Washington Park Library
10:42AM ON
07/24/2008
BY
Matthew Lawrence
Although it’s so disgustingly humid that I want to die right now (and, this just in, now it’s pouring, too!), I’m heading over to the former Benny’s on Broad Street today at five for the press conference/rally that the Library Reform Group is organizing about the Washington Park library.
<soapbox>Not to repeat myself too much, but the Washington Park Library (which was located in a city-owned building) was closed in January 2005 with just two days’ notice because the (privately-owned) Providence Public Library administration didn’t do anything about a roof leak in the building that they had been aware of since the late nineties. Alan Shawn Feinstein offered lots of money to fix the roof, and the Library turned it down. Then, this winter, the city put a new roof on the building. They also fixed the damage that comes from a decade-old roof leak, removing all the mold and dead pigeons that the building had filled up with.
Service in Washington Park, in the meantime, moved over to the old Benny’s down the street, but there was nothing about that building that ever approached what one might call a library. It was only open four hours a day, for one thing, and adults weren’t allowed inside. Really. Adults Were Not Allowed Inside. Not to check out books, not to use the computers, and not to ask the librarians for help.
Now, it seems, the Benny’s building is also under foreclosure.
The city says they’ll give the repaired branch building back to the Library if they promise to re-open it. And the Library, whose job it should be to keep branches open, apparently wants nothing to do with that. The roof was done in February and there are still no plans to re-open the building.
On top of this nonsense (and it is nonsense), the library and the city have now come to a tentative agreement about what to do about library service in Providence. No library branches will be closing for a year–yay!–but also it’s entirely up to the library to decide what to do after this June. Since the library has repeatedly tried to close five other branches over the past couple of years, it seems pretty obvious that their goal isn’t to keep their branches open. Essentially, this agreement would mean that the city would provide the Library with the same amount of money over the next few years, but that the Library would also be able (and willing) to close the branches in Smith Hill, Fox Point, Olneyville, Wanskuck, and Elmwood.
The agreement will be up before the City Council next week, which is why the press conference is being held in the middle of today’s tropical depression.
</soapbox>
July 24th, 2008 at 11:51AM
Dave Segal Says:
Duane!
[Reply]
July 24th, 2008 at 1:48PM
George Westerlund Says:
The City agreement specifies level funding over a four year period. That does not account for inflation. The U.S. Government inflation numbers of 4% to 5% do not take in all factors so that the U.S. government payouts such as Social Security can be kept low. Real inflation is currently in the range of 8% to 10%. Can the Library maintain services when inflation increases costs at the current 8% to 10% a year? We need to see fair assessments of the situation on the part of both the City and The Library Reform Group.
[Reply]
July 24th, 2008 at 1:49PM
George Westerlund Says:
See comment above
[Reply]
July 24th, 2008 at 1:57PM
George Westerlund Says:
The City agreement specifies level funding over a four year period. That does not account for inflation. The U.S. Government inflation numbers of 4% to 5% do not take in all factors so that the U.S. Government payouts such as Social Security can be kept low. Real inflation is currently in the range of 8% to 10%. Can the Library maintain curent services when inflation increases costs at the current 8% to 10% a year? We need to see fair assessments of the situation on the part of both the City and The Library Reform Group.
[Reply]
July 24th, 2008 at 2:21PM
matthew Says:
I think services can be maintained, yes, if the library made any effort to do its own fundraising and if it stopped pouring all of its money into foundations in order to avoid public oversight.
[Reply]
July 24th, 2008 at 9:50PM
Karen McAninch Says:
Hi, George. Full disclosure: I am the union representative for the library. George is the former head of maintenance for the library, now retired. I don’t know where the figures of 8-10% a year for inflation come from. Most figures I’ve seen are more in the range of 4-5%.
Library Reform Group is calling for an escape clause in the contract between the library and the city so that the city is not required to continue to contribute $3.5 million (with cost of living increases) for what the library considers a “sustainable system”, which seems pre-ordained to be a library system with fewer services and branches than what exist now.
The library has projected a worst case scenario deficit of $1.3 million for this fiscal year and the letter to city councilpersons calls the library contribution towards that to be a “gift” from the library. This deficit is in large part due to a federal requirement to more fully fund the pension plan up front (thus decreasing expenditures down the road), but provides no incentive for the library to rein in expenses. Indeed, it includes a new IT Coordinator position (salary?) in addition to several new positions added last year.
Meanwhile, grant money in the budget has been severely reduced, leading to layoffs of literacy and other grant funded positions and donations are non-existent (any donations appear to be used to pay for fundraising expenses, including the library’s lawyer Dan Prentiss and Dyana Koelsch, the library’s lobbyist).
Library Reform Group is also calling for a timetable for Washington Park Library to reopen now that the city has repaired the building.
[Reply]