Writing Shotgun

MAIN LIBRARY NOT WORTH $10 MILLION IN REPAIRS? WHAT ABOUT $3 MILLION?

Theo DouglasTue. August 05
 

And what’s this about a two-year “gap in service”?

Time to leave work early today, for this afternoon’s budget study session, at 3:30 at City Hall, 333 W. Ocean Blvd.

Among the hot topics, of course, will be what to do with the city’s leaky 32-year-old Main Library–which, according to this morning’s Press-Telegram editorial “is almost 15 times bigger than small, efficient branch libraries, and not worth $10 million worth of repairs.”

Okay, first of all, let’s remind the P-T: it’s a Main Library! They’re supposed to be bigger.

According to the Long Beach Public Library Foundation, the nonprofit that raises funds to cover library expenses not covered by the city, one reason we have a Main Library–besides to theoretically improve our minds–is to have a place to store all its 460,000 volumes.

If you want to know the truth, Main Library isn’t big from a librarian’s perspective. It’s small, partly because you can’t put shelves up against all those windows. (Thanks, Modernist architects!)

Also: according to the Foundation, if you cleared out every one of the city’s branches, there still wouldn’t be room to store all of Main Library’s books.

Now, on to the P-T’s second claim–that Main Library isn’t worth $10 million in repairs.

Foundation members met yesterday with City Manager Pat West, to discuss his and Mayor Bob Foster’s suggestion in the new city budget that the library be closed in October.

They handed West a July 3, 2007 report from the city’s Public Works department–asking Long Beach City Council to authorize the city manager to seek bids to fix the Main Library roof–and said West seemed surprised to receive it.

In the report, Public Works suggested three ways to fix the roof, and the third option didn’t even waterproof it–it mainly fixed leaky plumbing systems, for $800,000.

The first option was a complete rehabilitation–including removing concrete planters on the roof, “removal of pedestrian bridges and restoration of rooftop park,” asbestos abatement, fixing plumbing, and re-waterproofing the roof–for $9.1 million.
That, of course, was the expensive option.

But what about the second option? It featured asbestos remediation (perhaps not as good as abatement), fixing the leaky plumbing, “[removing] soils, planters and some concrete surfaces,” and waterproofing the roof–for $3 million.

I personally don’t have $3 million, but doesn’t that sound a lot better than $10 million?

What about that option? I have a call in to the city manager, and I’ll let you know his response when I hear back from him.

Foundation members say they were disturbed by yesterday’s meeting with West.

They say the city manager informed them that if Main Library does close in October, the city may have to go without any sort of a replacement–apparently even an interim, satellite Main Library–for two years. (I’ll ask West about that, too, when I hear from him.)

” ‘A gap in service’ is how he put it,” said Foundation Board Secretary Mary Hinds. Needless to say, Foundation members left City Hall unconvinced.

“There was nothing that definitely proved to us that it has to be shut down,” said Foundation Executive Director Sara Pillet.

“I think the question parents have to ask themselves is, ‘Is it worth one extra day a week for [my] kids, when people in this part of town won’t have a library?’ ” Pillet said, referencing the city’s plans to make up for shutting Main Library by keeping all the branch libraries in other parts of town open longer hours.

“I don’t think the public in good conscience can make that decision and decide that,” Pillet said.

Foundation members say they and various other Main Library support groups have collected more than 1,000 signatures on petitions asking the city not to close the library–and they’ve accomplished this in less than one week at one location: outside Main Library.

Maybe that’s some indication of how people really feel about not having a Main Library–even if being deprived of it for some indeterminate period would some day mean we had a new, better Main Library that didn’t leak.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Viewing 25 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Finally, an article that is showing us both sides of the story. Thank you Theo.
    • ^
    • v
    $800,000, $3,100,000, $9,100,000, or $10,000,000?

    Doesn't matter how much we might spend.

    Can you say, "Lipstick on a pig", boys and girls?
    • ^
    • v
    Dick, I agree that Main Library is not our most attractive public building. But it's a functioning main library (albeit, one not functioning as well as it should).
    I just wonder if the library's condition--and the potential $1.86 million yearly savings which closing it would reportedly generate--justify depriving residents of one of the city's greatest public resources, for however short or long a period.
    My understanding is that the City of Long Beach formed a main library task force yesterday--but as of now, there's literally no definitive plan in place to ensure (or even specify) what will happen when they close Main Library.
    And the city is considering closing it in October--about two months from now.
    Will the city immediately open a satellite library elsewhere in downtown? That's not certain.
    How will a new library be funded? Part of the money that could pay for it--roughly $18 million--is earmarked in Mayor Bob Foster's proposed infrastructure bond, which goes to voters the following month. What happens if that doesn't pass? We don't know.
    Will whatever system they arrange for citizens to utilize Main Library's resources, while the building is closed to the public, work as well as Main Library does when it's open? We don't know; to my knowledge, no one has worked out details of that system.
    These are some of my concerns.
    • ^
    • v
    Even if repairing the library is “Lipstick on a pig” as Dan says, it still bothers me that Mayor Foster is using the Library closing as a way to force his $571 million infrastructure bond down resident’s throats. To get our library back, residents will have to vote for Mayor Foster’s infrastructure bond proposal. I wonder if that was the plan all along.
    • ^
    • v
    Our library? I wonder how many people use the library? I really don't know. Maybe it's a lot. It does seem that when I've been there it has looked more like a place for the homeless to wash up than a place of thousands of children reading. No sarcasm so please don't blast...
    • ^
    • v
    If the Main Library closes in October and stays closed for at least two years, how much will it cost to move and store all those books and other delicate treasures? Who will move them? Where? Jus' wonderin'.
    • ^
    • v
    LBResident, I'm not going to blast you. But I would like to ask you to consider an argument made recently by folks who believe we should absolutely continue to have a Long Beach Museum of Art.
    They say--and with justification--that a real city needs institutions like art museums; that they enrich its social, cultural and intellectual life immeasurably.
    My question for you, LBResident is: can't we--and shouldn't we--make that same argument for the Main Library?
    • ^
    • v
    Theo, I don't think the Main library in its current form and location accomplish what you assert.

    I think we should have library services and that they should be accessible to everyone in the city. I'm not sure this requires "main" library though.

    Do we need a library downtown? We need the services but I think the existing building is a nice to have considering our budget. If we can save some money by closing Main yet still provide library services to the people downtown I think it is something we should consider.

    And I do think Main is poorly located (as is city hall). I'd love to see those buildings moved and the homeless camp eliminated.
    • ^
    • v
    I can't figure out why the city doesn't have the figs to remove the homeless from Lincoln. It gets tiring constantly stepping over the massive BM's the bums leave around the exterior library stairways & exits.
    • ^
    • v
    Citizens who live downtown deserve a library too. So yes, it should be located downtown. Especially since it's the only library next to the Metro. Where is a better location for the main library and city hall? I'll answer that - downtown. Every library you go to in a large city has homeless people around it and inside. Simply because it's a free and safe place to hang out. If you were homeless you would probably hang out there as well. By the way Chip (and I don't like the smell either), but I'm willing to bet that it is against the law, and the code of library ethics to deny the homeless entry in and around the library. What do you want them to do round them up? Send them to a camp maybe?

    By the way, if we can't afford $3 million to do minor repairs, how can we afford over $18 million to build a new library? We can't. So, no new library will be built, and no computer center will be started for at least a year (and how much will that cost?).

    This is simply ridiculous. They want to close the library, so they will say and do whatever they can to get it done. Listen closely. When they say "may" and "might" it means it won't happen.

    LBResident - take a look at the library statistics. Over 500,000 people a year use the MAIN branch of the library.

    Where will all of those people go? Do you think the neighborhood branches can sustain those numbers? I know the Bay Shore library has nowhere to park. So, where will the homeless go then? Probably to the branch libraries.
    • ^
    • v
    If the city can't fix the library the correct way (no mold, no leaks, a roof garden that can be used, addressing the homeless issue, etc) then please don't do it halfway! Obviously the City can't fix it because it's been a problem now for OVER 30 YEARS! Get a plan to relocate the Main Library to a storefront, shopping mall, or empty building. Anywhere that functions and is clean. There is no reason on earth for the Main Library needs to be this large. It's kind of like the family that buys the big new house in the suburbs but then doesn't have the money for a lawnmower or basic repairs. C'mon city, can't you negotiate and find a space for the library in all these empty downtown buildings? This *could* be a great opportunity if there's a plan in place! We'll see but I wouldn't count on the bond to provide the money. So, what' the backup plan? Don't let the library wither and continue to die a slow and painful death. Kill it with one blow or get a real plan (with real input from real library users & workers) to make the Main Library into the real showpiece it could be.
    • ^
    • v
    You've posted something similar before LB thinking. Is that a pun, because you don't seem to be thinking at all. Did you read the article your post is supposed to be about? A storefront? A shopping mall? It's not a McDonald's, it's a library.

    Any building it is moved to would have to be retrofitted to handle library shelving, and technological services. That would probably be at least $500,000.

    Again building a new library would cost a fortune, and we clearly don't have the money. And don't say bond issue, because #1 it's ridiculous, and #2 the bond measure will have a hard time passing.
    • ^
    • v
    No kidding the bond measure won't pass. Pretty much obvious. My point is that the City should not waste 3 million polishing a turd! No matter what it just won't shine. So, either dedicate the money to fix it right or close it down all the way. Either way, the plan should've already been in place to rebuild or relocate the library given the city has known about and ignored these issues for many years now.
    • ^
    • v
    I believe the move to close the main library is part of a larger civic initiative to redevelop the entire superblock. Note that they are telling us that the mid-century court house has to be demolished as well. This is baloney. Note that the Police Department was built at the same time as the court house. It was refurbished and seismically refit a couple of years ago. Why? Because the cell blocks are so solid that they couldn't afford to replace them!

    And they say our 32 year old city hall is in danger of falling down too. Probably baloney as well. I see them picking off the pieces one by one.

    I believe that the civic establishment will propose a lucrative private/public partnership to develop the whole superblock - minus the Police Department. The result will be a huge boondoggle for the friends of city hall and LA County Supervisor Donald Knabe. We will end up with a new civic center and an unnecessarily massive bill. And we will loose our mid century civic center in the mix. These buildings could be rehabilitated quite well. Why not let some of our fine local architects design rehabs for them? What is historical preservation all about? Is is just about saving late Victorian kit houses? Where is Long Beach Heritage when we need them?

    Folks this is just Long Beach politics as usual. And as usual the establishment is playing along.


    .
    • ^
    • v
    I agree with polishing a turd on this one. I like the building and love what it could be but it's never lived up to its potential and now it's one of the biggest sore spots in the downtown, next to walmart. It's already been stated that city hall can't be fixed so perhaps this is the cities way of paving the way to redeveloping that entire area.

    I go back and forth on this one but part of me would love to see a fresh start for this whole area as it should be the heart of the downtown and a great public space. Instead it's a giant poop stain.
    • ^
    • v
    On the courthouse- that isn't a city expense. it's a state and county financial issue, mostly the state. And anyone who has occasion to go there would know it's a literal deathtrap. There's been at least one death due to medical personnel not being able to quickly access the sixth floor. It couldn't be sensibly retrofitted at all. That building is too far gone to save, and the only thing saving it from being condemned is that there aren't facilties around to accomodate the day to day activites. Comparing it to the police headquarters is apples and oranges.

    But as for the library, okay, fine. Let's say it doesn't close. Where else does the city cut then? People like myself, who grudgingly acknowledge the need for the infrastructure bond, do so because we would like to avoid these types of issues too. However, if anyone remembers from the Infrastructure comments made by me, if you don't like that bond measure, you really won't like the alternatives. That isn't any type of blackmail, just reality. One way or another, the library HAS to close, either for a while to put $3 million worth of band aids on it, and then the city will be accused once again of only going part way when doing something, or permanently, while a new one is constructed.

    I'd also question how many actually use the place. It's one thing to gather signatures from people going by the place, but how many of those people have really availed themselves of the main library enough to miss it?

    So again, alternatives? It's one thing to say don't do something, but what else would you have them do? The place is in dire need of attention, one way or another.
    • ^
    • v
    Remember people, the half million annual users of Main Library do not go there because of the building's aesthetics! The Main Library serves more people each year than all of the branch libraries combined, and its book collection equals more than all of the branch libraries combined. Plus, regarding the notion that extending branch's hours and services will fix things...so, the rich kids in Belmont Shore will get more from their library, while the lower-income children downtown will get less - or zero. Per usual the city is picking on the easiest part of the community to pick on - the poor.
    • ^
    • v
    Grant Thornton...you are on to something.

    There is more to this than meets the eye, I think they are obfuscating or out and out hiding things, i.e., lying. They seem to be on a frenzy to tear stuff down and build new stuff, which is crazy. Especially now with the economy in free fall.

    There's a rumor that they are making some back room deal's to sell off the Queen Mary to India. When asked, they answer in double speak..

    What's going on, for real?
    • ^
    • v
    Permit me to toss this into the mix: About 10 years ago we embarked on a collaborative effort to set strategic goals for the City. The result was entitled our "Strategic Plan - Long Beach - 2010". Within that document we set many goals and objectives.

    One such objective was: "...to develop a new, independent organization to advise the City and act as an “advocate” for timely implementation of the Plan. The organization will include representatives of neighborhoods, and the education, business, not-for-profit and religious communities. The group will help identify the public policy issues vital to the Plan’s success and present them to our political leadership."

    Does anyone know whether that "new, independent organization" was ever actually created? If so, I'd very much like to communicate with one or more of its members.

    Among other duties, this group was to "...first be responsible for developing a “community scorecard” to measure progress on each part of the Plan (see sidebar). As necessary, the new organization can also develop new public policy initiatives and civic programs, forums, and communication projects that will aid implementation of the Plan."

    Does anyone know whether such a "community scorecard" was ever actually developed? If so, can you tell me where it might be found and reviewed?

    I'd be very interested to learn whether we actually followed through on one of the central objectives of "Strategic Plan - Long Beach - 2010".

    Are there any readers out there who may have been involved in the production of this document who can provide answers to this?
    • ^
    • v