Back to the Weekly Home Page

Classifieds

Palo Alto Online

Library bond survey under fire

by Geoff S. Fein

The second city survey to determine what community assets should be on a November ballot measure has come under fire for so-called manipulative tactics, as city officials prepare to ask property owners to fund the renovation or rebuilding of Children's, Main and Mitchell Park libraries and the Mitchell Park Community Center.

The survey has been the focus of much debate as its public release was delayed several days after its completion. On Monday, the survey was made available on the city's Web site.

But before the results will be made public, the Libraries Plus Bond Committee is launching the first of two campaign events on Friday, June 7, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Palo Alto Unified School District's Board Room. A second event is scheduled for Saturday, June 8, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.

Libraries Plus is a community group made up of library advocates, former city officials and community members -- all working toward passage of either a $78 million or $96 million bond measure.

But they will have to counter residents' negative reactions to the survey itself.

Lorraine Van De Riet, one of the 609 Palo Alto voters called between May 23 and 28, said "the survey was really crazy." She said by the end of the 20-minute poll she was "angry."

In a letter to The Palo Alto Weekly, Van De Riet called a question about lighting inside the 62-year-old Children's Library "manipulative."

It was "one of the most outrageous questions," she added in a follow-up interview.

The question asked whether voters would be more likely to support a bond measure if it will "replace aging and inefficient lighting systems in the Children's Library so that staff does not have to provide flashlights to library patrons who can't see where they are going when they look for materials."

Ruth Bernstein, of the opinion research firm Evans/McDonough, said the survey's language was no different than similar surveys done for other cities.

"The basic structure is used by pollsters all over," she said. "I don't think the overall structure is skewed. We will get good information from it."

Whether the lighting question was manipulative or far-fetched, there is some truth to it, said Katy Obringer, supervising librarian at the Children's Library.

Staff and patrons who use Children's Library have to deal with an antiquated light system that has never been upgraded in its 62 years.

"The lights are not energy efficient nor do they last long," Obringer said.

During the winter months, when lights burn out, library staff place candles at the checkout desk and hand out flashlights so patrons can locate materials in the dark.

But Obringer could not recall the last time that occurred.

Among the voters polled in last week's survey were former Mayor Lanie Wheeler, co-chair of Libraries Plus, and Mary Jo Levy, head librarian for Palo Alto's six libraries. Levy did not participate in the survey.

Wheeler, however, said she was excited to be polled. She tried to write down as many of the questions as she could during the survey.

"I knew someone would ask me what the questions were," she said.

Wheeler said she heard some of the complaints about the survey; however, she said such concerns may be due more to people's lack of knowledge about the issue.

"My reaction was the survey did what was promised by the consultant," Wheeler said.

But she acknowledged that people called out-of-the-blue might think the survey was less than objective. "There were phrases being used that would either appeal to you or make you angry, depending on how you perceive them," she said.

Bernstein said surveys are just one of many tools used to give input to city councils and staff.

She added that Palo Alto has paid more attention to the surveys than normal.

"But I can't understand why," she said.

Bernstein will present the survey's findings to the council on June 10. Until then, she will compare the most recent findings with those from the first city survey done last fall and a private survey done by Libraries Now!, a grass-roots organization advocating a libraries-only bond measure.

Even if the survey results show support for either a $78 million or $96 million bond measure, it will take at least two-thirds approval by voters to pass a bond measure.

Bernstein said she will not rely solely on the most recent survey's findings to tell the council whether to move forward or hold off.

She also said there is no way to tell if a mailer from Richard Alexander had any affect on the survey's outcome.

Alexander sent out 12,000 post cards asking potential respondents to support libraries but to say no to anything that includes renovation of the Art Center.

Bernstein said she will look at differences in the results from all the surveys to determine if there were any significant changes from survey to survey.

Van De Riet recalled seeing the mailer, but said it did not influence her answers to the survey. She does not plan on supporting either bond measure.

E-mail Geoff S. Fein at gfein@paweekly.com