| Dave, one correction to your post. You wrote:
>If true - and I'm opening to arguments that it isn't - new library directors >will have to deal with the mess. Will you allow diversion of referendum >funds to operating costs? What measures would you support to close the $1.6 >million annual operating deficit Bob identifies? Would you close libraries? >Ask for a new referendum? Level with voters that there may have been a >bait-and-switch? The $1.6 million per year is capital money normally budgetted through the CLIC process to the Library. This amount has been cut for 2003-2006. The operating shortfall is a separate issus. It is still an estimate but it is significantly higher than $1.6 million per year. The shortfall estimates announced by the library last year were in the range of $2.6 to $3.2 million dollars per year when the projects are all complete. You mention the library directors having to answer to this question. I am interested in what the mayor has to say about her involvement in all of this as well. Library staff and board members have told me, and this was all confirmed by a reporter at the SW Journal, that the Library Board met with the mayor before the referndum and when the shortfall was discussed the mayor said something to the effect of we can't ask the people for more money now, we will have to go back to them after the buildings are up. The mayor did not respond to the SW Journal when they were researching this but someone on her staff said the conversation did not take place. Bob Gustafson 13th |
