When is a lifetime not a lifetime

[Andy A]

If the Walton County Library system offered "lifetime" memberships in the past, they should be honored. People paid for them believing they would be honored as long as presented. It is alright to stop issuing them but it is ludicrous to revoke "lifetime" memberships already issued.

 

[idlewind]

I think Shallows is saying the library was operated by a different entity when these folks got the cards. Maybe a compromise could be found ; they could pay an additional fee to help with the increased costs associated with the library.

Reasonable people should be able to see that if they wish to continue to be provided with an up-to-date library, $8.00 paid years ago to a volunteer organization is not helping the cause much. And I do not think there will be a groundswell of taxpayer support for free services to anyone.

 

[meigsart]

When I was in Daytona the library charged $35 a year to transients. Daytona also had a huge library system with numerous branches. You can renew books online. Hopefully with this extra income and updated system that will be considered.

 

[North Lake]

The BCC is going to consider this again at their meeting on Jan 27. See http://www.co.walton.fl.us/administration/CommissionMeetings/januarytwentyseven/i1b.pdf
for more info.

Yes the winter visitors do contribute to our economy; but they don't pay property taxes, bed taxes can't be used for the library, gas taxes can't be used for the library, and the amount of sales tax returned to Walton County that can be allocated to the library in the budget is small...very small.

We do offer an on-line system where books can be reserved, rechecked, and the collection browsed in all four libraries in our system. You can access it at Walton County Library.

As SN pointed out, the "lifetime" commitment was made by a private entity that is no longer in business so to speak. Since the county began running the libraries in 2000, we have been fortunate to be able to share the library service at essentially no cost to our winter visitors - particularly those who paid $8 up to 23 years ago. Those times obviously are changing. 90 people have paid the new $35 fee (as of last Wednesday), so I don't think there's going to be a groundswell of winter visitors not coming to our area because of the library fee. They recognize the great value of our libraries, and are willing to contribute their fair share to support them.

 

[wrobert]

Yes the winter visitors do contribute to our economy; bed taxes can't be used for the library, gas taxes can't be used for the library, and the amount of sales tax returned to Walton County that can be allocated to the library in the budget is small...very small.

Tell me you are not serious here. They do not pay property taxes? Come on now. Just where is it that they stay when they are down here? What do you think the owners do with the rent that they collect? I imagine some share of it goes to pay the property taxes. If snowbirds quit coming you will see even more empty buildings, more foreclosures, and fewer property taxes than what we are already seeing.

And if gas taxes did not pay for the roads then we would have to allocate a larger percentage of property taxes, which would result in fewer dollars available for the library. The same goes for sales tax.

If the library feels a need to put into place some sort of a system, that is fine. But we should not insult our visitors by indicating that they are not paying their share and we should do what we said we were going to do years ago, no matter how painful it is.

Please explain this private entity statement. The library was not part of the government until 2000? If that is the case how did the BCC pass the proposal in the first place?

Interesting that the BCC is willing to go back on it's word for $3150. I wonder if anyone has ever sat down and calculated the processing costs for collecting the $35 as it goes through the system.

If $35 is the "fair share" that needs to be paid for using the library, what are we doing with all of the other residents that live here full time but pay really do pay no property taxes? Will the library be identifying those individuals and asking them to pay their "fair share" or are they just going to single out those that do not live here?

 

[idlewind]

Tell me you are not serious here. They do not pay property taxes? Come on now. Just where is it that they stay when they are down here? What do you think the owners do with the rent that they collect? I imagine some share of it goes to pay the property taxes. If snowbirds quit coming you will see even more empty buildings, more foreclosures, and fewer property taxes than what we are already seeing.

And if gas taxes did not pay for the roads then we would have to allocate a larger percentage of property taxes, which would result in fewer dollars available for the library. The same goes for sales tax.

If the library feels a need to put into place some sort of a system, that is fine. But we should not insult our visitors by indicating that they are not paying their share and we should do what we said we were going to do years ago, no matter how painful it is.

Please explain this private entity statement. The library was not part of the government until 2000? If that is the case how did the BCC pass the proposal in the first place?

Interesting that the BCC is willing to go back on it's word for $3150. I wonder if anyone has ever sat down and calculated the processing costs for collecting the $35 as it goes through the system.

If $35 is the "fair share" that needs to be paid for using the library, what are we doing with all of the other residents that live here full time but pay really do pay no property taxes? Will the library be identifying those individuals and asking them to pay their "fair share" or are they just going to single out those that do not live here?

Robert, you are correct that visitors drive a large part of our economy. On most issues I stand foresquare for encouraging all the visitors we can get. But I also understand that if we do not want to increase taxes and want continued services, income must be raised. That includes the Library.
I have been told that these passes were issued by a non-profit group that ran the Library until the BCC took it over. This covers the Costal Branch only, I do not know what role, if any, the cities of DeFuniak Springs and Freeport had in operating their libraries.
Maybe the right thing to do is honor the few 8 dollar passes still out there and begin selling new ones for the 35 dollar fee.

 

[wrobert]

Maybe the right thing to do is honor the few 8 dollar passes still out there and begin selling new ones for the 35 dollar fee.

Now we may be getting somewhere. Seems like the south Walton library was ran a bit different a few years back. But yes, honor the passes that were sold, and then if you want to do something different in the future, do it. I agree that it takes money to do these functions. And if the powers that run Walton County want to be one of those groups that taxes others, that have no say, instead of stepping up to the plate and doing the properly funding the system, so be it. But right now we are talking $3K and I find it hard to imagine that this $3K is going to cause a severe cut in services or a change in the basic function of the library. What I fear is happening is this $35 fee is being used to better control those that use the library. Making it just a wee bit harder for them to afford, so we can have it all to ourselves. That, my friend, is a bit sad.

 

[scooterbug44]

If people are going to stop visiting Sowal because we charge them $35 a year to use the library w/ its many services, I say 'don't let the doorknob hit you in the arse on the way out'. Those will not be the visitors who are putting $ into the community, they're the ones stealing splenda packets and lightbulbs.

I can understand getting upset because your "lifetime" library card is not being honored, but these are also tough times and budget cuts are affecting services across the board.

Plus, even as a resident I pay more than that a year in late fees.

 

[Matt J]

Now we may be getting somewhere. Seems like the south Walton library was ran a bit different a few years back. But yes, honor the passes that were sold, and then if you want to do something different in the future, do it. I agree that it takes money to do these functions. And if the powers that run Walton County want to be one of those groups that taxes others, that have no say, instead of stepping up to the plate and doing the properly funding the system, so be it. But right now we are talking $3K and I find it hard to imagine that this $3K is going to cause a severe cut in services or a change in the basic function of the library. What I fear is happening is this $35 fee is being used to better control those that use the library. Making it just a wee bit harder for them to afford, so we can have it all to ourselves. That, my friend, is a bit sad.

So a new entity that as a courtesy honored old "lifetime" cards issued by another entity should continue to honor them?

I could have sworn you were a republican?

 

[DuneAHH]

IMHO, the idea of "Lifetime" anything is a rather idealistic notion.

"Lifetime" is a relative perspective. WHOSE Lifetime?
In practical reality, Lifetime Warranties/Guarantees more frequently relate to the grantor's lifetime... NOT the grantee's lifetime.

Unrealistic expectations cause many a heartache. Children grow up, people die, concrete crumbles, hair turns gray or falls out, diamonds get scratched, and lifetime library cards don't last forever because everything is mutable.