THUNDER BAY — City officials are keeping mum on the Thunder Bay Public Library’s claim the municipality never delivered over $20 million in funding it included in its own spending plans over the past 15 years.
The library has highlighted the claim in an aggressive advocacy campaign, after city administration proposed cutting its capital funding by 15 per cent, or around $120,000, in the 2023 city budget.
Library CEO Richard Togman said the city’s failure to provide adequate infrastructure funding is challenging the library's ability to simply keep its branches open, and also impacts its collections budget that covers materials including books.
City council has tentatively restored the library's capital funding this year, though the decision won’t be set in stone until a final vote to approve the budget on Feb. 6.
During a budget meeting this week in which council signalled support for nearly $4 million in increased spending on police, several councillors suggested the answer to the library’s funding shortfall is not for the city to step up with more dollars, but for the library to consider cutting branches.
Coun. Brian Hamilton hinted the library should consider closing locations so it could offer better service in fewer branches.
“Are we spreading our resources too thin?” he asked. “I think by your own admission, the library from a capital perspective is actually almost unsustainable, given your ginormous capital needs.”
Council then asked administration to report back on how Thunder Bay’s four library branches and its per capita level of funding for the library compares to similarly sized municipalities.
The city’s long-term financial forecast does plan for some increases in future years, showing capital funding to the library rising slightly to $850,000 in 2024, then to $3.8 million in both 2025 and 2026, before returning to $850,000 in subsequent years.
As Togman points out, however, the city has repeatedly planned for millions in investments in library infrastructure in future years, then failed to deliver.
The city’s 2022 budget, for example, forecast $2.85 million in capital spending in 2023, but by the time city administration delivered its recommended budget, that was reduced to $688,000.
Togman said that approach has robbed the library of over $20 million in capital dollars the city included in its financial forecasts over the past 15 years, based on a capital plan developed by the library in 2007.
“That capital plan was … accepted by city council, and then incorporated into the city’s long-term capital forecast,” Togman said.
The library says only $44,000 of that was ever delivered.
City administration declined requests for comment.
Togman also suggested city administration has run afoul of the Public Libraries Act in how it presents the library budget to city council each year.
He said while the budget proposed by the library’s board of directors is supposed to be passed on to council directly for consideration, administration has repeatedly presented a version modified with suggested cuts.
“That’s just a budget process issue, but one that has led to this very systemic underfunding of the library system,” he said.
“It’s something we’re now working with the city manager’s office to correct in terms of the proper process under the Public Libraries Act legislation, where we can go directly to council and properly present our ask, and then it’s up to our elected officials to determine how much money we get, not city administration.”
A 2021 facilities assessment by TBT Engineering identified $1.4 million in immediate maintenance needs at the three library-owned branches. It also rents space at the County Fair Plaza.
That includes work like replacing an electrical panel at the Brodie branch coming up on 10 years past its life cycle, replacing fire alarm and emergency lighting systems, and more than 40-year-old windows at Waverley.
The library receives only about $300,000 a year from the city for physical infrastructure, Togman said, with other parts of the capital budget directed elsewhere, including book buying.
“We’re kind of deep in the hole now in terms of core needs, and this isn’t including any of the other infrastructure needs, like our IT systems or computer hardware or basic furnishings around the building — you know, replacing 40-year-old carpeting,” he said. “This is simply core infrastructure relating to the physical upkeep of the buildings to make sure they’re safe and properly functioning.”
Coun. Michael Zussino, appointed as council’s new representative on the library board, said he accepts the library’s argument its capital needs have been neglected, particularly in the downtown branches.
“I was surprised [by] the underfunding of it over the past 20 years,” he said. “The ask has been there for a long time and the delivery has not, and so you fall more into a deficit year after year... and then it gets to the point where I'm like, how do we fix this?”
“Then it becomes millions and millions of dollars. It's just like your house — if you don't invest X amount each year to maintain that, it becomes a staggering bill. Then you have to change windows, change the roof, change lots of different things at one time.”
In defending the library's value, Togman noted the library ranked first among all municipal services in the city's Citizen Satisfaction Report, tied with the fire service with a 94 per cent satisfaction rating.
Demand for service grew by over 27 per cent during the pandemic, the library reports.
“We really need our elected officials to understand the value the library has for the community, and the way it essentially should be treated and ranked versus other kinds of demands on public infrastructure,” Togman said.
Council is set to approve the library’s request for a 3.5 per cent — $225,000 — increase to operating funding from the city this year, rising to around $6.6 million.
That accounts for over 90 per cent of the library's budget, typical for Ontario library systems. The library also receives about $227,500 from the province, and generates around $400,000 in fees.
The library said its operating budget has increased by only 0.02 per cent over the last 15 years, after accounting for inflation.
During Wednesday's meeting, one councillor repeated a false claim about the library's budget that previously influenced a vote to cut its funding.
Coun. Shelby Ch'ng incorrectly said cuts to the library's capital budget would have no impact on its ability to purchase materials, suggesting books are funded through its operating budget.
“A lot of the commentary was regarding that we’re not giving the library money to purchase books … However, the 15 per cent cut was actually to capital.”
The same false claim was used by council to justify a cut to the library’s capital budget in 2020, in the midst of a highly charged dispute between library and city leadership.
During those budget deliberations, Coun. Albert Aiello made a similar suggestion to explain his decisive vote for a $50,000 capital cut.
“The cut was on capital, so there will be no change as far as the ability to buy books and licenses and stuff like that,” Aiello stated at the time.
Ch'ng acknowledged the error in an email, saying she stood corrected after Togman had responded that books are, in fact, funded through the capital budget.
Citing the large “amount of emails and publicity” over the proposed 15 per cent cut, Ch’ng asked Togman to communicate to library patrons council had restored the funds, “so that … council isn’t looking like big meanies taking away kids’ books.”
