Voting no is NOT a solution.

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.

• The proposed library project is not a Taj Mahal. It’s a functional 21^st Century library.  A library to provide our citizens today and in the future with the necessary space and resources to compete in the classroom, the workforce and everyday life. Additional amenities such as a fireplace or aquarium could be included, but only if private contributions are made available to fund them.

• This project will not exceed the proposed $20.8 million budget. It cannot exceed that budget. The language is specifically included on the special election ballot. All necessary funding for the library project will be provided by the temporary 1% sales tax. As soon as the $20.8 million is raised, the sales tax is retired. It’s done.

• A larger, more energy efficient building with new technology will not demand increased staff. Current library staff will definitely be utilized in different ways, with automated checkout systems, book return processing equipment and radio frequency ID tags performing the tasks that will no longer require personal interaction. Most public libraries installed those technological upgrades several years ago.

• Lack of space is the single largest deficiency with our current library. We have no more space to use, so a remodel of the current building will not solve our problems. Although the building was originally constructed to include a full second floor, advances in mechanical and lighting systems now require 15-foot ceiling heights, and we don’t have that space. We have received opinions from multiple experts, and the current library is not structurally capable of supporting an additional floor, so a third story is not possible. We’ve learned that the library’s current mechanical system is one of the most inefficient models 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. 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.

• It is the Library Board’s intent that the new library be located where the existing building stands, with acquisition of adjacent property as needed to accommodate the plan. If Councilman Terry Bjerke has a different idea for a location, he will need to pursue that with his fellow Council members. As always, majority will rule.

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.

Extreme energy usage at Grand Forks Public Library

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.

Yes, the sales tax has an end date.

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.

Stewards of a Library Legacy

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.

Statistics show need for new library.

 “There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library.”  ~Andrew Carnegie

The Grand Forks Public Library is the cornerstone of our community, a public institution of immeasurable worth to the responsible citizens of Grand Forks and the surrounding area – and it needs your help.

Thanks to all of you, we’ve outgrown our current library and desperately need more space to accommodate your reading, research and relaxation needs. Vote YES for a larger, light-filled, comfortable and safe environment!

 * * *

Like thousands of public libraries across the United States, the first Grand Forks Public Library building was constructed with funding provided by Andrew Carnegie. It was located downtown on the corner of 5^th and Alpha from 1903 until 1972, when a new library was built at 2110 Library Circle.

The new library seemed large at 31,415 sq. ft. but it was soon apparent that more space was needed. In 1984, an expansion project added 4,500 sq. ft. for a new Children’s Department on the second floor, as well as space for the library’s first computer room. It was an exciting place for the growing community of readers.

The library’s collections and services have always kept pace with the needs of its patrons, and never more than in today’s ever-changing electronic world. The statistics below contradict the assertion that the Internet has made the Grand Forks Public Library expendable, showing instead that its use increases with every year:

	1979	2009
Population of Grand Forks County	63,425	66,585
Library visitors per year	175,000	283,956
Library visits per capita	2.76	4.26
Total number of library materials owned	137,514	314,310
Total items checked out (the largest number of any library in North Dakota)	360,128	852,129
Total interlibrary loan materials provided to other libraries	293	3,598
Total interlibrary loan items borrowed from other libraries	381	536
Items checked out per capita	5.68	12.80
Number of internet users served	N/A	52,784

Your public library continues to grow and be a vital part of Grand Forks because its mission is taken very seriously.

But… the building is the same size as it was in 1984 and library service has changed dramatically since then. Not only have we outgrown our current building; it has serious deficiencies. The wiring and the heating system have not been updated since they were installed in 1972 and are limping along with continual repairs. The lighting in the stacks is totally inadequate and there are no windows to provide natural light. The library’s bathrooms and stacks are not in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The existing elevator must be replaced. And so forth.

No hype. No exaggeration. We need a new library and these are the facts and statistics to prove it. 

Vote YES.

If you believe in a new library, please share this article with your family and friends. Email or post the link to your Facebook. The vote is only 12 days away! Thank you.

Support family reading time.

Below is a guest blog post from Jami Schumacher, mother of three book-loving boys. She was kind enough to share her perspective and support of a new library. Thanks, Jami!

My family is a family of readers. I have to say that my husband Matt and I take great pride in the fact that our three boys all enjoy reading. I believe we have helped them develop this love of reading and that it will serve them well in their lives.

On March 29, my boys and I attended the public session to listen to the architect share some ideas for our new library. To say that they were excited to hear what has been done at other libraries is an understatement.

My boys’ first exposure to the Grand Forks Public Library came through the Tuesday morning story time program. I was a stay-at-home mom for 12 years and this was a much-loved weekly outing. That they could check out any books they wanted week after week was such a treasure, especially during those years when we were living on a very tight budget. Eight-year-old Eliot said recently that the library “needs to get a bigger and better place for story time.” For many years the story time room was packed, especially in the summers when the Summer Reading Program was in session.

Now that all of my boys are in school, we do not attend story time but we still frequent the library throughout the year. My son Sam, 10 years old, gets hooked on reading books by certain authors and has said, “One of my favorite things to do at the library is check out books from series I’ve been reading, but don’t want to buy.” He has grand visions for a new library, “I hope our new library will have a 24-hour media pick-up center and a full cafe so I can spend the day there.”

My oldest, Max, is a teenager and has a more limited interest in what is currently available at the library. While he stills likes to go occasionally to check out books on particular topics of interest, Max has said, “In the new library I would like to see a teen multi-media area like I saw the architect show from other libraries.”

The needs of a 21st century library are very different from a library which was built almost 40 years ago. There is no doubt in my mind that a new library would enhance our community. We need this new library so it can reshape the role that it plays in the community, we need sufficient parking, and we need public support. My husband and I will be voting YES on May 3, and we would invite others to as well.