Gilmanton voters refuse to operate Year Round Library

For weeks people have been talking about this town being split down the middle over the contentious issue of who should pay for the cost of operating the newly-constructed, privately-owned Gilmanton Year Round Library. The deciding vote came Saturday, at the end of seven hour long Town Meeting and the deep chasm turned out to be more like two-thirds vs. one-third in scope.

The library association's petitioned warrant article to raise $75,000 in property tax revenue to support the fledging institution's initial operations was defeated in a secret ballot vote of 224 to 125.

Community interest in the issue could perhaps be gaged by the fact there were almost 100 more people in the school gymnasium for the library vote than were present when, hours earlier, a $3.1-million operating budget for 2009 was debated and adopted. Even at peak, however, the number of votes cast represented only 14-percent of the names on the town's checklist.

Supporters of the library initiative argued the overall benefit to residents, especially children, of having a modern year round library far outweighed the relatively modest cost — said to be in the neighborhood of a $40 annual tax burden on $250,000 worth of property — of operating it, even during a period of severe economic recession.

Opposition came from a number of quarters, including people who just didn't think the added tax burden was appropriate, especially at this time.

The most striking theme, though, was betrayal, as a number of speakers chastised library supporters for going back on their alleged promise to never ask for public support for their pet project. More than one indicated they had enthusiastically thrown their personal and family effort into the private fundraising drive and now felt they had been lied to by association leaders.

Association board members have repeatedly denied that any such pledge was ever made and believe the official record backs them up.

The building would have continued to be owned and managed by the association but operations would have been funded through a contract with the town. Such relationships are permitted under N.H. law.

Now, it's back to the drawing board for the association that, remarkably, was able over 10 years to raise $675,000 in cash and another half-million dollars in in-kind contributions of labor and materials to relocate the post and beam shell of an historic barn to a field across Rte. 140 from the school and then use it as the foundation for a contemporary building. The completed structure, which has been certified for occupancy, houses fixtures and some 4,000 books but the association lacks the resources to pay for a professional staff, even on a part-time basis, and other operating expenses.

Association officials say it had been there hope that interest earned from an endowment would be used to fund operations at the library but they have not been successful in their efforts to attract such a large donation.

Gilmanton is said to be the only township in the state that does not have a public library that is open all year. There are three small libraries that have traditionally receive a small token of public support but none of the buildings, including one at the "Corners" and another in Gilmanton Iron Works are winterized.

Association board member John Dickey made the initial pitch for the passage of Article 23 and he reviewed much of the information in a two-page flyer the group mailed to voters. He made the case that the town would not be accepting any future liability for the operating the library if the article were to pass and N.H. State Librarian Michael York of Goffstown was on hand to emphasize that point. The town would not be "establishing" or "accepting" a library, he said, so state law would not dictate that the town had any ongoing responsibility. It could be treated on a year-to-year basis.

York also stressed that is was not unusual for N.H. towns to provide public support for privately-owned libraries and that the institution in Gilmanton Iron Works was an example.

An audible sigh went through the room as Moderator Mark Sisti finally brought Article 23 to the floor late in the afternoon and it was obvious that pent-up emotion was going to carry over into the debate.

Amy Gardner-Booth acknowledged there was "a lot of anger and emotion" in the room but she urged voters to put their feelings aside for the good of the town. To keep relying on the current, little libraries in town for services, she argued, was the equivalent of "expecting us to go back to the one-room schoolhouse" for education.

"Little libraries are not enough," agreed Sarah Thorne. "We need a full-service, year around library . . . wouldn't it be wonderful if we had one of our own."

Ann Kirby said the entire community would benefit. "We all gain from this, it's for everybody," she pleaded.

Echoing statements made about the added importance of libraries during tough economic times, Association board member Carolyn Baldwin recalled he own depression-era childhood and said she wanted the town's youngsters to find the same joy in books that she did.

The subject of the town's existing libraries was obviously a sore one, especially for those associated with the Corners library.

Diane Nyren told voters she did not understand how the town could be asked to provide $75,000 for support of the new library when its annual contribution to Corners facility amounted to only a little over $1,000 per year. "It is a year round library," she said.

That insult to existing libraries theme was similarly struck by Barry Howland, who noted that he and his wife had dedicated hours and hours to the "little corner library" when she ran it.

Cindy Hougton was the first of a number of opposition speakers who stressed what they saw as the poor timing of Article 23.

"A lot of people are never going to set foot in this library, no matter how nice it is," she said. "I'm not against the library but we have neighbors making decisions to skip taking medications (because of hard times brought on by the recession). Your want is not our need."

"Don't make your passion my financial burden," echoed Katie Kardinal.

Ted Maltzie was one of a number of opponents who urged association members to continue their fundraising efforts in order to get the library open. "People don't have the money (to may more in taxes)," he said. "Not now."

One of the most poignant moments in the debate came when David Waterman came to the mic to note that his family had made "significant" donations to the year round library project before indicating that he now felt betrayed. "We were told (when we were asked for donations) they wouldn't be coming to the town (for money)," he recalled in urging his fellow residents to vote "no".

Lainie Rosato told the gathering she will no longer have anything to do with the association because she was associated with a group of people who threw their heart and soul into fundraising for the new library only to be told they were no longer needed. "We were stopped in our tracks," she said of efforts to produce more auctions like an initial one she described as being very successful.

Though association members insisted they could run their new facility for 25 or so hours a week with a professional, part-time librarian and one part-tine assistant and forecast no increase for the "foreseeable future" there were plenty of people in town who considered the $75,000 request just going to amount to the tip of the iceberg.

Perhaps foremost in the group was Al Blake, whose letter writing campaign to area newspapers first brought attention to the issue to people outside Gilmanton. He rose near the end of the debate to report that his research into libraries in other New Hampshire towns of about the same size indicated that none was any larger than 1,500-square-feet — the new building is several times that size — and all have operating budgets in the $130,000 a year range.

Sisti kept the polling stations open for an hour and there were perhaps only 100 or so people still remaining in the room when he announced the result. There was no applause.

Prior to the start of debate, the moderator implored that, "we all walked into this room as a community and we're going to walk out as a community." It remains to be seen if that was indeed the case.