Libraries return to the ballot box following a COVID-impacted pause

During COVID-related shutdowns, library boards had a difficult time holding meetings to conduct normal business, let alone engage in the detailed planning and discussions that are necessary before going to the ballot. It was even more difficult to engage with other community-based organizations, colleagues in education, and the business sector when society was so thoroughly disrupted. But the library sector is beginning to recover from that pause. Back in 2021, we saw fewer libraries on the ballot (89) than at any other time in recent memory. In 2022, with 175 ballot questions, the total number returned to closer to normal. But it is important to note that—as in 2021—most operating questions in 2022 were renewals. When most referenda are simply renewals, the sector continues to leave vital new funding for salaries, collections, programs, and technology off the table.

Overall in 2022, there were 175 ballot questions on the primaries and midterms for 164 individual libraries. Of these, 134 were for operations and 32 were for building initiatives, while the remaining nine focused on the library’s governance (e.g., becoming a district). There was one statewide ballot measure in New Mexico for the state aid General Obligation Bond (GO Bond) package that passed handily. Fully 87 percent of operating questions passed, which is on par with the 10-year running average of 90 percent.

Ballot questions asking for new funding are always the most difficult, with only eight out of 11 passing. The percentage of operating budget votes that passed in the South and West was considerably lower than in the Northeast and Midwest, where the libraries are smaller and more localized. Ohio and Michigan combined account for more than half (92) of all the questions on the ballot throughout the year.

Large urban libraries continue to be supported by their voters, with several major American cities approving funding for library operations. Denver passed Referred Question 2L, a new levy that will generate $36 million annually. San Francisco voted for Measure F, which will continue the Library Preservation Fund charter through 2048. Voters across the Toledo–Lucas County Library service area passed Issue 11, a renewal of a 3.7 mil five-year operating levy.

Other highlights include the enactment of the first local option 10-year levy for the Monroeville Public Library in Ohio, an increase in the sales tax in Mendocino County, CA, for library operations, and the removal of tax caps on the South Routt Library District in Oak Creek, CO. Unfortunately, Adair County Public Library, MO, failed to pass its first new tax increase since 1986, while Ionia, MI, continues to defeat new operational millages even as the percentage of support increases each election.

New Mexico’s biennial GO Bond for Libraries passed with over 63 percent support and will provide state aid for public, academic, school, and tribal libraries. The authorized amount was increased by the legislature from $9 million to over $19 million following a campaign by library stakeholders to expand its impact. The largest margin of victory this year looks like it was for the Kellogg-Hubbard Library in Montpelier, VT, which garnered an 88.26 percent approval to spend $395,696 in fiscal year 2022–23.

Building initiatives pass at a lower rate than operational levies, and in 2022 construction and renovation questions saw mixed results with 56 percent passing, which is well below the 10-year average of 67 percent. In Texas, Houston voters endorsed Prop F, a $26 million improvement bond, and Fort Worth approved $12.5 million via Prop C bonds. The Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore is now authorized to issue debt for infrastructure projects. The town of Belmont, MA, approved a $39 million debt extension to construct a new library. Salem, OR, approved a bond package that includes $7.5 million for two mixed-use library and affordable housing projects. Lyon Township, MI, will be building a new $12.8 million library after voter ratification. This follows the defeat of a similar project in 2018. Voters ended an impasse for Santa Cruz Public Libraries, CA, when Measure O, a voter initiative that would have halted construction of a new downtown library, was defeated. However, voters in Chesterfield Township, MI, again rejected a library building project that first went to vote in 2020.

Governing questions are always difficult to define as a win or loss, especially in 2022 when several measures to restructure or even defund a library were on the ballot. In Michigan, voters established an independent board for the Leelanau Township Library but failed to approve a district for Millstadt. Boulder Public Library, CO, became the newest independent library district in the country when voters approved establishing a district with new boundaries beyond the city limits. Southington, CT, ratified a charter amendment that puts responsibility for the library and museum’s personnel and finances under the town manager. The town of Morton, WA, voted to leave the Timberland Regional Library, a five-county system. Johnson City, OR, voters declined to be annexed into the Library District of Clackamas County. The community of Minisink Valley, NY, will continue to be the only school district in New York to not have an independent library.

BOOK BANS ARE AN EMERGING FACTOR

All decisions to fund libraries are inherently political. In politics, the factors that connect voters to both candidates and the issues live at the intersection of individual values and group identity. Candidates or issue campaigns need to demonstrate how they are in line with the value system of a voter before the voter will back the candidate or cause. Likewise, for voters to identify with a party—or even as an independent—the identity that the party espouses is a proxy for the way voters validate the legitimacy of a ballot question or down-ticket candidate. As our colleagues at PEN America note in their September 2022 “Banned in the USA Survey,” the majority of book bans are targeting books with LGBTQIA+ themes and narratives, or stories of BIPOC communities. Some book banners succeeded in using language around concern for children alongside messages painting the library and librarians as negligent, or even as predators, as a wedge issue on election day.

In certain places, censorship crusaders use 2022 ballot questions as the logical endpoint of book banning campaigns. The Glen Carbon Centennial Library District, IL, saw an advisory referendum pass that would forbid taxpayer funding of Drag Queen Story Times. For libraries like Craighead County Jonesboro Public Library (CCJPL), AR, and the Patmos Library in Jamestown Township, MI, the efforts by anti-LGBTQIA+ activists to defund the library succeeded. In both places, demands to ban books had been turned down by the library after following proper policy and legal procedures. In both places, the anti-access forces pivoted to ballot campaigns to defund the library. Both employed ugly, hateful, and inaccurate images about the library and attacked the reputations of librarians. These campaigns used incendiary labels like “groomer” and “pedophile” printed on yard signs, posted on social media, and spread around town. Both campaigns received national attention when author and library champion Nora Roberts made major donations to the libraries. Unfortunately, both defunding efforts succeeded. The Patmos Library levy expired on January 1 and the CCJPL budget is now cut by 50 percent.

These types of defunding efforts did not succeed everywhere. In Gateway Borough, AK, the Ketchikan Public Library budget survived a targeted push by book banners to remove funding for the library. Likewise, anti-LGBTQIA+ campaigners were active in opposition to the Parkersburg & Wood County Public Library, WV, levy renewal that passed in November 2022 after failing in May. In a year with so many asterisks, not all defunding questions were driven by censorship. In Westmoreland County, PA, an anti-tax group called the Friends of the Norwin Library Reform launched a campaign to defund libraries in the county. While that group was not associated with censorship, it is exemplary of the unstable political situation in certain areas. Not all defunding campaigns were negative, either. The Central Arkansas Library System voluntarily asked voters to eliminate a surplus levy in order to right-size its operations.

We know from OCLC’s “From Awareness to Funding” surveys of American voters that support for libraries on a generic ballot question declined from 74 percent in 2008 to 55 percent in 2018, the most recent year of the survey. In that same period, appreciation for librarians dropped for key factors such as trust, appreciation, and approachability. Those declines happened in a political climate influenced by the Great Recession, the rise of the Tea Party, and the first half of the Trump administration—and prior to COVID shutdowns, fights over masking rules during the pandemic, and, most important, the current unrest over content, censorship, and book bans in school and public libraries.

If we are coming out of a COVID-influenced pause in ballot questions, we cannot allow new hesitancies over book bans and censorship campaigns to slow down our return to the ballot. If 2022 results are any indication, support for libraries by local voters remains very high across the country. But the American electorate is unsettled and unsure in many places. In a September 2022 voter survey by the EveryLibrary Institute, we learned that 95 percent of Democrats, 80 percent of independents, and 53 percent of Republicans are against book bans and consider book bans when voting.

We also learned that only 51 percent of voters are absolutely against book bans and censorship. Eight percent of voters are perfectly willing to ban books and say so outright. The remaining 41 percent of voters are persuadable that certain books at certain times could be banned. They are most uncomfortable with books about sex, sexuality, and gender identity. Books about our history of racial animosity and unrest are a close second.

The lesson of 2022 election days for libraries is that they must be the first to defend themselves and the first to define themselves. Library leaders need to be very aware and active in the face of potential or ongoing book bans, censorship, and anti-LGBTQIA+ actions. Campaigners from Michigan to Arkansas and Pennsylvania to Alaska have shown that librarians, library workers, and the library can be labeled as the source of danger for children even as they claim the mantle of defending free speech.

John Chrastka is Executive Director of EveryLibrary, the national political action committee for libraries.