If you’ve done your homework…
If you understand the importance of libraries for your community, your business, your family…
If you want your children to be proud to call Grand Forks home…
If you believe in investing for the future…
Then check that “yes” box. Boldly.
Do it tomorrow. Polls open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
This is a guest post by Susan Mickelson, GFPL Board President.
The three-year Library Revitalization process that was spearheaded by local volunteers was effective in its fact-finding, research, comparative studies and planning. The proposed solution has been thoughtfully developed, carefully documented and professionally reviewed. The $20.8 million project proposal was prepared and approved by the Library Board, based on the current situations existing in Grand Forks at this time. It is the proposal that is being offered to voters on May 3 in the form of a special election.
The Grand Forks Public library is well used and highly valued. Based on documented usage, we need a facility nearly twice the size to accommodate existing patron traffic. The proposed $20.8 million library project would be funded by a temporary 1-cent sales tax.
Although we’ve been encouraged by the amount of public interaction that has been generated by the upcoming Library Vote, we are also frustrated by deceptive messaging and blatant untruths that have been distributed by the opposition, Citizens for Responsible Government.
I would like to address five of the most deceitful statements at this time. These bullet points come directly from the flyer that is being distributed by Councilman Terry Bjerke and his supporters.
These are significant problems that require big-budget solutions. We have looked at options and requested proposals, and it would cost approximately $18 million to remodel and add on to the existing building. That is not a cost-effective solution, and it would force us to make the compromising adaptations that are always necessary when joining new construction with an existing building.
Voting “no” is not a solution. There are serious deficiencies at our library. Many of these problems need to be corrected immediately. Voting “no” will only prolong the problems, and in some cases the costs for correction will grow higher as each month passes.
What solutions have been provided by Citizens for Responsible Government? What alternatives have they proposed? What professional opinions have they garnered? What comparative facility reports have they prepared? What budgets have they offered?
Where will we carve out the necessary space for our existing library materials, as well as current children’s activities, computers, meetings, study groups, teens, staff and parking? And what about future accessibility for Grand Forks Public Library and our tax-paying citizens?
It’s very easy to say “vote no.” It’s even easier when you don’t bother to put in the time to research the problem, study the possible solutions, support your case with the necessary professional documentation and suggest a solution with a bona fide price tag.
The Library Task Force for Revitalization did their work and they did it thoroughly. The results have been made available to the public since October of 2008. Don’t be misdirected by an easy way out. Be an informed voter. Read the reports, study the research, learn about the advances within the library industry, and review the 35 line items in the proposed budget at www.gflibrary.com.
Most important, be sure to cast your vote on Tuesday, May 3.
As promised in this post, here is Dave McFarlane’s full expert opinion about the current energy efficiency (or lack thereof) in the Grand Forks Public Library:
By Dave McFarlane
About four years ago, our company started working with the City of Grand Forks in a process to evaluate energy efficiencies in public buildings. The library was one of the 30 or 40 buildings we looked at, and it turned out that it was one of the top five most inefficient buildings in the city.
Earlier this month, the Library Board asked us to review the energy usage in the building and give our professional opinion regarding efficiency levels. So, we’ve studied the library’s energy bills from the last three years and we’ve made comparisons with buildings of similar size and occupancy in the region. With this information, we are able to determine how much energy per square foot the building is using and calculate exactly how much the library is spending above and beyond normal expectations.
The end result is the Energy Analysis Report we are releasing today. As expected, the energy usage at our Public Library is extreme. It’s significantly higher than it should be. Our analysis indicates that the library complex is using 58% more energy than recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency for a building of similar occupancy within the North Dakota region. That inefficiency results in annual energy costs that are $22,500 higher than necessary.
It’s important to remember that the Grand Forks Public Library was built in 1972, and that was a time when energy was very inexpensive. It was so inexpensive that Northern States Power Company was running an ad campaign that proclaimed, “Electricity is penny-cheap at NSP.” At that time, NSP used Reddy Kilowatt as their cartoon spokesperson. You might remember that his arms and legs were made of lightning bolts and his nose was a light bulb.
Since energy was so inexpensive in the early 1970s, it wasn’t a priority to conserve, and there were no building design initiatives that concentrated on energy efficiency. The design professionals at that time did not concentrate on energy usage – electric, gas or anything. Because of that, the system that was originally installed in our library was a very inefficient one, and after all these years, it has become one of the most inefficient buildings the City owns.
The library building is almost 40 years old, and these types of systems have life expectancies of 25-30 years. Mechanical equipment, by its nature, is going to wear out. It’s not unusual that the library’s system is failing or that the maintenance staff has been replacing components several times a year. This gets to be a very expensive ongoing upkeep for the library administration. It is also a precariously unreliable system.
The question now is, “How do we fix it?” Results from our Energy Analysis certainly lend credence to the need to redo the entire system. The cost to retrofit the library would be significant. We would need to gut the building and basically start over. It would mean shutting down the library for a year; removing all ceilings and some walls, removing the air handling systems and starting over.
Energy inefficiencies alone do not justify the construction of a new library. However, a failing mechanical system is a very expensive component in a public building, so we need to carefully consider whether it is a wise decision to make that investment in a 40-year-old building that has serious space deficiencies.
This is a guest post written by Douglas C. Carpenter.
In my conversation with residents about the new library proposal, the most common question I receive is “Does the sales tax have an end date?”
My answer is yes, the proposed Home Rule Charter amendment has a specific date by which the tax terminates. Actually, it can terminate earlier than the September 30, 2014, sunset date. The specific language on the ballot has the new 1-cent sales tax, if approved by voters, starting on October 1, 2011, and terminating on September 30, 2014, or at such time as it is reasonably expected that the sum of $20.8 million in such sales tax proceeds will be remitted, whichever occurs first. In other words, the tax must stop on September 30, 2014, or once $20.8 million is collected if earlier than September 30, 2014.
Currently the city collects approximately $8.4 million per year for a 1-cent sales tax, which means the new 1-cent tax should end on March 31, 2014. This means the new 1-cent tax should be in effect for only a short 30-month time period, but in no manner can it continue past September 30, 2014. A new library for the 21st century is critical to the future of Grand Forks and a new 1-cent sales tax is the best way to pay for it.
I strongly encourage you to vote YES on May 3rd.
The top 10 reasons why you should vote YES to a new Grand Forks Public Library:
10. Because we’ve loved our library to death.
9. Because books are alive and well.
8. Because our kids and grandkids deserve a brain playground.
7. Because the parking, technology, lighting and energy in the current building just aren’t cutting it.
6. Because meeting rooms build community. (And the current library has only one meeting room!)
5. Because the current library is overused and undersized.
4. Because libraries must be available to all.
3. Because libraries open minds and inspire imagination.
2. Because libraries advance people. (And people advance companies and communities.)
1. Because voting no is not a solution. (The current library needs serious help, and it’s going to cost a considerable amount of money either way.)
We need more space for parking, displays, programming, computers, teens and children, story hour and book clubs. We need more space for community. We need more space to grow.
Remember to get out and vote YES on Tuesday, May 3!
This blog post is in response to a question we received last week, regarding alternative funding options for the Grand Forks Public Library.
At their April 14, 2011, meeting, the Grand Forks Public Library Board received and reviewed a formal complaint submitted by Molly MacBride in regard to accessibility problems in our library. MacBride’s letter was forwarded to City Hall for official review, and last week library officials met with City Attorney Howard Swanson and City Administrator Rick Duquette to discuss the complaint. We have also contacted Bev Collings, Building Inspector for the City of Grand Forks. Library officials will seek legal counsel regarding appropriate next steps for addressing the complaint.
Within the next 90 days, the 2012 Library budget will be prepared and submitted to City Hall. If the 1-cent sales tax is not approved for the proposed construction project, the 2012 budget will most likely include a request for additional funds necessary to address the immediate needs for safety and accessibility at GFPL. Budget requests are usually funded through the City’s General Fund, which is derived from property tax collections. Library officials will work with City Council to prioritize the biggest deficiencies at the library.
The American Library Association provides a comprehensive report at the end of each year, recapping the size, budget and funding source for all library construction projects. This is a comprehensive document to review if you are interested in learning how other communities have paid for library construction projects.
We are aware of three funding options for library construction projects:
Many times, a blend of two or three sources is utilized. Such is the case with the Grand Forks Public Library.
The historic records in our library show that Grand Forks voters approved a public library levy in 1900. In 1904, funding for construction of the first new library in GF came from a private donation provided by library philanthropist Andrew Carnegie. As part of the agreement with Carnegie before his construction funding was released, the citizens of Grand Forks voted to provide the necessary operating funds for their public library. The City of Grand Forks purchased property in the center of town and provided the necessary funds for equipment and furnishings, staff salaries and ongoing operating budget. With that decision, future generations of Grand Forks citizens were ensured of ongoing service, free of charge, from a public library.
The current GF Public Library building was completed in 1972 using property tax dollars from a bond issue approved by voters in 1969. Money from the Anna Lindaas estate was also used to fund the construction. The annual operating budget at GFPL continues to be funded by property tax dollars from the City of Grand Forks and from the County of Grand Forks.
With the proposed library construction project, a combination of revenue sources will once again be utilized:
North Dakota State Century Code plays an integral part in public library governance. The City of Grand Forks must adhere to these laws regarding any plans for our public library.
Paul Holje, local architect and Library Building Committee member, shared wonderful insight in today’s Grand Forks Herald with a Viewpoint regarding our obligation as stewards.
Here’s a preview of Paul’s perspective:
Each generation is called upon to be stewards. We are asked to think not only of the people who have come before us, but what will happen many generations after us. Our actions will ripple through the community long after we have left this earth. Personally, I choose to make Grand Forks better than I found it. That’s what stewardship is all about.
I don’t want our great grandchildren asking why their great grandparents abandoned their Library. I don’t want them asking why we gave up on the over 100-years of Library Legacy.
To finish learning about Paul’s insightful perspective, you can find the rest of his article in today’s Grand Forks Herald opinion section.
Mayor Mike Brown
The Special Election for the proposed Grand Forks Public library project is just 12 days away.
When I delivered the State of the City address in February, I talked about the many exciting things that are happening in our City. I mentioned the Library and I acknowledged that I had questions about the proposed project that needed to be addressed before I was ready to support it with a “yes” vote. I encouraged my fellow citizens to study the issues and become informed voters.
Today, I am here to tell you that I have done my homework. I’ve visited the library, studied the reports, researched the usage levels, and talked to the experts. Concerns have been addressed, and questions have been answered to my satisfaction. I’m ready to vote “yes” to the plan for funding our Library Project. I support the proposed 1% sales tax to raise the necessary $20.8 million to build a 21st Century Library for the citizens of Grand Forks.
The problems here have been clearly documented. Our library is well used and valued, but increased population and expanded offerings have pushed this 40-year-old structure well past its limits. The Grand Forks library has the largest circulation of any public library in the state. Usage has increased every year since it was built. More than 825 people a day visit this building. Based on current usage, we need a facility nearly twice this size to accommodate the existing patron traffic. We need more room for materials, but also for children’s activities, computers, meetings, study groups, teens, staff and parking.
Since lack of space is the biggest issue, a remodeling of the current building will not solve our problems. We have opinions from multiple experts, and this building is not structurally capable of supporting an additional floor. We’ve learned that the mechanical system in this building is the most inefficient model ever made, with heating and cooling running simultaneously 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. We also have serious issues of accessibility in this building, which prevent some of our residents from fully utilizing their public library.
These are significant problems that require big-budget solutions. I have looked at the proposals, and it would cost approximately $18 million to remodel and add on to this building. That is not a cost-effective solution, and it would force us to make compromising adaptations that are necessary when joining new construction with an existing building. Total new construction is definitely the best solution.
The three-year Library Revitalization process that was spearheaded by local volunteers was effective in its fact-finding, research, comparative studies and planning. Their proposed solution has been thoughtfully developed, and it is the right one for our city at this time.
There is quite a bit of misinformation out there, and I want to help clarify a few things that may have been inaccurately represented in the past few weeks:
If you are undecided on this issue, it’s time to do your homework. Ask questions, read the consultant reports, learn about the site selection process, and get a better understanding of the project scope. This information is all available at the library website: www.gflibrary.com If you prefer, you can request copies of the documents at the reference desk right here in the library.
To post specific questions regarding the project and to review the ongoing dialogue within our community, visit www.speakupforyourlibrary.com. Information on this site is updated several times each day.
Most important of all, prepare yourself as an educated voter and go to the polls on Tuesday, May 3.
I urge you to join me in voting “yes” to lifelong learning. “Yes” to informed citizens of all ages. “Yes” to a resourceful and connected community.
Vote “yes” to fund the proposed project that will provide our residents with the 21st Century Library we deserve.
As Mayor Brown said – educate yourself and ask questions before you vote. We invite you to ask questions right here in the comments.
One question we’ve heard is, “Can’t the current library be renovated to accomodate future needs?” We’ve addressed some reasons why a remodel is not the answer in this blog post, and earlier this week Dave McFarlane further clarified why the library’s current HVAC system needs more than minor renovations. Here’s the transcript of his radio interview:
Transcript of the Jarrod Thomas Show, KNOX AM-Radio
Wednesday, April 20, 2011 – 9 a.m.
In-studio guests: Rick McCarthy and Susan Mickelson
Phone guest: Dave McFarlane, president, McFarlane, Grand Forks, ND
Dave is the head of all engineering functions at McFarlane and has overall responsibility for Design-Build, TAB, Commission and Retro-Commissioning projects. A nationally-recognized expert in the field of energy commissioning, Dave is a NEBB-qualified supervisor with more than 25 years of experience. His expertise has helped form U.S. national standards for environmental balancing in HVAC systems. He has often served as guest lecturer for industry professionals and has written numerous trade journal articles on the subject.
McFarlane:
“About three or four years ago, we started working with the City of Grand Forks to identify the energy use in all of their buildings. We also looked at the County buildings and anything that was kind of City-related. The library was one of those. Of the 30 or 40 buildings we looked at, the Grand Forks Library was in the top five most inefficient buildings. Now, my memory isn’t that good, but it maybe even in the top three.
“It was built in 1972, at a time when energy was cheap. I don’t know if you remember this… NSP Electric, at the time, had a Reddy Kilowatt guy running around, and their logo was ‘Electricity is penny-cheap at NSP.’ Because of this, the design professions at that time did not concentrate on energy usage – electric, gas, or anything. Because of that, the system that was put in there was just a very inefficient system.
“Right now, Susan [Mickelson] asked me to look at it, so we’ve taken the last three years’ energy bills and we’re in the process of reviewing that to determine exactly how much energy per square foot the building has used over the last three years. We’ll get back to her this week with that information.
“Once we see what the energy usage is, we can determine what it should be — from a lot of the work we’ve done — and tell you exactly how much the library is spending over what it should be. But it’s significant. It’s one of the worst buildings the City owns.”
Thomas:
“Is there a way to make the building more energy efficient?”
McFarlane:
“To do so would mean, basically, shutting the library down for a year, gutting the mechanical system, replacing with something new, and putting it back in. This building is almost 40 years old. The life expectancy on equipment like this is 25 to 30 years. Because of that, you need to gut it and start over, basically.”
Thomas:
“So, if we were to build a new library, would the energy efficiencies that were to be put into it today, would they be only good for 25 to 30 years? Or have we moved far enough along in this arena, where we can make sure that if we want this building to be around for 40, 50 years or more, that it’s going to continue to be energy efficient?”
McFarlane:
“The energy efficiency sequences and control logics, the design strategies that are used are state-of-the-art right now. But, I’ll bet you anything – 30 years from now – someone will have come up with a better way of doing it. They will be efficient by today’s standards – which are much more efficient than they were 40 years ago. Mechanical equipment, by its nature, is going to wear out. So, once you get more than 40 years out of a system, you may end up having to replace components anyway.”
###
We expect to receive a complete report from Dave McFarlane next week on the library’s energy usage, and we’ll post that information as soon as we can. As always, if you have questions, please comment below.
Here, we will share a weekly update addressing Mayor Brown’s questions, which are probably your questions, too. (And, if you’re still puzzled, be sure to comment directly on this post or ask us here. We want to be on the same page.) Answers to questions 1 & 2 regarding location can be found here. The answer to question 3 regarding demographics can be found here and question 4 about the sales tax here.
Mayor Brown’s Question 5: Does the library currently serve as a safe place for kids after school? Is this a continued, diminished or expanded role for the proposed new library?
Library Board’s A: If you have visited the Grand Forks Public Library recently, especially after school and on the weekends, you know that school-aged children are using the library in record numbers.
Children come to the library to:
They also come to the library for various programs and events. A sample of recent events for school-aged children includes:
The number of programs and events for children has expanded dramatically in the past two years. However, that expansion is limited because the library has only one meeting room, which needs to be shared with all other library events. With increased space in a new facility, the Grand Forks Public Library would be able to meet the community’s demand for more children’s programming and events.
Children often come to the Grand Forks Public Library to study. The library is used by students of all types, including homeschooled, distance education, tutored and college students. However, group work is very difficult in the current facility since there are no private areas for students to use. Instead, groups must sit at tables in the main library where they may disturb or be disturbed by other library users. The new facility would address this problem by providing several small, quiet study rooms and group study rooms.
Teens
There is also a great need for space in the library for the community’s teenagers. Too old for the children’s area with its knee-high book bins and pirate’s ship play area, yet too young for the hushed atmosphere near the adults, teens are in desperate need of a place to call their own. They are at an age where it is essential to keep them reading and hooked into literacy-promoting activities, yet our current facility isn’t welcoming to teens and doesn’t have the space to create the needed area for teens. A new facility would not only offer that space and the resources teens want and need, it would give teens the chance to help design that space.
The Grand Forks Public Library is an important place for children and their families, particularly after school. The current facility is being used to its capacity but is not large enough to meet the community’s wants and needs. A new facility would help to ensure that the children of Grand Forks today have all they need to become the leaders of tomorrow.
speak up for your library 