30-01-2025
Residents at special meeting want Lodi Library kept under local control
Jan. 30—Residents came to the Lodi City Council's special Tuesday meeting in full force to vehemently oppose a proposal to give up control of the local library.
More than a dozen people urged the city to continue operating the Lodi Public Library as it has done for more than a century, rather than enter into a contract with the Stockton-San Joaquin County Public Library system.
Lodi's library is the only one among the county's eight that is not a part of the SSJCPL.
Residents who spoke against joining the county system said they feared the community would lose unique classes and programs created by previous library directors.
Brian Campbell, president of the Lodi Public Library Board of Trustees, said any change made to how the library operates is going to be permanent or extremely costly to roll back.
He noted the City of Tracy had difficulty trying to retake control of its library in 2012 after joining the SSJCPL, and that the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors ultimately denied the request after a back-and-forth with the Stockton City Council.
"Once an activity is given to Stockton, it does not come back," he said. "We lose control over how we invest in the library, and how it serves the community. We would no longer have discretion over programs and materials. When the (county) system is doing well, we'll benefit greatly. But when it's doing poorly, the library also does poorly and we won't have a say in the matter.
Trustee Eve Melton reminded the council that the city passed Measure L in 2018, the half-cent sales tax that generates $5.4 million in general revenue, with some of that allocated to the library.
Melton said residents did not intend for that revenue to be sent to Stockton or San Joaquin County to oversee library services.
She also urged the council to investigate the issues the county has had with the City of Stockton managing the library system.
"There have been numerous reports about the lack of transparency on how money was allocated and how money was spent by the city," she said. "Even to the point where they considered privatizing the library over letting Stockton continue to run the system."
The council was presented with three options regarding the library's future, which included contracting with the SSJCPL, merging it with Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services or continue as is with some internal adjustments.
Joining the county system would save the city some $580,000 in annual operational costs and eliminate the director position, which is currently held on an interim basis.
The directors' responsibilities would be divided between an SSJCPL library manager that oversees the county's seven other branches and the deputy community services director-city librarian for the City of Stockton.
In addition, a larger shared catalog would give users access to all materials throughout the system, including a wider selection of digital services and eBooks, as well as a simpler process for placing holds and having items delivered to the library.
If the city were to combine the library with parks and rec, the city would save about $150,000 annually and the library director position would be converted to a deputy director position under the absorbing department. Staff said many cities across the country have opted to combine library departments with services that provide similar enrichment and activities and that have shared users.
Absorbing the library into parks and rec would provide better financial sustainability than the current operating model, staff said, adding that there are opportunities for co-programming with recreational activities.
This option would allow the city to retain control of the library, but it would increase the workload of an already very busy parks and rec department, staff said.
If the city were to continue operating the library as before, it would need to make small improvements such as expanding community programming, modernizing technology, adding a librarian position and creating clear documentation for the board of trustees.
While the other two options would save the city in operating costs, this one would require as much as $200,000 in annual spending, staff said.
It was recommended by consulting firm Baker Tilly, which created an assessment report for the city, to conduct a review of all library job descriptions to ensure qualifications match positions if library management changes aren't pursued. It also recommended requiring librarian associates to actively pursue a master's degree in library science.
According to staff, the city attorney advised that joining the county system or PRCS may require voter approval on a future ballot.
Councilman Ramon Yepez said one of his campaign priorities was to improve the library.
While Baker Tilly's assessment offered some good recommendations — such as making sure staff is qualified and creating clear documentation for the board of trustees — he said pursuing a contract with SSJPCL was absurd.
"If we go with (that option), we need to go to the voters," he said. "This is going to be a city-wide election that's going to cost a lot of money. The residents are not going to support this. To me, it's just a waste of money."
Councilman Mikey Hothi said he thought the library staff did a lot of great work, and that many of the events created over the last few years had improved the facility.
He said transferring its operations to the county was not one of his resolutions for 2025.
"I feel like this is an opportunity for us to continue and elevate the library's work and figure out some cost-saving measures," he said. "There is some good information here to keep the conversation going, but I get the sense (a contract with the county) is not the right direction."
The council did not take action Tuesday night, as the discussion will be brought to a future meeting.
