![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
livingdebBackground: I hate voting because I have trouble learning enough information.
Here's what will appear on our city ballot for Proposition Six:
When I first heard about this proposition to replace our current central library with a new one, I didn't like the sound of it. If the old library's too small, they should add on to it, not build a new one and quit using the old one. $90 million is a lot of money, and it seems like a waste. Also, I don't think it's too small; it still seems very spacious to me.
Then I got the idea to ask an actual librarian about this. Someone with insider information. Would they think it's great or would they think it was a waste?
Before I got to a librarian, I learned that the new facility would have a lot more parking and would be further from the bus routes. It would have more space for community programs and meetings and it would have an auditorium. So then I thought, this is just stupid. If you want space and parking, you should build that into the branch libraries. The central library is for people who use buses and for holding the most books, so it would be the place for researchers. Expensive downtown space for large-space uses is inefficient.
So then I went to my local library and I caught three librarians all standing together behind the counter with no patrons, so I asked them. Right away one of them made a funny face and started walking away. I knew he had an opinion.
But one of the other librarians explained that they weren't allowed to discuss their opinions or to tell me how to vote. She did show me a flier and how to find the library system's website explaining what all the proposition would do. I said, "Yeah, that's what the bigwigs think, but I want to know what the regular librarians think." The woman told me that this bigwig wasn't so bad. She had come by to visit and seemed very down to earth.
Of course the flier and website were extremely pro. My best guess is that the librarians are for this proposition. At the very least they are fantasizing that if they were at the central library, they would love to have this new library.
I learned from the League of Women Voters that the old library would be used to give more space to the Austin History Center. (At least it won't be demolished, which I find destructive for some reason.)
I learned from the City of Austin Bond Election brochure (which I've seen at community centers and libraries) that the new location for the library would be where the current Green Water Treatment plant is, right across the street from the hike and bike trail. (Although this location is not guaranteed.) I love that building because I love the retro writing on it. Since they insist on redeveloping that area anyway, I would like to have something cool like a big central library be there.
From the library's web site I learned there will be a cafe and a bookstore, which makes me think the library will get some revenue out of it, which I like. And which reminds me of the Denver library. So then I started thinking that as a car-owning person, maybe I'll be selfish and vote for the is totally cool sounding library. And those people who have to ride a bus and then walk several blocks with their walkers or their white canes, well, screw them!
Of course it will be at least six years before it opens and then I won't be able to quickly hike there and grab something during my lunch hour.
I don't know. Any opinions?
Here's what will appear on our city ballot for Proposition Six:
The issuance of $90,000,000 in tax supported General Obligation Bonds and Notes for constructing and equipping a new Central Library facility and acquiring land and interests in land and property necessary to do so; and the levy of a tax sufficient to pay for the bonds and notes.
When I first heard about this proposition to replace our current central library with a new one, I didn't like the sound of it. If the old library's too small, they should add on to it, not build a new one and quit using the old one. $90 million is a lot of money, and it seems like a waste. Also, I don't think it's too small; it still seems very spacious to me.
Then I got the idea to ask an actual librarian about this. Someone with insider information. Would they think it's great or would they think it was a waste?
Before I got to a librarian, I learned that the new facility would have a lot more parking and would be further from the bus routes. It would have more space for community programs and meetings and it would have an auditorium. So then I thought, this is just stupid. If you want space and parking, you should build that into the branch libraries. The central library is for people who use buses and for holding the most books, so it would be the place for researchers. Expensive downtown space for large-space uses is inefficient.
So then I went to my local library and I caught three librarians all standing together behind the counter with no patrons, so I asked them. Right away one of them made a funny face and started walking away. I knew he had an opinion.
But one of the other librarians explained that they weren't allowed to discuss their opinions or to tell me how to vote. She did show me a flier and how to find the library system's website explaining what all the proposition would do. I said, "Yeah, that's what the bigwigs think, but I want to know what the regular librarians think." The woman told me that this bigwig wasn't so bad. She had come by to visit and seemed very down to earth.
Of course the flier and website were extremely pro. My best guess is that the librarians are for this proposition. At the very least they are fantasizing that if they were at the central library, they would love to have this new library.
I learned from the League of Women Voters that the old library would be used to give more space to the Austin History Center. (At least it won't be demolished, which I find destructive for some reason.)
I learned from the City of Austin Bond Election brochure (which I've seen at community centers and libraries) that the new location for the library would be where the current Green Water Treatment plant is, right across the street from the hike and bike trail. (Although this location is not guaranteed.) I love that building because I love the retro writing on it. Since they insist on redeveloping that area anyway, I would like to have something cool like a big central library be there.
From the library's web site I learned there will be a cafe and a bookstore, which makes me think the library will get some revenue out of it, which I like. And which reminds me of the Denver library. So then I started thinking that as a car-owning person, maybe I'll be selfish and vote for the is totally cool sounding library. And those people who have to ride a bus and then walk several blocks with their walkers or their white canes, well, screw them!
Of course it will be at least six years before it opens and then I won't be able to quickly hike there and grab something during my lunch hour.
I don't know. Any opinions?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 2006-10-29 11:30 pm (UTC)As far as the old and infirm go — don't forget that they have their local libraries, too. And perhaps if the library is cool enough and there is enough demand, they'll extend one of the bus routes out there.
I would question what program would go begging in place of it — although I seriously believe that you can't go wrong investing in infrastructure if you want an area to remain vital.
FWIW: You might be able to find an online email list of librarians where someone might be willing to correspond with you off the record (or at least while they're not actually in a library). There are a ton of librarian lists out there.
$90 million?!
on 2006-10-30 04:24 pm (UTC)I can understand the need for additional storage space for the library collection, but the auditorium, study rooms, youth area, teen area, exhibit space (WTF?), etc., that they are planning on building do not make sense to me. I think it's interesting that on the FAQ you linked to, they don't even bother trying to justify why the central library should function as some kind of general meeting facility or provide additional space for users. As it is, the central library looks very empty even on Saturdays when I go there; I can't imagine the vast space during the week. It seems that they took a possibly legitimate need and decided hell, we'll only get one crack at this, let's ask for everything we could ever want all in one big fat expensive package.
I also seriously question that any meaningful revenue would be generated by a cafe or bookstore to make that a drop in the $90 million bucket.
To my mind, librarians are likely to be an extremely unhelpful source of unbiased information on this issue. It's hard for me to imagine why librarians in the system would oppose it. More “free” (from their perspective) money for the library system they work for - what's not to love? Perhaps finding out that the librarians don’t like the plan would tell you something, but support on their part says nothing about the actual merits of the proposal.
To llcoolvad’s point, I don’t think the issue for voters is what program would go begging. We are talking about borrowing money to pay for this that will have to eventually be paid back with interest. It’s not a matter of diverting already existing funds from one program to another but taking on an additional $90 million worth of debt. And government = us so it’s money out of our pockets.
To me, this falls in the category of, my 1999 Honda Civic isn’t all I would want it to be anymore, so I think am going to take on a huge debt to purchase a brand new Mercedes convertible because it’s got all these really neat features and all the cool kids are doing it and I don't want to look cheap. It’s an attractive idea, but not necessarily a fiscal responsible decision.
OK, I just looked at the presentation on the site you pointed to and am trying really hard not to laugh that they're pulling out that old "economic impact" argument to help justify what they're doing and citing a Seattle study, as though the results for Austin will somehow mirror the Seattle experience. Seattle is already a very top (I've repeatedly seen it in the top 10) city for tourism in the US so it makes sense that an additional tourist attraction will help bring in outside dollars. It's hard to imagine that a new public library in Austin will have the tourists flocking here to spend their travel dollars and hence generate any real economic impact to make a $90 million debt worth doing.
New Library
on 2006-10-30 07:05 pm (UTC)It sounds wasteful to me. Money isn't free, and $90 million is a lot of it. How many people live in Austin? A million? Is it worth $90 to you to have a new central library? Now are you willing to take $90 for everyone else for the same thing?
I'm not against all government or even all of these types of projects, and I agree that, all other things being equal, new fancy buildings are cool. But it seems to me like if this is the most important thing Austin needs for $90M, the money might as well remain in people's pockets instead. Then they (the people) can build more important things.
Re: $90 million?!
on 2006-10-31 01:40 am (UTC)Reading between the lines, from what the library and your librarians said, they don't like it. The library has a faq question about 'why no money for the branches', which says, basically, we did them last time. I suspect the librarians at your branch wanted money for the branches, and didn't get it. The funny face was a signal of that dissatisfaction.
This is a $90 million debt obligation on a city of 656,000. That money is going to come out of tax money, at a clip of $140 per person + interest. (The area is 1.2 million, but this is a city, not regional, project.) Add to this the day-to-day cost of maintaining the building (there is an agreement with a 'private' library group, but we'll see how much they will be contributing, and how long that lasts. Electricity, staff, IT, etc. add up. Computers are usable for 3-5 years, then they need to be replaced. And all of this to create a facility which will only hold 1/3 more books than the current one. The rest is conference facilities, auditorium, 'teen' center, a 'programming' area. (aka a nice, private location for the kids to hack past the parental controls, rather than being in plain view like at the current library.) Also note, current central is 375k volumes but, system wide (the number that matters, since you can request materials online) they have 1.6 million volumes. New library - increases that less than 10%. (They plan to add the old library to the Austin History Center. Note that the Austin History Center is currently in the 26,000 sf facility next to Faulk. Now they will be in 110,000 sf. I'm sure they're salivating, but from what I've seen, virtually no one uses the present facility, or even knows that it is there.
I'm looking at the presentation slide about what the library could provide. One is 'cultural center offering programs for a vibrant community.' Maybe, but if so, what is the point of the separate 31.5 million for 'cultural centers' for Prop 4? 'An engaging teen destination.' Yeah, right. "Hey guys, let's go down and hang at the LIBRARY." YEAH.
'A tourist and community destination'. Hand check - how many here have ever thought, "Let's go to xtown, they have a great new LIBRARY!" At best it will catch some incidental traffic from people who are waiting for the bats. It isn't even in with the rest of the tourist stuff - the capitol is at 15th and Congress, the University is north of that. This is Cesar Chavez and San Antonio.
Notice that $90 million isn't the 'real' number. There is $41 million of 'unfinished' space in this new library. This is a real waste of money project.
no subject
on 2006-10-31 03:17 am (UTC)And yes, as pointed out below, this is a bond issue--what goes begging is lower property taxes.
I like your can't-go-wrong-investing-in-infrastructure idea, except I think you can go wrong if you do it stupidly. I'm not convinced all this money would disappear into cheating pockets or even leaky buckets, which would be the most stupid way, but I've decided this doesn't seem too smart to me. And the city already owns the land, so it's only building materials that would increase.
I guess another thing that would go begging is whatever would be built on this land instead of a library and library parking. Something worse than a library, right? Because almost nothing is better than libraries. But auditoriums? Libraries are for books and computer terminals! If we want meeting rooms, we should build more community centers or town halls or something.
Don't worry; chances are very good this will pass. All bonds always pass around here, with very few exceptions.
Re: $90 million?!
on 2006-10-31 03:20 am (UTC)I wanted to talk to librarians in case, with their inside information on what's really going on, they thought this was idiotic. Rvman suspects that's exactly what I found out.
But then I would have wanted to hear why they thought it was idiotic so I could better decide for myself.
Re: $90 million?!
on 2006-10-31 03:21 am (UTC)