Assembly delays vote to terminate library agreement after hours of public pleas

The Ketchikan Gateway Borough Assembly on May 11 postponed action on a motion that would have directed staff to send a notice of termination to the City of Ketchikan and start negotiations over the borough’s library funding agreement.

The motion was introduced by Assemblymember Thompson and seconded, but after lengthy public comment — including testimony from teachers, the library director and dozens of residents who warned that cuts could close school libraries and remove services for hundreds of students — the assembly voted to postpone the termination until its May 18 meeting.

Residents who spoke at length warned of direct effects on students and vulnerable residents if the borough reduced or capped the non-area-wide funding that pays the borough’s share of the Ketchikan Public Library. Pat Tully, the library director, told the assembly staff is preparing contingency plans if borough funding is reduced and flagged additional operational costs if the shared library system with the school district can no longer be used.

Several speakers cited usage data and grants to make the case for steady funding: Susan Thompson told the assembly that library digital checkouts have risen 58 percent and that last year the library ran about 500 programs and more than 9,000 program attendees; other commenters described outreach to homebound elders, tech-help classes and the role the library plays for homeschool families and students without home internet.

Assembly discussion centered on two competing aims: members who argued termination is necessary said the current open-ended contract leaves the borough writing checks for services it cannot directly influence and that recent library operating-cost increases have been unsustainable for non-area-wide taxpayers. Those members noted the borough lacks effective input under the existing agreement and that terminating the contract would force the city to the negotiating table. Opponents of immediate termination stressed the harm to students and seniors and urged additional information, clearer scope-of-service proposals and the possibility of a capped mill rate (0.7) tied to a defined scope of service.

As part of the debate members also discussed alternatives such as setting a capped annual contribution and explicitly defining a scope of services for that contribution, or pursuing an area-wide tax and direct borough management. No final decision on those ideas was made; the motion to terminate will be taken up again on May 18.

The assembly’s postponement preserves time for staff to scope negotiation objectives, produce cost and service impact details, and for the public to offer additional input before any termination notice would be sent to the city.