Last night's meeting was relatively brief - a little less than an hour - but it was packed with information. In fact, it seemed the public learned more from the trustees and staff at Urbana Free Library about the ongoing issues related to #bookgate in last night's meeting than in any other forum to date.
Notably the trustees described the terms negotiated for former director Lissak's terminal contract and some general details about how the search for a new permanent director will proceed.
We learned too from acting head of adult services Mary Towner that 297 boxes of books were probably shipped to Better World Books (BWB) during June. Towner spent 45 minutes on the phone with BWB, but that would have been unnecessary if the employee who has access to the Library's BWB account would simply provide access to it. So it seems that among the ranks of the Library's staff, partisanship and allegiances continue to hold sway.
Another takeaway from the meeting is that the trustees might need refresher courses in Robert's Rules of Order, their own by-laws, and the Illinois Open Meetings Act. Much of the confusion focused on two issues: how to change the meeting time for the regular board meetings and on the chain of command for the search committee (e.g. who chooses who serves on it - the appointed head of the committee or the Trustees).
You can read a brief article about the meeting in the News-Gazette, but be sure to check out some notes provided by Kathryn La Barre who attended the meeting. There is also a recording available of the meeting courtesy of JP Goguen, but the sound quality is hit and miss.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Monday, September 9, 2013
With Friends Like These...
Allow me to call your attention to a brief announcement in the September 2013 Director's Report.
"The August 22-26 book sale raised $7,147. The sale included items from the library collection from the Better World Books shipment that were not returned to the collection after careful re-evaluation by the Adult Services librarians. According to the Friends, of the 145 boxes of books offered to the Friends for the sale, a total of three boxes of books were selected by the public."
Dear Reader, I attended this book sale on Saturday, August 24. Full disclosure: I bought a handful of books that had been returned from Better World Books and not added back to the collection.
Most of the books that filled the Lewis Auditorium were donations, not discarded library books. The paperback mystery selections—no library copies among them—were lovingly attended and groomed by a circulating clutch of Friends. The romance and fantasy paperbacks were also tenderly tended.
The Library's former books? The ones at the heart of #bookgate? They were partitioned off in two small rooms, still in boxes, difficult to browse. A few other boxes, even more jumbled, were shoved into a corner of the large room. There were signs pointing the curious to "Former Library Books."
I didn't count the boxes - adorned with the Better World Books logos on their sides - but I would be surprised if there were more than 50 available all told.
I didn't count the boxes - adorned with the Better World Books logos on their sides - but I would be surprised if there were more than 50 available all told.
Where were the other 100 boxes? I have no idea. Some were stacked up in the back hallway. A Reclaiming traveler said when s/he inquired about them, s/he was told the boxes contained "crap fiction" that no one would want.
Perhaps, just maybe, the Friends could have sold more than 3 boxes of the returned books if they lovingly groomed and curated even a small portion of them in the same way they did the rows of James Patterson, Sue Grafton, and Lillian Braun.
Of course, the Friends didn't want any of the returned library books to sell, period. As one of the Friends stated during public comment at the June 19 Special Meeting of the Library's Board (you can listen at about 01:26:00 mark in this recording), no one wants to buy old library books anyway. We were told to trust the Friends, that they know better than even the librarians what the community wants to read.
With Friends like these, who needs enemies?
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Immaterial? Inconceivable!!
Maybe-current Executive Director Deb Lissak, Maybe-interim Executive Director Kathy Wicks, and Trustee Mel Farrel were not in attendance last night. Lissak's attorney was nowhere in evidence. The climate in the packed Sattherthewaite conference room verged into the intemperate zone as tempers ran hot, as did the temperature.
Chris Scherer opened the meeting by advising us that public comment would be limited as a closed session would commence at 7pm in order for the Board to have a phone conference with their attorney "on personnel." He was clearly agitated and emphatic in advising the assembled that the Board had no announcements for us. We were informed that after the closed session we could expect no further announcements. We were advised to keep our comments brief.
Mark Netter injected a note of calm following these opening remarks with his statement here: http://reclaimingourlibrary.blogspot.com/2013/08/late-august-updates.html
After closed session the Board did have one announcement - they will convene a special meeting on September 4, at 7 p.m. in the UFL auditorium.
First the hopeful signs:
The meeting was livestreamed and is archived here:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/ucimc
Yesterday and today news about #bookgate reappeared on the radio (WILL) with small soundbites sprinkled liberally throughout the programming. Here is one such piece: http://will.illinois.edu/news/story/lissak-still-working-at-urbana-library-following-weeding-scandal
The News Gazette published a credible overview here: http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2013-08-27/confusing-situation-arises-2-directors-payroll.html
I appreciate the extremity of the situation which the Board of Trustees now faces and I am sympathetic about the pressures they face. It would seem that they can't answer many of our questions because concerns about of legal liability, and because much remains unresolved. We verified the following:
Last night's meeting gave us a new word for our vocabulary: Immaterial. Chris Scherer, Board President, who appeared increasingly frustrated and angry as the evening unfolded repeatedly used this term to dismiss many of our questions.
Al Kagan led the public comment with observations about the 'two popes' problem facing the library as indicated by the WILL transcript of Scherer's comments which indicate that there are two acting directors (Lissak and Wicks). He stated that the director continues to demonstrate her incompetence by not removing herself from leadership of the library in a dignified way, and is prolonging harm to the library. He urged the Board to fire her due to her gross incompetence.
Carol Tilley brought copies of the Library Journal article here:
http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/08/opinion/michael-stephens/collection-bashing-trashing-office-hours/ She advised the trustees that the events at UFL are being watched by people in the US and Internationally as this is an issue affecting libraries everywhere.
JP Goguen thanked the trustees for opening up public comment. He noted that Lissak was given an opportunity for a graceful honorable exit, and expressed his appreciation for the upcoming consultation with an attorney. He addressed the civil service guidelines for termination as the tool that would allow them to be aggressive in pursuing her termination.
A dispute about Lissak's actual employment classification ensued as Scherer indicated that she is a civil service employee, and Becky Brown stated emphatically that she is not. Lissak is an exempt class employee of the City of Urbana, and she has a current contract for employment.
Kate McDowell then testified by stating her appreciation for the ability to comment and addressed the trustees requests for trust and faith "It is faith that brings us here, what we say may not indicate full trust. That is our job - we are asking you to represent us. I know we may not all agree. We show up because we care and because we have faith. When we speak please do not address our comments as silly." She asked for the trustees to foster respectful dialogue, and began to ask a series of questions which were interrupted by Scherer.
She asked if a paid separation agreement has been reached, if the director has resigned, who is the library director, what is the legal authority that makes this person director? Where is this contract? Why are we pursuing separation and not termination? What is the authority that grants the ability to pay two directors at once?
McDowell then suggested that the trustees consider more openness by soliciting public input on the appointment of and terms of the contract for the next director. She asked for clear answers in this very confusing situation. After being interrupted several times near the conclusion of her comments Scherer told her she was done talking and dismissed her from the podium.
Aimee Rickman stated her outrage about the inaction of the Board, how appalled she is by the squandering of public funds and by the fact that the pillaging of the library has not prompted more decisive action on the part of the trustees, despite repeated calls for action. She addressed the fact that the contract with Lissak was renewed - at which point she was interrupted by Scherer - who advised her that she did not know what she was talking about. Rickman countered by asking the Board to help us understand what is going on. At this point the trustees seemed to indicate that a contract was in place prior to their awareness of the issues at the library.
Rickman then stated her frustration about the lack of willingness to protect library workers by addressing the bullying. She asked the trustees what they were doing to protect staff, and highlighted the 'no time' / 'needing more time' disconnect. Recent events of the library unfolded quickly under the oversight of the Board. Now the Trustees continue to state that there is insufficient time to conduct a SWOT analysis, for example, prior to state reporting requirements. The Board continues to ask the public for more time, and yet the urgency of the situation intensifies in direct proportion to the lack of clear communication from the Board. Rickman then renewed her questions about how many books were removed.
In response - Scott Bennett, Trustee, advised us that the trustees are trying to proceed mindfully and not incur any further liability for the library. There is no separation agreement. There is an existing contract which must be honored.
We were advised by Chris Scherer that questions about the number of books that came back are immaterial. That the number of books that were sent out is immaterial. This speaker was advised her time for speaking was over.
Carol Tilley interjected that the trustees interactions by this point in the meeting were now contrary to the spirit of respect and open dialogue the group had repeatedly requested. Indeed, The plea for respect that Kate McDowell presented earlier seemed to create an equal yet decidedly opposite reaction.
Ashley Price took the podium next and asked about transparency for the strategic plan, and stated her concerns about the fact that most of the information was coming from rumors as no official communication was forthcoming from the board about the many extant questions the public continues to restate from meeting to meeting.
Chris Scherer stated emphatically that 'Rumors are a problem.'
Stuart Levy, speaking on behalf of an Urbana resident asked about the status of the search for a new director particularly with respect to this now unsettled situations with two acting directors. He asked for a public resolution as expeditiously as possible.
After roll call the Trustees convened in closed session.
This meeting unsettled everyone and left Board members and the public alike disappointed and frustrated. The complexity of the situation is now far more clear, as the path to resolution leads into a briar and bramble filled terrain. The concerns the public continues to state are not irrelevant, not unimportant, in other words not - as Scherer deemed them IMMATERIAL.
What we have here is a failure to communicate. I add one further plea to the trustees. We know there is much you can not tell us. Please tell us what you can and clearly define what you can't. If we have things wrong, please tell us. The rumors that have upset you will only grow in this vacuum.
We sincerely hope that Scherer's statement about the problematic nature of rumors does not bode ill for current employees who still have no protection in this rapidly evolving situation. We appreciate and respect your continuing efforts under unimaginably difficult circumstances. We look forward to a more respectful and open dialogue with you.
Chris Scherer opened the meeting by advising us that public comment would be limited as a closed session would commence at 7pm in order for the Board to have a phone conference with their attorney "on personnel." He was clearly agitated and emphatic in advising the assembled that the Board had no announcements for us. We were informed that after the closed session we could expect no further announcements. We were advised to keep our comments brief.
Mark Netter injected a note of calm following these opening remarks with his statement here: http://reclaimingourlibrary.blogspot.com/2013/08/late-august-updates.html
After closed session the Board did have one announcement - they will convene a special meeting on September 4, at 7 p.m. in the UFL auditorium.
First the hopeful signs:
The meeting was livestreamed and is archived here:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/ucimc
Yesterday and today news about #bookgate reappeared on the radio (WILL) with small soundbites sprinkled liberally throughout the programming. Here is one such piece: http://will.illinois.edu/news/story/lissak-still-working-at-urbana-library-following-weeding-scandal
The News Gazette published a credible overview here: http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2013-08-27/confusing-situation-arises-2-directors-payroll.html
I appreciate the extremity of the situation which the Board of Trustees now faces and I am sympathetic about the pressures they face. It would seem that they can't answer many of our questions because concerns about of legal liability, and because much remains unresolved. We verified the following:
- There is no separation agreement.
- Lissak has not resigned.
- Lissak still reports to work and it is unclear who is in charge of the library on a day to day basis and to whom staff should be reporting (according to statements made in the WILL piece above).
- Negotiations are ongoing in an attempt to seek a separation agreement with Lissak.
- Last night seems to have been the Board's first opportunity to consult with an attorney.
Last night's meeting gave us a new word for our vocabulary: Immaterial. Chris Scherer, Board President, who appeared increasingly frustrated and angry as the evening unfolded repeatedly used this term to dismiss many of our questions.
Al Kagan led the public comment with observations about the 'two popes' problem facing the library as indicated by the WILL transcript of Scherer's comments which indicate that there are two acting directors (Lissak and Wicks). He stated that the director continues to demonstrate her incompetence by not removing herself from leadership of the library in a dignified way, and is prolonging harm to the library. He urged the Board to fire her due to her gross incompetence.
Carol Tilley brought copies of the Library Journal article here:
http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/08/opinion/michael-stephens/collection-bashing-trashing-office-hours/ She advised the trustees that the events at UFL are being watched by people in the US and Internationally as this is an issue affecting libraries everywhere.
JP Goguen thanked the trustees for opening up public comment. He noted that Lissak was given an opportunity for a graceful honorable exit, and expressed his appreciation for the upcoming consultation with an attorney. He addressed the civil service guidelines for termination as the tool that would allow them to be aggressive in pursuing her termination.
A dispute about Lissak's actual employment classification ensued as Scherer indicated that she is a civil service employee, and Becky Brown stated emphatically that she is not. Lissak is an exempt class employee of the City of Urbana, and she has a current contract for employment.
Kate McDowell then testified by stating her appreciation for the ability to comment and addressed the trustees requests for trust and faith "It is faith that brings us here, what we say may not indicate full trust. That is our job - we are asking you to represent us. I know we may not all agree. We show up because we care and because we have faith. When we speak please do not address our comments as silly." She asked for the trustees to foster respectful dialogue, and began to ask a series of questions which were interrupted by Scherer.
She asked if a paid separation agreement has been reached, if the director has resigned, who is the library director, what is the legal authority that makes this person director? Where is this contract? Why are we pursuing separation and not termination? What is the authority that grants the ability to pay two directors at once?
McDowell then suggested that the trustees consider more openness by soliciting public input on the appointment of and terms of the contract for the next director. She asked for clear answers in this very confusing situation. After being interrupted several times near the conclusion of her comments Scherer told her she was done talking and dismissed her from the podium.
Aimee Rickman stated her outrage about the inaction of the Board, how appalled she is by the squandering of public funds and by the fact that the pillaging of the library has not prompted more decisive action on the part of the trustees, despite repeated calls for action. She addressed the fact that the contract with Lissak was renewed - at which point she was interrupted by Scherer - who advised her that she did not know what she was talking about. Rickman countered by asking the Board to help us understand what is going on. At this point the trustees seemed to indicate that a contract was in place prior to their awareness of the issues at the library.
Rickman then stated her frustration about the lack of willingness to protect library workers by addressing the bullying. She asked the trustees what they were doing to protect staff, and highlighted the 'no time' / 'needing more time' disconnect. Recent events of the library unfolded quickly under the oversight of the Board. Now the Trustees continue to state that there is insufficient time to conduct a SWOT analysis, for example, prior to state reporting requirements. The Board continues to ask the public for more time, and yet the urgency of the situation intensifies in direct proportion to the lack of clear communication from the Board. Rickman then renewed her questions about how many books were removed.
In response - Scott Bennett, Trustee, advised us that the trustees are trying to proceed mindfully and not incur any further liability for the library. There is no separation agreement. There is an existing contract which must be honored.
We were advised by Chris Scherer that questions about the number of books that came back are immaterial. That the number of books that were sent out is immaterial. This speaker was advised her time for speaking was over.
Carol Tilley interjected that the trustees interactions by this point in the meeting were now contrary to the spirit of respect and open dialogue the group had repeatedly requested. Indeed, The plea for respect that Kate McDowell presented earlier seemed to create an equal yet decidedly opposite reaction.
Ashley Price took the podium next and asked about transparency for the strategic plan, and stated her concerns about the fact that most of the information was coming from rumors as no official communication was forthcoming from the board about the many extant questions the public continues to restate from meeting to meeting.
Chris Scherer stated emphatically that 'Rumors are a problem.'
Stuart Levy, speaking on behalf of an Urbana resident asked about the status of the search for a new director particularly with respect to this now unsettled situations with two acting directors. He asked for a public resolution as expeditiously as possible.
After roll call the Trustees convened in closed session.
This meeting unsettled everyone and left Board members and the public alike disappointed and frustrated. The complexity of the situation is now far more clear, as the path to resolution leads into a briar and bramble filled terrain. The concerns the public continues to state are not irrelevant, not unimportant, in other words not - as Scherer deemed them IMMATERIAL.
What we have here is a failure to communicate. I add one further plea to the trustees. We know there is much you can not tell us. Please tell us what you can and clearly define what you can't. If we have things wrong, please tell us. The rumors that have upset you will only grow in this vacuum.
We sincerely hope that Scherer's statement about the problematic nature of rumors does not bode ill for current employees who still have no protection in this rapidly evolving situation. We appreciate and respect your continuing efforts under unimaginably difficult circumstances. We look forward to a more respectful and open dialogue with you.
Statement from Mark Netter - member of the UFL Board of Trustees
August 27, 2013
Last night in a packed special session in the Satterthwaite meeting room, with eight of the trustees in attendance [Mel Farrel was absent], and with Becky Brown taking notes - I counted 25 people at the meeting, some were press members, most were citizens. After a brief statement by Chris Scherer - which I'll post about next - Mark Netter read the following comment as a response to a post on this blog earlier that day - Late August Updates http://reclaimingourlibrary.blogspot.com/
He provided us with the text of this comment and asked us to share it with you here:
Comments on August 27 2013 UFL Meeting
For the past two months UFL board members, UFL staff, and members of the community have come to understand that there were deep seated issues that must be addressed.
We have listened to the public, and have started the process of change. Some people believe that the board is moving too slowly, there may even be a few thinking otherwise.
Most of the board's meetings take place in public, and that is both the right thing to do as well as the law.
However, the main purpose of tonight's meeting is to have closed session discussions with our attorney and on personnel. That meeting is the board's first with our attorney and is scheduled for 7:00 pm.
Why didn't we find a bigger space? Because of the agenda, I really didn't think that a large number of people would attend just to watch us go into closed session and come back out later with no announcements. To hold this meeting in the Auditorium displaces another group that has a regularly scheduled claim to that space. Moving the board meeting to another facility and making the necessary arrangements seemed wasteful. If I was wrong, I am sorry.
We hope that the members of the public will understand the need for the board to conduct lawfully permitted closed sessions from time to time.
Last night in a packed special session in the Satterthwaite meeting room, with eight of the trustees in attendance [Mel Farrel was absent], and with Becky Brown taking notes - I counted 25 people at the meeting, some were press members, most were citizens. After a brief statement by Chris Scherer - which I'll post about next - Mark Netter read the following comment as a response to a post on this blog earlier that day - Late August Updates http://reclaimingourlibrary.blogspot.com/
He provided us with the text of this comment and asked us to share it with you here:
Comments on August 27 2013 UFL Meeting
For the past two months UFL board members, UFL staff, and members of the community have come to understand that there were deep seated issues that must be addressed.
We have listened to the public, and have started the process of change. Some people believe that the board is moving too slowly, there may even be a few thinking otherwise.
Most of the board's meetings take place in public, and that is both the right thing to do as well as the law.
However, the main purpose of tonight's meeting is to have closed session discussions with our attorney and on personnel. That meeting is the board's first with our attorney and is scheduled for 7:00 pm.
Why didn't we find a bigger space? Because of the agenda, I really didn't think that a large number of people would attend just to watch us go into closed session and come back out later with no announcements. To hold this meeting in the Auditorium displaces another group that has a regularly scheduled claim to that space. Moving the board meeting to another facility and making the necessary arrangements seemed wasteful. If I was wrong, I am sorry.
We hope that the members of the public will understand the need for the board to conduct lawfully permitted closed sessions from time to time.
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Late August Updates
Tonight (Tuesday), August 27, at 6:30 p.m., the Urbana Library Trustees will hold a special meeting in the Library's Satterthwaite Conference Room. The agenda is simply two items: public comment and closed session.
Many of us appreciate the opportunity the Trustees have afforded for additional public comment, but there are a few problems accompanying it as well. Let me outline two of them.
First, the meeting location holds only 14 people. The Trustees and staff who regularly attend the meetings will easily fill most of those spaces. How exactly can public comment occur effectively? The other two regular meeting spaces at the Library are booked for other events, but why not move the Trustees' meeting elsewhere such as the Urbana Civic Center or the City Building or, hell, even the quiet reading room on the Library's main floor?
Second, the trustees have continued in their silences. I realize that legal issues (the former? Executive Director has apparently hired an attorney to aid in negotiating the 'early separation' that was announced in July) preclude comment on some issues. Yet, the complete public silence suggests that the Trustees still lack any sense of urgency to meaningfully address issues related to governance, personnel administration, strategic planning, and more.
I am beginning to shift my views that the Trustees are acting from a position of benign incompetence to one of willful and hubristic obstructionism. Urbana Library Trustees, please prove me wrong.
#Bookgate has also reached the pages of Library Journal. In his August column, Michael Stephens reminds the greater library community why #bookgate is not simply a local Urbana issue. You can read it here: http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/08/opinion/michael-stephens/collection-bashing-trashing-office-hours/
Many of us appreciate the opportunity the Trustees have afforded for additional public comment, but there are a few problems accompanying it as well. Let me outline two of them.
First, the meeting location holds only 14 people. The Trustees and staff who regularly attend the meetings will easily fill most of those spaces. How exactly can public comment occur effectively? The other two regular meeting spaces at the Library are booked for other events, but why not move the Trustees' meeting elsewhere such as the Urbana Civic Center or the City Building or, hell, even the quiet reading room on the Library's main floor?
Second, the trustees have continued in their silences. I realize that legal issues (the former? Executive Director has apparently hired an attorney to aid in negotiating the 'early separation' that was announced in July) preclude comment on some issues. Yet, the complete public silence suggests that the Trustees still lack any sense of urgency to meaningfully address issues related to governance, personnel administration, strategic planning, and more.
I am beginning to shift my views that the Trustees are acting from a position of benign incompetence to one of willful and hubristic obstructionism. Urbana Library Trustees, please prove me wrong.
#Bookgate has also reached the pages of Library Journal. In his August column, Michael Stephens reminds the greater library community why #bookgate is not simply a local Urbana issue. You can read it here: http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/08/opinion/michael-stephens/collection-bashing-trashing-office-hours/
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
One step forward, two steps back?
Last night’s UFL Board of Trustees meeting was lightly
attended by about 30 people, including Lissak’s attorney. Confusion (for the
third time in a row) about the start time of the meeting resulted in the loss
of public comment for several who arrived at 7:30. Public comment ended by 7pm.
I'd like to thank those who provided comment, including Kate McDowell, Laura Haber, Al Kagan, and Danielle Chynowith. This meeting provided some answers and resulted in more questions. I’ll call
this a 'two steps forward one step back' outcome since I’m feeling charitable
this morning.
Steps forward:
The IMC livestreamed the meeting. UPTV recorded the proceedings. View them here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/37270267 and here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/37271369
The IMC livestreamed the meeting. UPTV recorded the proceedings. View them here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/37270267 and here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/37271369
An interim director was appointed effective immediately:
Kathy Wicks – Lissak’s Associate Director for the past 4-5 years. Lissak remains on the payroll - as her contract was renewed on July 1, and her role at UFL is unclear. She was quite vocal at the meeting.
A national search will commence for the position of
Executive Director, timeline to be announced. A working group consisting of
Mark Netter and Beth Scheid will craft the search process.
The UFL Board announced a special meeting for Tuesday,
August 27 at 6:30 in the UFL auditorium. correction from the UFL website: > Satterthwaite conference room on the ground floor. Under discussion may be the criteria
for the search candidates, and the proposed search process among other items.
Of the 259 boxes returned by BWB only 40 remain to be evaluated. Adref staff
have carefully (and I'd say heroically) reassessed the contents and 2074 books have been returned to the
collection. The target completion date is one month from now. Return rate is approximately 50%, though the remaining boxes have
subjects such as finance and health – which have higher weed rates due to temporality. Scherer
estimates that at $12.50 valuation per book/ this means over $25,000 in resources have been
restored to UFL shelves.
As part of the state library reporting process - Kathy Wicks recognizes the need to learn more about the UFL
audience and how to reach them. The public has been directed to send ideas for
how to do this to her. These ideas may be incorporated into an actual SWOT
(strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis – "at some point in
the future".
The UFL grievance policy revision is in the hands of the city, which is
overseeing the process. (according to Chris Scherer).
Steps backward:
Confusion about the Board meeting start time (again!) –
Listed as 7:30 on the library calendar (but corrected by the morning of the
meeting), in the reminder email sent out by UFL and as 6:30 in the meeting agenda,
and the flyer posted on the announcement board at UFL.
Scherer characterized role of comment on the strategic plan
with what appears to be another retrenchment – "The strategic plan will be
evaluated and the new director will have input." There was no indication if – or
when – the public would be allowed to comment.
Mel Farrell is back from vacation with a new word she likes to use:
‘silly’
She did praise the staff, while reminding the audience “we
don’t often have the luxury of hiring immediately” and we shouldn’t worry about
this because our ‘eminent staff will carry on.’ Ostensibly we’ve all been
worried about a decline in programs and services and we just don’t need to be!
Aren’t we silly!
News Gazette coverage – which – again doesn’t quite get
things right in ways that inaccurately color the news.
No one said that “many of the removed books have been
returned to the stacks.” We were actually told – again – that the numbers are
not available, though Mary Towner feels this may be possible once all of the
boxes have been unpacked and assessed.
Towner didn’t say: “she believes the
actual number of removed books may have been smaller than that [9,343 is the number stated in the article].” What she
told us is that not all of the yellow highlighted books on the spreadsheet were
removed because the weeding stopped prior to completion.
Continued vigilance is needed, and indeed appreciated by Chris Scherer - President of the Board of Trustees, though he repeatedly warned us not to push too hard - especially on timelines.
Thursday, August 1, 2013
JP Goguen looks back on #bookgate
JP Goguen, who helped bring the news of June's massive and misguided weeding project at Urbana Free Library to light, has written a summary of the past two month's events.
As we wait for a response from the Library's Board of Trustees to the open letter mailed to them this week, we hope you'll read JP's article and explore this blog to help catch up on what you missed and why it matters.
On the Library's site, you can also find results of a recent parking and transportation study (see Planning Studies) it commissioned.
As we wait for a response from the Library's Board of Trustees to the open letter mailed to them this week, we hope you'll read JP's article and explore this blog to help catch up on what you missed and why it matters.
On the Library's site, you can also find results of a recent parking and transportation study (see Planning Studies) it commissioned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)