I thnk I like scenario #3 , it best keeps the services intact and
dispersed. It mostly imposes a scheduling burden on patrons. That would seem the
lesser burden to bear compared to the other options.
As long as there is no likelihood of any of the three closed buildings
being sold (permanently closed) I'd opt for number three.
I admit to being only a recreational user of the library, I don't use it
for research much, so this certainly isn't a comprehensive opinion.
I think keeping the outreach programs going is of the utmost importance.
Jon Gorder
Loring Park
TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject
(Mpls-specific, of course.)
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
