The Cache County Council held a half-hour public hearing on possible changes to county spending as part of a broader budget review that included discussion of library funding. County executive George told the audience the county had identified about $2.8 million in reductions and said workforce reductions had already been implemented. He framed the library question as part of a broader “double taxation” concern because many cities operate municipal libraries funded by municipal levies while the county library is funded from the county general fund.

Council opened the hearing for public comment and heard from a long line of residents and library advocates representing a range of constituencies — parents, educators, former librarians, USU students, and the Cache Valley Library Association. Speakers repeatedly stressed children’s access to books, literacy and early-learning impacts, the countywide equity argument (residents who do not live inside city library districts rely on the county library for free access), the history of the system (bookmobile funding cuts), and the relatively small per-household county share (speakers cited about $4.81 per household). Several speakers pointed to accreditation and grant opportunities the county library was pursuing that could become available if the library remained in operation.

Representative comments included:
• Anne Hedrick, president of the Cache Valley Library Association: “Libraries are institutions that provide and protect deep rooted American values.”
• Janelle Seeley (Providence): noted state law language and said a modest county levy could sustain library access; she contrasted county per-household cost estimates with municipal card costs.
• Allison Peterson (Hiram) described libraries as vital safe places for children and credited the library with personal life-changing benefits.

Council members thanked speakers and reiterated that no final budget decisions would be made that night; the executive and staff said they would continue to pursue difficult choices and that the final budget would be decided later in the appropriations process. Residents asked council to delay any cuts until voters or municipal councils could weigh in and asked cities to consider partnerships to preserve access for non-municipal residents.

Council will consider the library issue as part of final budget and appropriations deliberations over the next several weeks.