Value within community makes library bond proposal worth pushing through
I am writing to urge all of your readers to make their way to the bottom of the back of their ballots on Nov. 6 and vote YES on the library bond proposal.
There are many reasons to support the millage but one is most important to me. As a long-time teacher in the Ann Arbor Schools (now retired) I am aware of the importance of the library to all of our students but especially those students without internet access at home and families with the library as their only source of reference and reading materials.
These students and their families use the library facilities for internet searches, to fill out college and job applications and to write their papers. They need a quiet, safe place to study and easy access to bus transportation (to get) home. Others in our community — newcomers, older residents, and those on fixed incomes — need these services as well.
Our library staff provides the best services possible but they are challenged by the inability to upgrade services to the current building, particularly dated and limited technology. There is a line of students waiting for their half-hour on the computers almost every afternoon, study tables are crowed, study rooms are limited and in great demand by tutors for students and new immigrants.
Please join me in voting YES on the LIBRARY BOND PROPOSAL on Nov. 6.
Robin Wax
Ann Arbor
Comments
A Voice of Reason
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 8:30 p.m.
Too dangerous for our kids to have more strangers at the Library with a conference center attached, plus for $130,000,000 we can purchase everyone one in this town a $200 Kindle with $1100 in free e-books. Keep the current library! Save money and protect our children!!! Not sure what is in it for the owner of Gratzi (Main Street Ventures) other than she thinks she is doing good work with her $5000 contribution for lawn signs.
kk
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 5:37 p.m.
I could not consider funneling money towards such a project when far more important needs remain unmet.
LuvAA
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 3:27 p.m.
I just looked up what I pay for AADL per year...SEV = $118400, Tax = $183.52 just to put it in perspective for other homeowners. This breaks down to $15.29/month or $0.50 cents per day. I find the library an invaluable resource to the community and use it every week. I agree that a $65 million price tag is a high price to pay when the local economy needs funding in so many other areas. I am on the fence as to the proposal and really want more details before making a decision. I would love to see monies set aside by AADL from their current budget to remodel or expand the West branch location.
Jim
Thu, Oct 25, 2012 : 5:45 p.m.
I suggest you watch the 65 minute video of the June 12 meeting about the project. You can find it here: http://www.aadl.org/node/205386 I think it's a relatively honest assessment about what they want. Some note I made on this: Main phys. plant issues: cabling, server room, ductwork, heat/A-C,operating expenses Can renovate, but: can't get auditorium, can't get children's space, can't get reading room, can't get tech updates Issue about moving archiving space to downtown from Green road. Car drop off for books. They wanted this 4 years ago, but tabled it due to the economy. Other stuff said: (I think this is an important issue to them): Library says a lot about the city. Building to be proud of. Visible symbol; something to be proud of. "We're committed to having a marvelous building, inside and outside." They basically want a nicer, more modern building. Look at the branches. They look fantastic. They want a really cool building for the main branch. It's old and it could be renovated, but they want a nice new one. That looks cool. I can sort of see that, to be honest. Says something about the city; would help property values (in a way) and 'curb appeal' of the city. I wished they'd done this (to the library) versus the City Hall, for example. They should be honest about what they REALLY want.
LuvAA
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 5:56 p.m.
Thank you, Brimble, for the perspective! I'll definitely be open to hearing more arguments from both sides. I'm also curious to see the current space and how it's used, so I'll be venturing downtown to observe before elections. I don't go down to that location as often due to parking issues. I can understand the argument of taking advantage of construction costs now, but I'd really like to see the breakdown and justification of the costs entailed for this project and how it got to $65 million.
brimble
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 4:08 p.m.
LuvAA - So this is the operative question: for the next 30 years, that cost will increase from the current $183.52 to roughly $247, or $20.50/mo. For that extra $5/mo, you won't get to use the downtown branch at all for at least two years. For 18 years after that, there will be a central library building constructed with the assumption that a central library is the best model of service to the community. Then, with 10 years to go on the bond, the 20-year life of the renovation will be done. The bit of the discussion that supporters ignore is the opportunity cost implicit in this millage. Now, if taxpayers will sign up for any and all increases, there is no opportunity cost -- except to our pockets. But will this millage make it harder to ask again for money to build another branch, or to expand information services in the future? It sure would seem so. Another way to ask the question is this: will the demolition and construction of this building make the library system 133% better, either for you as an active user, or for the system as a whole? Is this the of the additional tax money you'll pay? If not, then the 133% increase in tax burden isn't warranted, and you should vote 'no'.
Nerak
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 11:59 a.m.
The Library Board and senior leadership have been great stewards of the system and have thoughtfully and responsibly built new branches, improved technology, and stayed on the forefront of ensuring that libraries are relevant and serve the community far into the future. More people should tour the "innards" of the downtown library to fully appreciate how desperately the facility needs to be replaced. If it isn't, operating costs will only eat up more and more of the budget, and replacement will be far more expensive a few more years down the road. Ann Arbor and its current and future generations deserve a beautiful gathering place, a place for quiet study and contemplation in the midst of the urban setting, a noteworthy building to reflect the value we put on literacy, and a secure place to house the record of our living, in all the media forms that it's found. I struggle to pay my property taxes every year, but I value the library above almost all of our institutions. I'm definitely voting Yes. Please join me!
RUKiddingMe
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 9:59 a.m.
Robin Wax, if you are able, please post a weekday and time that you have seen a line of people waiting to use the computers; I will be going several days this week, but "afternoon" is a little vague, and I just want to see this for myself. I ask because I have purposefully made several visits to the downtown branch on several days and different times of day to assess the usability of the computers/internet access. I have seen no lines.
Halter
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 9:52 a.m.
Nope...sorry...voting NO on this overpriced proposal
Westfringe
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 7:17 a.m.
I am voting yes. Renovating the old library would cost almost as much money.
mtlaurel
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 4:13 a.m.
If people vote NO maybe some decent proposals will arise to enhance /fix what exists and do prudent expansion.Creativity abounds and there is a lot of empty space around town to be used. It's time people do their job and craft new information SYSTEMS instead of tearing down something that isn't even old. I'll be voting No because there is no reason to vote yes with the hodge podge of reasons given to spend a huge amt of money.
Veracity
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 3:53 a.m.
Many schools require that students come to class with a computers or provide computers or tablets which connect via WIFI. Within five years every school will probably have such a requirement. So as long as the Ann Arbor District Library maintains a WIFI Internet connection students will have access to resources sufficient to meet their educational needs. I expect that the recently approved $45 million school bond issue which will be used for technology upgrades at schools will provide access to computers by all students. Also I agree with Me717's comment which suggests "that public schools should keep the media centers open longer after school for students to use." Prior to announcing the bond issue referendum I am unaware of any patrons complaining about the accessibility to the computers at the main library. Perhaps the large computer banks at the branch libraries (such as Traverwood and Pittsfield) suffice for many families so that few have to travel to downtown Ann Arbor to use computers at the main library.
Classof2014
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 2:16 a.m.
I personally don't think a new library is needed, I go to the one downtown a lot and there is nothing wrong with it. If there is a heating problem, then get that fixed, that should not be a reason to tear the building down. There is the Art Tax, the AATA Countywide Transit (if passes) and now the library millage tax!? I wish i was old enough to vote, I would vote no on this if I could.
DJBudSonic
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 2:12 a.m.
Yet another pro-library bond opinion published. And yet more board trolling by the library supporters. Am I the only one who is tiring of this pro-bond drum beating by Annarbor.com? Vote NO, against higher taxes for unnecessary civic spending.
Dog Guy
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 1:21 a.m.
We local tax parasites vote for each-other's millages as reliably as we support each-other's causes. The people at the U of M support us out of professional courtesy. It is a wonderful system for us. But this wasteful $150M to build, finance, and equip a direct replacement library at this time of confiscatory tax rates is likely to greatly injure the geese who lay those golden tax eggs. I am voting against it.
Veracity
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 4:24 a.m.
Mark - I do not believe that you want the total price of building the library and paying off the debt to be divided by "the population of Ann Arbor" but, instead, by the number of tax paying property owners, a smaller subset of the total population.
MARK
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 1:52 a.m.
Take the cost of the library and divide it by the population of Ann Arbor. That is everyone's cost. If enough people want to pay that price then you can fund it. If not then you cannot. That is much more fair than having some people pay for something that some one else wants but expects others to pay for.
A2comments
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 11:59 p.m.
I'm curious. What did the rusty Traverwood branch cost?
LXIX
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 11:18 p.m.
I think this is the third pro-lib opinion pushed in the last few days. So, again for the third time NO. Keep raising taxes on the surrounding community and pretty soon those internet-less families will be forced to use the library in another, more afordable town. How about just a library internet cafe rental/purchase out of one of the vacant buildings downtown?
RUKiddingMe
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 11 p.m.
Everyone voting no, please make sure you get your friends, family, and coworkers out there to do it as well; voter turnout has been so pathetic that all they need is for the library staff and some friends to go vote; to stop it, we have to make the effort. You let this one pass, you'll be paying for many years to come.
talker
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 1:46 a.m.
I looked at my absentee ballot for the November 6, 2012 election. The library proposal is on the back of the ballot. It's the last ballot proposal on the ballot. Thus, it's in the far right column of the back of the ballot. It's a crowded ballot. I suggest looking at a sample before then. There may be one on AnnArbor.com at some time. Those who will be voting at a polling place may want to go over a sample ballot before then. Some people like to take with pieces of paper with their choices, which I believe is allowed.
RUKiddingMe
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 10:54 p.m.
Can you name a time of day that there are lines for the computers? I have made multiple visits since this proposal came to light, at different times of day and on different days of the week, and I have never seen a line. I'd like to go see one, though. Day and time, please.
Vivienne Armentrout
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 9:30 a.m.
Yes, I understand that many other reasons are being given for the new facility other than computing resources. But this particular opinion piece makes the access for students its principal reason for the expansion. I was responding to the point made by the author.
Ryan Burns
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 11:27 p.m.
Regarding "It should not be what drives library expansion." If you look at the AADL "The Vision / The Vote" document, (http://www.aadl.org/files/vision-vote-faq.pdf) you can see that computing resources is a portion of one of the ten points driving library expansion.
Vivienne Armentrout
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 11:19 p.m.
I had a very positive experience today with the computers at the West Side branch. The power was out in my neighborhood, so I used the service for the first time. I was able to get on after a short wait, it was very orderly, and I got my online news fix and left. What a nice service. But I would hope we would not build huge square footage for computer usage. If there is a pressing need for student access, that should be handled through the education system. It should not be what drives library expansion.
Ryan Burns
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 10:04 p.m.
Reading these comments you'd think the reason for a new library is just a bunch of meeting rooms. The actual items that are not possible in the current building: a youth area that can simultaneously accommodate open play and story times, a large quiet reading room, access to the local history collection (currently offsite), an auditorium for free lectures, film, performance and discussion, spaces that can handle messy hands-on programs like electronics workshops, a cafe, and more computing resources. Not to mention that the current building has a number of systems at end of life (elevators, roof), poor lighting and is not accessible to those with disabilities (for instance, the elevator opens on a descending staircase). The library is a community nexus for learning, literacy, and culture, and having a great library is a competitive advantage and asset that we need. AADL has the track record designing the wonderful branch libraries within schedule and budget, and their programs are top notch. The new downtown library will be a keystone of this community for decades to come.
Halter
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 9:59 a.m.
Ryan, what you describe is not a Library.,, its a community center which Ann Arbor DOES need...but not inside the Library. Voting NO.
thorj97
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 2:15 a.m.
"The actual items that are not possible in the current building: a youth area that can simultaneously accommodate open play and story times..." Not true. I've many times seen kids playing in the play areas, while stories are being read nearby. It is strange how many of these "facts" are being promoted by those who wish to tear down our library. Clearly they are not coming from user complaints. What will prevent story times and play? Our library reduced to rubble and closed for three (plus) years. Yes, I've heard the vague promises about continuity of service, with no facts or actual plans to back it up. If you value having a downtown library now, please vote NO.
talker
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 1:48 a.m.
Another place likely to have a sample ballot is the City of Ann Arbor site, especially the City Clerk's office.
John of Saline
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 11:04 p.m.
"The new downtown library will be a keystone of this community for decades to come." Or for a decade or two, when new complaints that the building is out-of-date and no renovation can save it will start.
zags
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:24 p.m.
65 million dollars. That's a lot of money to ask for. Tell you what. Add some police officers and firemen. Make me feel safe in my city again. While you're at it, restore the street leaf collection. :) That only cost $400k or so. After that, then we can talk about spending 65 MILLION dollars on a luxury and not a necessity.
Ryan Burns
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 10:47 p.m.
+1 for street leaf collection, would be nice to get that back.
Jamie Pitts
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 8:38 p.m.
Rent one store front and call it "Ann Arbor adult computer literacy center", rent another and call it "Ann Arbor meetup center". These might cost 250k to build out, and perhaps 35k per month to run. A fraction of the ridiculous numbers we're looking at. A lot of problems are solved with these two simple steps. One special problem is the homeless people, drug addicts, people who do not take showers making life unpleasant for 95% of the people using the central library. I don't really care about unpleasantness, but a lot of people do. No need to spend $65M! And no more silly excuses to deny us a central park that connects Liberty to the library!
Jamie Pitts
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 8:49 p.m.
At the central library, distribute laptops to children in A2 schools and given them space to work in. Adults have to bring their own computers, and are put under restrictions to foster a better environment for other users at the library. Then re-work the bathrooms and other aspects at the entrance to reduce the misuse of these resources. I can't imagine that these changes at the central library would cost more than several million dollars. The point is, get creative and save money. Like the rest of us are doing right now!
Linda Peck
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:58 p.m.
This is the second opinion published within the last week in support of this library proposal. It is not a popular idea at this time and I will be voting no, for most of the reasons re-stated above by other intelligent community members. I cannot understand why the idea of spending 65 million dollars right now on a building that it clearly not needed is attractive. A member of my family tells me he already pays more than $700 per year in taxes just in support of the libraries here. He says that is enough and I surely agree.
Linda Peck
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 7:04 p.m.
To all who care, I think I made a mistake or misunderstood the amount I stated above that was supposed to be the cost spent on libraries for the year. Sorry to all. I think it was more like half of that amount. I still don't support this particular proposal, though. Thank you, Brad, for pointing out my calculations.
Brad
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 1:38 a.m.
@Linda, I've been shopping for housing and so I am pretty current on my knowledge of taxes and values. Sure there are some outliers, but there is NO house with $700/yr in AADL taxes (that's an SEV of over $450K) that isn't pretty special.
Linda Peck
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 11:52 p.m.
You are so wrong, Brad, in your assessment of what taxes are being charged and on what value homes. I would suggest to you that you look at the city's public records and see for yourself what taxes are being charged in Ann Arbor. Do you think it is fair for a house worth $200,000 on the market, not taxable value, to be charged over $6,000 in taxes per year? I don't and this is happening all over town. I look at these figures and cannot explain it, but this is the case. There is a house on the market now that has an asking price of about 250,000 and the taxes on it are over $12,000 per year. It is in the arboretum area.
talker
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:48 p.m.
In addition to the AADL, we support library facilities in elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, and Washtenaw Community College. There is also a technology milliage for schools. We have branch libraries. We have a downtown library that can be rewired for a lot less than the $130,000,000 (including financing costs) and renovations of equipment will be needed even while paying for the building). If some want to demolish a 20 year old addition now, how do we know if the new building will be equally out of date in 20 years, where the millage for the library would still be on property tax bills. There are long term residents in Ann Arbor who deliberately paid off their mortgages to reduce expenses later and there are people in Ann Arbor whose property taxes per year are higher than their mortgages payments were per year. There are people in Ann Arbor who are paying mortgages they can barely afford with current property taxes. It's not just about the library. Higher property taxes for a new building could hurt local restaurants and stores that rely on spending by Ann Arbor home owners and renters. There are people in Ann Arbor who pay tuition and people who are paying back college loans.
A2Onward
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:45 p.m.
Taxes aren't disproportionally high in Ann Arbor. Our tax rate is lower than Ypsilanti. It's our PROPERTY that is worth so much, making our actual taxes high. And if your home has a market value of $200,000, your taxable value is about $100,000, and this library is going to cost you $56/year. I don't know what situation you're talking about that you'd get taxed for more than the value, the tax is BASED on the value.
Brad
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:22 p.m.
And yes, $700 worth of AADL taxes on your primary residence equates to like a $900K house. That would qualify as "pretty fancy" for most people.
Linda Peck
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:20 p.m.
To A2Onward: Taxes are disproportionally high in Ann Arbor and often do not reflect the value of a home. It is an outrageous situation for home owners here. Perhaps you don't live here and don't realize how difficult a situation this can be. For example, what if you owned a home with a market value of 200,00 and were being taxed for a home at 400,000? That is often the situation here in wonderful Ann Arbor.
Brad
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:19 p.m.
Actually the second TODAY.
A2Onward
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 8:04 p.m.
$700 per year in taxes? On a 1.5 mil levy? Must be a pretty fancy house.
DonBee
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:17 p.m.
And the counter reasons are: 1) It is much cheaper to do a renovation only 2) It much more environmentally sound to do a renovation only 3) closing the library again for 2 years downtown hurts the mission of the library 4) the streets just reopened - now we are closing them again - hurting the businesses close by 5) the per square foot price in the proposal is 3x the average midwest price per square foot for libraries according to the largest construction database 6) the library is not getting much bigger - so how does this fix the crowding issues 7) the 400 seat auditorium is not a library function - so why is the library adding it 8) since no plans have been drawn, no one knows how much the building will really cost or what it will look like, the library bond may be very wrong for the final design 9) the prior bonds are not paid off yet, so we will be paying double for two years for no library - the old and the new millage 10) no one has explained how the new e-book technology impacts the library design 11) there was a promise last time that the update would last generations - is 20 years generations? 12) no one has explained how the AADL fits into the overall regional scheme for libraries, including UofM and others
DonBee
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 11:51 a.m.
Mr. Baker - 1) How do we know, no renovation only study has ever been done. The only studies done were demolition of at least part of the existing building. 2) Show me a study, every study, every urban planning professional I have talked to indicates that renovation is more environmentally sound 3) Your idea of a renovation is demotion based, a pure renovation would leave the shell of the building completely intact, hence little or no street closure. 4) The AADL has said that the street would close, read the reports they commissioned, I have in detail. 5) Salt Lake and Eugene are way outside the midwest. They have different building costs. 6) The gross square footage quoted by the library on there 1990 renovation was 130,000 square feet (I have the flyer). So how did it shrink by 20,000 square feet? 7) 400 seats is not a small auditorium, not by a long shot, 100 seats would be small. Go to the local cinemas and count the number of seats, most auditoriums (theaters) have many fewer than 400 seats. At 10 square feet (this is tight, 15 is more standard) - the theater eats 4,000 square feet of the expansion - making the difference not 30,000 square feet for the library portion but 26,000 square feet or 24,000 square feet if you use the standard rules of thumb for planning. 8) I rest my case on this point - we don't know the costs and won't until a millage passes. Even AAPS had preliminary drawings for Skyline before the millage. 9) At locations to be determined and with undetermined times to get at books - so yes there will be services, but where and how good is up in the air. Two years will pass without a central library, less than 20 years after the last time. 10) Again I rest my case - no one knows - maybe we will end up like the "CD" library in New York. 11) So 30 year bonds, 20 year updates - wow - just wow! 12) Wow! just wow again. There are lots of libraries in the area. I take my children to the UofM library for projects.
nextthursday
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 10:40 p.m.
I wish I could vote Peter Barker's response up a thousand times. Thank you, sir, for fighting this fight.
Peter Baker
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:56 p.m.
1. 10% cheaper is not "much cheaper" 2. Not if the building you're replacing is more far more inefficient than the replacement. 3. A massive renovation would close it too. 4. Who says the street would have to be closed? Fifth Street was closed because they were tunneling under it, something that building a surface building wouldn't require. 5. If you don't factor in branch libraries, and only account for main libraries that actually house all the facilities that support the branches, that's not the case. Des Moines, Salt Lake City, and Eugene have all recently built libraries that cost far more per square foot. 6. 1.5x as big seems bigger to me (110,000sq ft increased to 160,000sq ft) 7. Speaker events and lectures are absolutely a library function, they're already doing it and they're extremely popular, more than justifying a small auditorium 8. The library is not going to spend a large chunk of their operating budget on architects and engineers before they even know if they'll use the building they design. 9. The downtown services will be moved to temporary locations, there will be library services during construction. 10. I would trust the people who live and breath libraries to determine that. 11. It's one. The library has always operated on a 20-year feasibility update schedule. That's why there were additions to the 50s building in the 70s, then again in the 90s, and now it's time to expand again. 12. UofM runs research libraries, they don't want kids coming for reading time.
alarictoo
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:38 p.m.
I wish I could vote this up a thousand times. This list perfectly resonates with my own questions/concerns about the proposed library millage, and sums up succinctly why I will be voting "no" at this time. Thanks, DonBee!
CynicA2
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:04 p.m.
For $65 million, you could buy a new $600 computer/laptop/iPad for every man, woman and child in Ann Arbor, and they could "visit" any library in the the world, and then some. I think the whole concept of "library" needs rethinking, just like any other "bricks and mortar" concept in a digital age. Especially in a time of scarce dollars and many competing priorities. I will be voting NO.
A Voice of Reason
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 8:32 p.m.
You forgot the interest. See my post below.
CynicA2
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 8:12 p.m.
I thought I was quite magnanimous, actually.
A2Onward
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:13 p.m.
Staying true to your name I see.
a2schoolparent
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 6:59 p.m.
Whenever I go to the downtown library to study/read, I have never failed to find a big table all to myself on the 2nd floor. There are always lots of empty seats. if the number of computers is the issue, maybe there could be a request for money to buy more computers? If the number of computers for school kids is the issue, maybe the school district can find a way to let them use the school computers (which another expensive millage is supporting) after school ends?
Jim
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 6:37 p.m.
Thank you for your comments, Robin. At the end of the day, what concerns me about the proposal is the notion put forward by its supporters is that is simply not possible to fix the current library's problems (heating, communication wiring, server room, etc.) for less than $65 Million. So the whole place needs to be torn down and a new one put up. That argument as presented (with the video) is simply not credible to me. I think tying up 5th for a year+ again is also a serious concern. Does someone have it out for Jerusalem Garden??? All that said, perhaps there is a case for getting a new building. Maybe the existing one is all wrong for future library stuff. But that's not how the case was made. Instead, they said they couldn't fix a server room, the heating system, etc. and it would be CHEAPER to build a new building. I could believe BETTER, but not CHEAPER.
Jim
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 10:17 p.m.
Saw the video from the June 12 meeting. Anyone interested in this issue should watch it. I think I will support this, if they can keep 5th Ave. open. Bottom line, they just want a nice library downtown. They wanted one in 2008 but economic conditions stopped that effort. Now it's back. The old library is tired and not suited for the additional activities a library is expected to do in the future. I think the boosters were a bit disingenuous to talk about the failing physicial plant of the existing building. It's not really about that. It's about creating a wonderful amazing space (as they have in the branches) that is downtown and something for visitors and residents to appreciate and be proud of. I just wish they'd own that. we already spent $$$ on the city hall, which no one at least WANTS to go to. Why not have a nice space that you can enjoy? Badly, badly presented to the voting public, however.
RUKiddingMe
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 10:58 p.m.
When people need to change or extend their heating/cooling or wireless/wired home networks they don't tear down their house and build a new one either
Brad
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:02 p.m.
The owner of J. Garden gave CONDITIONAL support for the library which started like this: "With thoughtful consideration to its neighbors, users & staff during construction [...]" That's a diplomatic way of saying "PLEASE don't try to drive me out of business like the DDA did with their total mismanagement of the Garage Mahal project".
catbehindthecouch
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 8:35 p.m.
"Does someone have it out of Jerusalem Garden??" The owner, of Jerusalem Garden, Ali Ramlawi, doesn't think so. You can see him listed as a supporter of the new library building here: http://ournewlibrary.com/testimonials
Peter Baker
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:55 p.m.
Renovation-only isn't an option because they need to expand the building to keep up with the increasing usage (as they've done every 20 years). When people need to increase the number of bedrooms in their house, they don't look for redecoration-only quotes.
DonBee
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:20 p.m.
Mr Baker - And your source is? To my knowledge no renovation only study has been done. All the studies include tearing down at least part of the building. So where do you get your data on the cost of renovation?
Peter Baker
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 6:54 p.m.
Fifth Street was closed for the parking garage construction because they were tunneling under the street. That shouldn't be the case with a typical building construction. And to your point about rehabbing the current building, it's not just that the current building needs serious work, it's also that the library is at capacity with many of the things they try to do there, and because of the way the building was built (3 eras of additions, load bearing cinder block throughout), they can't easily reconfigure the building to adapt the current needs. So it's more than just HVAC replacement and new wiring, it's real deal reconfiguration of the interior that just can't happen without spending nearly as much as a new, and far more efficient, building would cost.
bruno_uno
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 6:36 p.m.
cant the schools allow their tech millage for computers be shared for public after hours? this generation of baby boomers have done nothing for sustainability, our poor kids and grandkids have been left a legacy of greed by teachers.
Robot Charles
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 6:11 p.m.
I do support the idea of public libraries but the additional cost of this proposal may be hard for home owners to afford as there seem to be new millages being tacked onto property taxes every year. This may be difficult for a life long government employees to understand but we've learned with this recent economy that fiscal responsibility makes for better communities in the long run. I do use the library and have noticed that the main branch is used by adults sitting at the computers looking at various websites and kids running around and yelling. The proponents of this proposal have morphed the idea of a library from being a archive of knowledge to being a entertainment/child care facility with workspace for people to start up a company. I'm not sure if I want to foot the bill for that. How about opening another branch? Look at the addresses of the patrons using the main library and see where they live as there could be a clear indication where a new branch is needed.
Me717
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 5:48 p.m.
I think the public schools should keep the media centers open longer after school for students to use. I would like to see more research on how libraries might look in the future. I think we're jumping too quick for a larger building. The basement and top two floors of main library seem to be empty most of the time. I'm voting no until I see more information.
say it plain
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 1:12 p.m.
Great points...and the schools *should* keep media centers open after school! That would be a great use of the dollars we already spend. We just got a tech bond passed...that should be part of AAPS spending!
Peter Baker
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 5:55 p.m.
This is a great article about the past, present and future of libraries: http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/05/future-u-library-3-0-has-more-resources-greater-challenges/ "We think of the library as a hybrid environment that consists of physical spaces, people, and objects; as well as a digital entity that provides online access to digital resources, services and tools," Bourg said about Stanford's libraries. "But the truth is that technology has simply provided libraries with new ways to fulfill our age-old mission of collecting, preserving, organizing and providing meaningful access to information in support of teaching and research."
bruno_uno
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 5:43 p.m.
Wish we had a pension to support this like teachers but this is not the time, seriously.
Tom Todd
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 9:46 p.m.
should have went to College and became a teacher!
kelsey2
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 5:35 p.m.
Robin, I am a retired teacher as well, and I think the whole idea of centrally located computers is out of date. Equip a semi (or two or three) with a hundred wirelessly connected lap tops and some tablets in an air conditioned trailer and send it/them out into the community on a rotating schedule. Cheaper, no?
Goober
Tue, Oct 23, 2012 : 7:56 p.m.
Wow! Lots of commenter support for your alternative suggestion, eh? I think your idea has merit.