Jump to content
I also attended the LUC meeting and came away with a differrent impression. There appeared to be @ 8 active LUC members actively engaged in blocking the building of a new RLD facility ( to combine administrative, technical and collection space now being leased). Most people were silent andlooking a bit bewilderd as to what petitions and resolutions had to do with being able to use the WWPL another year.
No vote was taken on anything nor have votes ever been taken at LUC meetings. Core members meet separatly and decide actions. There does seem to be general support for annexation as the answer to the WWPL's budget woes. Plans for a new District facility is not the real issue holding up annexation discussions going anywhere.
The City has never discussed putting together an ordinance stating intent to join the library district. In fact, this year it has stated it will not consider annexation if the District continues its plan to build. (last year the excuse was Plaza Way, the year before it was WALNET). Since the District can afford to build and contract with the City for annexation - it is unclear to me why this building effort is perceived as a roadblock to any future Annexation Agreement. The Annexation Agreement is the document that works out what the new District will look like. It is developed after the acceptance of the ordinance of the RLD and before a vote.
The Council too has refused to answer questions or respond to citizen input regarding this issue. The LUC met with the City several times and none of its recommendations (on green sheet passed out at LUC meeting) were met.
Yes the residents of 4 & 8 should have better and stable library service closer to where they live. However, working with the City to destroy the Rural Library District and gain access to the building fund is counter productive. The District may be amenable to a rational discussion of ideas for how it can better serve those people who prefer to use the WWPL. It is right not to respond to threats, ridicule and accusations.
Mrs. Hammond is correct to say past frustrations and failed contracts need to be risen above so the W.W. Valley can move forward on a District Library system that will grow and develop - providing seamless resource sharing and universal access for those member jurisdications.. Unfortunately the City of Walla Walla seems determined to once again repeat the cycle of the last few years . Two years ago, the City rejected annexation because of representation issues in WALNET. The Chair (WWC C library director) was attacked and withdrawal threatened. Addition of new members was blocked. Union Bulletin presents Mayor's perspective on Metz draft report. Last year the City would not consider annexation because RLD leasing of the Plaza library space was deemed responsible for none agreement on @ $400,000 contract demanded by the Council for RLD service area patrons' use of the WWPL. The Director of the RLD was atttacked. WWPL withdrew from WALNET. Council decision made without public input and without notice. Union Bulletin mum. This year, the building of a new facility (to replace leased space with designed space) is the reason given by City for not moving forward on annexation. The RLD Board is attacked, county residents are encouraged to rise up against the District. and divert tax monies to City library. UM relies on city and teritary sources (recyling old, inaccurate articles).DejaVue. The RLD breaks the cycle by refusing to play the game.
Last login: Wednesday, October 16, 2013
2013 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. All rights reserved.