Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Tuesday, September 15, 2009, 11:36 PM

Council kicks back Downtown Library plan
In a 12:40 a.m. action, Palo Alto City Council members narrowly vote to radically shift design of downtown branch

by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Online Staff

Posted by Carroll Harrington, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 1:41 am

I applaud Susie Thom and her decision to resign from the Library Advisory Commission. There is no one in the town who works harder to study an issue and is more fair in reaching conclusions and recommendations. And I totally agree with her comment that this is "a good example of why it has become more and more difficult to fill board and commission positions."

Posted by doh, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 7:30 am

Yes! Now we just need to re-visit the design for Mitchell library. Well done, FOPAL!

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 7:56 am

It has been said so many times now. We do not need to have duplicate sets of materials in Downtown and CT libraries. Our hold system is so good and is the only way to use our library service that having materials at these two sub branches are not necessary - even at Mitchell Park and Main we have to put hold on materials we want to borrow. All that is needed at Downtown is checkout/returns facilities and the rest of the space can be used for community center type uses.

Posted by Jean Wilcox, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 8:10 am

"Councilman Greg Schmid also said that he'd like to see the library's administration moved to the Mitchell Park Library." This is outrageous we have already rejected building Library Staff Offices at the new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center.

Every precinct around Mitchell Park voted down the first library Bond because it was designed with 11 staff offices on the second floor and underground parking. It was so big it had to be built over the tennis courts on designated parkland which we strongly objected to.

The reason the neighborhoods around Mitchell Park supported the latest library bond was because we were promised it would be built with a smaller footprint and away from designated parkland.

The voters of South Palo Alto have made it absolutely clear that Mitchell Park is first and foremost a PARK and that the proposed new library should be built with that in mind. It should not become an extension of City Hall; a huge warehouse for City bureaucats.

As an alternative may I suggest you offer the library administrative staff offices at the Cubberley Community Center.

I think it's an insult to the Library Commission and all the people who have worked so hard and listened to the residents around Mitchell Park that Council now rejects their recommendations, and even suggest that Mitchell Park should include many offices for library staff.

Posted by Aaaaargh!, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 8:34 am

I could not be more disappointed, after working on the Measure N campaign, to have Council change direction on libraries AGAIN. There is only ONE library south of Oregon Expressway to serve ALL of south PA. North PA presently is served by THREE libraries. Main library and DT will receive improvements. Children's already has undergone expansion. Now they want MORE.

Why can't this Council stay the course? This project already has undergone more study and review than any project should. Please move forward. We are losing time and money with every delay. Had I known Council might make such an aggregious turn about at this late date, I'd have gone to the meeting. It never occurred to me that they would bow to a noisy, self-interested minority at this late date.

Forgive me, but Ms.Wyman was not promised a bigger collection in the DT branch north. We ALL were promised a larger collection for the CITY. She will be able to access that larger colleciton via reserve as we all be able to do. Adding on to a small DT branch will not get us where we need to go with our limited funds. We were promised something quite specific at Mitchell Park. I hope Council will follow through on those promises.

I am deeply troubled and disappointed by this decision. Council appears to have lost sight of the big picture...and now our library leadership is destabilized. Please fix this error. Quickly!

Posted by Not surprised, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 8:46 am

It is too late now, but PA voters brought this on themselves--had we rejected the bond and opted for a single library, we would not have these issues. one person quoted above said this is "This is not a competition between branches"--but it is--the Downtown folks want more and more volumes at their branch, despite the fact that we are a relatively small city and have a very good system where requested material can be brought from another branch very quickly.

It is too bad that a small vocal group is ruining everything for the entire city and it is also too bad,but not surprising, that our concul is following this groups marching orders

Posted by anon, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 8:53 am

Count me as another disappointed resident. Last night's vote was indeed a slap in the face of all of those who worked on LAC .. and who worked to get the bond issue passed.

btw, there are actually four - not three - branches in North PA to the one in the south - main, downtown, college terrace and children's. I don't want to see the Mitchell Park branch filled with staff offices.

Posted by Andrew L. Freedman, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 8:55 am

I am reposting this from the other similar thread on this subject.

What if, as a solution, Palo Alto Library Advisory Commission and the Friends of the Palo Alto Libraries suspend any animosity (if there is any), Susie Thom un-resigns, and both groups get together to come up with plans that everyone will be happy with? One thing I'm sure of is that both groups really want what is best for the libraries and both groups are comprised of good people.

Andy Freedman

androcls@aol.com

Posted by Max Power, a resident of another community, on Sep 16, 2009 at 10:20 am

Maybe the "Friends of the Library" should change their name? It might clear things up for everyone what the real agenda is. It's funny that these ardent fans of Downtown don't really spend any time there. It's usually just homeless people using the computers.

Posted by library patron, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 11:29 am

As a parent in South Palo Alto -- who thinks we should have closed the downtown branch altogether but am willing to respect the decision that was made -- am incensed that this small disgruntled group can bully these kinds of changes.

There are other people in this community, too. I voted for money for the libraries mainly because of the Main library and Mitchell Park library and COMMUNITY CENTER, because the thing we have at Mitchell Park now is such a pathetic excuse for a community center, you could hardly call it that.

While there was public outreach and input on Mitchell Park library, I'm told this process was not done for the community center design -- all that was done for the community center side was to pretty much upgrade the existing functionality.

A lot of the parks and recreation offerings are available only on the north side of town because of facilities -- Lucie Stern, mainly, but also the children's theater. It's much harder for families on the South end of town to give their children access to these programs because of the distance and lack of facilities in the South. I thought that with us spending all this money for a COMMUNITY CENTER on this side of town, we would at least get some of the same functionality so that we could bring some of those programs here for our kids.

But I was told there isn't even space for a permanent stage in the multipurpose room! Stages/performances space is an essential feature of most community centers. There will be a portable stage in a closet, but given the logistics, this effectively means the kids on this side of town will continue to have less/no access.

Given that lack of space for such a typical/essential function of a community center, it's outrageous that the city counsel would want to change all this planning and take up more precious community center space to put those administrative offices at Mitchell Park.

I think the downtown facility would benefit tremendously from having those administrative offices, because frankly, it will keep the building obviously occupied and monitored (which given some of its past problems, is an important step for making it a vibrant safe downtown community space). Ultimately making the library a vibrant community space is the best hope the residents downtown have of defending it in the future anyway.

Posted by Are You Kidding Me?, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 11:46 am

YEARS of work flushed down the drain because of the City Council? Do they know how many meetings have taken place and how hard Director Jennings has worked to make even the thought of providing state of the art libraries possible for Palo Alto?

I am through with any hopes of better libraries here. The Friends of the Library have proven once again to be anything but friendly.

Oh, and did the council notice that the Assistant Director's office is penciled in to be at Mitchell Park? Did anyone think having the Director near City Hall was a bright idea? THINK people! Maybe if you used the libraries to sharpen your critical thinking instead of making selfish demands, it would all be headed differently.

NOW the project will be delayed, the costs will escalate, and this will apply to all the Measure N projects as the effects ripple through.

City Council, undo what you have just done and apologize to Mr. Jennings and the LAC. Do it now!

Posted by frustrated, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 12:22 pm

This isn't process, this is a circus. What is the pull Ellen Wyman has over the Council? This is the second time I have seen her blow up years of work because Council can't stay the course and trust the boards, commissions, staff and friends groups' advice.

Posted by Paul, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 12:32 pm

It's merely the council asserting itself. It stirs the pot now and then to show that it holds the spoon.

Posted by Fearful Five, Step Aside!, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 12:47 pm

This makes me want to cry, for so many reasons. I thought we had finally moved beyond this. We were making progress...right?

The library plans are backed by amazing talent and thought. I have been profoundly impressed with the input, drive and leadership of Alison Cormack and Diane Jennings. Dawne and the Group 4 team are extremely experienced in their field. They have created an invigorating plan for Downtown Library to will meet the demands of our thriving city, now and in the future. And Mitchell Park and Community Center? I can hardly wait to walk in with my family and celebrate the hard, dedicated work of so many people. It has been a personal high to see our city at work.

Then, five of the city council members want to slam on the breaks. For what? More studies? Turning up rocks that have already been turned, and turned again? What are they afraid of?!

To the fearful five: Fix TRUST the work that has been done. TRUST the talent and thinking behind the plans. TRUST that the right decisions are being made. It's what we voted for and it's your job as elected leaders to enable our city to progress and to respect our vote.

Thank you to John Barton, Larry Klein, Mayor Peter Drekmeier and Vice Mayor Jack Morton -- you are the true leaders of our city.

Posted by nat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 1:28 pm

I watched the Council meeting and the Weekly article is missing some information. The library director had said she wanted to be at the downtown branch to be near city hall, because she needed to interact with staff there. The council motion included the possibility of moving the administrative office (the library director's office)to City Hall. When one council member asked the city manager if there was space in city hall for the library director and her staff, he never answered the question, but went off on a confusing tangent, of which I couldn't understand a thing, except that he avoided answering the question.

Posted by Karl Reseck, a resident of Los Altos, on Sep 16, 2009 at 5:33 pm

I am a bit of an outsider to Palo Alto, but it is very disappointing that the officials in Palo Alto, California legislature, and the Federal Congress are all failing to govern effectively. We need real leaders, that realize it is not possible to satisfy everyone in our diverse country. Do the studies, get the various inputs, analyze the results, and make decisions. Then get on to something else. We have plenty of something elses on which to spend our resources.

Palo Alto will have a difficult time, if it is at all possible, to replace Susie Thom.

Posted by Alice, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 6:30 pm

Bravo to Ellen Wyman and Elaine Meyer, and to the 5 Council members. We need to provide a substantial collection of books at the Downtown Library.

Posted by What?, a resident of another community, on Sep 16, 2009 at 6:40 pm

Why can't you go to the Main Library? Free shuttle, lots of books and staff. WHY? You have a substantial collection THROUGH Downtown with free delivery of materials from any other library. Downtown is not a neighborhood library, it is a homeless shelter. Please answer these questions so I can understand your side.

Posted by library patron, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 8:55 pm

Exactly. Why do you NEED those books there? I go to the santa clara county library in los altos, and I"m able to get all kinds of books there I can't get in Palo Alto, because you have access to the entire county system. You just search and reserve a book online, and it arrives for pickup. Very easy.

"What?" You are right. Some very unpleasant things have happened at that location because it's not open enough (too many hidden spaces). Those administrative offices are the best thing that could happen to it. I think the current design for that building is beautiful and will dramatically improve its usability.

And I agree with the above assessment of the architectural planning. I'm not easily impressed by architects, but these guys are fabulous. I only wish they were doing our schools, too.

Posted by Bob Moss, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:57 pm

I had suggested what I think is a reasonable compromise in a letter to the Council. Here is a variation on that. Reduce the size of the community room by about 10%, and use that space plus some currently vacant space in the main library area to increase the collectoin. That would add perhaps 4000 to 6000 books. The current plan is to have bookcases on wheels in the community room and move them out to the library area when the room is in use. Those books aren't counted in the 17,000+ of the current plan. Count them and adding those books plus the ones in the former community room space should bring the collection to about 25,000 to 30,000, which ought to be adequate. Keep staff downtown, in about the space that was proposed with the possible exception of retaininng the current children's room for library use instead of converting it to staff restroom and service space. This approach should provide adequate circulation materials, retain a usable community room and keep staff downtown where they have been for decades.

Posted by Diane Jennings, Library Director, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2009 at 10:35 pm

Hi, Bob -

I appreciate your interest in studying the plans for Downtown Library. In developing your compromise, you might have been looking at one of the alternative layouts that the Library Advisory Commission had considered instead of the one selected. There are a couple of corrections to what you've written:

- The books that would be shelved on the moveable stacks to be located in the multipurpose community room are counted in the current plan to increase the collection to 17,500 volumes.

- The current plan will keep the staff restroom where it is now. Instead, the current office area used by the public services staff at Downtown would be converted to a children's room.

Posted by question to candidates, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 8:53 am

TO the candidates running for City Council:

How would you have voted on the amendment?

This will be the deciding factor in my vote.

Posted by Herb Borock, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 2:45 pm

The size of the Downtown Library collection has been reduced in recent years. So, increasing the collection to 17,500 (with some books on moveable shelves) from 12,000 has to take into what the original collection size was.

At the Council meeting, staff said the original designed collection size was 18,000:

------------------------

Councilmember Kishimoto's Agenda Question

Emslie, Steve

To: Council Agenda Email; Council, City

Cc: Keene, James; Jennings, Diane; Minor, Beth; Grider, Donna; Baum, Gary

Item 17: library

what size collection was the downtown library designed to accommodate originally?

Staff Response: Downtown Library was designed for a capacity of 18,000 volumes

-------------------------

But at that time the library occupied only 5,000 square feet, because the other 3,500 was used for other Community Service Department functions, including senior services before there was the current Senior Center.

We now have a larger library space (8,000 square feet less administration and program room), but two-thirds of the books (12,000) than the design size of a much smaller library space.

Posted by Darwin, a resident of another community, on Sep 17, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Mr Borock,

Does the fact that the way libraries are used these days not change anything? The numbers you're quoting are from decades ago. Things have changed exponentially since then. I don't find your numbers to hold much value to the current way of things. I'm sure you'll disagree.

Posted by ellieg, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 3:01 pm

It is interesting to note that of the four council members who voted no on the amendment to restudy the plan for the downtown library, three of them, Peter Drekmeier, Jack Morton, John Barton, are not returning to the council. The fourth, Larry Klein, is up for election, but perhaps feels that he is a shoo-in to be re elected and does not need to be accountable to any public concerns about the proposed design of the downtown library. Many residents of the downtown area would like to be able to walk or bicycle to their library and have a book collection that is adequate in size with room for a children's room and reading space. It is completely inappropriate for the bulk of the space to be allotted to housing all the staff. Staff should be allocated fairly evenly appropriate to the size of the various libraries, not all in the limited space in the downtown library. The residents were promised a much larger collection

of books, enabling browsing and reading in the library. A library is not just a space for on line access and ordering books. It is true that the Santa Clara county system offers books on order to all its members BUT Los Altos also has an excellent full service library with a children's room, space to read periodicals and an excellent collection of magazines, newspapers, movies, and recordings. I often go there and it is possibly the best library of its size in the country. The staff works in minimal space and is always courteous and helpful. When I talked to them about the problems in Palo Alto, they were polite and just a tiny bit condescending saying that 'well Palo Alto has its problems'. One of their customers, mentioned to me that while she worked for the Palo Alto Library system, she much preferred the Los Altos library and came there often....

Finally, Ellen Wyman and her husband, Bob Wyman, have worked tirelessly for many years, organizing 'the Friends of the PA Library',

and setting and working for the monthly book sales that have contributed tens of thousands of dollars towards the purchase of new books for our libraries. Here is a quote from their website;

(9/5/07) Over the last five years, the Friends of the Palo Alto Library has given more than $1.3 million to improve the Palo Alto Library. This includes over a half million dollars to renovate and expand the Children's Library, approximately $410,000 of new books, DVDs, and CDs, about $100,000 for children's events and the Summer Reading Program, and about $220,000 of new computers, printers, and online resources such as the Rosetta Stone language training and the Historical New York Times. Thanks go to the thousands of donors, members, booksale customers, and volunteers who helped raise this enormous sum for their great generosity and support of our local libraries. In fact, from July 2005 through June 2006, our 150+ volunteers contributed 25,237 hours, up 6% from the previous fiscal year.

I think that both Ellen and Tom deserve a lot of respect from the city and the council and that the returning members understand this.

They have contributed for over 20 years and have continued to expand and improve the sales to a truly professional level that attracts

thousand of peoplea to their sales.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 3:55 pm

Ellieg -

How many libraries does Los Altos have? 2 How many do they need to stock and staff? 2 If we had two libraries, or even three (Mitchell, Main and Children's) instead of five, this would not be an issue. Do Los Altos residents complain because they do not have a library within a very short walking distance or do they enjoy their well staffed, well stocked, spacious library?

"Los Altos also has an excellent full service library with a children's room, space to read periodicals and an excellent collection of magazines, newspapers, movies, and recordings." Guess what, we do too - its the main library. We also have a fabulous children's library which is a short walk and even shorter bike ride from the Downtown Library.

Just curious - what is the average age of the people pushing for more space for books and less for people? How often do they or the City Council actually go to a library and see how it is being used.

Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of Palo Alto, on Sep 17, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Paul Losch is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

I was part of last year's effort to get the Library Bond passed.

I am intrigued that the most active City Council members who worked on the Library Bond voted differently on this issue last Monday.

Since I am an appointed public official on the Parks and Recreation Commission, I do make an effort and I think our Commission makes an effort, to provide City Council members our best thinking and recommendations on what issues we face. That is good "process," Palo Alto or otherwise.

It is troubling when a similar Commission basically gets told we reject the work and thinking that has gone into the new Library Plan.

The "Palo Alto Process," which I for years have viewed as broken, seems to have reared its ugly head here. Thousands of dollars and hours have been put into the right configuration of the various libraries we have in town, and after a vote of the people nearly a year ago, we were on our way to having world class libraries that our neighboring cities have at present.

Council asked for more "study" at the last meeting. I predict that we will spend money we did not need to and arrive at the same conclusions that were presented to Council at this last meeting.

This really has to stop. Poop or get off the proverbial pot.

Posted by jane, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 4:39 pm

the irony, I have donated dozens of books and media to the Palo Alto Library. I didn't know that it was going to a separate group, FOPAL

while my donations hep the library, they also seem to bolster this group.

Not knowing too many details, I am completely in favor of anything that disbands the homeless component to the downtown library. Close downtown.

As someone else posted above, I'm also someone who voted for money for the libraries mainly because of the Main library and Mitchell Park library and Community Center.

Posted by Curious, a resident of another community, on Sep 17, 2009 at 5:04 pm

Does the library in Los Altos have anywhere near the homeless population that Palo Alto has? I am curious because most of the neighboring librarians know that Palo Alto has a large number of homeless in their libraries, especially at the Downtown branch.

Also curious, how many of you have been in the Downtown library lately? There are incidents of people messing thier pants, fighting and smelling awful. Do you want to hang out there?

Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 5:21 pm

All this over a branch that gets only 9.8% of library visitors. (From the PA library's door counters in 2007.

No age discrimination intended, but I would also be interested in knowing the ages of those pressing for more books.

I hope print books will always be with us, but the tipping point for ebooks has arrived. Dan Browm's "The Lost Symbol" was released yesterday. On Amazon, the Kindle edition was outselling the hardback copy.

Posted by anon, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 5:27 pm

At this rate, 50% or more of Palo Altans will have Kindles before Main and Mitchell are refurbished.

Posted by Typical developer behavior, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 5:43 pm

The library administration and the Library Commission which seems to be subservient to the administration behave like typical developers.

They hold meetings and give the impression of listening, but stick to their original plan. Then when the plan they present is found wanting, they wail, we had so many meetings. We worked so hard.

How many times has this scenario been played out? It's practically a written script.

Yes they had some meetings but they did not respond to the public. The public has been saying we want a decent collection (NOT JUST BOOKS, please get that right!) and the administration has been unmovable.

Perhaps with a new chairperson the Commission will be able to question and vote more independently in accordance with their charter

.

Posted by plain dumb, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 5:50 pm

"I think that both Ellen and Tom deserve a lot of respect from the city and the council and that the returning members understand this."

What? So why have the LAC at all if Ellen & Tom can just overrule any proposal they provide? Oh, you're right! That's why Susie resigned and she's right about getting rid of LAC as well since it's of no use.

Posted by Jane, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 10:32 pm

Curious,

I went to the downtown library once, with my young child, and I never went there again. It smells bad, and is creepy. It's certainly a place for adults only.

If the council is doing this to accommodate the homeless, don't call it a Library branch. Call it the homeless internet cafe.

Typical,

"The public has been saying we want a decent collection"

what do you call the public? it sounds like a small minority that wants more books, or a "decent collection" what kind of collections? everything else is now digital,

Posted by Typical developer behavior, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 10:53 pm

Jane, the director's office is in the downtown branch so she sees its deterioration every day. Why hasn't she had minor upgrades done, to make it more cheerful and bright? A couple of cans of paint aren't a big a deal and doors can open to let in fresh air in the morning and late afternoon.

By the way, the whole library plan is going ahead, only the downtown layout is being reevaluated. It would be nice if people knew what they were talking about. Paul Losch should have known that before he joined the mob.

The Weekly was looking for a little sensationalism by using the words kicks back in the headline. Well, they got it.

Posted by anon, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2009 at 11:27 pm

Typical developer said "By the way, the whole library plan is going ahead, only the downtown layout is being reevaluated. "

hmmm... since part of the push back involves a suggestion to move the admin offices out of Downtown to Main or Mitchell, it is not exactly accurate to say that the planning for the other libraries is not being affected.

Posted by i want my books back, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2009 at 12:50 pm

I was not aware that the books and dvds i have donated to the library go to FOPAL? I have donated hundreds of books, and they are selling them? My intention was to donate the books and dvds to the library to share with the community and be able to check out myself, not have a group sell them to cover there expenses and make their own contributions.

I go to all the library branches EXCEPT downtown because I have been accosted by homeless people and the parking is terrible. It sounds like years of research and hard work have gone into a well thought out plan that has been screwballed by a silly interest group. I am hoping that nothing is going to be ruined at the Mitchell Park branch, since it is first and foremost a park, that accomodates a library.

Posted by larger collection, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2009 at 1:03 pm

Downtown is the branch that has the most items turn up missing, it is the poorest maintained branch, nobody should bring their children there because of the vagrants. Such a stink is being put into this, and when all is said and done, its just going to become stinky again, and their will be more items available for the DT thieves to steal.

Next council meeting, lock the FOPAL out of the room.