August 16, 2012
The full-page ad in yesterday's U-B (Aug. 14, page A5) by the directors of the Walla Walla Rural Library District (RLD) had some important, valid points to make.
However, it's disappointing that the RLD board chose the most expensive, least interactive method to explain its side of the library story. I wish the board had held a public meeting back in June to explain the RLD’s plans, and why they decided not to follow the plan offered by Ruth Metz last year.
It's also disappointing that the board took such a defensive, reactive approach to the questions.
In journalism jargon, the RLD ad "buried the lead" in making its case against the City of Walla Walla and in favor of their plan to build a separate county library.
The strongest case against the City's library funding history is based on three facts (with my comments in parentheses):
-
The City withdrew from the WALNET consortium in January 2012, a decision that the RLD says "reversed a 20-year trend of cooperative models for service ... which significantly diminished service to City and Country patrons alike." (The decision to leave WALNET was originally taken one year earlier; the action seriously undercuts the City’s claim that it supports cooperation and consolidation of library services.)
-
The contracts between the City and the RLD required the City to fund the WWPL at a level comparable to the tax rate paid by RLD taxpayers. (If the City did break those contract requirements, I’d like to hear an explanation from City leaders.)
-
The City has refused to sell WWPL cards to non-residents – at any price. (Again this speaks to the City’s readiness to cooperate. I've heard the City Manager and the Library Director try to justify this policy at three different public meetings. Repetition has not made the explanation any more credible. You can't accept money from non-residents because you can't predict in advance how much you'll get? Seriously? Please let me know which crystal ball you're using to predict the sales tax revenue from say, Christmas 2013.)
The fact that the City Council has been irresponsible and resorted to little more than bullying to force the RLD to pay for access to the WWPL does not, repeat does not,mean that the best solution to the community's overall library needs is to build and staff a separate library for county residents.
The best solution is the one Walla Walla taxpayers have already paid for: Annex the WWPL into the RLD.
Obviously any agreement to consolidate library service in our area will require some new thinking about governance—and probably some new people in leadership positions.
Moving ahead with building plans that have little or no public support is just not acceptable.
- Bart Preecs
In response to:
City of Walla Walla has grossly profited from RLD's generosity
A number of letters, columns, editorials and articles have been written in regard to the inability of the Rural Library District and the Walla Walla Public Library to come to an agreement on a contract. I don't feel all the facts have been aired.
Comments
0324633 9 months ago
Glad to see awareness growing. I am unclear about just what support the RLD has for building a new facilty. Some of the comments in the surveys appear to be orchestrated and I know from responding to the WWPLsurvey - it would have been very easy to submit several surveys - cutting and pasting the same responses in the comment spaces. And some people clearly did. The survey seemed to indicate to me a desire for more public spaces, support for a consolidated service center designed for centralized services (difficult to remodel for networked infrastructure) and administrative space. The Board is justified in translating those service requests to the need for a new bulding. Giving 100s of thousands to the City each year does indicate to me the Board was listening to residents of 4 & 8 but my view is not a popular one.
Just returned from latest LUC meeting whee it was pointed out to the founding members producing all these documents (with an increasing number of demands to be included with the annexation proposal) that a recall of the RLD Board (who are trained in District management, experienced in finace, education,....) could cripple the District system - throwing hundreds of people out of work and leaving the woefully inadequate city library as the sole source of library service! The person sitting next to me (Doughnut, well-heeled Whitman retiree) thought that was just fine and merited by the Board's desire to build a new facility. Others paused for 2 seconds and then began debating the best ways of collecting the latest petition. I don't know who they are trying to convince - the City sems to be finally convinced and petitions from city residents are not going to sway the RLD Board.
Dan Clark told me the RLD should buy the WWPL, fix it up and use it for their service center instead of building a new building to do the same. I wonder how the WWPL staff feel about that outcome!
Sign in to comment