3 comments

• 

  Lindaonline

  10 months ago

  The community may feel better about the thought of closing the Main Library if only there was already a plan in place for its replacement. As always…. city hall backwards.
  reply
• 

  Joe Weinstein

  10 months ago

  Type your comment here.
  
  Yes, as Lindaonline notes, City Hall continues its 'shoot first ask after' approach to 'planning' . Its folk make super-professional salaries for non- (or even anti-) professional approaches to their work. If the City Council had a clue, they would fire Pat West for permitting this sort of sleaze anti-planning so-called 'budgeting'.
  
  Apparently the District's reporter now believes that Foster's bond proposal (whatever and wherever it actually and specifically is at the moment) actually earmarks money for a new main library. Maybe not enough money, but that's missing the real irony.
  
  Namely, there's no legally guaranteed connection between Foster's bonds and the proposed parcel tax. The actual legal lingo of the parcel tax proposal merely restricts the tax money to certain broad kinds of uses labeled 'infrastructure', but contains no commitment to use the money for any specific projects or in any specific amounts or mechanism, let alone to repay bonds, or indeed to finance Foster's bond proposal or his projects.
  reply
• 

  Bill Cwiklo

  10 months ago

  Notice that the current site of the main library is not on the list of potential sites for a "new" library. Grant Thornton hit the nail on the head when he said that getting rid of the main library is part of a grandious Foster/Knabe scheme to redevelop out historic 6 block civic center as commercial property by a public/private partnership. Too bad that Bob Foster didn't internalize much from the ancient Romans that he claims to admire so much. They enhanced their great city, yes, but their historic forum, the Fora Romano, is still standing. He wants to tear ours down!
  reply