D. Klein,
Just for the record, not that anyone is keeping track, I'm not supporting
the Library referendum either for some of the very reasons you have stated,
quite well I might add. Today I was figuring how much I would be paying
over the long hall and its just too much for a shoddy plan. I would like to
support a new library but their plans do not seem well thought out or
fiscally responsible.
Karen Forbes
Central
----- Original Message -----
From: D.Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 10:16 AM
Subject: Library vote
> I am usually a lurker on this site, mostly because I feel I don't have a
> good grasp of the issues discussed here (but obviously I am interested!) -
> and since I was soundly walloped for my one voiced opinion on graffiti.
> But, I offer my (and others of my family and acquaintance) opinion on the
> library vote as perhaps the voice of those of us who don't "get" the
debate.
>
> We're not voting for it. (We are voting for schools.)
>
> I may be wrong, but the site, method, means and manner of obtaining a new
> main library seem seriously flawed, and the corollary branch plans seem to
> be a weak addendum. I am no longer willing to vote for something with
the
> good faith that it will all be worked out later in the details. Give me
> good details and I'll support it.
>
> This has nothing to do with our property taxes. We pay alot, and are
> willing to do so in order to live in this city in a great neighborhood.
In
> fact, for a terrific library plan, I'd pay more. But closing the central
> library down for years, building it in the same location, and shuffling
> books and people around in the interim makes no sense to me. Why not
> consider a city/county merger? My hometown did it twenty years ago. Why
> not move to the Sheraton Hotel site, make it part of the skyway system,
make
> it a city center rather than an out of the way afterthought? Why bundle
the
> branch plans in with the catastrophically needed central building?
>
> If all of these questions, and more, have been cogently answered, well
then,
> I haven't gotten it, and neither have those I have discussed it with.
>
> When I moved here twenty years ago I was excited, anticipating using a big
> city library. Had to be much better, I thought, than what I was used to
> living in smaller and less progressive towns. While I moved to St. Paul
> (what did I know?), I worked in downtown Minneapolis. But, even though
my
> office was one block from the downtown library, I found I used on a weekly
> basis, a beautiful old St. Paul Carnegie library on Marshall Ave. I
> preferred that and the downtown St. Paul library to Minneapolis. Why?
> Because when I first saw the downtown Minneapolis library, I laughed. I
> thought it was a joke. I couldn't believe that a city of this size and
> sophistication, to say nothing of striving for a world class,
arts-forward,
> progressive reputation, could consider that mess, that pole building with
> escalators, a world class public library. Everywhere I had lived had
> better, and many towns were smaller, less noted and poorer. Then when I
> finally moved to Minneapolis, I thought - now I bet I'll have a great old
> Carnegie building to take the kids to for story time - and what's our
> neighborhood library? The Walker - a groovy basement space with tin can
> signage - out of necessity to explain what the heck it is (LIBRARY, thank
> you very much), overlooking a littered, unused courtyard. So where do we
> go? Ridgedale. But we shouldn't have to.
>
> The rationales given for a new central library are so "well-reasoned", so
> "well-studied" and so lame! For example, one of the core reasons given is
> that there might be a fire and it isn't well protected! People! The
> average voter isn't going to rally around that concept (not to ignore the
> Fahrenheit 451 implications). Please! Give us something with heart! How
> about "The building is baboon-faced ugly, it never worked, it never could
> work, we messed up. Could we just start over and do it again?" That I'd
> vote for.
>
> So - bring me a simple, well thought out plan that doesn't look like pork
> barrel with 293 amendments tacked on and I'll support it, I'll vote for
it,
> I'll campaign for it, and I'll help pay for it. But this one isn't it.
>
>
>
>
> Also in support of the mandatory use of Spellcheck, (all grammatical and
> punctuation errors are my own).
>
> D. Klein
> Kenwood
>
>
