COMMENTARY | Community Voice Raises Concerns Over County’s Proposed Library Contract

In a recent conversation held in her downtown Front Royal office, Sue Laurence laid out her concerns about the proposed 10-year contract between Warren County and Library Systems & Services (LS&S), the out-of-state, for-profit company selected by a Board of Supervisors majority to potentially replace Samuels Public Library.

Taking refuge indoors from the heat instead of her usual bench outside—Sue Laurence, who has authored several letters to the editor and closely tracked recent county meetings, arrived with a copy of the LS&S contract, thoroughly marked in yellow highlighter. “There are a lot of things in this agreement that probably need to be looked at by more than just me,” she said.

At the June 3 board meeting, the contract was on the agenda but was ultimately delayed after a motion to postpone was approved unanimously. Laurence, who had initially planned to address contract specifics at the meeting, explained, “Time is three minutes… some people said, no, no, read your letter to the editor, which everybody’s already read. So then I got anxious. I felt like I couldn’t breathe or talk, and I felt really bad about it.”

Among her many concerns is the county’s legal ability to transfer the Samuels Library building to LS&S while the current lease—issued in 2008 for $1 per year—still has 14 years remaining. “They can’t really just go evict Samuels for being in a building that they’re paying rent on,” Laurence said. “And Samuels certainly has the funds to pay the rent for the next 14 years.”

Laurence pointed to the now-expired Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), which previously allowed the county to handle certain repairs at the library. “When that memorandum dies, then it reverts back to the original,” she said, referencing the lease terms. According to Laurence, the county’s previous support with maintenance may have caused some confusion. “They said, we’ve got the equipment, we’ve got the people, it’s gonna cost us less than it would for you to do those yourself. So under the memorandum, they said, we’ll do the repairs.”

Reviewing the new contract, Laurence noted that the county, not LS&S, would pay for all maintenance and repairs on the building. “Which they’re not doing now,” she said. She also observed that LS&S is requesting the same funding levels Samuels has had for years, with no increases.

State funding is another concern. “Are they actually gonna get state funding with the way things are going in our federal government these days?” she asked. Laurence said the deadline for requesting those funds for the next fiscal year had already passed before LS&S could qualify. “They’re not the library, so they can’t really request funds.”

The pay scale listed in the contract also caught her attention. “They, in their agreement, say they’re gonna pay minimum wage (except for a few positions), and the county pays any increase in that,” she said. (Samuels currently starts employees at $15 per hour)

Laurence raised concerns about whether the contract ensures enough transparency for the public. “Maintaining complete, accurate, and transparent record keeping of expenditures, revenues, and fund balances, except that they’re a private company,” she said. “We can’t FOIA anything from them.”

The LS&S contract includes a provision that would allow the company to subcontract services. Laurence said, “They may subcontract or delegate portions of the service. To me, that means they can bring in anybody to do anything.”

She also raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest, noting that LS&S could purchase materials from vendors it’s connected to. “That 10% markup that goes directly to the company,” she said. “My understanding in doing a little bit of research into this company is that Ellington Capital Partners owns them, and they also have another sister company that provides the books.”

Though LS&S claims to offer comparable services, Laurence said Samuels already distributes books throughout the county and is deeply embedded in the community. “We also have horses, and they can do as they did back in the Depression era,” she added with dry humor, referencing bookmobile services LS&S included in its proposal.

Laurence also questioned who would oversee the library’s collection under the proposed contract. “They also have the right to, with county board approval, remove any books. Take any books, move any books, buy any books,” she said. She noted that those managing the library would control circulation data going forward.

Laurence also criticized the process that led to the current proposal. “They seem to be rushing to make decisions on things that could absolutely spend a little bit of time. If it takes a couple of weeks, if it takes until the next regular meeting, is that a problem? Is anything gonna change between now and then?”

She questioned the legitimacy and openness of the county-appointed Warren County Library Board, which is set to review the LS&S proposal. “Is that the one that was appointed by our Board of Supervisors but not elected?” she asked. “Who got to apply for that?… I didn’t even see anything about applying for that.”

With public opposition mounting and fall elections that could reshape the board, Laurence said there’s time and reason to slow things down. “There’s so much in here that needs to be gone over,” she said, flipping through the contract’s 30 pages. “My hand got tired, and my highlighter stopped working.”

Despite the complexity, Laurence emphasized the importance of community awareness. “The contract is on the website, it’s on the board site… most of the citizens of Warren County (LSS Contract) need to read it,” she said.

The future of the county’s library system remains undecided, but Laurence hopes more people will speak up. “There are so many people out there that would like to have that sort of conversation where they just want to get their view out,” she said. “And I think if they want to do that, they should.”

For some in the community, the library dispute is no longer about logistics or budgets—it’s about control. Critics argue the current push to replace the library’s longtime operations stems not from financial necessity or performance issues but from a grudge tied to past disagreements over book content. The aftermath of that dispute, they say, continues to echo in the county’s decisions. Whether or not the board majority will acknowledge those motivations remains unclear, but what’s obvious now is that the conversation is far from over—and the community is watching.