Carter County Public Library Director Matthew Parsons has taken some heat for some of his social media posts this past week. While noting the limitations of the Carter County Public Library, Parsons has pointed out where library patrons can find those resources the local library can’t afford to offer. He then goes on to encourage those who value the library to contact their magistrate and the rest of fiscal court and ask them to support funding for the library.
If that means a tax, Parsons has said, he would be able to begin multi-year planning and implement a number more programs. If it isn’t going to be done through a tax, which doesn’t seem likely with the current fiscal court – Judge Malone has publicly stated his reservations about establishing a library tax district – Parsons is asking for a one time boost from the county, from ARPA funds, and a continuation of existing funding.
But fiscal court hasn’t committed to that funding request yet. So, Parsons, it appears, has turned to social media to rally support. And, if the comments section of the posts are any indication, he has that support – and from some very prominent community members.
If Parsons approach comes across as a little too direct, possibly even impolitic, it’s because he’s a pig farmer not a politician. He’s more interested in the brass tacks than the networking. And the strategy may not work out for him in the long run, but nothing he has said about services available have been untrue. And what he’s asking for isn’t exorbitant.
Parsons is asking for the fiscal court, through their ARPA funds, to grant the library a one-time bonus of $175,000, plus their share of the regular $25,000 from the Interlocal Agreement. That, along with the $25,000 offered by Grayson and the $27,000 offered by Olive Hill would give the library a total of $252,000 for an operating budget from local sources.
There are other funding sources available, including some grants and a possible, but unlikely, state allocation that along with adult education contributions and remaining funds could bring the total revenues for the year to $336,551.62 – though it’s important to note that some of those revenue streams are not guaranteed.
But if Parsons could secure this one time windfall, he could do more than pay staff and keep the doors open. He could bring some real services and programs to the library. He could also complete some very necessary repairs to the Grayson branch, which includes a roof replacement.
The budget does include some modest salary increases for Parsons’ personnel – no different than the increases in pay approved for other county administered departments (though the library isn’t technically a county government entity) to help them retain personnel – and competent staff is essential to running a good program. But the big difference would be in services.
Parsons one-time budget request would fully repair the roof of the Grayson branch, without need to do it patchwork and piecemeal because they can’t do it correctly and risk further leaks.
It would include Kentucky Virtual Library access – for courier services for interlibrary loans, and online databases for academic and genealogy research, a motion picture license that would allow the library to show films, physical materials and digital licenses for online loans, and other necessary software and program licensing.
It’s honestly a pretty short list. An expensive one, but modest compared to other libraries in our region, and of other counties our size.
When Parsons brought his budget, he also presented the court with a list of other counties and their library budgets.
The regular budget for our Carter County Public Library, which serves a population of more than 27,000 people, is $75,000. The next smallest budget on a list of counties serving similar populations – Bell County with a population of around 26,000 – is $929,477. Nearly one million dollars.
Granted, as Parsons was quick to point out himself, a similar population doesn’t mean a similar tax base. But he isn’t asking for a million dollars. He’d love to have a larger budget than the $75,000 – or $77,000 with the additional funding Olive Hill has approved the last couple of years – but all he’s asking for at present is the money to implement these programs and purchase these software licenses.
We can’t tell you if you should support him in his ask. And we concede he has been very direct in his ask for your support. But nothing he’s said in his Facebook posts or in his statements before court have been untrue. Now it’s up to the county to decide if they support the vision of the library he has for them.
We do.
