Responding in two parts: Part I On Wednesday, August 17, 2005, at 03:46 PM, wmmarks wrote:
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.
I really feel great about so many candidates - citizens all - who care and have passion about libraries. I've come to know almost all of them and they are all very fine people. The choice for voters is very diverse.
The DFL has endorsed six candidates: Alan Hooker, Laura Waterman Wittstock, Sheldon Mains, Gary Thaden, Rod Krueger, and Laurie Savran. AFSCME has endorsed Alan Hooker, Laura Waterman Wittstock, Sheldon Mains, Gary Thaden, and Rod Krueger. AFL-CIO COPE has endorsed Alan Hooker, Laura Waterman Wittstock, Sheldon Mains, Gary Thaden and Rod Krueger. And there are many other endorsements for this group.
These endorsements represent thousands of voters. The candidates answered questions in detail and explained their views. The endorsements are meaningful and valuable in this election process. In my opinion, we have passed careful review and tests of our suitability to be excellent library trustees.
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.
I really respect Wizard and her contributions to this list. On this point, I would have to say that the number of candidates (19) plus the time restraint (90 minutes) equals less than optimum time for probing questions. Therefore its really hard for me to say anyone is clueless because there isn't much chance to hear the full views. I'd urge everyone to look at the web sites of the candidates, pick up their literature and call them on the phone with questions.
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.
I got a similar question in the forum from Wizard about book selection. Here's what I said:
Under the pre-2003 decentralized collection development approach, over 65 different staff made selection decisions, resulting in inefficiencies and duplication of staff time and money, a loss of discounts, and highly inconsistent collections in terms of circulation and broad community needs.
Community librarians can communicate directly with selectors about the needs of their particular branches, and on-line forms have been developed to facilitate that communication. Selectors frequently visit community libraries for review and discussion with staff, and there are cross-divisional conversations at every level of the organization about how best to develop dynamic and relevant collections system-wide.
Is there room for improvement? Yes. I said I would take Wizard's concerns back for discussion and try to find the middle ground where the system continues to be more efficient and cost effective and individual community library choices are honored.
Laura Waterman Wittstock Candidate for Minneapolis Library Board of Trustees DFL and Labor endorsed Minneapolis, MN 612-387-4915 www.laurawatermanwittstock.com http://laurawatermanwittstock.blogspot.com/ Wittstock for Library Committee 913 19th Avenue SE, Mpls, 55414 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
