[Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting 11/18/2004
I attended the 11/18 meeting of the Walker Library Joint Task Force. I haven't played an active role in this Task Force project, but I'm very interested. I've been an advocate of a mixed-use library facility on this site for several years now. I missed the last meeting of 10/13/04 and wanted to provide some input on the 18th. However, there was no time on the agenda for public comments, which seemed odd and I left the meeting feeling very frustrated. But there's always the issues list! Thus, I'm posting my public comments to list members, and forwarding them to Ms. Kit Hadley, Director of MPL. At the meeting, Ms. Hadley kindly agreed to forward my comments to all Task Force members. Thanks, Kit. ~~ Much of the 11/18 meeting dealt with wordsmithing language in the draft RFP which will soon be sent to developers-- an onerous process at best, especially in a public meeting. The Task Force adopted the RFP as amended. My comments deal with the RFP and my concept of the development process, as it pertains to this project. Hopefully there is still time for consideration of my comments and concepts by Task Force members, and possibly room for inclusion in the RFP-- implicitly or explicitly, before it is issued. Likewise, many of the concepts should prove useful in any project negotiations. A couple of major issues were evident at the meeting. First off, there is great concern by Library Board members over the seemingly large shortfall in funds available to construct a new Walker Library as part of a mixed-use development on the current site. The fair reuse value of the 'air rights' on the site has been estimated at approximately $500-600K (I'm not sure of the source). Combined with tentative other sources of funding, there seems to be a $1-2.5 million capital shortfall, assuming the new library will cost $5.5 million. Secondly, there was some expressed concern over language in the draft RFP being overly restrictive-- hence the wordsmithing. Regarding the value of the site to a potential developer: It is totally dependent upon what kind of development is designed and built. An overly restrictive RFP process will either doom the project to failure, or result in a less than optimum project. Any potential developer must have the freedom to design a project that meets or exceeds the needs of both the community and the MPL, while providing an acceptable return on the private investment. Simply stated, the more value the developer can add to the site, the higher the potential value of the site. I think a fundamental concept should be to allow the developer to assume as much risk with the project as possible. Reduce as much risk as possible for the MPL. Let the developer hold the upside potential as well as the downside risk. Let the developer be responsible for commercial space; the library shouldn't be responsible for filling commercial space or making a coffee shop successful. Perhaps the value of the property exceeds the estimated value by a significant amount! The only way to find out is to specify 'minimal needs that must be addressed' in the RFP , and allow the developers the freedom to make it all happen. There should always be room for negotiation in order to keep the process viable-- allowing the developer a fair return while helping the MPL close the funding gap. After all, we know pretty much what we want, but we can't get there without the developers and the private financing they bring to the table. The developer wants a good investment project, the city wants to increase the tax base by getting a higher-value, taxable property on prime real estate, the community and MPL want a state of the art library. We want a win-win solution all around. It will take the community, the MPL Board, the City and a good developer to make that happen, through negotiation. The MPL wants all library operations on a single floor to assure operational efficiency-- the public library portion, and backroom storage/operations. It shouldn't be terribly important what floor the library is located on except for shipping/receiving concerns. Maybe the library should be on the street level, maybe there are better options. Commercial space is usually located on the street level, but it probably depends on what is going in the commercial space. In this Uptown location, I'd think commercial would work just as well on the second floor as on the first, but I'm no expert in such matters. However, these issues should be open to discussion/negotiation. As I understand it, the current library consumes about 17,000 sq. ft. of space, including the meeting room. For purposes of the RFP, I'd suggest breaking out the space requirements for the public library/backroom storage/operations functions, and assigning a range of required space (i.e. between x and y sq. ft.), and likewise for public meeting space. This provides flexibility to designers. After all, the public meeting room need not be adjacent to the l
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting
> Finally I just got my property tax statement and the Library Board's share > was eye-popping, with further increases coming down the pike. While I can't > speak for my fellow citizens, I would be hard pressed to pay even more for > libraries. Perhaps the Library Board needs to look at its entire system, to > determine whether it can afford to keep all of its properties. A strategic > sale of one or two of its libraries may help pay for other more pressing > needs. Furthermore, a merger with Hennepin County should be examined for > cost saving opportunities as well. No kidding! I just got my property tax information as well. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have just one year without increases that are 5 times the rate of inflation? If these annual 9% increases keep up, I'll be forced to sell my house, and move to another city in a few years. The library share was amazing to me also. Most of the increase in my property taxes goes to the city. Dear Mr. Mayor, and City Council, STOP SPENDING SO MUCH! I can't afford it! Dan McGrath Longfellow http://www.smokeoutgary.org REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting 11/18/2004 1pm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, I'd just like to say some words in defense of MPL, because I think WM's remarks are not entirely fair. I'm not saying malicious, but I don't think that they take into account the way the library functions or Niziolek's intentions in the dual-use plan. Yes, I do know that Niziolek and RT have arm twisted the MPL Board by saying they would not loose the money we voted for community libraries through the Library Referendum unless the MPL Board created this task force so that Niziolek can explore his idea of mixed use for the library. This is because the library sits on a spendy piece of property which is not collecting taxes. This is also a traditional Minneapolis approach to the historicity of its buildings--anything over 15 minutes old can be knocked down and rebuilt. This is made more complicated by the fact that the library has already lost to the historical commission by having to keep the old Walker Library historical, which limits it's salability, or so it is claimed. (I have huge doubts about that declaration.) The city council representative on the MPL Board is Kathleen Lamb. She is the board member who argued at the historical commission hearing that MPL did not want any of it's Carnegie libraries designated as historical and that their constituency had so decreed. Since I had already argued for historical preservation for Hosmer at that same meeting at the behest of my neighborhood, the chair pointed out to Ms. Lamb that some of her constituency had just stated that they wanted historical designation for a community library and had been asking for it since about 1987. My question: does that imply that the city council did not want to preserve historical buildings? or just historical libraries? RT thinks he's in the position of having to squeeze blood out of a turnip at every turn. He appears to be willing to sacrifice highly important public space for another pile of potential shekels. Seeing the area of town in which the Walker finds itself, would it not be more thoughtful to consider the possibility of building an even bigger library on that site in future years, rather than passive-aggressively losing control of it now? None of this, however, addresses internal flaws in library practice which make keeping community libraries open and adequately staffed linger in library limbo. Deployment of staff determines who can stay open for how many hours per week. The traditional argument has been that some community libraries are underutilized because the patrons are not there. Hosmer was one such. Franklin another. However, when Hosmer proved decisively that the it was underutilized because MPL had not encouraged patronage (actually had actively discouraged it and still does to a certain extent) and that by presenting materials and programming that the neighborhoods using that branch needed, the patronage was there and would use the library, no efforts were made to examine other flagging community libraries in light of that discovery. In the end, the library system looks fine to the casual visitor, but does not serve the citizenry as well as it can and should. Dorie Gallagher was declaring that "we want our libraries open" in the post that I replied to. (My credentials in defense of MPL are well known.) I agree with Gallagher, I want our libraries open, but that cannot happen unless we thoroughly examine how staff are deployed and whether or not staff deployment serves MPL's constituency. I say it does not, nor has it for many years. That the most neglected libraries also mesh with less economically fortunate areas of the city is, I would argue, the primary reason for their neglect. It is not malicious, necessarily, but it is habitual and stems from the middle class perspective of library management. In the past, efforts to include a non-middle class perspective have been routinely rebuffed--and are to this very day. As a result of all this, I consider Niziolek's initiative--to combine housing with the Walker library--a way of interfering with the work of the MPL board, the city council, and the mayor vis-a-vis libraries in Minneapolis. I want the city to loose the referendum money to fix Walker and to find some other spot on which to exercise personal experiments. WizardMarks, Central REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting
The reason the City is having problems keeping its libraries open is not due to staffing decisions at the Central Library. It's due to the fact that the Library Board owns too much real estate given the fact that one of it's major sources of funds -- Local Aid to Cities -- has been substantially cut over the past couple years (with very little chance that is will ever be restored). Now of course I want Libraries in the City, but the fact is Walker is a dysfunctional library. Even though I live equa-distance between Walker and Washburn, our family goes to Washburn 95% of the time. This is due to conveneince (including parking), books in the stacks, and yes aesthetics. Uptown is a high density, high traffic commercial area that serves the region as well as the surrounding neighborhood. It makes sense that the City and Library Board look at all options at this site, including mixed uses and even outright sale. Obviously the options looked at thus far don't pencil out (don't make sense financially) but fixing a leaky roof, while the cheapest, is a wholly dissatisfying option. Finally I just got my property tax statement and the Library Board's share was eye-popping, with further increases coming down the pike. While I can't speak for my fellow citizens, I would be hard pressed to pay even more for libraries. Perhaps the Library Board needs to look at its entire system, to determine whether it can afford to keep all of its properties. A strategic sale of one or two of its libraries may help pay for other more pressing needs. Furthermore, a merger with Hennepin County should be examined for cost saving opportunities as well. Dean E. Carlson Ward 10, East Harriet - Original Message - From: "WizardMarks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "mpls mn forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:35 PM Subject: Re: [Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting 11/18/2004 1pm > > Dorie Rae Gallagher wrote: > > >Well said MD! We want our library doors open! > > > WM: If you want library doors open, then you are going to have to > persuade the board of MPL and it's staff that the way they have deployed > staff has been screwy for the last 10 years or better. Look particularly > at circulation statistics for ALL libraries and the staff count for > those community libraries with the highest stats. Then compare that with > Central stats. and Central staff count. I believe that you will discover > that Central has far more staff members (just in the library itself, not > in the admin. depts.) than its circulation warrants. Granted, some > people who use Central come there for reference documents which cannot > circulate, but then people come to community libraries for reference > work as well. The over-staffing of Central predates the recent extreme > budget cuts by years. > > Vis-a-vis Walker, I have no idea why the board is even discussing > sharing space with private entities. Walker is extremely busy, it's on > at least six bus lines, it's incredibly convenient and, as such, it's in > a primo position to build patronage of the library. In a nation which is > becoming more illiterate by the year, this is an important function for > libraries. > > WizardMarks, Central REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting 11/18/2004 1pm
OK, I'd just like to say some words in defense of MPL, because I think WM's remarks are not entirely fair. I'm not saying malicious, but I don't think that they take into account the way the library functions or Niziolek's intentions in the dual-use plan. See below: > "WM" == wizardmarks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: WM> Dorie Rae Gallagher wrote: >> Well said MD! We want our library doors open! >> WM> WM: If you want library doors open, then you are going to have WM> to persuade the board of MPL and it's staff that the way they WM> have deployed staff has been screwy for the last 10 years or WM> better. Look particularly at circulation statistics for ALL WM> libraries and the staff count for those community libraries WM> with the highest stats. Then compare that with Central WM> stats. and Central staff count. I believe that you will WM> discover that Central has far more staff members (just in the WM> library itself, not in the admin. depts.) than its circulation WM> warrants. Granted, some people who use Central come there for WM> reference documents which cannot circulate, but then people WM> come to community libraries for reference work as well. The WM> over-staffing of Central predates the recent extreme budget WM> cuts by years. Circulation figures cannot be the only criterion. Central provides many services that the branches don't. For one thing, Central holds a large number of resources and distributes them out to the branches (e.g., I hardly ever bother to go direct to a branch these days, because each branch has spotty holdings; I just order the books I want through the web and go pick them up). Also, the central library provides repository services such as reference services, federal documents, etc., that simply can't be done remotely. Central also provides the invaluable inter-library loan service. In general, staffing up Central can be justified as providing services that are used by all the branches. WM> Vis-a-vis Walker, I have no idea why the board is even WM> discussing sharing space with private entities. Walker is WM> extremely busy, it's on at least six bus lines, it's WM> incredibly convenient and, as such, it's in a primo position WM> to build patronage of the library. In a nation which is WM> becoming more illiterate by the year, this is an important WM> function for libraries. I apologize for speaking for Dan Niziolek, since I might be garbling his essential idea. Here's my understanding of his proposal. You may not agree with it, but it was prompted by a love for our libraries and our neighborhoods: 1. This building is a mess. It's built like a bunker, and it has been plagued with repeated leak problems and now this roofing issue. The building was designed in a brief fad for underground construction for energy-efficiency. Now we can build much more energy-efficient solutions without building bunkers. 2. The underground location has other adverse impacts. One of the most notable is that the garden area around the library must be closed, because of the danger of people in it being hit by garbage and other objects thrown down by passers-by and people waiting for the bus. Look down at the garden someday as you pass by. You will find that it is always filled with rubbish. 3. My personal take: being underground is yucky. If you buy ##1-3, or any substantial part thereof, you might like to see the library get out of the present building. This is especially true of #1, because it holds out the promise of a steady flow of expenses to repair the building. Unfortunately, notwithstanding ##1-3, there is no way that the library board, by its lonesome, could afford to replace this building. They can barely afford to fix its roof alone! Given that, it seems entirely reasonable to try to take advantage of the fact that the Walker is on some primo real estate to try to get developer dollars to add to the library's money and make a nice building. I think that we are right to be concerned about some of the details: 1. Would enough $$$ would come in to make this worthwhile? I seem to recall some of these projects not working out that well for the non-profit. I think the Museum of Modern Art tried to do this in Manhattan, and it didn't work too well because the multi-million dollar condos came on the market during a NY real estate slump. 2. Would we be paying too high a price in terms of library downtime? I don't know whether the library would be closed much longer under the mixed-use plan than under the plan that just fixes the roof. If this falls through, making some deal with the YWCA seems like it might be nice. But the cost of finding some way to bridge over the Greenway might make that a non-starter At any rate, I don't know enough about the pro's and con's yet to either endorse the dual-use plan or reje
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting 11/18/2004 1pm
Dorie Rae Gallagher wrote: Well said MD! We want our library doors open! WM: If you want library doors open, then you are going to have to persuade the board of MPL and it's staff that the way they have deployed staff has been screwy for the last 10 years or better. Look particularly at circulation statistics for ALL libraries and the staff count for those community libraries with the highest stats. Then compare that with Central stats. and Central staff count. I believe that you will discover that Central has far more staff members (just in the library itself, not in the admin. depts.) than its circulation warrants. Granted, some people who use Central come there for reference documents which cannot circulate, but then people come to community libraries for reference work as well. The over-staffing of Central predates the recent extreme budget cuts by years. Vis-a-vis Walker, I have no idea why the board is even discussing sharing space with private entities. Walker is extremely busy, it's on at least six bus lines, it's incredibly convenient and, as such, it's in a primo position to build patronage of the library. In a nation which is becoming more illiterate by the year, this is an important function for libraries. WizardMarks, Central Minneapolis Issues Forum - A 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. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting 11/18/2004 1pm
> > > Concerned about parking at the library. Parking needs to be reasonably > priced. Currently people have to watch the clock so they don't get a ticket > at this library. As a result, people don't use the parking. Better computers > and upgraded facilities are also needed. Expressed concern re the funding > gap. Suggested that the task force consider taking public testimony at the > Nov. 18 meeting as well. The Walker could be an even more important civic > space in the future if Jefferson School closes. > > Gary Farland - ECCO - If a new facility is not affordable, he suggested > there were many things that could be done to make the current library nicer > (seating, décor). > > Ben Paulus - Felt it was great that a library existed on this expensive > site. Did not think the Library should be sacrificed for housing. Closing > the library for two years or moving it to a temporary location suggests that > priorities are in the wrong place. > > Jill Bode - sees the roof of the current Walker as a park and likes it > > Mayor Rybak said the discussion is about a better library. There is no in > interest in moving the library or getting more intense development on the > site. > > Some comments... > > They left out my favorite comment from the kid from the coffee shop who > said that the library should be a 5 story edifice dedicated to books and > culture... > > Both the Minneapolis and Hennepin County Library systems have had a > strong focus on brick and mortar money and building and renovation... > and all that money, goes for extravagant, excessive, unnecessary > structures, great for a photo-op in Architecture Minnesota magazine... > but not a penny to keep the library open, or to hire enough staff, or to > fund programs, > or to purchase materials, or to offer the services that make a library > a vital resource to our community. > Madeline Douglass > Well said MD! We want our library doors open! What good are buildings if the doors are closed. What good is a business if it is not producing or accessible. To give stats that we have all these libraries...what an accomplishment...did anyone tell some of these impressed people with Minneapolis that our libraries are closed 50% of the time! We don't have money for librarieswe only have money for housing. I do not believe that every inch of ground needs to have cute litte 3-4 story buildings on. Yes, it is very European...Europe has been around many hundreds of years...Minnesota since the early 1800's. There is no need that housing needs to be in institutional buildings. Let the building stand alone for what it is. Want 4 stories...make it 4 stories of library. If there is no money to keep all the libraries open and functioningthere should not be money available for excess building at the whim of developers. Our taxes are for core services for citizens... not to supply revenue for developers. Thanks Madeline for the update... Dorie Rae Gallagher Nokomis > > REMINDERS: > 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 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. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Walker Library Task Force Meeting 11/18/2004 1pm
The next Walker Library Task Force Meeting is Thursday November 18th at 1:00 pm at Walker Library.. Some of the players in the last meeting... Members in attendance: Co Chairs Gregory Gray, R.T. Rybak, Members: Anita Duckor, Lisa Goodman, Diane Hofstede, Christina Melloh, Dan Niziolek, Ed Pluimer, Helen Spry. Excused: Keith Sjoquist Staff/consultants: Chuck Lutz, Cherre Palenius, Mark Winkelhake, Beth Elliott (City); Amy Ryan, Kit Hadley, Dave Kirk, Ed Koval (Library); Sally Westby (Task Force Coordinator) Community Members/Others: Library Trustee Rod Krueger, Susan Andre, Scott Bader, Jill Bode, Josephine Clark, Doug Copeland, Annella Duerr, Gary Farland, Dorie Gallagher, Caroline Griepentrog, Nancy Hite, Michael Lander, Taylor Laux, Paul Mellblom, Ben Paulus, Richard Rebers, Linda Schutz, Pat Scott, Carsten Slostad, Karen Sterk, Gary Thaden, John Veda Some highlights of the last meeting... LIBRARY: Possible funding Library referendum* $440,000 Trust fund proceeds from the Old Walker Library** $180,000 GO Tax abatement bond proceeds (city/county) $500,000 - $850,000 Private capital fundraising*** $500,000+ Hennepin County Transit Oriented Development (TOD) $400,000 MPL Land sale (air rights) to developer $350,000 - $500,000 *Subject to Library Board and City Council approval of MPL's capital plan ** Subject to Library Board approval *** As noted in other cities' mixed-use library projects OTHER POSSIBLE SOURCES: Possible funding Met Council Livable Communities Development Account (LCDA) $ 500,000 -$1M Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP) $ 500,000 - $1M TOTAL $3.37M - $4.87M Parking, parking and more parking Amy Ryan said that the current Walker parking lot has 33 parking spaces of which 8 are designated as staff parking. The Library owns the parking lot and the City maintains and enforces the meters. The meters have a one-hour limit. Use of the parking lot varies by time of day. It is not usually busy in the morning and picks up by the end of the day. By 6 p.m. it is often full. 5.0 Feasibility of Mixed Use Development - Cherre Palenius reviewed the report prepared for the Task Force by Bonestroo & Associates (attachment 4.3). In preparing the report, Bonestroo reviewed a great deal of factual information regarding the site. They were assisted by Beth Elliot of the City's Community Planning and Economic Development division. Zoning allows a maximum of 34 residential units on the site. To meet code, 47 parking spaces are needed. Because of the size of the site, this will mean two levels of parking. If housing is developed along with a library on the site, the actual number of housing units possible will be 21 because of parking restrictions. Duckor said she was not as comfortable as others were with the potential financing sources. She felt there was a significant difference between the cost of repairing the current roof vs. the cost of a new facility. There is no point in issuing a RFP if there is no way that a developer can make the project work The Mayor reminded the group that there was a difference between a new building that would last for many years and the current challenge of roof repair In response to a question from Hofstede, Lutz said that construction would take 12 - 18 months and could begin in April-May, 2005. Ryan said it would take the library 6 months to move back into the building so that the total amount of time that the library would be closed (or an interim site needed) would be 2 years 6.0 Community Comments - the following comments were made Nancy Hite of the YWCA said that the Y is bursting at the seams and looking to redevelop. A membership survey indicates interest in expanded fitness offerings and in meeting space for community gatherings. Both the Y and the Library are places that serve whole families. The Y has 200 parking spaces in its ramp - they are not all used all the time. The Y would like to explore ways to connect to the Greenway. Hite felt it made sense to see if coordination with the Library were possible. Gary Thaden - Lowry Hill East - suggested that an opportunity was lost when the Park Board was not invited to be part of the Walker Library development process. Mary Gallagher - felt the cost of redoing the Walker Library was out of control. Branch libraries in other parts of the city (e.g. Nokomis) are suffering. Cheryl Lugar - Nokomis neighborhood. Was disturbed about the gap in financing for the Walker redevelopment. Felt that the current Walker well used. It is not a flop. It is not an ugly building. Pat Scott - Kenwood Isles Area Association - Suggested that the Walker is a crucial institution for the Uptown community. She said she is committed to working with the Board to keep the Walker open. The financing gap for a new facility seems to be huge especially in light of the small library budget but she is willing to listen to the numbers and possibilities. There are developers who would like to
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library task force meeting this evening
Forgot to mention..Sale of the Walker would bring in $180,000. Do you really think the library is the focus? dorie gallagher nokomis - Original Message - > with... > > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > > > > > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A 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. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 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. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Walker Library task force meeting this evening
On Wednesday, October 13, 2004, at 08:49 AM, Dorie Rae Gallagher wrote: The Walker library task force will be meeting from 4:30 to 6:30 this evening at Walker. This meeting is to discuss the mix-use development for a new library. The library board picked members who were supposedly open to all suggestions, but a couple will sway in the direction told, the Mayor and the two Council have already expressed their wish for multi-use and have used their power to obtain it...giving it a slanted task force to start with. No neighborhood groups were asked to participate nor some of the people who have really worked within the system to preserve the libraries. I'm reluctant to ever wear an official hat, but this is an exceptional occasion. The library trustees voted, prior to the vote in city council to deny sale of the bonds for the Walker roof, and certainly prior to the formation of the Walker task force, to fix the Walker roof and take a longer view on other options. So to say that the library board picked members who "will sway in the direction told," is to say that they are inclined to stick with their prior decision to fix the roof. It is quite erroneous to suggest that the library board has taken a position other than its stated one. There may be several who would want to characterize the trustees as going in one direction or another, but the library board is on record with a position. The work of the task force is to assess the feasibility of other options. In my mind that is good public policy formation. Why close the door to answers before any consideration? What is to be gained by not knowing? The worry is, and the council agreed to this, that the findings be brought forward in time to go ahead with the roof in 2005. So that option is not foreclosed. This is a measured and considered course of action which will benefit the city, not detract from it. It is a gross distortion to call the task force "slanted," or to suggest that the neighborhood representative was selected sans neighborhood organization input. Input is what this process is all about. Best wishes, Laura trustee of the library board Laura Waterman Wittstock MIGIZI Communications, Inc. 3123 East Lake Street Minneapolis, MN 55406 612.721.6631 ext 219 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.migizi.org http://laurawatermanwittstock.blogspot.com/ REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Walker Library task force meeting this evening
The Walker library task force will be meeting from 4:30 to 6:30 this evening at Walker. This meeting is to discuss the mix-use development for a new library. The library board picked members who were supposedly open to all suggestions, but a couple will sway in the direction told, the Mayor and the two Council have already expressed their wish for multi-use and have used their power to obtain it...giving it a slanted task force to start with. No neighborhood groups were asked to participate nor some of the people who have really worked within the system to preserve the libraries. It will be up to the neighborhood to come together and decide if they want a six story building on the spot, it will be up to the park board to preserve land near by, and it will be up to the task force to be honest in assessment and not direct according to their own wants.elected officials are for representation of the people.. not to pursue own agendas. Last I heard anyway...times are changing. I have been told...Lake street Library is having a meeting this evening also on it's closing in May. Don't know the times. dorie rae gallagher nokomis REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Walker Library Task Force
http://www.mpls.lib.mn.us/wa_update092004.asp The Walker Community Library Joint Task Force is charged with making a recommendation on the future of Walker Library by February 28, 2005. The members of the Task Force are: Mayor R. T. Rybak, Co-Chair Library Board President Gregory Gray, Co-Chair Library Trustees Anita Duckor and Diane Hofstede Council Members Lisa Goodman and Dan Niziolek Community Representatives, City Appointed: Ed Pluimer, Keith Sjoquist Community Representatives, Library Board Appointed: Helen Spry, Christina Melloh Thursday, September 30 from 7:30 to 9:00 a.m. Wednesday, October 13 from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. Thursday, November 18 from 1:00 to 2:30 p.m. All meetings will be held in the Walker Community Library meeting room, 2880 Hennepin Ave. *** Ed Pluimer is an attorney with Dorsey and Whitney who also appears to be actively involved with several neighborhood organizations, Keith Sjoquist is an architect who has converted existing buildings to "commercial use." Not sure who Helen Spry is, but Christina Melloh was or (is) an officer with the Powderhorn Park neighborhood association. Seems odd that Pat Scott is not a member of this task force or anyone from the CARAG neighborhood association. So... the head librarian of Walker Library was excluded... or should I say "muzzled" She knows who uses the library and how important it is to the community but we don't want to know about that...not too many community reps there either... they'd just cause a ruckusgotta get those condos built before the first freeze sets in. Madeline Douglass Kingfield REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email 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 City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
