Regarding the Library Board's 6-0 vote not to renew Mary Lawson's contract as Director:
1) If memory serves me, Ms. Lawson submitted a letter of resignation to the Library Board early last spring, and the Library Board took no action. They should have initiated a nationwide search for her replacement at that time. 2) Now the Library Board votes to not renew her contract (6-9 months after she submitted her resignation). The Library Board should have directed staff to initiate a nationwide search as part of their recent motion and vote to not renew Ms. Lawson's contract. We should be seeking an experienced manager with strong leadership and finance skills, good public relations experience and political acumen; a good library background would be nice, but shouldn't be a requirement. A national search should not preclude internal candidates nor any other qualified metro candidates from applying. 3) Now that the Board has publicly acknowledged that there is a looming shortfall in operating funds as the new, larger and remodeled library facilities begin coming online across the city, I expect to see Board action to actively address the issue. Which programs are to be cut? How much more operating money will be needed, where, and over what time periods? Where will the needed funds come from? When will the Library Foundation be made operational, and how will it interface with Friends of MPL? How can the Library work more effectively with MPS to get more children and their families actively using the library to help improve educational outcomes? Hopefully preschool storytimes and homework helper programs will be expanded rather than reduced or eliminated. Hopefully the parties are planning for the future. Michael Hohmann 13th Ward www.mahohmannbizplans.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Robert Gustafson > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 1:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Mpls] New Director for our Libraries > > > Steve Brandt writes in todays strib about the Library > Board's 6-0 vote to not renew Mary Lawson's contract > as director. It makes for interesting discussion when > you look at the reasons sited. > > The major stated reason for the non-renewal is that > Ms. Lawson had pursued another job opening in Florida > earlier this year. I have a hard time swallowing this > one. Carol Johnson looks at another job, she gets a > raise. Mary Lawson makes it to the final cut in > Orlando, and she gets terminated? I don't think so. > > A second reason stated by President Savran for the > action was that "the board wanted to move in a new > direction." Pardon my confusion but we are sitting in > the first years of a ten year program to entirely > rebuild or renovate the entire Minneapolis Public > Library system. If this is the reason for her > termination than exactly what new direction does the > board want to head? Is there something we, as the > taxpayers that supported the $140 million dollar > referendum, should know? > > The last reason stated was that some board members > felt they need someone who could "better communicate > with the board, City Hall and the public." This might > have some substance. Certainly however Mary can't be > blamed for poor communication to the public concerning > the referendum. It passed with substantial support. I > do believe the Internet controversy was not handled > very well in the public eye, but other than a few > library or Internet advocates did any significant > portion of the public really care? > > As to communicating with the board she has been > reporting as their director for seven years and as > head of Community Libraries for probably ten years > before that. Are we to believe that her communication > skills somehow decreased suddenly? This seems doubly > interesting with Mary's comment about the action > saying she was "puzzled by the board's lack of > communication to me" as well as that she had "been > given no specific reason" for the action. Is anyone > communicating with anyone else at our Library? Perhaps > they should try using e-mail if they find personal > communications difficult. > > I wonder if Mary is being set up as the fall person > for when the Board "discovers" that they don't have > the finances available to adequately run their newly > remodeled libraries. That would be a hard sale however > since it was Mary that first tried to push the > referendum for the Central Library only, leaving the > community libraries off due to their unanswered > funding questions. It would also be a hard sale as it > is Mary's signature on budget requests that predict > the over $4 million dollar projected operating > shortfall upon the completion of all the libraries. > She was communicating the information to the city, was > the Board not hearing the message? > > The one fault I would put at Mary's feet is that she > was too willing to defend the position that the budget > issue could be resolved somehow. That they would just > run a tighter ship if they had to. It took way to much > effort to get her to acknowledge that what was really > needed was more revenue. Or perhaps a different plan > for the community libraries altogether. > > Harder questions should have been asked before the > referendum was approved. Better answers should have > been demanded. These questions and answers were the > responsibility of Mary, but they were the > responsibility of the Library Board as well. Perhaps > now the Board will begin searching for those financial > answers. Lets try to have some of those answers before > a new director is hired, or at least make sure the new > director knows what the hard questions are. > > Bob Gustafson > 13th > snip _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
