Keep library control local, retain contract

Quit messing with our library!

I mean you, Spokane Valley City Council.

You’ve spent months dickering over something with which most people are satisfied, all in the name of “cost-efficiency.”

First you demand a special rate to contract with the county library district. While we library patrons held our collective breaths, this maneuver almost left us without a 2004 contract and library services.

Then you began considering an independent city library a la Liberty Lake. Do Valley citizens know that frustrated Liberty Lake patrons must pay an $80 fee to access the county library system? This has caused such a fuss that Liberty Lake is now refunding that cost to patrons, at least for now.

Do we really want to go back to the little storefront libraries of two decades ago? I dread discovering my “second bookshelf” has been reduced to a smattering of contemporary authors, without the long-standing collection of periodicals, resource materials and wide-ranging fiction we have now.

And if you need to pinch pennies on the existing library, how can we fund building and supplying materials for our own facility, since the current one belongs to the county?

Now you’re contemplating privatizing with out-of-state companies or other third parties to run our library.

I find this last option utterly astounding – an absentee landlord for our library system.

One passionate raison d’être behind incorporation was local control. Why would we want to relinquish control of our library management to a for-profit company, for whom we are merely another client and who will make decisions for us from afar? You can’t complain about jobs being outsourced or lack of local involvement and then let outsiders run one of our most valuable resources. Especially when our own county is able and willing to partner with us.

One company that has already visited is Library Systems & Services of Maryland. It is currently managing the Riverside County, Calif., library system. That system reportedly expanded library hours by one-third, added staff, increased circulation by 10 percent, increased the materials budget by $60,000 and provided a higher quality of service without exceeding their budget.

Just how did they accomplish this feat? We need details.

Is LSSI outsourcing management responsibilities to keep its own costs down? If so, who is ultimately going to be administrating our library and from where?

Privatizing also means administrative job losses for local people who faithfully serve us and participate in our economy.

I am concerned that cost is the sole bottom line in these considerations. Some things are too important to a community for bottom-line reasoning.

Despite its concern about cost-efficiency, the City Council envisions building a joint library/City Hall/pedestrian mall at U-City, hoping it will become a central gathering place. News flash! That area, though needing revitalization, is no longer the population center of the Valley. The center has moved east and will continue to do so.

I feel we should retain our contract with the county, which serves us well, with which we have good relations and which is willing to cooperate with us in building a larger library.

Here’s something to consider. The Safeco building at Sprague and Adams is for sale. It’s beautiful with great parking and easy access, it’s on a major bus route and is convenient to shopping and several schools. Its interior is open for ease of remodeling; it already has cable infrastructure in place. City Hall could occupy one wing, the library another and extra space could be rented out or house a community center. Having one main library would keep all materials in one place (great for browsing), without the cost of duplicating resources.

Perhaps Safeco could be persuaded to sell the building at a low price, gaining a tax write-off. With building costs soaring, wouldn’t contracting with the county and moving everything to this (or another) building be more cost-effective than building more libraries or embracing the financial unknowns of privatizing?

Please don’t experiment with the library as a litmus test for privatizing city services. Let’s enhance what we have and keep control local. The library belongs to us; no other will care about it as we do.