Felton, Boulder Creek libraries in jeopardy
by Michelle Camerlingo / Press-Banner
Apr 23, 2010 | 2623 views | 17 17 comments | 14 14 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Already having suffered a slashing of hours, the Felton and Boulder Creek libraries are in danger of being closed altogether.  Lucjan Szewczyk/Press-Banner
view slideshow (2 images)
Felton and Boulder Creek could lose their neighborhood library branches as the Santa Cruz Public Libraries system grapples with an ever-shrinking budget.

This year’s budget of $11 million was down from $12.6 million the previous year, with cuts that included a extreme reduction in hours at smaller branches, a downsized pot of money for books and materials, and a doubling of late fees, along with Friday closures across the system.

Scotts Valley Mayor Jim Reed, a member of the Library Joint Powers Board, said the system’s next budget is expected to be half a million less than this year’s, and it will likely drop by another $1.4 million in the 2011-12 fiscal year.

The Santa Cruz Public Libraries system comprises all county branches except those in Watsonville.

“The system is in desperate financial shape. The library system we have today is not financially sustainable,” Reed said. “One thing everyone can agree on is that nobody likes the service and hours we’re at today. The scary thing is we can’t even afford what we do now.”

The libraries already borrow money from the city of Santa Cruz to stay afloat and have no reserves, Reed said. 

While Santa Cruz County’s public libraries are some of the most used in the state, according to the system’s newly released Three- to Five-Year Strategic Plan, six of the 10 branches do not meet minimum state and federal staffing standards.

Reed, who is a driving force behind plans for a new, larger library in Scotts Valley, said the smaller branches are the least cost-effective in the system, and he thinks five of the six neighborhood branches must close to save money.

Reed said he expects a decision to be made sometime in May or June.

“The lowest-circulating libraries are the least cost-effective. The smaller branches are closed a lot, but there are still building costs, regardless of how little a branch is open,” Reed said.

Reed said closing the smaller branches might be an economic necessity. He has proposed keeping the system’s larger branches in Aptos, Live Oak, Scotts Valley and downtown Santa Cruz, as well as Capitola, because that city is about to build a new library.

According to library circulation reports, 85 to 90 percent of library visits are to the Aptos, Live Oak, Scotts Valley and Central branches, which have many more open hours, compared with the neighborhood branches.

Reed said he would like to see the smaller branches converted into independent volunteer community centers that would provide basic library services.

“We could turn the smaller branches over to community groups or nonprofits, which would mean turning over collections, furniture and operations,” Reed said.

Ben Lomond already has an all-volunteer library not connected to the public library system.

Reed said the county libraries could provide increased bookmobile services and storyteller visits.

However, Paul Machlis of the Felton Library Friends said closing the smaller branches should remain a last-resort measure, and he doesn’t think all other options have been fully examined.

“In 2005, the board voted that it would not close any branch except as a last resort. Difficult as the current budgetary climate is, we are not to that point yet,” Machlis said. “We’ve only begun to investigate alternate scenarios that could preserve our branch system.”

In 1996, county voters overwhelmingly supported Measure B, which included an expenditure plan to preserve existing libraries and extend services to the underserved areas of the county, like Boulder Creek and Felton.

Machlis said Reed has pushed the agenda of a four-branch system for some time, even though it goes against Measure B and the board’s priorities.

Voters in 2008 supported a renewal of the sales tax, which accounts for 49 percent of the operating budget of the library system.

“This radical reshaping of closing branches runs completely contrary to the letter and spirit of Measure B and the priority the board has given to Felton,” Machlis said.

Machlis said a system of fewer branches would obviously benefit the Scotts Valley branch with more money, staff and materials.

“But the big losers of his proposal would be children and seniors served by SLV branches — like those in Boulder Creek, Bonny Doon and Zayante, who would need to travel 10 miles or more to the nearest library,” Machlis said.

Laura Whaley, senior library assistant for the north county region, said that if the smaller branches are forced to close, some people will lose their jobs.

“It’s entirely up in the air right now. It depends on how many branches are closed and which positions would be eliminated,” Whaley said. “We’re in a holding pattern right now and are hoping the board decides quickly.”

Whaley said that while she does not want the smaller branches to close, it’s a necessary measure.

“It’s needed. It’s the only way we’re going to have a functional system,” Whaley said. “We cannot have 10 branches in this system. I wish we could, but financially, it’s not a reality.” 

But Joint Powers board member Nancy Gerdt, from Felton, said keeping only the four largest branches would fall short of a lot of community needs.

“Having a four-branch system for a county of our size — you would lose a lot of patrons, especially combined with the cutback in bus services,” Gerdt said. “It’s important to keep the branches we have to reach the population. You can’t just have four branches. We’d be losing a lot of patrons, like youth and elderly who won’t travel far to go the library.”

She said the board owes it to the community to look for creative solutions before shutting any doors.

“In the library world, it’s really hard to close branches, because the community gets really attached,” Gerdt said. “I think we’ve got to get creative. It’s not simple. It’s not black-and-white. We owe it to the public to think about solutions.”
Comments
(17)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
S.O.L.
|
May 06, 2010
Please join Save Our Libary (S.O.L.). The Boulder Creek library is part of the Santa Cruz County Library system. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scsaveourlibrary/

This is not a coalition - but a grass roots, community effort organized by and for our local Boulder Creek citizens to get involved and share information. This group was created to support all our small Library branches in and around San Lorenzo Valley. We are fighting for their very survival by holding the Library Joint Powers Board (LJPB) accountable to the taxpayers.

Be a part of this Yahoo! Group to join the discussion, stay informed about Library Joint Powers Board (LJPB) meetings, community meetings, and relevant documentation such as flyers, meeting minutes and S.O.L. objectives. This movement will evolve as the wider community joins in the effort to save all our small branches.

HELP US ORGANIZE S.O.L.: Do you have any special networking skills, other ways you'd like to hit the pavement, or perhaps you have a legal-ease you can offer the group - Please let us know!

PLEASE ATTEND:

What: Santa Cruz County Library Joint Powers Board Meeting

When: Monday, June 7th at 6:30pm ** S.O.L. MEETS AT 6PM to ORGANIZE and Q&A **

Where: Central Branch Library, Santa Cruz
BCSOLC
|
May 03, 2010
Boulder Creek Save Our Library Coalition and Supporters (BCSOLC),

A summary of the Friday, April 30 community meeting (at the Rec Hall) has been posted to a newly created Yahoo! Group and both documents are attached for your reference. The following bullets are to be considered as talking points for the 7pm, May 3 Library Board meeting. We hope you can join us at 6pm and the LJPB meeting starts at 7pm. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scsaveourlibrary/

Key Talking Points:

We want to be part of the SC County Library System.

If unincorporated library branches close, most residents will have to drive over 30 minutes to a regional branch library.

The BC Library serves a 4,000 person population according to Census, but the 95006 zip code serves a 10,000 person population.

Key Questions:

Do Library Board sub-committee meetings have to comply with the Brown Act? Will they be publicly noticed and open to the public?

Where and how are our tax dollars being spent?

What criteria is being used to determine what libraries should be closed?

Why does it cost $126K to operate the BC Library only 12 hours per week?

How does the SCC Library System count membership at each library?

Can space at the BC Library be leased?

Can volunteers help the Library System?

Key Requests of the Library Board:

The Library Board sub-committee must include representation for the unincorporated areas equal to the proportion of unincorporated users.

There must be an equitable distribution of Library System funds. Boulder Creek library is one of 10 branch libraries, but recieves only 1 percent of system funding.

Boulder Creek residents want more open hours at our library. There is not equal access to the library system when other branches have nearly 300-400 percent more hours.

The Library Board should NOT move toward a regional library system. This does not equally serve the Santa Cruz County population. It only serves the cities.

The Library Board should control individual board members presenting potential Library Board policies at their respective local-government council meetings. Mayor Reed has discussed a move toward a regional library system at Scotts Valley City Council Meetings, however this is not the consensus of the Library Board.

The Library Board must evaluate disproportionate environmental justice impacts on low income populations of potential closure of smaller unincorporated branches.

The Library Board must evaluate disproportionate mobility and accessibility impacts of potential branch closures on transit dependent populations.

Thanks for you support and participation!

Elinor, Oxo, and Leah (BCSOLC group moderators)
Library staffer
|
May 01, 2010
Elinor,

Your comments are RIGHT ON! Everyone on this forum, please be sure to read her comments carefully. They are the most relevant so far. I've worked for the Santa Cruz Public Libraries in the past, and I know that there are some very intelligent people on the JPB Board and in the Santa Cruz Public Libraries administration. Non-drastic solutions CAN BE worked out -- for goodness sake, folks, think out of the box. There have been many constructive suggestions both in this forum and the Sentinel's TOPIX forum. Take a look. Talk to other people passionate about not shutting down the libraries. Contact the Friends of the Boulder Creek and Friends of the Felton Libraries.

Once again, a ginormous thanks to the Slayer family. They have put a ton of work into bringing together the community members who will be adversely affected by shutting down the libraries. You guys rock the Casbah!
Licensed Psycholog
|
April 30, 2010
Seth, you need counseling.
Seth Knoepler
|
April 30, 2010
I only recently moved to the SL Valley, but neighborhood bullies everywhere are all alike. Some of my best friends happen to be Republicans, but cynical, predatory opportunists like Jim Reed must be stopped.
BC Bookworm
|
April 28, 2010
How ironic that this article is published along side an article detailing Scotts Valley's grand plan to have anew library. Sure they have used "Redevelopment Funds" to purchase but they are relying on the funding of the Library System for maintenance. With our libraries in such fiscal distress, it doesn't seem like the time to make such grand plans. Unless of course you can ensure funding will be available. One way to do this is eliminate other branches.....but not very kind to your neighbors.

Voters have twice demonstarted support of maintaining the libraries with the 2 recent sales tax measures. If library branches are closed, voter support will be diminished as voters realize they have been duped twice over.

I will not be travleing to SV, or even SC to go to the library if this happens (nor stopping by to shop in SV). I might as well spend my sales tax in another county if the sales tax I voted for will not even keep the library open for my family!

LJPB, we the residents of SC Cty are counting on you to look out for ALL the SC Cty residents. If you vote to close any branches...close them all or lose our support.
Felton Homeowner
|
April 27, 2010
Sorry folks,

As sad as I am to see the libraries go, that's exactly what happens when we vote in politicians that continue to spend beyond our means. The libraries were never an issue until we added all the new entitlements, gross government saleries and benefits with no accountability, and endless interest payments on past bond acts. You need to choose wisely in the future.
Library POWER
|
April 26, 2010
WHY DIDN'T THE BANNER PUBLISH ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THE LIBRARY JOINT POWERS MEETING HAPPENING MONDAY, MAY 3RD ?? CITIZENS MUST PULL TOGETHER AND SHOW UP TO THE MEETING SO THAT MARC STONE DOES NOT THING BOULDER CREEK IS FULL OF APATHETIC CITIZENS REGARDING OUR LIBRARY. GET OUT YOUR SIGNS AND PETITION THE MEETING WITH YOUR KIDS. LETTER WRITING CAMPAIGN FROM BOULDER CREEK ELEMENTARY STUDENTS? HOME SCHOOLING STUDENTS? WHO ARE THE "FRIENDS OF BOULDER CREEK LIBRARY" AND WHY AREN'T THEY DOING ANYTHING?? WHO ELSE?

YOU???

Save our Beautiful Boulder Creek Library! Those of us who attend the boulder creek library and those of us who have children who attend the library have an opportunity to go to the May 3rd joint powers board meeting at 6:30 pm and explain the importance of our town library.

If you cannot make that meeting I will deliver letters from you and/or your children to the board. Just leave your letter at the Boulder Creek library - I'll pick them up Monday May 3rd and take them downtown.

Your fellow citizen - Elinor Slayer
SV Senior Center
|
April 25, 2010
was suggested as Library building by poster. They pointed out it is mostly unused, and Ideal for serving BOTH purposes. The library only money would cover the furnishing costs. NO Bonds would issued, no debt incurred. A commercial building would remain on tax rolls. Money could have been used to keep doors open. Never did see a council response.
celine
|
April 24, 2010
aw c'mon... do leave politics out of this. put on your thinking caps, get together and figure out a way to keep the libraries afloat. quit pointing fingers. step up to the plate and offer your help!! some folks love to play the "blame game" and have to plant blame somewhere. times are tough. pull up your big girl/boy britches and offer YOUR help!!
Albinca
|
April 24, 2010
Personally, I like the smaller branches in our communities. It makes going to the library convenient ad down home. I agree with No No No who questioned why if our libraries are in such trouble, why on earth is Scotts Valley getting a brand new huge library? That spot in Scotts Valley should be the rec center location.I questioned the library plan in Scotts Valley the first time I heard it mentioned..how dumb!. That is crazy! Makes no sense at all. Could it be politics? Something is really fishy here.I do not trust Reed...
S.O.L.
|
April 23, 2010
Save our Beautiful Boulder Creek Library! Those of us who attend the boulder creek library and those of us who have children who attend the library have an opportunity to go to the May 3rd joint powers board meeting at 6:30 pm and explain the importance of our town library.

If you cannot make that meeting I will deliver letters from you and/or your children to the board. Just leave your letter at the Boulder Creek library - I'll pick them up Monday May 3rd and take them downtown.

Your fellow citizen - Elinor Slayer
No defense needed
|
April 23, 2010
I 100% agree. I have yet to see a problem whose solution is better found through partisan wrangling than it is by focusing on what we have in common. Which, in this case, is the level of library services we can manage in the current fiscal situation.
In defense
|
April 23, 2010
You miss the point, which is that it is a waste of valuable time and resources with the petty grumblings of Democrat vs Republican.

Not to worry. The comment wasn't a criticism of the article or reporter.

I still say: Get the partisanship out of the equation and work together to find a solution for our libraries.
No defense needed
|
April 23, 2010
I don't see anything in this story attacking Reed, nor anything he has done in this arena that warrants an attack. And there's nothing particularly republican about being realistic in regards to matching revenues with expenses. Other library board members may have a partisan agenda, but they should be smart enough to keep it to themselves because it just doesn't belong here.

Reed carries plenty of other political vulnerabilities going into his first ever election campaign this fall. I don't see this as one he needs to be overly concerned with. The idea of keeping the smaller facilities on life support through the direct oversight of local advocates and community members is certainly worthy of exploration.
In defense
|
April 23, 2010
Certainly the library closings are a concern. But, let's not bash Jim Reed. At least he is looking at options.

From conversations I've heard from some of the library board members and associates, it seems they are more angry that he is a Republican than anything else.

Get the partisanship out of the equation and work together to find a solution for our libraries.
NO NO NO
|
April 23, 2010
I will not drive my family to Scotts Valley nor anywhere else. As a disabled parent, I can join the Bookmobile to get our books and will do so after many years of enjoying the Boulder Creek library with my three kids. Now we won't visit the Library, but make them come to us via Bookmobile which is going to become even more burdened. What can we do? We are left with little choices! Scotts Valley? Who wants to go there??? They get a new library while we lose out, it's just not fair.

Many people in Boulder Creek like to have our community sustain itself by having all we need right here.


We encourage your online comments in this public forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a forum for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Readers may report such inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at pbeditor@pressbanner.com.