Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Library Bond Refunding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Library seeks $7.5M appropriation to prepay/refund library bonds; public raises concerns about Brooks Hall collections

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Budget & Finance Committee · May 25, 2016
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

The Library Commission asked the Budget & Finance Committee to approve a $7.5M appropriation from general reserve to reduce lease revenue bond debt and pursue refunding; the committee recommended approval but public commenters warned the move lacked public process and could further remove collections from public access.

The San Francisco Public Library requested the Board's Budget & Finance Committee approve an ordinance to re-appropriate roughly $7.5 million from the FY2016 general reserve to pay down lease revenue bond debt and pursue refunding that the Library and the Comptroller's Office of Public Finance identified as producing long-term savings.

Library staff said the supplemental appropriation would reduce current debt from about $28 million and that refinancing could produce estimated long-term savings in the range of $14 million to $16.7 million over the life of the bonds. Jamie Karubin from the Comptroller's Office of Public Finance joined library staff to answer questions.

Public comment included criticism from Peter Warfield, executive director of the Library Users Association. Warfield said the Library Commission presentation at the Board did not disclose further moves of Brooks Hall collections and argued there was insufficient public process for relocating core materials. "I think that the lack of public process here is very problematic," Warfield said. "It's a real dismantling of the library as a library," he added, urging more public involvement before approving funding that could lead to collection moves.

Committee members and the budget analyst generally supported the appropriation as sound fiscal management and moved the item forward with a positive recommendation to the full Board. The committee took the motion on item 22 without objection.