Jump to content
Using one's status as a 'vet' is about as valid as using one's status as an academic or a Christian or an educator to validate one's access to the truth. My husband is a vet and he does not believe he enlisted in 1967 and put his life on the line in Vietnam because he was protecting those of us in the United States from losing our constitutional rights. He paid attention in High School and knew the conflict was between the north and the south with economics motivating US troop support for the south. I see young people today (my son's age) enlisting because they need the cradle to grave support the military provides. Yes - being killed or badly injured physically and mentally should be a consideration. And those individuals so impacted have all my sympathy. I gratefully support the portion of my taxable income that goes towards their treatment and support of families.
Ms. Semerdjian was writing a column. Rick Eskil accepts guest columnists. A 'guest' is allocated many more words than the 400 word limit given to those writing Letters to the Editor. As a scholar, with relevant credentials, she is well qualified to educate those interested in learning. In the context of being a good citizen in our richly diverse country, she also pointed out the harm in irresponsible use of the First Amendment. Mr. Buchanan seems to have focused on the latter element (and objects) because of comments he made in an earlier Letter to the Editor. Here he opened our eyes to the creeping influence of Muslims/Jihadists in our airline cleaning crews, the local school system and in foreign and domestic policy. The UB does print many Letters to the Editor that are far from factual, literate or logical. That Mr. Buchanan's letter was all those things was not a reason to omit it. However, the UB does need to be cautious about being used as a podium for those who would promote taking action against those we would identify by attire, religion and perceived dislike of Christians.
If the WWPL would rejoin WALNET - the local resource sharing consortia - you would have your choice once again. This is up to the City Council - they were the ones who decide.
I appreciate this fact checking piece posted by the UB. Wish it could have wider coverage in the print edition.
Here they go again. I've read the official complaint and 'supporting' documents.' I'm lost as to the goal of the five who signed the complaint. There is nothing I saw that indicated the RLD had had any secret meetings or took a vote over the phone or even by email regarding annexation plans. The City Council too, may discuss anything controversial before its council meetings and, if deemed prudent , may also chose to avoid certain issues or approaches to those issues entirely. The RLD letter to the City Council spoke of continuing with the strategic plan, in which annexation plans were not included. This strategic plan had been presented in a meeting, open to the public and was accepted by the RLD Board before the letter was sent.
Well written. Still - concern over the building of a new library seems misplaced (really - this is the 'block' to annexation?!)and some of the ongoing $ figures overlook the cost of currently leased space.
The new facility planned by the RLD will consolidate several activities now housed in leased space - administration, processing, technical services. It will also, in part, enlarge on leased space for collections and computers (Plaza Way). This seems a reasonable response to both rural and city residents who have noted the smallness of the Plaza Way library.
A new RLD facility, designed for 21st Century library operations, could be used to also provide processing, network and courier services for the WWPL should it be annexed. This would free up space at WWPL for an enlarged & current item collection, programming and other public service functions the city library staff enjoy (and we enjoy having them available for). And who cares where the offices, network hub and technical services reside.
The RLD's plan for a new facility makes sense to me. Hanging on to 1.3 million and, instead remodelling the WWPL as a library distribution center for the county does not.
Original 'request' by the LUC for removal of RLD Board of Trustees made big headlines and the entire left side column of the front page. Article followup on unfounded 'allegations' is buried on page 5 of section A. Highlighting the LUC's silly allegations made for a lot of unnecessary drama and angst. Not to mention the cost of legal counsel for the County. Guess the truth is judged not as interesting to the UB readership.
The 'proposals' Barbara Clark refers to (see her latest contribution as resident 'Special to the UB' columnist), are a couple of ideas for locking the District into a long-term service contract with the City. These were put together during the Library Working Group sessions but never serously discussed or developed into actual proposals. They were passed out at a City Council meeting. Annexation is also not a consideration as both the city and the District agreed in June to not pursue any consolidation models in the near future.
From her remarks regarding the inefficiency of a District system, the lack of accountability in appointed board members, and the waste inherent in building a new library or remodelling current facilities for county residents who don't read - the District model is not a preference for this City Council member anyway.
The above response is more worthy of a Special to the Union Bulletin spot than Barbara Clark's continuing series of 'misinformation', and recycled, and insulting remarks. Debating one sentence in a full page ad? How desperate is that. 'Either of current proposals,' refers to 2 ideas, she assisted the WWPL Director prepare for the Library Working Group. They were presented, along with other ideas - none of which were seriously considered let alone developed. The City Council has not discussed these proposals and, in fact, announced at the time they were distributed in a Council meeting, that there would be no further contract negotiations with the RLD Board.
Quite the contrary, Council member Barabara Clark has immersed herself in library contract issues, discussions and operations - both with WALNET and the RLD these last few years. The new RLD library facility would not duplicate anything already in existance and, for the most part, it would combine services and collections currently housed in either existing RLD libraries or space leased by the RLD. That is being both accountable and efficient.
The City Council pretends that the RLDs plans to build a new library is the block to annexation. It should be honest and admit that it does not plan to support the WWPL out of the general fund with anything even close to the support provided by similiar size cities in the state. The RLD has to take out an ad to tell its story - otherwise most of an article about the RLD by the UB ends up on the correction page the next day..or so. When was the last time the UB printed letters received by library users supporting the RLD (and it has received them), interviewed the RLD Board or Director, ran a piece on the marvelous childrens programming also going on in the county this summer?
The WWPL has a larger circulation rate because 1.) of its method for counting circs and 2.) it has fewer current materials to circulate with a denser population in close proximity - of course the circ rate is going to be higher. WWPL was happy to drop out of WALNET . It couldn't handle the borrowing/loaning traffic generated by its own patrons requesting RLD and WWCC materials.
We should be working together on this issue but over and over again the City Council has blocked progress by manipulating public opinion, denegrating the rural residents (WWPL patrons read more books than do rural residents? What is she implying?!), breaking off negotiations and refusing to include annexation as part of the contract process. When the City is ready to mature and put past practices aside the RLD Board will once again be ready to listen. The RLD has a marvelous strategic plan. It knows where it is going and why. When the City wants to join that effort, it will be a great day for city library users and those residents who live close to the city limits.
Last login: Wednesday, October 16, 2013
2014 Best Of The Best Winners
The latest wine and dine news.
The Valley's people, wine & food.
Find your way around the Valley.
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Union-Bulletin, 112 S. First Ave., Walla Walla, WA 99362/509-525-3300. All rights reserved.