Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 6:21 PM

Future of Downtown Library sparks debate
Palo Alto weighs demands for a larger book collection with plans for a smaller, more flexible branch

by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Online Staff

Posted by WilliamR, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Jul 1, 2009 at 8:28 pm

"The Downtown Library, much like other libraries, needs to have a children's area and a book collection, the report said. But it should also strive to provide seniors with learning tools and comfortable reading space; give daytime workers lunchtime programs and wireless Internet access; make homeless residents comfortable with a "community living room" space; and create room for business groups to meet and collaborate."

After the first sentence, the functions described aren't really part of the 'traditional' library model. So one option is to redefine 'library'. As another option, is it possible to develop a separate facility downtown that would be a 'community services'

site, for education, socializing, computer access, etc.? Some of the programs geared to seniors may already be handled by the Senior Center, but a broader, multi-generational might be an idea worth exploring.

Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of another community, on Jul 1, 2009 at 9:46 pm

It's no wonder at all that there are few children at the DT library.

Who in their right mind would intentionally put their children in the day care center for Palo Alto's homeless?

Posted by Down with branches, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Jul 1, 2009 at 10:52 pm

If we would have voted down thebond and built a single library we woul dnot have this problem. Get ready for a long, drawn out battle. This will be another example of the Palo Alto process in action--nothing will be accomplished until all the special interest groups and other "my way or the highway" people get what they want.

Jennings states:

""Libraries are changing and the way people are using libraries is changing too," Jennings said. "It's not just about the size.""

She forgets that in PA many people are still stuck with a 1960's mindset and things should not change (i.e. they like to constantly remind us how "good" things were years ago)

Posted by Carla, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 1:11 am

"--make homeless residents comfortable with a "community living room" space"

How ridiculous!

Why don't they just convert it into a homeless shelter, since that is what it will turn into anyway.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 7:57 am

Since I personally find it ridiculous that we are staffing and buying books for so many locations, I think we should use the land that the DT library is on to expand the police station.

Posted by Waste of Money, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 8:42 am

A friend of mine who happens to be a nearby resident of the Downtown Library told me he never goes there and uses Main Library. He says it's full of homeless and you can smell the urin as you enter.

Filling it full of books at a time when books can be downloaded is retro but then our City has many Seniors who find it difficult to look forward and only look backwards to the way things used to be.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 9:55 am

As was said many times before the vote on the library was passed, we should not have shelves of books in Downtown. What we need is a drop off/check out desk for reserved materials and use the rest of the space for community center type things. However, having space designed to fit the needs of the homeless is not something we should be aiming for.

Libraries are changing and the needs of residents are changing too. The present seniors may still prefer things the way they were when they were in their 30s, but the next generation of seniors will want more technology and be savvy enough to use it. Shelves of expensive books taking up space which could be used more innovatively is what should be used. Even at Main or Mitchell, I find I have to put a hold on books I want to read and wait for them to become available. Therefore, one central location with shelves of books makes more sense than 5 different locations with repeat materials.

Posted by I use libraries, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 10:17 am

You are arguing about the Library Bond. If you didn't want money spent on libraries, that was the time to speak up. Now the money is allocated and the question is, how best to use it.

Talk to anyone who uses libraries and they will complain about the collection. Anyone! Downloading books is an option used by very few people so far. Reading a book, a magazine and borrowing a DVD is still a necessity, and a pleasure.

Know-nothings don't see the need for library collections but we have an educated population that does, and we voted for it. Lets do it right.

Posted by Inga, a resident of the Triple El neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 10:48 am

Yes, lets do it right and close the downtown library and make the Main Library more up-to-date. The Main library is not that far from downtown. How spoiled we are in PA to have so many libraries. Some of which are unnecessary. What ever happened to the BookMobile (if you want to go into the past). The future is now, let's get the Middlefield and the Main libraries on the drawing board, or will I have to wait another 10 years.

Posted by Nut Head, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 11:07 am

I think this is a good time to ask - what is the status of the new library construction? does the current California financial crisis have any effect on that? Will construction begin on time?

Posted by odd, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 12:39 pm

"The Downtown Library, much like other libraries, needs to have a children's area and a book collection, the report said."

Why on earth do this when the children's library is just down the road, recently refurbished and will always be 10 times better than the DT library for kids.

Posted by I use libraries, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 1:19 pm

What does "learning tools" for seniors mean? Most Palo Altans have college degrees and a large percentage have advanced degrees.

Is there a stereotype of older people being used to keep the collection down?

For information about the status of the construction, see the City's Library web pages.

Posted by DT library neighbor, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 2:07 pm

I think it's a stretch to call one bookcase and one table a children's section. As a neighborhood resident, I would love it if the DT library had a reasonable children's section. We would walk there and use it much more frequently. (The children's library is great -- but it involves a drive and we're trying to instill a walk when you can ethic.) Anyone paying attention to all the families walking to Heritage park and then visiting the pitiful DT library children's section would identify that as an underserved constituent.

As an adult, I'm fine requesting materials sent from other libraries for pick-up -- but kids need the ability to browse. Not really reasonable to expect pre-readers and early readers to choose and reserve books online...

Posted by Palo Alto Library Fan, a resident of another community, on Jul 2, 2009 at 4:05 pm

some things never change

Posted by Palo Alto Library Fan, a resident of another community, on Jul 2, 2009 at 4:07 pm

which refers to the interminable debate about what a library is, and how best to serve constituents based on the best intuitions of the experts in this situation - i.e. the librarians. Sure, some will be disappointed, but in the end the system will run better if we let librarians make the strategy, rather than one oro another small disaffected group of citizens. Imagine if our police department or highways were run that way!

Posted by James, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 4:09 pm

Like many other traditional services who seek innovative ways to retain (or regain) relevance in what appears to be an ever-changing society, Palo Alto needs its libraries to focus and stick to the core offerings and purpose of libraries.

A library's core purpose and definition is a place set apart to contain books, periodicals, manuscripts, publications, and other material for reading, viewing, listening, study, or reference, where books may be read or borrowed. If the library is unable to house an adequate amount of these materials, in favor of more peripheral offerings, it is failing to fulfill its core purpose to its community. The vast unwashed sea of resources found on the Internet cannot replace a library with a truly relevant purpose and inventory.

The library's charter does not need to include lunchtime programs and "community living room" space, with room for business groups to meet and collaborate. These may be served by other services and places. I have used and enjoyed all of Palo Alto's library branches, from Main to Downtown, College Terrace and Children's to name a few. While programs for children and seniors should be part of a library's offerings, they are not community nor business centers.

Posted by Sylvia, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 5:35 pm

James, you said perfectly what I believe. While I've used the computers often, especially before I got fast internet, I really believe BOOKS are what libraries should be about. I've never been thrilled about library meeting rooms - to me it takes away from shelf space.

Posted by Darwin, a resident of another community, on Jul 2, 2009 at 5:47 pm

The Friends of the Library newsletter says that they would prefer not to have chidrens materials since the Children's Library is close by. It's somewhat hard to understand what FOPAL is thinking half the time. They fought tooth and nail to prevent the Downtown library from closing -saying that they needed a neighborhood library- yet at the same time they're so ready to dismiss the children from downtown.

When did they become such a political lobby group instead of solely a financial benefactor to the library?

I understand that people need to fight the good fight, and supporting open libraries always seems to be that fight, on paper at least. I can't help but wonder if this 5 library system is the best for the city and its finances.

Posted by anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 5:54 pm

It's called mission creep. The library bond buys meeting rooms, back office and reading rooms, not collections.

Question for traditionalists: if a library's mission is to lend books, then what does a fire department do?

Posted by fan of our library, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 7:14 pm

We stopped using Downtown library years ago and certainly prefer the Main, although Odor in the Main library is not very pleasant anymore.

Why have a children's area in the Main or Downtown. There is a wonderful new Children's library just up the street!

Anxiously awaiting the update of Main and Middlefield libraries. Let's get it done!

Posted by James Hoosac, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2009 at 8:14 pm

In this day and age. The only kind of library we need is Children's Library. We should get rid of traditional libraries and instead expand the Children's Library. The Children's Library may have a little bit of adult materials such as DVDs and magazines. But that should be it. We should use the money we have wisely.

Posted by a resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 3, 2009 at 10:36 am

Long ago the Downtown Library site should have become an extended site for the Police Dept, with a 3rd floor overpass connecting over the street to the present building. It's not too late to think creatively and solve several problems at the same time.

Posted by Ellieg, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Jul 3, 2009 at 12:12 pm

Listen to the people that live close to the downtown library and want to WALK there with their children.It is not appropriate to have a homeless shelter room there, or a community meeting room, or extended online area. There are plenty of other options for those uses. Let the library be a library, with access to books, and an area to read the papers and periodicals.

Are we becoming a completely illiterate society? I think there are a lot of people that would like to have a real functional library in their neighborhood and there are many families that live close to the downtown library. Reading books by good writers is one of the best educational experiences there is. Please make it a real library, not just another 'community service'

I agree completely with the opinion of James who posted earlier.

Posted by downtown user, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 3, 2009 at 12:38 pm

I can hardly believe we are having this kind of debate over and over again. How about letting the downtown library users determine what it should be used for? That would satisfy the most needs. I have never been bothered by smells in the downtown library.Those that don't use it can talk about the library that they use.

A library should have reference materials, periodicals, books, knowledgable staff, room to read, copy machines and computers. We don't need to provide meeting rooms, homeless daycare, etc.

Let's get going with our downtown library remodel and improvement! There has been a steady deterioration of service there for many years.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 3, 2009 at 1:51 pm

While I don't frequent the DT library, I am at the Main library several times a week. The VAST majority of the people there are on either a library computer or there own laptop. Every seat at every table is usually filled. In contrast, there may be 1-2 people strolling thru the books, 1-2 looking at the new books, and 3-4 picking up reserved books. Based on my experience, devoting a excessive amount of space to books is a waste of space.

I agree that children need to browse, a small rotating group of books (sent by the children's library) would make sense. A large dedicated collection of books for DT seems like a waste of $$.

Posted by I use libraries, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 3, 2009 at 2:48 pm

Darwin, either you mis-read the FOPAL newsletter, or you are spreading mis-information to further your agenda.

My newsletter says one person (not a FOPAL person) suggested Downtown could be an adult library, they didn't say it should not have a children's room. If you turn the page you will see that FOPAL gives huge sums to the libraries, and if you look at the schedule of children's programs, most of them are funded by FOPAL.

Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 3, 2009 at 5:11 pm

Good grief! How many times will we have this discussion?

By now everyone should know that the library bond cannot pay for books, computers or other materials.

Re walking to a branch (for children’s books or whatever): Most Palo Altans are not within walking distance to any city library. Our former library director said that if we wanted walkable libraries for all residents, we’d need 30 branches.

Re public spaces: I agree with James on the core purpose and definition of libraries. However, plans call for the following spaces (capacity in parentheses)

- a group study room and a program room (60) in the Downtown branch.

- 4 group study rooms and a program room (100) at Main

- 4 group study rooms and a program room (60) at Mitchell Park

Per square foot building costs at Mitchell, Main and Downtown are $1,022, $748 and $422 respectively.

The city currently has community rooms at:

- Downtown: group study room (4)

- Lucie Stern: Fireside Room (30), community room (60), ballroom (200)

- Art Center: Green Room (15), meeting room (50), auditorium (180)

- Cubberly: 3 classrooms (50), lecture room (100), auditorium (250), theater and gym

- Mitchell Park: 2 classrooms (30), teen center (50), ballroom (150)

In addition, rooms are available to the public at schools and private buildings. Many projects are required to provide community space in order to get a building permit.

Yet no one at City Hall knows exactly how much public space is currently available in the city. There is no one person or department that tracks all community meeting spaces. So, without knowing if we need more, we are planning to build more.

All this info was available prior to the library bond vote.

Posted by Kate, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jul 4, 2009 at 4:14 am

The Main Library also has its share of the homeless (oops 'unhoused resident" population - that's the official city term) now that it's nice warm weather. They sleep under the trees and bushes around Library and the Community Garden, use the rest rooms, and one even dismantled the outside lighting a few years ago because it disturbed his sleep. The rest rooms are a problem there also. And why the hurtful remarks about senior citizens on this blog? I have not read or heard about any organized effort by any senior group to demand anything in the libraries. Whose library bond money do you think paid for them in the first place along with most of the other buildings and infrastructure in town?

Posted by whatever, but not now, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 6, 2009 at 2:46 pm

What would it take to get an initiative to repeal the authorization to issue more library bonds. Now is NOT the time. Next time, plan better to meet actual library needs in an efficient manner.

Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm

[Post removed due to possible copyright infringement]

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 6, 2009 at 7:34 pm

Pat makes a sound argument for turning DT library into a community center with checkout/return desk. Full library materials are not needed at 5 centers around town.

Posted by Book Lover, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 9:17 am

Libraries are traditionally a place to study and learn. The need for rooms where students can work together on projects is a real need that the librarians will acknowledge. Every day someone asks for a room to study in. The very small room at Downtown is not an answer. We need study rooms.

Also, the community needs a place where civic groups, book groups, investment groups, etc. can meet - when it is convenient for them. That would be the hours the libraries are open, evenings and weekends.

To say libraries are just about books is a 19th century attitude in the 21st century. You can read a classic anytime, anywhere online now. Free. We can argue the future of libraries, but we need to bring the discussion into the present with an eye to the future.

I applaud all the people who had foresight enough to pass the library bond measure. That was a two thirds majority. Now, lets build the best medium sized library system in the US and be proud of it.

Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 10:19 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Heading to the DT library, a resident of Stanford, on Jul 7, 2009 at 10:27 am

I work at Stanford. I realize now that instead of wasting my time using my high speed network connection and internet here at work I should head to the Downtown Library to ""obtain the latest information, to catch up on what's going on, to work and to network."

Thanks

Posted by I use libraries, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 11:15 am

Yes, she is wrong about how entrepreneurs meet, but other people who arent at the leading edge of technology do meet at the library. It's a community resource.

Of course Stanford people have high speed connections, the library is supposed to provide that connection for the thousands of people who don't.

Mitchell Park is being designed to be a childcare center with books. Anyone complaining about that?

Posted by yep, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 1:00 pm

"Mitchell Park is being designed to be a childcare center with books. Anyone complaining about that?"

Isn't that the definition of a modern day library?

Posted by Deep Throat, a resident of another community, on Jul 7, 2009 at 2:24 pm

If the ballot measure for the library bond said it was for a child care center with books, it would have been defeated.

Polling of voters before the election demonstrated that the only way to win the election was to say that there would be a traditional Downtown library branch, because a bond measure without the Downtown library would have lost.

Now that the bond measure has passed, City staff wants to make the Downtown Library a child care center and City office building (at first for library administration, then for other City staff), with a small number of books that will continually get smaller.

Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 2:27 pm

Does anyone believe an entrepreneur is going to head to the PA library to "obtain the latest information"?

I use libraries says, “…she is wrong about how entrepreneurs meet …” I didn't say anything about where they meet, only about where the go for information. But I doubt they meet at a library.

As for all the claims about people needing the library as a meeting/networking spot, I’d like to see some data.

I don’t think a library should be a general meeting place for entrepreneurs or anyone else, nor a place to eat lunch, nor a childcare center.

Posted by I use libraries, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 4:43 pm

Sorry Pat, I wasn't clear. I meant that Wyman was wrong about entrepreneurs/business people going to the library for the latest, not you.

I think Deep Throat is on to the administration's plan. If you keep diminishing the branch's content, people won't go there anymore. Then you can show that Mitchell Park has the highest usage. That is what has been happening for several years already

.

Posted by whatever, but not now, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 4:49 pm

On the subject of meeting places -- it seems to me that if the schools want to assign group projects, the schools should provide the places to meet. The schools already have the physical facilities. They would need to turn on the lights on hire security for the extra hours. It would cost something, but less than constructing new capacity in the libraries.

Posted by cecelia Horn, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 7:52 pm

Today I took out a library card in the San Jose Library System. A branch near Doyle and Saratoga Avenue. Restrooms right in front of the library--look at the savings when dealing with repair. Also covers the homeless's needs without making them pretend to read. However some of them are still reading there, but not annlyingly. Very fast cheeckout system superior to what PA has currently. I got on the computer and with ID, I inputted the information directly into the system. This library located off a busy street and a "mixed" neighborhood. Check out the competition. It's a great small library.

Posted by Cecelia M. Horn, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 7, 2009 at 7:57 pm

Second comment. Small libraries do work. This small San Jose Library uses lap tops instead of the fixed mode of operation at Mitchell and Main. Completely heterogenious population parking but many walking across a very business intersection. Lively, clean and effeciant? check it out. I am a member of Friends and saw some ideas we can use in our operation, also. Library located at Saratoga Ave and Doyle next to San Jose Firehouse #14.

Posted by In the Know, a resident of Stanford, on Jul 8, 2009 at 9:24 pm

Cecelia,

The Palo Alto library system has laptops as well, and they've had them for much longer than San Jose.

Posted by I use libraries, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 9, 2009 at 1:18 am

There's something strange going on when the citizens clamor for a better library and the library administration says you don't need a good branch, you can drive to Mitchell Park...but we want our new, bigger office downtown.

Why can't downtown get its 4.1 million dollars worth? they are going to pay for it, just like everyone else.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 9, 2009 at 9:13 am

Downtown will get its 4.1 million, its just a question of how it is spent. On a traditional library with just a lot of books or a more flexible space for staff, community meetings, computers, etc. From this forum, it sounds like many people feel that using the space for merely books is not the most useful since we have many other libraries which house extensive collections and we have a great transfer/reserve system. Children's books being the exception, since they really need to browse (but we also have a fabulous, renovated Children's Library which is 8 blocks away.

Posted by downtown user, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jul 11, 2009 at 1:47 pm

Regarding "it sounds like many people feel that using the space for merely books is not the most useful"- it seems most of these many people are in other neighborhoods, are not using the downtown library and have a library in their neighborhood. It seems this is selfish I want whats good for me talk.

Let the people who are in downtown area decide what is needed in the downtown library.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 11, 2009 at 4:40 pm

Downtown user - I agree that the people who use the DT library should have input, but we also need to consider how each branch works as part of a the whole system. If the whole system has plenty of books and needs meeting and staff space (or vice versa) then thats what should go there.

Posted by I use libraries, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 12, 2009 at 10:49 am

I have heard the administration make this "system" argument but it makes no sense. Sounds good but what does it mean? How does having a weak branch help the system? Having books and DVDs at a branch that don't need to be transported in response to Hold requests saves money. Sending Downtown users to Main and Mitchell is not efficient, that's what happens now.

And since most of the staff is at Mitchell and Main, why would meetings be held downtown?

Posted by Andy, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 28, 2009 at 11:49 pm

The residents of Palo Alto are spoiled when it comes to the Library and its many branches. Is it really necessary to have 5? Other larger local communities have fewer locations. The DT library is only a little over a mile from the Main Library. Palo Alto really has but one library system with 5 doors. Residents need to stop thinking of the various locations as MY branch and start seeing the Library as one unit.