Gilford Library - Skip's turn
Well, a week ago, the Friends of Gilford Library announced a bombshell - you want it, you got it. Actually, the operative words are: if you "accept" it, we will build it. Taken together, it could present a quandary.
Maybe not for the average person.....frankly, if I had not become more aware of how things work, I wouldn't put two and two together. My reaction would be “hey, it's FREE! What do you MEAN, you don't WANT it? Are you out of your freakin' mind?”
Now, I think I know a bit better. One of my favorite phrases is TANSTAAFL – There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. In other words, nothing in life is free – almost anything will cost somebody something. It is this phrase that I wish more people would take to heart and really understand that there are no exceptions.
For instance, I remember back when Oprah gave everyone in her audience a brand new car. When it was announced, the audience EXPLODED! Crying, cheering, screaming, back-slapping, hugs all around. And there's Oprah, a real big grin on her face, as all of the audience members this day were “deserving” and could not afford these Pontiacs themselves. Er, except for one thing.....as gifts over $10,000 (I think that is the limit), the cars were now considered income – therefore, eligible for income tax.
What was seen as free quickly became sore points – crying again ensued, but for other reasons (for complete disclosure, I don't remember what the outcome was). Why? These were people that couldn't afford it (no, not the cars, but couldn't afford even the tax on one).
Same thing when people yelp for joy when government grants are won – although “free” to the local citizenry, it did cost other taxpayers somewhere else. And the opposite is not often considered – when other places get grants, we pay.
So whenever government is involved, nothing is free. And I guess that this is my concern with respect to the gift of the library.
So, what do I know at this point?
- The Friends of the Gilford Library have gathered sufficient private donors to construct a new library; a concept that has been twice rejected by the voters.
- According to the Sun, they will purchase the Milo Bacon homestead on Potter Hill Road for about 400,000 – negotiations are still in process.
- The new building will be about 12,500-13,000 square feet – the present building is much smaller
- Twice defeated (2004 & 2005), the warrant articles that were defeated had costs of about $3 million.
- The Town already paid $150,000 for another lot on which a library could have been placed if the warrant articles had been approved – there are no present plans for it.
- A new warrant article to be voted upon in March, 2007 will be for the taxpayers to “accept” the give of the building.
- If the present building is no longer used as a library, it has to revert back to the heirs of Wilber Harding who donated the land in 1922 for the express purpose of library.
- The construction will NOT begin until after the taxpayers approve the warrant article – or in terms of the news reports, “accepted”.
- The Town Administrator, Evans Juris, has stated that before the Town "accepts" the building, a certificate of "occupancy" must be issued before the Town will take control of the building.
- The Town lawyer is working with the Friends to work on the wording of the warrant.
So, what do I don't know - read - what am I concerned with?
I am uneasy, bottom line, for voting for something that the Town (officially) has no control over and legally, has no authority or oversight. Effectively, the Friends "could" build anything, and we'd be obligated to take it. And once accepted at completion (whatever "completion" means), for what is the Town obligated to in terms of ongoing costs? What if the Friends decide to weight their design / building criteria for one thing, yet will end up costing the Town more (e.g., energy efficiency, lower operating costs, "cutting corners" in various ways so that a "better library thing" could be purchased instead", or the like)?
Face it, I just don't have the warm and fuzzies at this time. I would say that I would am guardedly optimistic, but I'm retreating to that old Reaganism: "trust but verify".
I have other thoughts as well:
- If the Friends are building this with completely with private funds, why do the Town voters have to "accept" the offer BEFORE the building is even started?
- The Friends can build the building anyway they want (given that codes and other strictures are satisifed).
- One of the issues with the rejected Police Station was "how much will it cost to operate?". We didn't get answers before the voting on that; it presently seems that the Town will not know how much it will be on the hook for annual operating costs with the new Library either.
- Will it be "adequate"? Who will get to define "adequate" from the Town's perspective (see previous question as part of an overall question).
- I am puzzled by discussion with the Citizen reporter (Cutter Mitchell, 12/18) and Library Director Katherine Dormoday:
Contrary to what was reported before, the complete acceptance of this gift will be going before the voters as a warrant article, to include both the property and the as-yet-unconstructed building, come town meeting in March. This means that while the property will be purchased, the building will only be constructed after the town accepts it.
Gilford Public Library Director Katherine Dormoday explained that this was done for much the same reason as why a public building is accepted before taking out a bond on the construction, "where the money comes from is just a little different."
The taxpayers need to accept the building, indicating they want this gift, before the efforts are made to go ahead and invest money and start construction, said Dormoday.
Actually, I am extremely puzzled by this line of reasoning (which, to be perfectly honest, I am not following):
- The Friends are building this with private donations. They say that have the money and that they want to build the building.
- Why this statement of requiring "acceptance"? If the Friends have said that they want to build a new Library, then just build the flipping building! Why the need for an "acceptance" - what was stated as the reason is not making sense...
- Why the comparison made to the construction of a public building where a bond (think mortgage) is needed? As far as I know, there should be no comparison, right? Unless...
- There hasn't been a mention of a mortgage in the news articles, right? Bond in the public sector = loan in the private sector.....what's brewing here....
- Is the Town being put on some kind of "legal hook" for something? I ask this not to cast aspirsions - I just don't know the answer!
How will the Town be protected if something goes wrong? I would think (not being a lawyer) that once the Town does accept it by voting for it, other than a certificate of occupancy will the Town have an "out" if things go badly?
I will probably update this post in the future as I either get more details, or have more concerns.....
