- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 11/17/25 at 1:29 pm to ronniep1
quote:
My response is tremendous pressure was placed on this board by elected officials, those in positions of power that are above this board, to accept this "compromise." Doing otherwise would have decimated the EBR Parish Library System.
Where's the compromise? You're basically saying they said do this and you did.
What's going to happen if the Library board told them to pound sand? They aren't going to let you put a new proposal for renewal on a future ballot or something?
Seriously, how would they "decimate the EBR Parish Library System, and who is they?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 1:46 pm to ronniep1
quote:
My response is tremendous pressure was placed on this board by elected officials, those in positions of power that are above this board, to accept this "compromise." Doing otherwise would have decimated the EBR Parish Library System.
This one paragraph demonstrates the main problem we have with the Libraries, BREC, and all the other separate entities. They all believe that their mission is most important. They would never voluntary cut back on their revenues on their own. They intend to spend the revenues as they see fit because they alone know best.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:16 pm to ronniep1
Ain't reading all that shite.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:24 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:
Like I told jizzface - saying libraries are not used or a waste is ignorant.
Oh honey, that’s not nice.
And it’s waste. Sorry.
This post was edited on 11/17/25 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:25 pm to SuperSaint
Thanks for building a new library we will never use!!!
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:30 pm to jizzle6609
quote:sometimes the truth is not nice
Oh honey, that’s not nice.
quote:there are many areas where the library can be thought of as a waste but until there are no kids needing books for school and there are no people trying to better themselves, then that’s when libraries become irrelevant
And it’s waste. Sorry.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:33 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:
are no people trying to better themselves, then that’s when libraries become irrelevant
You have all the books and knowledge you’ll ever need in your hand right now.
100 years ago when you were in high school I would understand the need.
This post was edited on 11/17/25 at 2:34 pm
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:37 pm to ronniep1
I voted no because it was a renewal but the library is bloated. We could buy every citizen internet and a subscription service to online books for less than we spend now. And we should
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:38 pm to jizzle6609
quote:I do, but not everyone does
You have all the books and knowledge you’ll ever need in your hand right now.
Plus what I have in my hand is expanded exponentially with with the help of the library
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:48 pm to TeddyPadillac
Regarding how the library system would have been decimated without agreeing to the millage "compromise," Mayor Edwards initial proposal was to put the Library System back into the General Fund, to provide $38 million for 2026 operations, and to take ALL of the Library's fund balance. Though $38 million is a big number to most people, me included, salaries and benefits alone are budgeted to consume $29 million of that $38 million originally proposed total for 2026. The term "benefits" includes not only retirement system contributions, but also the employer's provided portion of health, dental, and (minimal) life insurance, social security contributions for those not covered by the city's retirement plan, unemployment premiums, workers compensation insurance, and worker's comp self-insured claims.
In the interest of disclosure, this amount included deductions for frozen/unfilled positions as well as a salary savings deduction. Once a company or department reaches a certain size, perhaps as few as 100 people, it is never fully staffed. People leave jobs for any number of reasons, so taking a salary savings deduction attempts to project the actual amount the library is likely to spend on salaries. And when salaries are reduced, benefits are reduced as well.
Then, once salaries and benefits are taken into consideration, there are other expenses that are incurred whether or not the library is open or closed. If utilities are completely turned off, books and other materials will mildew. Walls will do the same. A building that becomes too hot could damage computers and servers, which are highly dependent on maintaining a relatively stable temperature in which they can operate. Water service must be maintained if the restrooms are to function properly.
If the library were to reduce its hours of operation, the buildings will still require cleaning and janitorial services, and trash service will be required as well. In addition, preventive and routine maintenance service must be performed if the buildings do not become what we'd commonly call "a dump."
All of this combined would be in the neighborhood of $34 - $35 million, leaving just $3 million for new materials (books, etc) and other programs or services. In a system this size, $3 million, spread across is practically $0. And this all assumes Baton Rouge will not be hit by a hurricane, flood, a branch would catch fire, or suffer any other unplanned disaster. Should that happen, the Library could easily find itself in a deficit, which like the restrictions on property tax usage, is not allowed by the state constitution. And given the current state of City of Baton Rouge finances, the library could not look to the City-Parish for a "helping hand" as it would be in the midst of its own hurricane or flood recovery.
I know my explanations are long, and I apologize, but the questions raised do not have short, easy answers. Just as with our daily lives, the answer is often "it depends," and "it's complicated."
In the interest of disclosure, this amount included deductions for frozen/unfilled positions as well as a salary savings deduction. Once a company or department reaches a certain size, perhaps as few as 100 people, it is never fully staffed. People leave jobs for any number of reasons, so taking a salary savings deduction attempts to project the actual amount the library is likely to spend on salaries. And when salaries are reduced, benefits are reduced as well.
Then, once salaries and benefits are taken into consideration, there are other expenses that are incurred whether or not the library is open or closed. If utilities are completely turned off, books and other materials will mildew. Walls will do the same. A building that becomes too hot could damage computers and servers, which are highly dependent on maintaining a relatively stable temperature in which they can operate. Water service must be maintained if the restrooms are to function properly.
If the library were to reduce its hours of operation, the buildings will still require cleaning and janitorial services, and trash service will be required as well. In addition, preventive and routine maintenance service must be performed if the buildings do not become what we'd commonly call "a dump."
All of this combined would be in the neighborhood of $34 - $35 million, leaving just $3 million for new materials (books, etc) and other programs or services. In a system this size, $3 million, spread across is practically $0. And this all assumes Baton Rouge will not be hit by a hurricane, flood, a branch would catch fire, or suffer any other unplanned disaster. Should that happen, the Library could easily find itself in a deficit, which like the restrictions on property tax usage, is not allowed by the state constitution. And given the current state of City of Baton Rouge finances, the library could not look to the City-Parish for a "helping hand" as it would be in the midst of its own hurricane or flood recovery.
I know my explanations are long, and I apologize, but the questions raised do not have short, easy answers. Just as with our daily lives, the answer is often "it depends," and "it's complicated."
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:49 pm to ronniep1
quote:
EBR Library System would, for all practical purposes, close on December 31.
for the best
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:50 pm to doubleb
My response is tremendous pressure was placed on this board by elected officials, those in positions of power that are above this board, to accept this "compromise." Doing otherwise would have decimated the EBR Parish Library System.
“This one paragraph demonstrates the main problem we have with the Libraries, BREC, and all the other separate entities. They all believe that their mission is most important. They would never voluntary cut back on their revenues on their own. They intend to spend the revenues as they see fit because they alone know best.”
The pressure placed on that board wasn’t about the Library believing its mission is “more important” than anyone else’s. It was about protecting the will of the voters. The Library’s dedicated millage was approved by the public for the sole purpose of funding the library system — not to backfill unrelated gaps in the general fund.
What happened is straightforward: elected officials attempted to redirect most of a voter-approved, restricted tax to uses the voters did not authorize. When the Library pushed back, it wasn’t because they think their mission outranks anyone else’s. It was because they are legally and ethically obligated to safeguard a dedicated revenue stream exactly as the voters intended.
Had the board accepted the original proposal, it would have gutted the EBR Parish Library System and violated the public trust. Calling that “self-importance” simply avoids acknowledging the real issue — a political attempt to repurpose restricted funds.
The Library didn’t fight for itself.
They fought for the voters who already decided where that money should go.
“This one paragraph demonstrates the main problem we have with the Libraries, BREC, and all the other separate entities. They all believe that their mission is most important. They would never voluntary cut back on their revenues on their own. They intend to spend the revenues as they see fit because they alone know best.”
The pressure placed on that board wasn’t about the Library believing its mission is “more important” than anyone else’s. It was about protecting the will of the voters. The Library’s dedicated millage was approved by the public for the sole purpose of funding the library system — not to backfill unrelated gaps in the general fund.
What happened is straightforward: elected officials attempted to redirect most of a voter-approved, restricted tax to uses the voters did not authorize. When the Library pushed back, it wasn’t because they think their mission outranks anyone else’s. It was because they are legally and ethically obligated to safeguard a dedicated revenue stream exactly as the voters intended.
Had the board accepted the original proposal, it would have gutted the EBR Parish Library System and violated the public trust. Calling that “self-importance” simply avoids acknowledging the real issue — a political attempt to repurpose restricted funds.
The Library didn’t fight for itself.
They fought for the voters who already decided where that money should go.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:57 pm to TeddyPadillac
If the library board were to tell the Mayor and Metro Council to "pound sand," the Council would first "fire," and then replace, the entire board.
Second, it is not the library board that brings proposals to the public and puts them on a ballot. It is a combination of the Metropolitan Council and Mayor-President, working together, to ultimately determine how and where public funds should be spent. Some spending items can be voted upon, and passed, at Council meetings. Others, such as this tax proposal, must be presented for a vote by the public, but it is this same Council who determines the tax/millage rate, how that tax money will be spent, and what language will be used when placing any item on a ballot.
Second, it is not the library board that brings proposals to the public and puts them on a ballot. It is a combination of the Metropolitan Council and Mayor-President, working together, to ultimately determine how and where public funds should be spent. Some spending items can be voted upon, and passed, at Council meetings. Others, such as this tax proposal, must be presented for a vote by the public, but it is this same Council who determines the tax/millage rate, how that tax money will be spent, and what language will be used when placing any item on a ballot.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 2:57 pm to tha real thang
quote:
by tha real thang
quote:
Ain't reading all that shite.
Ahh yes…found the person who has never been to a library.
And possibly middle school.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 3:23 pm to ronniep1
quote:This concept is foreign to too many people in Louisiana. They complain that, for example, the buildings on LSU's campus are in poor condition and receive inadequate maintenance.
preventive and routine maintenance service must be performed if the buildings do not become what we'd commonly call "a dump."
But then, when a public entity actually is fiscally responsible, and plans for and budgets adequate funding for maintenance, those same people complain that the entity is too flush with cash and should receive less funding.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 3:32 pm to ronniep1
quote:
If the library board were to tell the Mayor and Metro Council to "pound sand," the Council would first "fire," and then replace, the entire board.
I guess you have a good point there.
I do appreciate your honesty and information here. I know i've been a bit loud the last week opposing Thrive. While I do think the library system is antiquated and not needed as much as it is, I still appreciate how its run and what it offers to the citizens. I have no problem continuing to pay a property tax for the library system, just not at the rate it's currently getting. My overall issue is taxes that come from outside the city of BR being used on the city of BR. That has to stop.
quote:
Second, it is not the library board that brings proposals to the public and puts them on a ballot. It is a combination of the Metropolitan Council and Mayor-President, working together, to ultimately determine how and where public funds should be spent. Some spending items can be voted upon, and passed, at Council meetings. Others, such as this tax proposal, must be presented for a vote by the public, but it is this same Council who determines the tax/millage rate, how that tax money will be spent, and what language will be used when placing any item on a ballot.
Thank you for that. Didn't realize that.
This pisses me off
quote:
Regarding how the library system would have been decimated without agreeing to the millage "compromise," Mayor Edwards initial proposal was to put the Library System back into the General Fund, to provide $38 million for 2026 operations, and to take ALL of the Library's fund balance.
We really really really need to get rid of the City/Parish General Fund and elect a parish president and a separate mayor of BR.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 3:33 pm to Martini
quote:
The pressure placed on that board wasn’t about the Library believing its mission is “more important” than anyone else’s. It was about protecting the will of the voters. The Library’s dedicated millage was approved by the public for the sole purpose of funding the library system — not to backfill unrelated gaps in the general fund.
What happened is straightforward: elected officials attempted to redirect most of a voter-approved, restricted tax to uses the voters did not authorize. When the Library pushed back, it wasn’t because they think their mission outranks anyone else’s. It was because they are legally and ethically obligated to safeguard a dedicated revenue stream exactly as the voters intended.
Had the board accepted the original proposal, it would have gutted the EBR Parish Library System and violated the public trust. Calling that “self-importance” simply avoids acknowledging the real issue — a political attempt to repurpose restricted funds.
The Library didn’t fight for itself.
They fought for the voters who already decided where that money should go.
Well said.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 3:44 pm to Martini
quote:
The pressure placed on that board wasn’t about the Library believing its mission is “more important” than anyone else’s. It was about protecting the will of the voters. The Library’s dedicated millage was approved by the public for the sole purpose of funding the library system — not to backfill unrelated gaps in the general fund.
My comments have nothing to do with the election. It’s the fact that they can not act for the good of the whole. They won’t ever say they have more tax dollars than they need.
They will spend as much as they can justify and bank the rest.
It took pressure from the outside to get them agree to the “compromise”.
And the voters really had no say so. It was either renew the current millages, or not fund the libraries. What kind of choice is that?
If the Library Board was really looking out for the taxpayers, they would have lowered their requests and reduced the millages and funded a more lean system.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News