Our Town: Orange for the libraries | September 10, 2008 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |

Palo Alto Weekly

Notes & Comments - September 10, 2008

Our Town: Orange for the libraries

by Don Kazak

Palo Alto may take on a orange hue in the next month. That's the plan, at least, of the campaign for Measure N on the Nov. 4 ballot.

This story contains 710 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe

Senior Staff Writer Don Kazak can be e-mailed at dkazak@paweekly.com.

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by Leo
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 9, 2008 at 4:27 pm

There's a lot more info about this bond measure, drawings of our future libraries, and a fly-through of the new Mitchell Park library and community center!

Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by Leo
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 9, 2008 at 4:28 pm

the URL is www.betterlibrariesforpaloalto.com


Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 9, 2008 at 6:37 pm

Yes, the city will take on an orange hue over the next month as everyone decorates with pumpkins and fall colors for Halloween.

If choosing orange was to give the impression that the whole city supports the library bond, then it was a bad choice. Alternatively, it was chosen deliberately so that any poor fool who decorates their porch with some pumpkins and seasonal foliage appears to be supporting the bond.

Nice one, library supporters.


Like this comment
Posted by Hope it Fails
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Sep 9, 2008 at 7:17 pm

They'll try but I hope it fails. I like how the reporter slips in how we have branches, "even though it doesn't make a lot of sense." It doesn't, and neither does this bond unfortunately.


Like this comment
Posted by spend spend spend
a resident of Crescent Park
on Sep 10, 2008 at 10:21 am

"There's a lot more info about this bond measure, drawings of our future libraries, and a fly-through of the new Mitchell Park library and community center!"

I should hope so as they've already spent $1,500,000 on these library designs.


Like this comment
Posted by Marvin
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Sep 10, 2008 at 10:31 am

A couple of points from this article:

"That issue is dead and gone because Palo Altans don't want to give up their neighborhood libraries, even if it doesn't make real sense.
Different city councils, over the last decade, have reaffirmed the five-branch policy"

First of all, our city council has no spine and no desire to ever address an issue that will cause conflict--so naturally if people are yelling and screaming for 5 branches, the council will kowtow to these demands regardless of it is fiscally responsible or whether it makes sense.
Second, when this bond is defeated, then maybe the council will have to address the issue of building a single main library, instead of trying to flush more money down the drain keeping 5 branches open


"Kniss noted that seven of the 10 cities she represents in Santa Clara County have new libraries, while Palo Alto is trying to rebuild a branch library built 50 years ago."

What does that say then? All these cities see the wisdom of building new libraries and have moved ahead and done it---Palo Alto,with it's head buried firmly in the ground and living 50 years in the past, is pushing ahead to keep money wasting branches open.

Vote no on the bond, I plan to.


Like this comment
Posted by poor reporting
a resident of Fairmeadow
on Sep 10, 2008 at 11:43 am

"Different city councils, over the last decade, have reaffirmed the five-branch policy"

The city had a six-branch policy just a few years....before they *gasp* CLOSED a branch. Reports of a premature death and all that or just poor reporting?


Like this comment
Posted by Parent
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 10, 2008 at 12:02 pm

The library bond supporters taking orange as their theme reminds me of the MI debate when the supporters wore red and the opponents wore green. So, to keep the seasonal idea going, those who are against the bond should use black to decorate their homes. We could even take it further and wear orange or black clothing to support our views.


Like this comment
Posted by poor reporting
a resident of Fairmeadow
on Sep 10, 2008 at 1:07 pm

Nice idea, Parent.

I think those opposing the bond should go even further and decorate their house in orange, black and silver. For those *really* opposed they should go the extra mile and give out candy to any passing children.


Like this comment
Posted by Library Lover
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Sep 10, 2008 at 1:57 pm

All the quibbling over branches and neighborhoods overlooks a very important point. If one digs deeply enough, one finds that "cost estimates have been developed by a qualified firm." Taking the Mitchell Park item alone: 50,000 square feet for $50 million equals $1,000 per square foot. That is one mighty high number. Did anyone involved in this proposal consider asking for alternatives in the plan? What essential elements would have to be changed to get the cost down to $750 per sqft, or $500 per sqft? This is normal procedure in most private sector projects.


Like this comment
Posted by Neighbor
a resident of South of Midtown
on Sep 10, 2008 at 4:52 pm

"Different city councils, over the last decade, have reaffirmed the five-branch policy"

That is exactly why I'm voting "NO" on N. They're a big waste of money.




Like this comment
Posted by Wanting one great library
a resident of Crescent Park
on Sep 10, 2008 at 5:00 pm

Library Lover - Alternative would have been great. One branch would cost X. Keeping all 5 would cost Y. For 500 sq foot we can do A, for 1000 per sq foot we can do B. You get the point. Exactly why I'm voting no.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.