By Igor Studenkov | Bugle Staff
nweditor@buglenewspapers.com
@NilesILNews
Acting Mayor Marty Maloney and Firth Ward Ald. Daniel Knight sought to address residents’ complaints about the Park Ridge Public Library Board’s recent decision to add a controversial new fee.
During its Jan. 19 meeting, the library board voted 5-3 to impose a $10 per hour fee on “two or more individuals meeting in the library in the course of providing or receiving any goods or services for profit.”
Most notably, the policy would apply to tutors.
The patrons who fall under that category would be required to register with the library and sign in and out whenever they use the library to meet with clients. Library staff would also have the right to ask patrons whether or not they are conducting business.
The sign-in portion of the policy will take effect Feb. 1, and the library will start charging fees March 1. The library board has been discussing this proposal since the fall of 2015.
Park Ridge’s Jan. 25 committee of the whole meeting was the first time city officials met in an official capacity since the library vote.
Maloney said he wanted to address the complaints he’s been receiving. The acting mayor said a number of residents have contacted him to urge him to remove library board members or otherwise do something to reverse the board’s decision.
“As a mayor, I do have the authority to remove a [board] member for misconduct, and I don’t feel that meets the threshold for misconduct,” Maloney said.
He added that he wanted to avoid interfering with the decisions of another governing board because it would undermine its independence and could lead to abuses of power.
“It’s the right thing to do, contrary to the opinion of a handful of people who think it signals weakness or indifference,” Maloney said.
The acting mayor also strongly denied rumors that the library wanted to drive away patrons, the city wanted to demolish the library to clear the way for new development and that the library board implemented the policy on behalf of one tutoring company.
“That’s not true,” he said. “That’s not even remotely true.”
Knight added that he understood why the public didn’t like the board’s decision, but said he didn’t see any issues with the way library trustees reached it.
“It couldn’t be done in a more open and transparent way,” he said. “They let everyone speak who wanted, they listened, they asked questions.”
Knight added that the board didn’t reach the decision lightly.
“It was easily a six- to seven-month process where the public was invited to speak,” he said. “I’m not sure what more they could have done. The governing body, in this case the library board, implemented the policy they saw fit.”