I may be a librarian (I don't work at MPL) but I'm also a citizen of
Minneapolis. My wife uses the library for work and my kids visit at least
twice a week. Saying that I shouldn't be on the Minneapolis Library Board
because I work in a library is absurd.
It's hard to talk about 'thinking outside the box' when you have two minutes
to make an opening statement and a minute each to answer two questions. I
tried at least two times: one time suggesting that librarians needed to
change the way they provide service (get out from behind the desk and help
people find things in the stacks) and one time suggesting that MPL stop
buying new materials (save for children's and foreign language materials)
until we restore the branch libraries to full staffing and normal hours.
Eric Hinsdale
www.erichinsdale.com
From: wmmarks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Mpls] From Candidates Library Board Forum
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:46:28 -0500
Much worse than the naming rights, which were repulsive on the face of it,
was 15 candidates, only four of which would >possibly< be worth voting
for. It was very, very sad.
Of those 15 candidates, fully five of them were librarians, at least one of
which is an MPL employee. Hello... Are you quitting your day job? This is a
kind of 'you're your own grandpa' thing. You cannot be both an employee and
a board member. Second, this is a citizens board; librarians have a lot
more say in how the library works than do the patrons as it is. Having
librarians on the board--including Virginia Holte--is not OK with me. It
skewers the issues from the needs of the patrons to the needs of the
librarians. Librarians already have two unions, PLUM and AFSME, to bring
their issues to the fore. In fairness, the citizenry, who are paying the
freight on all of this, should have one vehicle for their input.
What was patently clear was that most of those asking for our vote were
pretty well clueless on what libraries are all about. For example: no one
seemed to understand that libraries are only about books secondarily.
Libraries are about people and their needs qua books, etc. Therefore, if
you are shifting employees around constantly, so that one is never sure
when walking into the library that the same staff will be there from one
day to the next, the library is not serving the public. Staff continuity is
part of what makes libraries work for the patrons.
Second, the library wants to both take money raised by individual community
libraries downtown and to have a newly installed person(s) in management
choose what books the community libraries should have. Excuse me? The
librarians in the branches are the ones who hear from patrons what kind of
books they need. Downtown has not a clue because they don't hear from the
branch patrons. Any materials they choose, other than standard replacements
(dictionaries, atlases, the latest Harry Potter) are chosen in a vacuum
Also, when we donate money to our neighborhood libraries, from NRP funds,
other neighborhood monies, or our own pockets we want that money to stay in
the neighborhood library so that it can be used for materials and
programming that meet our needs.
Third, at least one library employee who had put in 29 years, 46 weeks, was
summarily discharged, not because the employee had failed, but because it
could save the library x amount of money in pension benefits if the
employee did not stay the extra six weeks until retirement. How slimy is
that?
Fourth: not one candidate had anything to say about thinking outside the
box in an atmosphere where virtually no one in management can do that. How
astute does that make present board members? Zip, zero, nada clue.
Fifth: the culture of MPL is one of backbiting pettiness. Not one candidate
talked about how to change that paradigm to one which would serve the
patrons better.
On another level, city council and the mayor are now talking about
dissolving the library board and making themselves leaders of the library.
Unbelievable ego. Unbelievably stupid. The mayor is entirely
undistinguished as is this city council. Why even posit the notion of
taking on another whole host of issues when you cannot handle the issues
already on your plate.
What was distressing was the dearth of clear ideas. I left the forum
feeling lower than a snake's belly.
WizardMarks, Central
David Strand wrote:
I thought that the most controversial and distressing
idea to be presented at last nights forum was when
Alan Hooker expressed much enthusiasm for the idea of
selling naming rights to various libraries and
subsections to raise funds.
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules.
If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
