Town Square

Post a New Topic

Library commission Chair Susie Thom resigns

Original post made on Sep 16, 2009

Susie Thom, who for eight months has chaired the Palo Alto Library Advisory Commission, abruptly and immediately resigned Tuesday in protest of a 12:40 a.m. City Council rejection of long-developed plans for the Downtown Library. The council action was at the behest of a group from the Friends of the Palo Alto Libraries group.
==B Related material:==
■ [Web Link Text of Chair Susie Thom's letter resigning from library group]

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, September 16, 2009, 1:05 AM

Comments (53)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Not surprised
a resident of Community Center
on Sep 16, 2009 at 7:27 am

Is this surprising?
Let's see:

1) years are spent working something out
2) a small, vocal group opposes above work
3) small vocal group shows up at council meeting and voices their oppostion
4) Council is afraid to upset this small vocal group
5) Council caves into the demands of said group
6) years of work wasted

The Palo Alto process lives!!!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by RS
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 16, 2009 at 7:47 am

Independent of where the fault lies, a huge bond was passed with plans on how the library system would be upgraded. Has any of that work proceeded?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Andrew L. Freedman
a resident of College Terrace
on Sep 16, 2009 at 8:46 am

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


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Parent
a resident of JLS Middle School
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:11 am

I have seen no evidence of work progressing at Mitchell Park, but the Drop is not operating this school year due to the work that is not happening. In other words, we have less facilities at Mitchell Park at present and still a run down library building.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by doh
a resident of Crescent Park
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:23 am

Downtown was always going to happen first. Now FOPAL is just pushing that out, which is holding up Mitchell as well.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by George Browning
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:37 am

I am impressed with the letter from Susie Thom. She clearly described the way in which the Library Commission did its job and expressed her disappointment in the council's action. Susie correctly identified the weakness of the council when they become managers instead of making policy, and summed up by citing this as an example of the "Palo Alto Process".

How can some council members denounce this process in their campaign statements and then flagrantly foster it when elected? I am extremely disappointed in those council members who voted to derail a well-planned recommedation by a group of thoughtful residents.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jane Doe
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 16, 2009 at 10:39 am

As a former member of Palo Alto commissions, I can attest to the problem of a few vocal people, often the same few, coming in with strong words and threats, to stop proceedings or to get their way. What makes these people think they have the right - just because they invest the time to be watchdogs. Then they exaggerate and take undue credit, without seeing the other side.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathy
a resident of Crescent Park
on Sep 16, 2009 at 10:40 am

So sorry to see Susie resign. She is absolutely right that this is the process gone awry. The Council is indeed ignoring 4 years of public process.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John Q. Public
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 16, 2009 at 11:16 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Opportunity
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 11:27 am

If the chairperson of every commission resigned when the council amends a small part of their recommendation there would be resignations every week. The council does this all the time. It is their job.
It is a pity Ms Thom did not see this as an opportunity to bring the Library Commission recommendation more into line with the public views.
However, her resignation gives the city an opportunity to appoint someone who is more independent and responsive to the public, and not simply to support the library administration.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Not surprised
a resident of Community Center
on Sep 16, 2009 at 11:32 am

opportunity--you are clearly in the dark about what is going on here:

Web Link

"The reversal rejected recommendations of city staff and members of the city's Library Advisory Commission, which has conducted numerous outreach meetings and guided the library project into working-drawing stages. There is concern that the reversal would cause a delay of months or a year in the construction process throughout the system."

and

"Director of Libraries Diane Jennings and members of the Library Advisory Commission objected Monday night that the design presented to the council is exactly what voters approved in November. Jennings said she was confident that the renovated Downtown Library would meet the needs of its visitors. Thom pointed out that the overall library system's collection would still increase by 71,000 volumes -- all of which would be available by request at all branches."

and

"Alison Cormack, who spearheaded the Measure N campaign, praised the collaboration between the city, the volunteers and the architects and said the Palo Alto Library Foundation (of which she is chair) was "very pleased with the design.""

What we had is the city council kowtowing to a few vocal opponents of the plan, including one of Palo Alto's "grand Dames", who feel that their small branch is more important than the whole system


 +   Like this comment
Posted by palo alto mom
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Sep 16, 2009 at 11:52 am

Clearly a case of 8-9 vocal people holding the City and the Library Commission hostage. The Downtown Branch should be closing, not expanding its books.

Go to any library used by adults in PA (or anywhere) and the majority of the patrons are using it for computer access, research, quiet work or picking up reserved books. As a frequent library user, I see 1-2 people looking at new books, occasionally a person in the regular fiction stacks, virtually no one in the non-fiction areas, 3-4 picking up reserved books and dozens at the tables with their laptops or at the library computers.

Utilizing the space to encompass how a library is actually used today makes sense. Serving only the people who expect libraries to remain as they were 25 years ago does not.

I am very grateful to Ms. Thom for all of her hard work!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 16, 2009 at 12:19 pm

Palo Alto mom - how dare you point out what is actually occurring at PA libraries today? You are implying that facts are more important than opinions or fondly held memories/dreams?

Next you will probably recommend that the City Council members visit a library to check out your story. I am sure they are too busy listening to their most important / vocal constituents to have the time to do this.

And so it goes...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Another point of view
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 16, 2009 at 12:22 pm

I disagree with Ms. Thom that Council deviated from its policy-making role in its action Monday night. Whether or not Downtown Library should allocate such a huge portion of its limited space for Department Administration offices is exactly the kind of policy decision that Council should make.

I would argue that the Council should have been asked to weigh in on this policy decision earlier in the process, so as not to "waste" precious staff, consultant and LAC time on a design that did not fit with Council policy.

I am also surprised at Ms. Thom's reaction. LAC is an advisory body, as is the Planning and Transportation Commission. City Council has often chosen not to follow Planning Commission recommendations on major planning and development issues, including aspects of issues such as the Zoning Ordinance Update, which took well over five years to complete. The advisory body's role is to vet an issue and to provide the pros and cons on various positions regarding that issue. If LAC did its job, then the time spent on the issue is not "wasted," regardless of whether or not Council agrees with the advisory body's recommendation.

It's been less than a year since Measure N was passed. Supporters of Measure N understood that they needed votes from Downtown Library advocates in order to achieve the two-thirds majority required to pass the bond measure. Downtown Library supporters were led to believe that Downtown Library would be renovated to increase collections, computers and public space. To try to argue that these voters misunderstood Measure N and that it is too late to change their vote (so tough luck!) seems to me to be similar to the High Speed Rail Authority arguing that Measure 1A passed, so too bad if you didn't understand what you voted for.

It seems to me that passing the Library Bond was achieved by a compromise on the part of Downtown Library supporters who trusted that the Bond Measure would result in improvements to Downtown Library that would benefit its users in increased collections and a restoration of public space. To deny that now seems to me a betrayal of that trust and is kinda like saying "Gotcha! We fooled you and now we can do what we want!"

We need to build more trust, not keep tearing it down. Divide and conquer seems to work all too well in Palo Alto, and I wish there could be less divisiveness (including North/South).



 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 16, 2009 at 12:41 pm

"So sorry to see Susie resign. She is absolutely right that this is the process gone awry. The Council is indeed ignoring 4 years of public process."

This is not the first time that's happened. Citizens participating in the city process should be well aware of this possibility. I suggest an upfront disclosure for all novice recruits: Your hard work and good intentions may be abruptly wasted, totally or in part, at any time by the city staff or council whimsy. The city owes its well-meaning citizens at least that much.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 1:03 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Amazing, a public person with the integrity to resign rather than accept a policy they oppose.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by palo alto mom
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Sep 16, 2009 at 1:14 pm

"Downtown Library supporters were led to believe that Downtown Library would be renovated to increase collections, computers and public space." It is and under the most recent plans the Downtown Library would already be receiving more books then originally planned.

The Downtown Library's Plan, which were presented as part of Measure N, include a designated amount of space for staff/administration. These are the plans which were approved on by the VOTERS of Palo Alto.
Downtown Floor Plan Web Link

And Paul - thanks for making me smile!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by June
a resident of South of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 1:19 pm

The land used for the Downtown Library should long ago have become part of an enlarged police station, with a bridge joining the two sections over the street.

We've studied the library situation to death - we cannot have as many large (or larger!) branches as we have. The Council should have accepted the reasonable proposals from the Library Commission - they've come a long way from being just strident voices for "more." Their proposal was arrived at with great care; and they deserve a big apology.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by You've Got to Be Kidding
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 16, 2009 at 1:21 pm

Facts:

Library plans were presented prior to vote to approve.
Plans include more space and collections to Downtown Library as requested.
People voted - over 60% approved.

Build it. Please.

And it is not just whining about the council's decision. It is DOLLARS that this city doesn't have to talk talk talk talk talk

Oops, sorry, the fingers froze there for a moment. ;D


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Herb Borock
a resident of Professorville
on Sep 16, 2009 at 1:34 pm

All boards and commissions are advisory to the City Council.

The staff had originally proposed a library committee that reported to staff instead of to the Council.

However, the Council after receiving public input decided instead to create a Library Advisory Commission that advised the Council and had properly noticed public meetings that were open to participation by the public who had adequate time to review relevant documents.

The Council needs to ensure that its boards and commissions are truly advisory bodies to the Council by appointing people to its boards and commissions who understand the role of a member of those bodies.

We don't always have a City Council that makes those kinds of appointments.

Sometimes we have had a Council majority that appoints people who believe their role is to approve what staff wants done, or people who believe their role is to approve what developers want.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by CHinCider
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 16, 2009 at 2:38 pm

Fact:

The current Downtown Library collection size is 12,000 volumes

The proposed size under the new plan is 17,500 volumes

That is a 46% increase!

Isn't that providing an increase in collection size "as promised"?

What more do those folks want?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by anonymous
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 16, 2009 at 3:02 pm

While I have not been involved in city library matters, after reading all this, my sincere sympathies are with Susie Thom
-from a professional librarian


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 16, 2009 at 3:46 pm

I think Herb is correct on all counts. Citizen participants are advisors; the council is variously the decider or the final rubber stamper.

However, citizen participants who take their advisory role seriously will spend much volunteer time and effort to give sound advice: studying the situation, getting the facts, and formulating and debating options. The city, especially the city council that asked for their input, must not treat their efforts cavalierly. Or appear to.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by palo alto mom
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Sep 16, 2009 at 4:19 pm

they would like 35000 books at the DT library.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Opportunity
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 4:59 pm

35,000 items, not books. That includes magazines, media, everything.
Other branch libraries of the same size hold larger collections than 35,000.
It is cheaper to have extra copies of many items than to have librarians find, label, and transport back and forth between branches.
Seems really strange to have librarians fighting for years against an improved library, (not just bigger buildings) and the public asking again and again for better content. Really strange.
I wish the staff librarians would speak up.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Librarian
a resident of another community
on Sep 16, 2009 at 5:08 pm

Opportunity-

Staff librarians agree with the plan. And I'm afraid you're incorrect about having duplicate copies.

It's much better to have a more diverse collection than to duplicate materials at every branch. I don't know why you think it costs more to have things transferred.

Why is it that you don't trust the library staff to do their job? It's not as if they're trying to create a lesser service for the people they serve.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by michael james
a resident of Barron Park
on Sep 16, 2009 at 5:32 pm

the counsel should not be allowed to make decisions past 9:30 pm
they are not very professional to begin with and after 10;pm or so they get downright stupid


 +   Like this comment
Posted by michael james
a resident of Barron Park
on Sep 16, 2009 at 5:33 pm

i wanted to thank the counsel for re-arranging the chairs on the Titanic
good use of everyone's time


 +   Like this comment
Posted by bike commuter
a resident of Ventura
on Sep 16, 2009 at 5:38 pm

For Library construction updates visit: Web Link

Council often disagrees with the recommendations of an advisory commission. They are influenced by special interest fund-raising groups.
Typical political process.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Library Employee
a resident of another community
on Sep 16, 2009 at 5:57 pm

Librarian hit the nail on the head. We are excited with the current plans and wish to move forward. We also know the vocal "fans" of the Downtown library that made such a stink at the council meeting make very little if any use of the Downtown branch.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Librarian
a resident of another community
on Sep 16, 2009 at 6:31 pm

More facts:

More materials and space new paint will not keep the homeless out of the Downtown library.
A children's collection will not bring families into Downtown when the great Children's library is a mile away.
As long as the facility is a flop house, it doesn't matter how big the building or deep the collection - most people won't use it other than to pick up materials.

You asked us to speak up.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Me Too
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:24 pm

Sad. Thank you to Ms. Thom for taking a stand. What a Council. Go riddance to them and hopefully we will get a more professional and sensible group next time.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Me Too
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:27 pm

Could some one post how each council member voted?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:30 pm

Five ayes:
Burt
Espinosa
Kishimoto
Schmid
Yeh

Four no:
Barton
Drekmeier
Klein
Morton


 +   Like this comment
Posted by bikes2work
a resident of Santa Rita (Los Altos)
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:46 pm

The only winner from this decision is Group 4 Architects. They get to have a nice big contract amendment and lots of excuses for future delays. Council should not be allowed to make a decision like this at 12:40am. I watched the meeting until almost midnight. By 11:30 you could here the change in everyone's voice. They were really tired and not thinking straight. Barton made valiant effort to get the job done right. Schmid used the opportunity to hammer on his stale north .vs. south diatribe. I turned it off after that.

I went to a Mountain View City Council meeting last week. They were done by 8:30, and I even got to tuck my kids into bed when I got home.

I used to use the downtown north library a lot. I would reserve items on line and pick them up when they arrived. Worked like a charm.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Alan
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 16, 2009 at 9:47 pm

Another view point said:
"Downtown Library supporters were led to believe that Downtown Library would be renovated to increase collections, computers and public space."

This comment seems dishonest or at best willfully uninformed considering the floor plan was on the Measure N web site.

Web Link


Let's quite wasting time and start building what the Palo Alto Library Advisory Commission recommends. I'd hate to have to go downtown to a city council meeting just to tell those council members that buckled what we think about them.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by A voting parent in
a resident of Crescent Park
on Sep 16, 2009 at 10:16 pm

Another excellent example of our spineless city council members, complete with myopic statements. Will we ever get real leaders to get things done in the service of the greater good instead of the selfish few? Susie Thom for City Council!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Political process
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 10:23 pm

bike commuter says "Typical political process."
That's right. Susie Thom and her husband and Alison Cormack (Library Foundation) are all on Larry Klein's re-election committee. So Klein's support of their work is understandable.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Tired of the Palo Alto Process
a resident of South of Midtown
on Sep 16, 2009 at 11:22 pm

It has been more than a decade(!) since the LAC was re-formed (after being disbanded in the 50's). During that time a huge number of people have worked tirelessly to bring (no, pull) Palo Alto out of the past and into the future of libraries. Countless public meetings with incredible input from the citizenry. Two bond measures culminating finally in approval in excess of the 66% required to pass.
More than SIXTY-SIX PERCENT! Does that not indicate the level of support and involvement by the community in this project?
So how in the world can 5 council members turn this all on its head in one evening? I am appalled. For Kishimoto to have "argued Monday that the city needs to do a better job involving the public in the library-design process" is ludicrous. And by postponing, by not moving ahead aggressively, we are losing an opportunity to take advantage of the current economic situation and actually SAVE MONEY on the project. By waiting it will only COST MORE.
I am just dismayed.
-Tired of the Palo Alto "Process"


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 17, 2009 at 2:53 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Bikes-to-work has a point - As a Professional Engineer a job that does not get built is gravy. Money without liability exposure. As the Mechanical Engineer on the Mitchel Park Library years ago, I have regretted my failure to have fought more to add air conditioning to that job. All I got in was one attic exhaust fan. My offer is still open, to design the addition of Air Conditioning and the necessary electrical provisions for Mitchel Park for no fee if the Council agrees to contribute their total travel budget to the construction cost.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by not LAC/FOPAL spat
a resident of Green Acres
on Sep 17, 2009 at 9:25 am

Please do not be gulled into thinking this is a petty spat between the Library Commission and the Friends. This is the subversion of a process that is at least 5 years old. There have been community meetings (many sponsored by the Friends) to discuss the general plan for the future. There have been hundreds of hours spent with architects, consultants, city staff, and varied stakeholders. And finally, many many presentations to council and votes by council.

Measure N arose from this process. Since its passage, work has continued. Architectural work is at the stage of construction plans to start the bidding process. To make a major change - the location of the admin offices - at this point is not merely "overriding a commission," it is ignoring the past history of the project. Those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it and the action by the council could very well mean another five years of discussions before we get back to the point we are at now.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pat
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 17, 2009 at 9:48 am

Palo Alto Mom wrote: The Downtown Library's Plan, which were presented as part of Measure N, include a designated amount of space for staff/administration. These are the plans which were approved on by the VOTERS of Palo Alto.

What are the legal issues if the designs we voted for in Measure N are changed?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Alan
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 17, 2009 at 9:52 am

I'll submit that all cost over runs caused caused by a small vocal group should be applied entirely to the Downtown branch portion of this project.

The Mitchell Park library which is near 4 schools, and the only one in South half of Palo Alto needs to get built without delay. The LAC had many meeting getting input to discuss the project and the plans posted on the Measure N web-site reflect that. Everyone knew or should have known what they were voting for. The city council needs to under their grave error at the next city council meeting and get the building phase of the project started.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by too bad again
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 17, 2009 at 9:53 am



it's too bad that the phrase "small group of vocal people" is being given a bad name in Palo Alto. The problem is not with the fact that a small group of vocal people can, and often do derail a process, but it's with the way people in leadership positions do their jobs.

Contrasting this to the recent math wars in Palo Alto, it appears that the LAC process was clearly legitimate and thorough, which was not the case with the palo alto math wars.

SItuations like these could have been easily averted, or made a heck of a lot better if more work had gone into it from leadership. Business as usual is that elected officials throw things back to the community.

Small groups of vocal people are important, if nothing else, to test the ability and skills of those we elect to represent us.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by pat
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 17, 2009 at 11:34 am

I agree that small groups are important, but not all have equal voices. Enid Pearson and Ellen Wyman have a lot more clout than the average resident. And, there are too many sacred cows in this town.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by too bad again
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 17, 2009 at 12:45 pm



pat,

So, it's worse, not just a small group of people that derailed the library process, it's a "small" group, with power. In the case of the math wars, what everyone called a small group of vocal people were actually a decent amount of concerned parents (no power compared to teachers). It's rarely the merits, it's always the influence.

back to the issue of leadership and a few other things I can think of.











 +   Like this comment
Posted by Marie
a resident of Midtown
on Sep 17, 2009 at 2:14 pm

I disagree that FOPAL represents only a small number of people. I know I generally agree with their position. Over and over again, Palo Alto residents have chosen a branch library system. I couldn't understand why staff and the LAC kept wanting to downsize the downtown library and put the administration at the smallest branch unless it was to reduce the use of the downtown library and eventually eliminate it. Without computers, the downtown library will not support its users - especially its homeless population - who are residents of Palo Alto too. By eliminating computers, then you are limiting the access of people who don't have easy transportation to libraries that do.

I also think the proper comparison of number of items is to compare the maximum number downtown has had and the maximum number of computers they have provided with what the staff is proposing. Today, my understanding is that the floor space dedicated to user functions is far less than before renovations began.

It seems to me the only reason we still have branch libraries, which are supported by most Palo Alto residents as measured by polls and voting, is because of FOPAL. Staff has seemed to want one large edifice that is cutting edge - like Mountain View. I personally don't like the Mountain View library. I much prefer smaller libraries whose main purpose is loaning books. And I think the main purpose of a library should be to have as many books as possible not to be "cutting-edge."

I support the city council trying to figure out what would best reflect what the majority of Palo Alto residents want and how best to meet the needs of the users rather than the staff. This was a political decision - and what is wrong with that? What other way do ordinary people have to influence entrenched bureaucracies?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by too bad again
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 17, 2009 at 4:10 pm


Marie,

1. What is wrong with a political decision? The most important reason a political decision is wrong is that they disregard a transparent process. Actually, political decisions disregard everything, they are basically reckless.

2. What other way do ordinary people have to influence entrenched bureaucracies? You can get in line and go through due process, why is FOPAL getting council to "kick" back the downtown library, why is there a need to kick anything.

As for the concern for homeless people in Palo Alto which you say are also residents of Palo Alto (?). If the kick back is - as you describe - to have computers downtown for homeless people and for those that can't afford transportation to free computers, that's crazy.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 17, 2009 at 5:22 pm

Marie wrote: "I support the city council trying to figure out what would best reflect what the majority of Palo Alto residents want and how best to meet the needs of the users rather than the staff."

Marie, the majority of PA residents voted for the library bond - by more than the needed 66% - based on the allocation of space as shown in the proposed plans. To reject that now, on the basis of the testimony of a few people who managed to hang around late at night, is hardly responsive to what a majority of residents want.

The plans as presented represent far more than just what the staff wants. We are delaying much needed updates for Main and Mitchell apparently to try to meet demands from vocal Downtown supporters whose inability to accept anything less than total control of the DT design seems to suggest nullifying votes as well as ignoring months, if not years, of a widely discussed planning process.

And what a comment - if accurately quoted - from Council member Pat Burt in today's Daily News. "[he] said he was surprised by the reaction to what he saw as a 'very benign' action."

Kudos to Thom (who I have never met) for her comment yesterday
"I thought we had done everything that city council had asked us to do, so I didn't feel I could go back and do it again."

Small vocal groups are vital to any community - large or small - but at some point decisions have to be made or nothing gets done. Is that what FOPAL wants? do they want to risk challenges to the bond vote if the library spaces are significantly changed from the proposed plans?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by compromise
a resident of Crescent Park
on Sep 17, 2009 at 5:56 pm

FOPAL just want things to be done "their" way. Anything else will get voted down.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by i like libraries
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 18, 2009 at 11:21 am

This sucks because it is a huge waste of time and money. I don't really go to the downtown library, i prefer just about any of the other branches. Downtown library seems to have too many strange homeless people, and "missing items" from its collection. College Terrace has been closed, so is this situation going to hold up reopening that branch? College Terrace is tiny in comparison, but I can actually think or get work done there. I now want to find out more about this "FOPAL" .


 +   Like this comment
Posted by palo alto is a funny farm
a resident of Greenmeadow
on Sep 18, 2009 at 11:35 am

Wow, what a fubar. The work has been done, now is not the time. Friends of Palo Alto Libraries are no friends of mine. This is a waste of time and money, and now any time a bond vote comes on the table for Palo Alto, I will simply vote no, because Palo Alto squanders money.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sick of FoPAL Directors
a resident of Barron Park
on Sep 26, 2009 at 12:52 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Local picks on 2015 Michelin Bib Gourmand list
By Elena Kadvany | 8 comments | 3,685 views

Politics: Empty appeals to "innovation"
By Douglas Moran | 13 comments | 1,564 views

Marriage Underachievers
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,479 views

A Surprise!
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 1,473 views

It's Dog-O-Ween this Saturday!
By Cathy Kirkman | 2 comments | 752 views