Community Forum: Reviewing Renovation Plans and Funding Options
On Tuesday, October 28, 2025, Morrisson-Reeves Library hosted a Community Forum at The Reid Center. We shared information about the library’s proposed renovation, funding needs, and the overall process. The forum’s goal was simple: to clarify common misunderstandings, share detailed information on facility issues and funding options, and answer your questions. We were thrilled that approximately 140 members of the public attended the community forum.
Below is a summary of the information presented. After the hour-long presentation, the floor was opened to questions, and fifteen community members participated in a robust discussion.
The recording of the forum and the presentation slides are available for further review at the bottom of this page.
The Renovation Timeline
Spring/Summer 2024: MRL hired Kevin McCurdy of LWC to perform a comprehensive facilities assessment, which identified major concerns with the 50-plus-year-old building. Early options for temporary measures were rejected in favor of seeking a full renovation for long-term solutions.
Winter 2024–Summer 2025: MRL began the master planning process, which involved working with the public to determine future needs. This included six community forums, two online surveys, social media engagement, and a dedicated webpage to gather feedback.
June 2025–August 2025: The Library engaged with the County Council, presenting the facility issues and the community-developed plan. MRL requested the Council’s approval for a library bond. The motion was tabled, citing a need for more information.
Understanding the Library’s Structure and Funding
It’s important to clarify how the library is funded:
- The Library is a government unit, not a non-profit organization. The Library Board is appointed, not elected, and relies on tax revenue (Property Tax/Levy and Local Income Tax/LIT) to operate.
- MRL has limited fiscal authority. We cannot change tax rates, spend beyond our annual budget, or approve our own bond. This authority rests with the elected County Council, which serves as MRL’s fiscal body.
- The law limits the amount MRL can save to 150% of its budget, which is not enough to fund a large capital project. Therefore, borrowing money through bonds is the primary funding method.
- The Library Board chose the Petition/Remonstrance bond approach due to the time-sensitive nature of the building issues, as this is faster than the Referendum process.
Facility Assessment Findings
The 2024 facility assessment identified several high-priority issues:
- Life Safety Issues: The building lacks a fire suppression system (sprinklers), a fire alarm system, and smoke detectors. Furthermore, there is deterioration of railings and concrete, and a lack of proper exits (egress), particularly on the lower level.
- ADA/Accessibility Concerns: The main ramp to the front entrance is too steep for today’s ADA requirements. The existing restrooms also do not meet current standards.
- Structural and Architectural Problems: There is significant water intrusion leading to interior finish damage. Masonry veneer deterioration and structural failure are evident, including rusting metal supports due to water not draining properly.
- End-of-Life Systems: All major systems—including HVAC, electrical, mechanical, plumbing fixtures, and the elevator—are approaching or have reached their end of life (50 years).
Proposed Plan and Renovation Cost
The proposed renovation plan utilizes more space for the public, moving the lower level from 40% public/60% staff usage to 80% public/20% staff usage.
The estimated cost for the full renovation is $23,815,000 ($448 per square foot). Importantly, this figure includes a $4 million contingency (20% of project scope), which is a necessary buffer to account for potential market fluctuations and unforeseen issues. If we remove the contingency, the base cost estimate drops to $373 per square foot.
Other Options Considered
The Board and architects considered several alternatives but found renovation to be the most fiscally responsible path.
- Move into another building: Finding a suitable 53,000 square foot space is challenging. Library structural load requirements are twice that of office buildings, meaning structural reinforcement.
- Tear down and rebuild: A new building of the same size would cost $31.4 million to $37.4 million (plus $500,000 for demolition), significantly more than the renovation. A half-sized new building would still cost $16 million to $19 million.
- Renovate only a portion of the building: This would reduce patron services and still require equipment (like electrical switchgear and chillers) sized to cover unused areas, limiting future use.
- Repairs only: The cost for a “repairs only” approach, focused on life safety and ADA fixes without master plan services, is still estimated at $14 million to $15 million. This would likely leave some systems antiquated and services identified in the master plan unavailable.
Financial Impact of the Proposed Bond
The proposed maximum borrowing amount for the bond is $18,720,000, to be repaid over a term not to exceed 20 years.
This financing would result in an estimated tax rate increase of 10.24 cents per $100 of assessed value.
What does this mean for Wayne Township taxpayers? For the median home value ($136,100), this bond would cost approximately $53.14 per year, or about $4.43 per month.
| Property Type | Annual Impact |
| Median Home Value ($136,100) | $53.14 |
| 100 Acres of Agricultural Land | $201.85 |
| $100,000 Commercial Property | $102.40 |
Next Steps
The Library Board will convene in the coming weeks to discuss the feedback received from the forum and determine the options to present to the Wayne County Council.
If the bond request is successful, MRL will proceed with the design work. If it fails, the board would need to consider a referendum (a public vote) in November 2026, which would extend the timeline. Failure to secure funding would force the Library to consider relocating indefinitely (incurring lease payments and retrofitting costs) or reducing current services within the existing structure to avoid problematic areas.
The Library Board emphasized its commitment to transparency at every step of this process and is committed to continuing in this way.
The presentation slides and the video transcript of the Community Forum are included below for further review.