The Charter Commission has sought in its recent draft proposal (Harvard Press, Dec. 23) to “explore a radically simplified structure that would place executive powers firmly in the hands of the elected Board of Selectmen.” One aspect of the proposal calls for eliminating elected officials in favor of appointed officials on certain boards, including the Harvard Public Library Board of Trustees.
We, as trustees of the Harvard Public Library, believe that our job as advocates for the library is best done, as it is now, by an independent board elected by and responsible to the voters.
Like schools, libraries are committed to a tradition of intellectual freedom. As such, they should have some independence from political control. We believe that those who run for the office of library trustee are more likely to be committed to libraries’ traditional values than are political appointees. Although the library’s annual budget of more than $500,000 is only 2.5 percent of the town budget, an independent board with no competing objectives will provide the best oversight for that funding.
Small towns like Harvard across the state agree that an elected board is the proper library governance structure, with 90 percent of Massachusetts town libraries having elected trustees. The libraries with appointed trustee boards are generally in towns and cities with populations of more than 15,000.
Given that the library is the single cultural resource in town used year-round by the widest population, representing all ages and interests, we believe that the future of the Harvard Public Library continues to be best served by an elected board of trustees.
Gail Coolidge, chairwoman
Harvard Public Library Board of Trustees
