I've learned that the first version of the official announcement of tonight's meeting read "Personnel issues and the future of the library will be discussed." I guess the board decided not to baldly admit their desire to eventually close our beloved library, so they toned down the announcement a notch. Friends of the Library should keep the future of the library in mind, though, because you can be sure it is a hidden agenda of our board. The meeting will probably go into executive session to hammer the staff in some new creative way, but I hope you can make it anyway to show support.
I know someone who copied and pasted the website announcement into an email before the website was changed. I can't say why the text was removed or what the original version meant. But I don't need to speak with a board member to know that the page was changed. What's your point?
My point is that your conclusion that the board plans to close the library is because you seem to be predisposed to find fault with the board! Because the word future was used in the text you translate that to "the end"?? Webster defines future as "something that will exist or happen in time to come". Possibly your negative outlook stems from your statement that you don;t need to ("speak to the board)hear both sides to reach a conclusion. Do you believe board members that are current and former teachers as well as a school librarian are predisposed to CLOSE the library?
Personally I have never had any board members of any libraries, fire houses, ptso's, corporations just hanging around in case I had any questions. If you want to know how a board thinks, look at how something's run. They are responsible for it. Great atmosphere, dedicated staff, listening to customers, good benefits, EEO/ADA compliant, etc.
So then, you don't have to "talk to a board" to have your opinion of how they run things. They are supposed to reach out to me through their operational quality. Great staff don't stick around crummy work environments for long.
Boards are volunteer and how much time do you suppose they should spend for free? If the library operation is run poorly its a reflection of those who carry out the day to day functions (staff). If great staff don;t stick around a crummy library the Matawan Library (by your account) is crummy - then by your reasoning the staff must be worthless.
I'm not predisposed to a point of view. The Board clearly established its position on the library's future last year by voting to yield a good chunk of its building funds back to the local municipalities in order to provide short term tax relief. The long view is that the future of our library is a little less certain because of the actions of our board. We've lost our 5 year plan and our long-time director. Elderly and handicapped patrons still cannot get from floor to floor because of the inaction of the board.
IMHO, the Board doesn't see the library as a priority institution of the community. They see it as an anachronism that costs the local taxpayers money to keep open. They don't serve as advocates of the library but protectors of the taxpayers. Local politicians and their nominees benefit from these positions through the control they have over the library's purse strings. Maybe they are socially conscious and feel an obligation to give back to the community, I don't know. Maybe the positions are mandated by the state and an unpaid burden on them and their families and they'd rather be anywhere else but in the basement of the library on those Wednesday nights. But their dual obligations to the library and the municipalities cause a clear conflict of interests. The actions of the board's local political representatives and their nominees benefit them outside of the board. Actions speak louder than words, my dear. I don't need to consult with a board member to see what exists or will happen in time to come.
Pat stop ticking off the board members. You are hurting their feelings. It's not their fault! Fire the staff. Oh yeah, they're all either interim or part-time. Well fire the one with the most pull. Fire Susan! Oh, yeah, she's already fired. Dadnabbit. Well, fire her again!
I've learned that the first version of the official announcement of tonight's meeting read "Personnel issues and the future of the library will be discussed." I guess the board decided not to baldly admit their desire to eventually close our beloved library, so they toned down the announcement a notch. Friends of the Library should keep the future of the library in mind, though, because you can be sure it is a hidden agenda of our board. The meeting will probably go into executive session to hammer the staff in some new creative way, but I hope you can make it anyway to show support.
ReplyDeleteYou know this because? Have you ever spoken to any of the board members?
ReplyDeleteI know someone who copied and pasted the website announcement into an email before the website was changed. I can't say why the text was removed or what the original version meant. But I don't need to speak with a board member to know that the page was changed. What's your point?
ReplyDeleteMy point is that your conclusion that the board plans to close the library is because you seem to be predisposed to find fault with the board! Because the word future was used in the text you translate that to "the end"?? Webster defines future as "something that will exist or happen in time to come". Possibly your negative outlook stems from your statement that you don;t need to ("speak to the board)hear both sides to reach a conclusion. Do you believe board members that are current and former teachers as well as a school librarian are predisposed to CLOSE the library?
ReplyDeletePersonally I have never had any board members of any libraries, fire houses, ptso's, corporations just hanging around in case I had any questions. If you want to know how a board thinks, look at how something's run. They are responsible for it. Great atmosphere, dedicated staff, listening to customers, good benefits, EEO/ADA compliant, etc.
ReplyDeleteSo then, you don't have to "talk to a board" to have your opinion of how they run things. They are supposed to reach out to me through their operational quality. Great staff don't stick around crummy work environments for long.
Boards are volunteer and how much time do you suppose they should spend for free? If the library operation is run poorly its a reflection of those who carry out the day to day functions (staff). If great staff don;t stick around a crummy library the Matawan Library (by your account) is crummy - then by your reasoning the staff must be worthless.
ReplyDeleteI'm not predisposed to a point of view. The Board clearly established its position on the library's future last year by voting to yield a good chunk of its building funds back to the local municipalities in order to provide short term tax relief. The long view is that the future of our library is a little less certain because of the actions of our board. We've lost our 5 year plan and our long-time director. Elderly and handicapped patrons still cannot get from floor to floor because of the inaction of the board.
ReplyDeleteIMHO, the Board doesn't see the library as a priority institution of the community. They see it as an anachronism that costs the local taxpayers money to keep open. They don't serve as advocates of the library but protectors of the taxpayers. Local politicians and their nominees benefit from these positions through the control they have over the library's purse strings. Maybe they are socially conscious and feel an obligation to give back to the community, I don't know. Maybe the positions are mandated by the state and an unpaid burden on them and their families and they'd rather be anywhere else but in the basement of the library on those Wednesday nights. But their dual obligations to the library and the municipalities cause a clear conflict of interests. The actions of the board's local political representatives and their nominees benefit them outside of the board. Actions speak louder than words, my dear. I don't need to consult with a board member to see what exists or will happen in time to come.
Pat stop ticking off the board members. You are hurting their feelings. It's not their fault! Fire the staff. Oh yeah, they're all either interim or part-time. Well fire the one with the most pull. Fire Susan! Oh, yeah, she's already fired. Dadnabbit. Well, fire her again!
ReplyDelete