Sanders eventually withdrew the petition, noting that the Kentucky General Assembly was set to address special taxing districts like this one this year, which she felt would likely address the problem as she saw it.
When asked for comment about Senate Bill (SB) 20 on Tuesday, Sanders noted that she wasn’t familiar with the legislation itself yet.
However, “I’d be for that,” she said when given a summary of the bill. “I think (the board members) need more oversight. As it is, they select whomever they want and nobody has to approve it. The judge-executive signs off on it, but that’s just a formality.
“That (bill) sounds like what I’d be in favor of,” she added. “They’d still select two names (for appointees), but the court and judge would have to approve. As it stands now, the court doesn’t have any say.”
Those who opposed Sanders’ petition drive — which threatened to inadvertently shutter the library’s doors because of the library being in debt — again see things differently.
The blog site for the group Friends of the Pulaski County Library (friendsofthepcl.wordpress.com) features a post urging individuals to contact their legislators and tell them to say no to SB 20. The legislation “will allow local political influence to change how library board members are appointed,” reads the blog. “This bill will only harm our library system.”
The blog also mentions that February 20 is “Library Legislative Day” in which library supporters and personnel are encouraged to go to Frankfort and let their “voice be heard” by legislators about these issues.
Keeney herself said that should the bill pass, she doesn’t think there would be any problems working with Bullock and the court.
“He stated to me that he’s a huge library supporter,” she said of Bullock. “I think we could work together.”