The Library is required by law to offer Non-Resident borrowing privileges to people who live outside of the Library’s service area on an annual basis. We typically do this in June of each year, but I think doing it in May is prudent as we will have the audit and the architects’ presentation happening in June.
The law stipulates that a Non-Resident must use the Library closest to their residence, so most of our Non-Resident borrowers come from the area of unincorporated Palos Heights (approximately) between Ridgeland Avenue to the west, Central Avenue to the east, College Drive to the north, and 135th Street to the South. This service is to be paid for by that non-resident as calculated by one of three methods, although only two of these methods are available to us. Most of what is in this resolution is non-negotiable. The only real issue here is which of these calculations the Library wishes to employee in determining the Non-Resident rate for the next year.
Option 1: Historically, the Library has opted to use the “general mathematical formula.” This formula takes our property tax revenues from the previous fiscal year, divides that by the total local population (which gives us an average tax dollar per resident value), and multiplies by the average household size (which gives us an average tax dollar per household value). The result is the average amount that was paid per household by residents for the use of the Library in the previous fiscal year.
Advantages of this method:
- it is very simple and straightforward for both staff and patrons
- previous Non-Resident card purchasers are already familiar with this method
Disadvantages of this method:
- It isn’t necessarily the fairest method on an individual basis because to use an average value means that the Non-Resident isn’t paying the same amount that they would pay if they were a Palos Heights resident. If they live on a less expensive property than the average for Palos Heights, the average household amount is more than they would pay if they lived on that property within the City. If they live on a more expensive property, they would pay less for Library services than if they lived on that same property within the City.
Option 2: This option involves calculating a Non-Resident rate for each individual Non-Resident borrower using either the valuation of the property assessment (for homeowners) or a minimum of 15 percent (or a higher value that the Board is free to set) of the monthly rent (for renters).
Advantages of this method:
- It is fairer to each individual Non-Resident as the fee they pay is exactly what they would pay were their property located within the City. Renters and those living on lower-than-average-value properties won’t pay a disproportionately high rate and vice versa for those living on higher-value properties.
Disadvantages of this method:
- It is more cumbersome for both staff and patrons. Staff have to make the calculation for each Non-Resident applying for a card. Patrons have to gather and present more documentation than they would otherwise, i.e. a property tax bill, and they might find sharing that information to be invasive. This might be a turnoff for current and past Non-Resident users as they are accustomed to a much simpler process that does not involve the disclosure of personal financial information.
- It is more difficult for the Board as you all will have to decide what rate is fair for renters to pay, i.e. determining what percentage of a person’s monthly rent represents a value that is low enough to not be overly burdensome to someone who isn’t in a financially strong enough position to own their own home but is high enough to be fair to residents of Palos Heights who are paying an average of $235.28 per household for the use of Library services.
Recommendation: I recommend using Option 1 because it is the simpler solution due to the following considerations:
- This is the method that we have always used, and it is easier to continue a longstanding previous practice than to change it if there is no compelling reason for making a change.
- Monetarily, the difference to the Library should be close to nothing because the average amount paid using the second option should average out to be the same as the first.
The second method requires a bit more time and effort on the part of Library staff and collecting and bringing in more paperwork on the part of non-resident patrons. It is also more intrusive as it requires patrons to share sensitive financial information with us. It would also require training staff to accurately make this calculation and having someone check after-the-fact that it was done correctly.
