filed under Daily Dose
Library and city reach agreement
8:20AM ON
07/18/2008
BY
Dave Segal
I don’t know the ins and outs of negotiations as well as I did while on the Council. Matt, or somebody else, who’s been on the inside — the opening graphs of the article make this look pretty positive. Is it?
PROVIDENCE — The Providence Public Library and the city have agreed to a four-year contract that maintains all nine library branches for the next year, but looks likely to lead to branch closures, or at least relocations, next year or in 2010.
The deal avoids layoffs among unionized staff, provides for the reopening of the Washington Park branch in its former home, and ensures that no branches are closed or relocated before July 1, 2009.




July 19th, 2008 at 7:26AM
Karen McAninch Says:
The problem is that the library will be determining what a sustainable system is, and it isn’t clear what recourse the city council will have if they approve the agreement, come next year, to object if the library decides (as they are likely to do) that a sustainable system is Central, Rochambeau, Mt. Pleasant and South Providence. Also, there is no timetable to reopen Washington Park Library in the old location. The current temporary location is in foreclosure and was never satisfactory to begin with.
[Reply]
July 20th, 2008 at 11:22AM
matthew Says:
I’d be really hesitant to call this positive… I think I’ll have more to say about it tomorrow, though.
[Reply]
July 20th, 2008 at 4:37PM
Tabetha Bernstein-Danis Says:
I am glad Daily Dose is addressing this issue. I taught in Providence for 8 1/2 years and for many of my students, going to the local library was the only opportunity to use a computer, have access to a variety of books, and, in some cases, to have a quiet place to complete homework. Many of my students’ families did not have reliable vehicles and really depended on having a library branch within walking distance. The loss of libraries, particularly in the neediest neighborhoods, is a great disservice to school children from struggling families.
[Reply]