The Flossmoor Village Board voted down a proposal Monday, May 18, to authorize up to $50,000 in repairs for the sinking first floor at the Flossmoor Public Library.

The discussion was tense between village trustees and library officials over who should pay for the work. The library has its own governing board, but its budget is from village funds.

The debate centered on a floor settlement issue first reported in February 2025 when library staff noticed portions of the first floor had begun dipping and separating from the wall baseboards. Village investigations later determined that clay backfill used during the library’s 2003-2004 construction had dried out and shrunk, creating voids beneath the slab foundation. One void measured more than 11 inches along the west wall, according to Public Works Director John Brunke.

Village staff recommended awarding the repair contract to Lincoln Company for $43,000, with authorization for costs up to $50,000 if additional polyurethane foam was needed during the stabilization process.

But the discussion quickly shifted from the engineering issue to a dispute over finances and responsibility under a 2006 intergovernmental agreement between the village and library boards. 

In a memo to village trustees, Village Manager Bridget Wachtel quoted the 2006 agreement that she said “clearly states: ‘The library shall be responsible for, make and control all repairs, rehabilitation and maintenance of the building and its components.” 

Wachtel also pointed to the library’s Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB 54) disclosures, arguing the library had enough available funds to cover the project. She said the library reported approximately $1.9 million in fund balance and had designated hundreds of thousands of dollars toward building-related contingencies.

Library Executive Director Jamie Paicely said the $1.9 million figure was not a reserve account, but rather the library’s total operating funds for the fiscal year that ended April 30. Paicely said $1,814,610 is the library’s current budget. 

Paicely told the Chronicle, “The only money that is unbudgeted is $130,319.” Roughly $7,500 in emergency reserves had already been spent on a gas pipe leak. The estimated $50,000 to repair the void under the foundation would take up about 40% of the remaining reserve, she said.

Several exchanges during the discussion grew tense, particularly during debates over the library’s finances and reserve funds. At one point, Trustee James Mitros interjected, “I know the budget,” as library officials attempted to explain the library’s GASB 54 figures.

Village Attorney Joseph Miller III also said he believed the agreement placed responsibility on the library.

“I think the language is all repairs of the building,” Miller said. “It does have maintenance, but in that same clause, it talks about the library being responsible for the repairs.” 

“I was not aware that they were going to be firing off questions at us,” Paicely said afterward. “I was under the assumption that the (village) meeting last night was going to be them approving the contract.”

Paicely also expressed frustration with how long the process had taken, saying the library first alerted the village to the issue in February 2025 but experienced months-long gaps between inspections and evaluations.

The library maintains the issue is structural, making it the responsibility of the village as owner of the building. Village officials, meanwhile, argued the agreement makes the library responsible regardless of whether the issue is categorized as maintenance or structural rehabilitation.

Several trustees voiced concern about the cost of potential litigation if the disagreement escalates further. Trustee Gary Daggett said preserving the relationship between the two taxing bodies was more important than the repair bill itself.

He said: “$50,000 dollars, it’s a lot of money, but the relationship is way more important to me than $50,000.”

Trustees also discussed possibly revising the nearly 20-year-old agreement to clarify responsibility for future structural issues.

Library officials said the next step will likely involve attorneys for both agencies determining legal responsibility for the project. In the meantime, the library plans to rearrange portions of the building and install additional security cameras while continuing normal operations.