s service district as covering the north side of the county and cited towns that use the library’s services; council members and residents noted past efforts (not specified in detail at the hearing) to ask other municipalities to contribute and suggested reopening those conversations. One speaker asked whether the city could adopt a temporary, one-year tax increase; a council member said it was possible in principle but cautioned it was unlikely to be adopted in that form.

Several residents pressed the council to seek alternatives before increasing property taxes: asking the county and neighboring towns to share costs, pursuing grants, increasing nonresident card fees, adding fee-based optional services, and cutting or reprioritizing other city budget items. A question about a donation box was raised and answered by a council member who said it would not be legal (no statute or ordinance citation was provided at the hearing).

Officials said a vote on the proposed tax increase was expected later in the council meeting but no recorded vote or final action appears in the transcript of the public hearing portion. The council left the record open for public comment during the hearing and invited staff to pursue follow-up options raised by residents.

The public hearing included the following quantifiable items as presented to the council: an estimated additional $50,416 in property-tax revenue if the proposal is approved; an asserted 13.6% increase in property-tax budget revenue compared with last year excluding eligible new growth; library circulation figures of about 47,000 physical checkouts and 20,000 electronic checkouts in FY2024–25; 2,988 library cards (1,855 Mount Pleasant addresses); program counts (155 programs, ~4,500 participants) and a program budget of about $2,000. Where figures were unclear in the spoken record, the transcript marks the numbers as presented by staff or members and the article refers to them as estimates from the hearing.