These are non-partisan positions, with four-year terms starting Jan. 1, 2015. The seats are currently held by Newman, Surovell and Barbara Murphy, who decided not to seek re-election. Voters will be able to choose up to three of the four candidates on the ballot.

Leija is director of education and community engagement at the University Musical Society, a position he’s held since 2011. He’s worked for UMS in various roles since 2008.

Hart served as planning manager for the city of Ann Arbor from 1992-2004, and later was planning and development director for the city of Ypsilanti from 2006-2008. Her tenure as Ann Arbor’s planning manager overlapped with Surovell’s service on the city’s planning commission. Surovell owned an eponymous real estate firm until it was acquired by Howard Hanna in 2012. He has served on the AADL board since 1996, when he was elected to the first board after the library system separated from the Ann Arbor Public Schools.

Newman, who currently serves as board treasurer, is retired. Her professional background includes founding two Ann Arbor-based businesses: Aristoplay, an educational game company; and Learning Express, an educational toy store. She’s seeking her third term on the AADL board, having been elected for the first time in 2006 and re-elected in 2010.

Positions on the seven-member AADL board are elected by voters in Ann Arbor and portions of seven townships that are covered by the library’s district – Pittsfield, Scio, Ann Arbor, Lodi, Webster, Salem and Superior. Those are the same boundaries served by the Ann Arbor Public Schools, with the exception of Northfield Township, which is partly within the AAPS district but has its own library system.

Three spots on the board will be on the Nov. 4, 2014 ballot. These are non-partisan positions, with four-year terms starting Jan. 1, 2015. The seats are currently held by Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman and Ed Surovell.

Update: Newman and Surovell have told The Chronicle that they plan to seek re-election this year. However, Murphy has decided not to run for another term.

Depending on the outcome of the Aug. 5, 2014 primary, there might be an additional opening on the seven-member library board. AADL trustee Nancy Kaplan is a candidate in the Democratic primary for a seat representing Ward 2 on the Ann Arbor city council. The other Democratic candidate for that seat is Kirk Westphal. No Republicans are competing in that race. Kaplan has indicated that if elected to the city council, she plans to resign from the library board.

Prospective AADL board candidates have until 4 p.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 12 to file to be placed on the ballot. To file, candidates must turn in an affidavit of identity to the Washtenaw County clerk’s office, along with a $100 non-refundable filing fee or a minimum of 40 valid signatures on a nominating petition. More details on the filing process are available on the county clerk’s election website.

The positions are elected by voters in Ann Arbor and portions of seven townships that are covered by the library’s district – Pittsfield, Scio, Ann Arbor, Lodi, Webster, Salem and Superior. Those are the same boundaries served by the Ann Arbor Public Schools, with the exception of Northfield Township, which is partly within the AAPS district but has its own library system.

The $65 million, 30-year bond proposal was rejected, gaining support from 33,604 voters (44.83%), with 41,359 votes (55.17%) cast against it. Support inside the city of Ann Arbor was slightly stronger, with 46.4% voting for the proposal compared with 41.2% voting for it outside the city. In addition to the city of Ann Arbor, the district includes parts of the townships of Pittsfield, Scio, Ann Arbor, Lodi, Webster, Salem and Superior.

The funds would have paid for the demolition of the existing library at 343 S. Fifth and the construction of a new building on that same site. Four campaign committees had formed, including three that opposed the project: Protect Our Libraries, Save the Ann Arbor Library and LOL=Love Our Library. The Our New Downtown Library campaign led by Ellie Serras supported the proposal.

In the nonpartisan AADL board elections, five candidates contested four open seats for four-year terms. The top four vote-getters were all incumbents: Nancy Kaplan (30,508 votes – 23.14%); Margaret Leary (28,060 votes – 21.29%); Rebecca Head (26,827 votes – 20.35%); and Pru Rosenthal (23,498 votes – 17.82%). Challenger Lyn Davidge received 21,670 votes (16.44%). Outside the city of Ann Arbor, Davidge and Rosenthal finished in nearly a dead heat, with Davidge receiving 6,800 votes compared to 6,839 for Rosenthal.

The board has said that the current downtown building needs major repairs. Options they’ll likely consider include placing another proposal on a future ballot to pay for renovations or a scaled-back project. The AADL board’s next meeting is on Monday, Nov. 19.

Candidates for the Ann Arbor District Library board, from left: Lyn Davidge, Rebecca Head, Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary, Prue Rosenthal. (Photos by the writer.)

The five women presented their views at an Oct. 9 forum moderated by the League of Women Voters of the Ann Arbor Area. They are vying for four non-partisan seats on the AADL board, with four-year terms. The incumbents are Rebecca Head, Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary and Prue Rosenthal. [Other board members, whose terms end in 2014, are Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman and Ed Surovell.]

All candidates expressed strong support and affection for the library system, and stressed the library’s critical role in the community. Two candidates – Davidge and Leary, the board’s current president – are former librarians. Head, Rosenthal and Kaplan highlighted their professional and volunteer experience. Several candidates cited their work on boards for other organizations.

Positions on the bond proposal for a new downtown library revealed the greatest difference between the incumbents and Davidge. All of the incumbents argued strongly in favor of the proposal, citing deficiencies in the existing building at 343 S. Fifth and a desire to accommodate growth in programs and services.

Saying she wasn’t running against anyone, Davidge felt she’d bring a fresh perspective to the board and challenge the status quo. She believes the case hasn’t been fully made for a new library at the time, and that the public hasn’t been as engaged as it should be in the decision.

For more background on the downtown library proposal, see Chronicle coverage: “Library Bond Moves Toward Nov. 6 Ballot,” “Campaign Launches for Library Bond,” and “Third Group Forms to Oppose Library Bond.” The Chronicle also covers the board’s monthly meetings.

The Oct. 9 candidate forum was held at the studios of Community Television Network, and will be available online via CTN’s video-on-demand service. Information on this and other local elections can be found on the Washtenaw County clerk’s elections division website. To see a sample ballot for your precinct, visit the Secretary of State’s website. 

Opening Statements

Each candidate was given one minute to make an opening statement.

Prue Rosenthal: She said she’s delighted to be running for the board. She listed her experience over the last four years as treasurer and vice president of the board, and chair of the board’s facilities committee. She loves the job, and hopes to be able to continue doing it. The library is an incredibly important part of the city, she said, serving the whole community. It provides extensive services to children, parents, grandparents, people from different countries. Books are available in eight different languages. You can get CDs and movies, attend lectures, learn a language or how to operate a computer – all of these things happen at the library, she said. The board takes pride in running a fiscally sound organization that’s attentive to the needs of the community, Rosenthal said, and is careful with revenue from the community.

Margaret Leary: She described the library as about the most important civic, cultural and educational institution in the city. It’s fiscally responsible, yet always growing. It’s a separate legal entity with its own taxing authority, she explained. It’s not part of the city, the county, the public schools or the Downtown Development Authority. The AADL has a permanent millage, but currently levies less than the full authorized amount, which saves taxpayers $1.6 million a year, she said. [The library levies 1.55 mills, but is authorized to levy up to 1.92 mills.] The library has built three new branches in the last decade – on time and on budget, she noted. The library serves all ages, all economic groups, and is the one public place where everyone can come for free to learn, whether with a book, electronically or in a group. Last year, AADL held 2,000 computer classes, had 80,000 attendees of programs, a quarter-million Internet sessions, 1.6 million visits and 9 million circulation transactions. Leary concluded by asking voters for a third term on the board.

Nancy Kaplan: Her reasons for running are the same as when she first ran two years ago, Kaplan said. The library is an essential community resource. Her goal is to contribute to its innovative growth and development, while being fiscally prudent. She’s committed to representing patrons of all ages, socio-economic levels and capabilities. The library is at an important juncture, she said. With an excellent record of fiscal responsibility, the library now wants to invest in its future. “The decision is yours, and the opportunity is yours,” she said. Whatever the next steps, Kaplan said she welcomes the public’s input. She was honored by the voters’ confidence and trust in her two years ago, and has been pleased with the exchange of ideas since then. She’d like to continue to represent residents, and asked people to vote for her.

Rebecca Head: The AADL is an outstanding library system, she said, and she’s honored to serve and to run for re-election. Serving on the board has allowed her to hear from the community, from all the residents, and to work to meet their needs. AADL provides services, programs and tools for every community resident in a manner that “exemplifies its democratic nature – it is open to all.” Head said she’s committed to provide to community members the constant, careful support for all issues facing AADL and the community. She hoped people would vote for her.

Lyn Davidge: She described herself as the “renegade” of the group – the only non-incumbent running for the board. She emphasized that she’s not running against anyone. “I am running for our fabulous library, and its users and constituents.” She believes she has something to offer by bringing to the board some questions and perspectives that might challenge the status quo, but also fuel some new ideas. She’s eager to give back to her hometown and to what’s been her public library for most of her life. She’d be honored to serve on the board and participate in the critical decisions at this important time.

Experience

What professional experiences led to your run for the library board, and what was the most significant in preparing you for this office?

Lyn Powrie Davidge.

Davidge: She said she’s a librarian by profession, retired from the University of Michigan library. She also worked for 12 years as a substitute librarian for AADL, and has had some experience in school media centers. Right out of college, she also had four years of teaching experience. All of that experience makes her very familiar with both the library and education worlds, Davidge said. She’ll draw on those experiences to help shape the future of AADL and she’s excited by the prospect of doing that.

Head: She has served on local, state and national boards, and has also served as staff for various boards – so she sees both sides. She understands that a board works on policy and helps set the direction for an organization, as opposed to doing the work of staff. Her professional experience as a manager and a board member in other arenas helps her be a good library board member, she said.

Kaplan: As former director of a department of physical therapy, Kaplan said that gave her experience dealing with a budget. She also had to interact with people at UM and St. Joe’s, so she learned how to work with people and to reach compromises for a result. Besides that professional experience, Kaplan cited her volunteer work for Washtenaw Literacy and Jewish Family Services as giving her insight into what other people might need, and how the policy of the library might be helpful to them.

Leary: She is trained as a librarian, with a master’s degree in librarianship and a law degree. Her professional work has been as a librarian – for about 25 years she was director of the University of Michigan law library, which had a $7 million budget and 40 full-time-equivalent employees. Leary also cited her experience on boards of other organizations, and agreed with Head’s statement about a board being a policy-making body and not necessarily dealing with day-to-day work. She has served as president of the 5,000-member Association of American Law Librarians, which gave her experience as a board member for a large organization.

Rosenthal: In addition to serving on many boards, Rosenthal said she’s been a user of libraries, which has led her to understand their significance. She said she’s been a board member of museums, schools and the AADL, and has also served as chair. She understands the role involved in leadership as well as compromise and working with staff members, the director and chief financial officer of the library. It’s important to understand where another person is coming from, she said, as well as to work on policy, and to influence how the library moves ahead.

Downtown Library

Do you support the $65 million bond proposal to build a new downtown library?

Head: She supports the proposal because the current library building as it’s configured and constructed doesn’t really meet the needs of the current residents, and she doesn’t believe it will meet the needs of the future. It’s a poorly constructed building, she said, adding that the library staff does a wonderful job of keeping it in good shape. It has had in the past year 600,000 visits, she noted, and those keep growing. But it has a lot of problems. She cited the thick cement floors that prevent the library from expanding its technology infrastructure. If they continue in the current building, she said, “it’ll be a band-aid effect.” And from an ecological and environmental point of view, the building needs to become energy efficient and water efficient, she said – a building of the future.

Rebecca Head.

Kaplan: The board vote to put the bond proposal on the ballot was a unanimous one, Kaplan said, and she supports it. The library needs to move into the future, and the current building won’t accommodate future needs. One of the major issues is compliance with the ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act], she said. The ADA took effect after the building was constructed, she said, and right now there’s only one bathroom that’s compliant. The whole building should be compliant, she said, whether you’re a mother with a carriage or an elderly person with a walker – “the building should feel comfortable and accessible to all.” Also, the building’s sight lines should be set up to make everyone feel safe, Kaplan said. The building should be lighter and brighter, she added, as well as being able to accommodate technology infrastructure.

Leary: She described herself as a very enthusiastic supporter of the bond proposal. The current building is really three buildings, she noted, “and all three of them are worn out.” They weren’t put together correctly, she said, so they can’t be made much more efficient. There will soon be the need for expensive repairs. The board has studied this issue for a long time, she said. They engaged in a very thorough review four years ago, and again reviewed that information this spring, she said. A complete renovation of the building up to current standards would cost 90% of what it would cost to have a completely new building that’s even bigger than the current one, she said. Now is the time to do it, Leary added, when there are low interest rates and low construction costs. The project would provide jobs for the community. The demand for use of the downtown building exceeds the supply of space. “It’s time for a new building,” she concluded.

Rosenthal: The library has outgrown the downtown building, she said. The town has grown, and library usage has grown 12% in the last 10 years. They need to double the available space. It’s not ADA compliant. The building needs more bathrooms, more spaces for people who are not capable of going up and down stairs easily, more elevators. Meeting rooms are used beyond capacity. “We turn people away constantly.” They need an auditorium where everyone can see and hear presentations, that includes facilities for the handicapped. Half the people who come to events have to watch on a TV in another room, she said. She said patrons need better access to the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, which AADL manages. Researchers need access to the Ann Arbor News archives. A quiet room is needed for uninterrupted study and reading.

Davidge: “Well, I said I was the renegade,” Davidge began, “and I am not in favor of this particular proposal at this particular time.” That’s not to say that she’d never be in favor of a new library, she added. But right now, the case hasn’t been fully made. The community doesn’t feel particularly well-engaged with the process. She’s concerned that there hasn’t been any preliminary plan. She understands the need not to spend a lot of money before funding is approved, but there is no real specific plan for a new building. There are a lot of unanswered questions. She said she’s looked at the statistics for the meeting space – known as AADL Freespace – and it appears to be very much underutilized. She’d like the board to take a step back and look at a few of these things before moving forward. The public should also be involved in a better way.

Library Branches

In your view, what’s the reciprocal relationship between the downtown library and the AADL branches?

Kaplan: The downtown library is the main branch for a reason, she said. About a third of the system’s visits are to the downtown location – of the total 1.7 million annual visits to all branches, about 600,000 of those are to the building at 343. S. Fifth. The majority of AADL’s resources are downtown. In contrast, neighborhood libraries are just that, she said. They are meant for the neighborhoods. If you want to do major research, you’d probably come downtown. The downtown building is also on the bus line, she noted. People come downtown for many reasons, and one of those reasons is to use the library.

Nancy Kaplan.

Leary: The downtown library is the “mothership” of AADL’s system, Leary said. It’s the place where most of the librarians are, where most of the collection is. It has the largest meeting rooms and is the place that can provide the most to the person who comes there. The branches are intended to be conveniences, she noted, and to bring the library as close as possible to neighborhoods. The locations of the branches have been carefully planned to be spread around the city so that they serve residents equally. With technology, the library system can take good advantage of the branches, she said. For example, you can request a book online and pick it up at any of the branches or downtown. The spending on the branches is proportional, she said. AADL has done a great job of building three new branches. Leary noted that eventually it’s hoped a new west branch will be built as well.

Rosenthal: The downtown location is the central library, where most of the collection is, where most of the staff is, where they hope to house the Ann Arbor News archives. and where the Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled is currently located. It’s a center where people come and meet – most of the evening programming is located there, and people can use the bus to get there. It’s the most convenient place, she said. Rosenthal noted that the library is very fiscally responsible. The three new branches were built using the fund balance. They hope to provide the same kinds of services that are now at the branches to the downtown library “in a major way.”

Davidge: She joked that by this point – after others had addressed the question – there isn’t a lot to add. She agreed that the downtown location is the flagship. It’s the original library, and at one point was the only library. People get very possessive of their neighborhood branches, she noted – because they love them. The branches are a great convenience and a great way for the library to reach out into the community in new ways. As the board and staff plan for the downtown library – whatever it might be – it’s important to keep the fund balance in mind, and to do what they can within the current budget, she concluded.

Head: As the mother of a 17-year-old daughter, Head said her family loves all the branches. But they really enjoy going to the downtown location – because after they’re finished there, they can go someplace else downtown. It’s very convenient. There are about 500 events just at the downtown library each year. It says a lot that people come to those events and clamor for more, she said. Having an efficient, larger downtown library will serve the city well, Head added. Having that anchor for the citizens as well as for a vibrant downtown is really critical.

What If the Bond Proposal Fails?

What’s your Plan B if voters don’t approve funding for a new downtown library?

Leary: It’s critical for the bond proposal to pass, Leary began. But if it doesn’t pass, the board will have to decide what to do next. That will depend on the conditions, she said. It’s one situation if the proposal fails by just a little bit, and another situation if it fails by a large margin. If the bond proposal fails and the board doesn’t try to put it on the ballot again at a later date, the library will spend more of its operating budget on maintaining the inadequate building, she said. “We will spend good taxpayer dollars after bad taxpayer dollars.” They’ll need to replace an elevator for $1 million. They’ll have to replace a roof, and repair damage done from internal leaks. They’ll need to replace parts of a heating/ventilating/air conditioning system. “The building is worn out, and it wasn’t that good to start with,” she said. “We really need a new one, and that will be my focus, even if the bond fails – to figure out what to do next.”

Margaret Leary.

Rosenthal: The library has a fund balance, she said, and board members are very proud of that because it allowed them not to charge the community the full millage rate for the last four years – when people were having a tough time because of the economy. The library levies 1.55 mills instead of 1.92 mills. That fund balance will get very quickly swallowed up if they have to take a building that’s three buildings in one and cobble it together with the community’s best interest in mind, she said. They’d have to spend money on the kinds of things that Leary had mentioned – a new elevator, new roof, new wifi and computers – instead of providing programs and other opportunities for the community. “Our community deserves wonderful, fabulous library and does not deserve a patched-together, efficient but not prime-material building.”

Davidge: If the proposal fails, that’s a signal to the board to take a step back, a deep breath and a closer look at things, she said. It means the community doesn’t have enough information and is not ready to move forward. She said she’d advocate to find creative ways to reach out to the community, to get the maximum amount of community input – perhaps through citizen advisory committees, perhaps through “snail mail” to people who don’t have computers and Internet access – and really involve the public in looking at the situation. That doesn’t mean it should take a lot of time, she said. But the board would need to really find out why the proposal failed and what they should do in the future. That might mean remodeling, Davidge said.

Head: “I’m hopeful that the bond vote will not fail,” Head began. The building has a boiler from 1958 that doesn’t simply need replacement – it needs an entire new HVAC system, she said. The library needs an environmentally sensitive, appropriate, efficient building to save operating costs in the future. For about a dollar a week, she said, or $56 per year, the owner of a $200,000 house can get a new library. “That’s pretty good.” If this fails, the library will use dollars that would otherwise be used for services and programs, she said, and that would be unfortunate. “We have such a sterling library system – I’d hate for it to go downhill.”

Kaplan: She agreed with what the other current board members had said. It would be a shame to take funds from the operating budget to repair and maintain the existing building, and not use the money for programs. AADL has a good track record, Kaplan said. The district library has built three neighborhood branches that are loved and used – within budget, on schedule – and that says something. The library system is an independent unit. It’s not part of any other government unit. The district library is very fiscally responsible, she said, and she hopes that will be considered when people vote. She hopes people feel they can trust the library to use their money well and that taxpayers will be making an investment in the future.

Closing Statements

Each candidate had the opportunity to make a two-minute closing statement.

Kaplan: The role of the library is evolving and growing, she began. “We are books, and so much more.” Story hour remains an essential ingredient in a preschooler’s life. Computers and computer training sessions have grown, reflecting their importance in society, she noted. AADL has successfully taken over the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, and the Ann Arbor News archives. Diversity is fundamental to the library’s community outreach. As examples, Kaplan cited the library’s cooperation with the prisoner re-entry program, with the University of Michigan’s English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) family tutoring program, lectures on a variety of topics, and programs with the Ann Arbor public schools.

Excellence in service is the library’s goal, Kaplan said, which means moving into the 21st century with the newest technology, while keeping the comfort and pleasure of the book in a truly barrier-free environment that welcomes all. She encouraged viewers to attend board meetings and speak during the time for public comment. [The next board meeting is on Monday, Oct. 15 at 7 p.m. in the downtown library's fourth-floor conference room, 343 S. Fifth Ave.] It’s an excellent opportunity for the board to hear what’s on the public’s mind. “This is your library, and we want to hear from you.” She’d like the opportunity to continue on the board, and she asked people for their vote. She concluded by directing viewers to her campaign website for more information.

Head: One of her priorities is for the district library system to remain robust and relevant for the current population, and in the future as well. It’s important to offer AADL’s amazing services, materials and programs, Head said. She’s proud of what the library does, and proud to say she’s on the board and serving everyone in the area. It’s important to have a library. She promised to strengthen the already solid community partnerships. The library is great at collaborating, she said, and she gives a lot of credit for that to the library director, Josie Parker, and to staff.

She said she’s committed to continue providing careful fiscal oversight and to seek input from community members. Now, there are challenges with the downtown building. There are also challenges as print media is being phased out into electronic media, and in figuring out how as a library they can work with that change, she said. AADL is on top of that issue, Head added, and she’s proud to be on a board that supports it. She also encouraged people to come to the board meetings, to tell the board what they think, and to be part of the community.

Prue Rosenthal.

Leary: If she’s elected to a third term, Leary promised to continue AADL’s two traditions. One is fiscal responsibility, and the other is to continue to expand services and collections. She brings to the board her experience as a librarian and lawyer, her experience directing UM’s law library for 25 years, a decade on the Ann Arbor planning commission, and her work with the Institute of Continuing Legal Education, Habitat for Humanity of Huron Valley, and the United Methodist Community’s Heritage Foundation board. She’s lived in Ann Arbor since 1973, and has been a homeowner since 1976. Libraries are a key component of the educational system, including lifelong learning, literacy and computer access. They are also a key component of democracy, she said.

The downtown library is the mothership, and must be kept strong to keep the entire system strong. “We need a new building downtown,” Leary said. The board has studied this for several years. She noted that there’s a huge amount of information on the AADL website, and on the Our New Downtown Library website. The library held three public forums, she said, and has received comments on the AADL director’s blog. Now is the right time for a new downtown building, with low construction costs, and to avoid the need to put more money into a bad building. Ann Arbor uses the library, Leary said. Compared to five peer libraries in university towns, AADL has more than twice as many circulation transactions – in total and per capita – than the library that’s second to AADL, she said. Among the 12 public libraries in southeast Michigan, AADL is third from last in total revenue per capita. “We might have less money, but we do a lot more.” She asked for people to vote for her, so that she could continue serving them on the library board.

Rosenthal: She moved to Ann Arbor in 1977, “and I’ve used the library since probably the second day I was here.” She had young children at the time, and they’d all go down to the library and get books. The children were delighted to know that although everything else was new and different, the library was essentially the same as it had been in Boston, where they’d previously lived. She hopes to continue leading the AADL into the 21st century. The library wants to expand services, work with the community to find out what they want, and to help the public know what the library can do for them. As libraries expand and change, it will be an evolving, changing experience for everyone in the community. “We’ll all be learning together about the new things that technology can bring to the library.”

She cited her experience working with other boards, and said she enjoyed the collaborative experience of working with staff and AADL leadership. Libraries are the heart of the community. The AADL serves as a national leader, she said, providing valuable services and innovative programs, providing tremendous value to citizens and taxpayers. The current downtown facility is no longer adequate, with structural shortcomings, capacity limitations and foundational inefficiencies. Rebuilding now is a wise investment, Rosenthal said, as interest rates are at an all-time low, and construction costs are very competitive. The AADL leadership has demonstrated strong fiscal stewardship of tax dollars, responsiveness to the community’s needs, and has built several successful satellite branches on time and within budget, she said. Ann Arbor deserves a great library, and now is the time to invest in this critical resource for the community. Rosenthal asked for the public’s vote so that she can continue to work with this community to make that happen.

Davidge: “You may vote yes on the library bond proposal, and vote for me,” Davidge said. “You may vote no on the proposal, and vote for me.” It’s not about where any of them stand on that issue – it’s about what happens next, she said. If elected, she’d take office in January of 2013, and by then the next steps will be underway, she noted, whatever they are. It would be her responsibility to support the decision of the voters. She’d plan to get up to speed and jump into it as quickly as possible. She’d ask questions, offer new perspectives and “certainly give my opinions.” But her goal would be for everyone to move forward in the most effective, responsible way possible. Whether the library is then planning a new downtown building or a renovation of the existing one, she’d advocate for extensive community input. This will be the time for everyone who loves the library to come together, share their views, work diligently to make the downtown branch to come, to learn, to read and to grow.

As virtually a lifelong resident, Davidge said, she knows the Ann Arbor community, and the district library as well. [Her father, Emerson F. Powrie, served as deputy superintendent for the Ann Arbor Public Schools in the 1970s when the library was part of the school system, and the library director reported to him.] As a career librarian, she said she knows the library world. And as a former employee and longtime cardholder at AADL – since 1946 – she has particular knowledge of the library, its climate and its culture. She’s excited at the prospect of being able to come full circle and give back to the library as a board member. She said she’ll approach the job with integrity, enthusiasm and openness to the best of her ability. Davidge concluded by asking viewers for their vote.

The Chronicle would not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government. We hope you elect to subscribe. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Davidge previously ran for the AADL board in 2010, but was not elected. She has attended the board’s monthly meetings over the past few months and spoken during public commentary. Some of her comments were directed at the issue of the library’s downtown building – she supported renovation rather than replacement of the structure. She also attended an Aug. 8 forum for potential board candidates, though she had not filed at that time. Davidge has worked at AADL as a substitute librarian. Her father, Emerson F. Powrie, served as deputy superintendent for the Ann Arbor Public Schools in the 1970s when the library was part of the school system, and the library director reported to Powrie.

The future of the downtown library, located at the northeast corner of Fifth and William, will be a major issue for the next board. In July, trustees voted to place a $65 million, 30-year bond proposal on the Nov. 6 ballot for construction of a new downtown building. If the project is approved by voters, the board will play a critical role in determining the design and other factors. Located next to the city’s new underground parking structure – the Library Lane Lot – and across the street from Blake Transit Center, the library has the potential to anchor the southern edge of downtown Ann Arbor and influence other development. It is frequently mentioned as a factor in the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s efforts to form a framework to guide future development of city-owned parking lots in that same area – the Connecting William Street project.

The library board positions will be elected by voters in Ann Arbor and portions of seven townships that are covered by the library’s district – Pittsfield, Scio, Ann Arbor, Lodi, Webster, Salem and Superior. Those are the same boundaries served by the Ann Arbor Public Schools, with the exception of Northfield Township, which is partly within the AAPS district but has its own library system.

Ann Arbor District Library board members, from left: Prue Rosenthal, Margaret Leary, Barbara Murphy and Jan Barney Newman. Rosenthal and Leary are running for re-election in November, along with two other incumbents: Nancy Kaplan and Rebecca Head. The four-year terms will begin Jan. 1, 2013. (Photos by the writer.)

Library staff held an hour-long forum for potential candidates on Wednesday evening, attended by three people who are interested, or who represented others that couldn’t make the event. They included Lyn Davidge, who ran in 2010 but wasn’t elected. Also attending was Doug Jewett, who said he felt tremendously pleased with his experiences at the library. “For me, this is the center of Ann Arbor.”

Prospective AADL board candidates have until 4 p.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 14 to file to be placed on the ballot. To file, candidates must turn in an affidavit of identity to the Washtenaw County clerk’s office, along with a $100 non-refundable filing fee or a minimum of 40 valid signatures. [More details on the filing process are available on the clerk's website.]

The positions are elected by voters in Ann Arbor and portions of seven townships that are covered by the library’s district – Pittsfield, Scio, Ann Arbor, Lodi, Webster, Salem and Superior. Those are the same boundaries served by the Ann Arbor Public Schools, with the exception of Northfield Township, which is partly within the AAPS district but has its own library system.

Josie Parker, AADL’s director, moderated the forum. Four current board members attended: Rosenthal and Leary, whose terms end this year, as well as Barbara Murphy and Jan Barney Newman, whose terms run through 2014. Four other top AADL managers were also present.

The board will be key in making decisions about the future of the downtown library. Last month, trustees voted to place a $65 million, 30-year bond proposal on the Nov. 6 ballot for construction of a new downtown building. If the project is approved by voters, the board will be instrumental in determining the design and other factors.

Though it was mentioned, that project wasn’t the focus of the Aug. 8 discussion. Topics ranged from a summary of the AADL’s history to challenges that the library will face in the future.

Library staff had prepared packets of material for potential candidates, which included the library’s strategic plan from 2010-2015, the downtown building bond proposal, recent district statistics on circulation and other measures, a recent annual report and audit, policy manual and other information.

More details about the board are online. Chronicle coverage of the board’s monthly meetings can be found here.

Perspectives from Current Trustees

The two board members who attended, and whose terms run through 2014, shared their experiences on the board. Barbara Murphy talked about the difference between serving on boards for nonprofits or other groups, compared to being on the board for a public entity. It requires an adjustment to a more formal meeting style, she noted.

Responding to a question from Davidge, Murphy said the board gets along well. In addition to their regular monthly meetings – held on the third Monday of each month at the downtown library’s fourth-floor conference room – the trustees serve on standing and ad hoc committees. Jan Barney Newman noted that the board’s role is to set policy, not micromanage the staff.

Both Newman and Murphy praised the library staff and leadership. Being associated with the institution is rewarding, Murphy said, and she views libraries in general as a foundation for democracy. Newman said the experience has helped her become more aware of the rest of the community, as well as of the importance of the library. Before being elected to the board, she wasn’t as aware of actions by the city council and other local entities to the same degree. “We’re important to the downtown of Ann Arbor, and what happens to Ann Arbor is very important to us,” she said.

Library History, Use

AADL director Josie Parker gave some background about the library. She noted that the library’s finances have been completely in order since 2002. [Parker has been director for 10 years. Under the library’s previous leadership, AADL struggled with financial issues, including a deficit of nearly $1 million in 2000. Later that year, the library’s former financial director, Don Dely, was found guilty of embezzling $119,387 from the library from 1997 to 2000, according to a report in the Ann Arbor News.]

Parker explained that when the library separated from the school system in the mid-1990s, all of the functions that had previously been provided by the school administration had to be recreated at the library. The transition and the “ambiguity of the moment” allowed for the theft to occur, she said. Other issues included union contracts that hadn’t been finalized since the time of the separation from the schools. After discovery of the fraud, Parker said, the AADL organization was completely restructured.

Josie Parker, AADL director.

Since 2002, library audits have been exceptional, Parker said, and issues raised by auditors have primarily related to changes in the law and accounting rules.

Parker described the building of branches over the past decade: the replacement of the Loving branch on Creek Drive with the Malletts Creek branch on Eisenhower, the building of the Pittsfield and Traverwood branches, and the renovation of the Westgate branch. These projects were built without incurring debt, and were paid for out of the library’s operating millage. Currently, the library levies 1.55 mills – 81% of the 1.92 mills that AADL is authorized to levy. If the bond proposal passes, Parker noted, the library will be able to operate the new building within the amount that AADL is authorized to levy.

AADL employs about 220 people, including roughly 100 full-time staff. The use of the library has exploded over the past few years, Parker said, with an annual door count of around 600,000 visits to the downtown location, and 1.6 million visits system-wide. That’s an amazing number for a community this size, she said.

Transactions – instances when a patron uses their library card either in person or online – have increased from 1 million a decade ago to about 9 million in each of the last couple of years. The library’s collection has about 600,000 items. Parker noted that the AADL has received the Library Journal’s five-star rating for several years, and last year it was the only Michigan library to achieve five stars – the highest possible rating. That rating is based on usage, and AADL has the highest circulation per capita of any other five-star library.

The library’s technology, events and programming reflect the demands of the community, and the board has been an extremely important element of the library’s success, Parker said. The board sets policy, provides fiduciary oversight, and makes decisions on the budget and other issues, including the hiring or firing of the director. Regarding that last responsibility, she noted that for the past 10 years the board has handled her evaluation, which is another important role.

She praised current board members for their engagement, noting that their attendance at events hosted by the library is an affirmation to the staff that the people who govern the AADL budget care enough to use its services.

Upcoming Issues, Challenges

Responding to another question from Lyn Davidge, library staff and board members addressed challenges and other issues that the library will face in the future, aside from the major project of building a new downtown library – assuming that the bond proposal passes.

Eli Neiburger, AADL’s associate director of IT and product development, discussed the ongoing challenge of changes in the publishing industry. As the industry shifts to a digital format, there is no guarantee that libraries will be able to buy digital material – there are certain items that are already unavailable to libraries, he said. “That’s something new to the 21st century.” [Neiburger has previously briefed the board on this issue. See Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Library Frames Tech Issues."]

The question, Neiburger said, is :How does the library diversify its value proposition without becoming dependent on a single industry’s willingness to do business with the library? AADL is in good shape in that regard, he noted, but it’s still a big issue.

Regarding the diversity of AADL’s offerings, Jan Barney Newman pointed to the range of non-book collections that can be checked out, including science-to-go kits, telescopes, artwork, and musical instruments. Celeste Choate – AADL associate director of services, collections and access – said there will likely be more of those types of non-traditional items added to the library’s collections. [She briefed the board about AADL's realia collections earlier this year: "Mammoth Molars, Other Realia at the AADL."]

Parker cited another upcoming change related to the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, which is managed by the AADL. There are technology changes that will be supported at the federal level by the National Library Service – moving from tape cassettes to a digital format, for example. Some of the AADL staff are acting as advisors in this transition, which Parker said she’s looking forward to.

On the financial front, Ken Nieman – AADL’s associate director of finance, human resources and operations – pointed to the possibility that the state legislature might eliminate the personal property tax (PPT). If that happens, the library would lose about $600,000 in annual revenues, he said. The library would be able to absorb that if the board voted to increase the amount of its millage that’s levied, he noted. [For more background on this issue, see Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Library Board Briefed on Tax Issue."]

Parker also pointed to another aspect of running a public library that she said might not be obvious. As an example, she described a scenario in which a two-year-old in a stroller is playing games on an iPod, while a parent and four-year-old are taking part in a storytime session. Growing up, the expectations of that two-year-old for what the library offers will be very different from what expectations have been in the past, she noted. The challenge for the library is to meet those expectations without reserve or judgment, and she hoped AADL would be able to do that. In that regard, Parker added, “Space matters – and that’s all I’ll say about that.”

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of elections to various public bodies. We hope you elect to support our efforts. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

CTN producer Tim Nagae, standing, clips a microphone on Ann Arbor District Library board candidate Ed Surovell. Candidates Barbara Murphy, far left, and Jan Barney Newman participated in the forum, as did (not in this frame) Nancy Kaplan and Vivienne Armentrout. (Photos by the writer.)

Nancy Kaplan, Lyn Powrie Davidge and incumbent Carola Stearns are running for one two-year term. Vivienne Armentrout and incumbents Ed Surovell, Jan Barney Newman and Barbara Murphy are vying for three four-year terms. Five of the seven candidates attended the forum – Stearns and Davidge were out of town and unable to participate.

Terms for the three other current board members – Rebecca Head, Margaret Leary and Prue Rosenthal – expire in 2012.

The forum took place at Community Television Network studios and was recorded – it is available online through CTN’s video-on-demand service.

The hour-long event was moderated by Nancy Schewe, and questions covered a broad range of library-related topics, from the fate of the downtown building and thoughts on the next-door Library Lot, to issues of noise, security and technology. This report is presented in the order in which candidates responded.

Opening Statements

Each candidate began with a 1-minute opening statement. Moderator Nancy Schewe began by reading a statement from Lyn Powrie Davidge, which stated that Davidge was in Salzburg, Austria on a trip she’d planned for more than a year.

Vivienne Armentrout

Armentrout’s Opening Statement

Vivienne Armentrout said she’s lived in Ann Arbor since 1986 and most of that time has been involved in community service, either as a volunteer, appointee to a commission or committee, or as an elected official. Most recently, she served as a Washtenaw County commissioner from 1997-2004. She said she’s running for the library board because she sees this as a public service and that her prior service will help her be an effective board member. The library is an essential part of the community, Armentrout said, and it’s an institution we can be proud of. “I would be honored to help support the work of the library,” she concluded.

Surovell’s Opening Statement

Ed Surovell stated that he’s been a library trustee since 1996. “I’m the last of the original trustees,” he said, referring to the group who were elected when the library became an independent entity – it was previously part of the Ann Arbor Public Schools. The library has grown enormously during this period, he said, noting that he and the other trustees have been part of that growth. Surovell said the trustees’ job is to support the library’s director and staff, and to expect and demand fiscal conservatism and discipline. He said he has a personal commitment to that fiscal responsibility and to “programmatic adventurism.” Surovell said he was extremely proud of the enormous growth in services over the past 14 years, such as programs for non-English speakers.

Murphy’s Opening Statement

Noting that she’s served two terms on the board, Barbara Murphy said she’s learned a lot and feels she’s contributed a great deal to changes that the library has made over the past 10 years. That’s why she’s running again. Libraries are crucial to any democracy, she said. Having a literate, informed public is the only way to ensure that people can make wise choices when they vote. Unfortunately, she said, voting levels aren’t very high. The library tries to increase literacy, she said. She cited work the library has done with Washtenaw Literacy, the Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, and the University of Michigan’s Bentley Historical Library, and mentioned that the library has taken responsibility for the archives of the former Ann Arbor News.

Newman’s Opening Statement

Jan Barney Newman noted that her colleagues have already covered a lot of ground, and it would be hard for her to expound on that. She said she’s only been on the board for one term, and she is very proud of their accomplishments in the last four years. They completed construction of the  Traverwood branch, saved the county’s Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, and saved the Ann Arbor News archives. All the while, she said, they have operated very sensibly with reduced revenues for the library, and no layoffs. She said she is very proud of that.

Kaplan’s Opening Statement

Nancy Kaplan thanked the League of Women Voters for hosting the forum. The library is a key community-based resource. Her goal is to contribute it its innovative growth and development to meet the needs of current and potential users of all ages and abilities. If elected, she said she’d have opportunities to guide the board to include input from the wide diversity of current patrons, and reach out to gain new community involvement. She said she had a broad range of professional, volunteer and community experiences, and that she’s confident she can successfully represent the interests of both the library and the community.

Downtown Library Building

Question: In November of 2008, the library board voted to postpone expansion of the downtown library. When would the library be ready to reconsider the project? Do you think plans will need to change? What’s your vision?

Nancy Kaplan

Kaplan on the Downtown Library Building

What was stopped was the decision to build a new library, Kaplan noted. The discussion should be opened about whether to renovate or to build a new library, she said, and she would like the discussion to be open to the public – to go beyond the staff, board and the Downtown Development Authority. Hopefully the discussion will be reopened in the new year, she said, and will include input from citizens about what it should look like and what services to offer. She said they need to understand what the building doesn’t have now – it’s not meeting the needs of the disability community, for example. She restated that the discussion should be reopened now.

Armentrout on the Downtown Library Building

Armentrout said the library board was very wise in calling off the project, and that it’s unusual that anybody can stop and take a deep breath and hold up on something they’ve invested so much time on. Our economic circumstances haven’t improved since then, she said, and she thinks that as a country and a city we’re facing a very uncertain economic future for years to come. She said she wouldn’t currently support planning to build a new library downtown. She would support renovation instead, and making the current building as good as it can be. This topic has already come up, she noted, citing the building’s chiller that recently needed to be replaced. “We’ll have more of those,” she said.

Murphy on the Downtown Library Building

Murphy said this issue of whether to build or renovate will come up quite soon. The board did have a very public process last time, she said – it was not limited to the board, administration and DDA. The process included outside consultants and a large number of focus groups, she said. Based on that, they came to the conclusion to build. Then they decided to halt that project when the bottom fell out of the economy, she said. Given the amount of time that’s passed, Murphy said, they need to look at it again. They might not need to repeat everything they did before, but they will have to update some things. She said she’s looking forward to finding out how the community feels. “I hope that we can have a library that’s worthy of the 21st century,” she said.

Newman on the Downtown Library Building

Newman said that Murphy touched on an important point. They aren’t building or renovating for the moment – it’s for the future. They have to keep the library great for now, but make it right for tomorrow. It’s a little hard to know what tomorrow is, she added, given what’s happening in the publishing industry and the technology that’s impacting the disbursement of knowledge. They’ll have to look at the plans again, she said. The cost of maintaining an old building is a factor as well, she noted. They’ve had a lot of expenses in replacing elevators, air handlers and a cooler. They have to evaluate where they are now, she said, and how that impacts the decisions they’ll make.

Surovell on the Downtown Library Building

The decision to terminate the building project was based on a national financial crisis in November 2008, Surovell said. The decision was made based on the reality that bonds in Michigan could not be sold, he said. At that moment, it was a wise move to stop. Parts of the downtown building are 58 years old, he noted, which is older than the Carnegie Library building was when it was abandoned for the current building. Many parts of the current building are in deplorable condition, he said, and during the board’s review of the building they discovered that the cost of renovation and replacement were pretty much the same. At that time, they chose to rebuild. Surovell said he believes they are likely to make the same decision again, but it will have to be reviewed.

Library Lot Development

Question: Recognizing that the library doesn’t own the Library Lot underground parking structure next door to the downtown library building, how could the site be developed in a way that would enhance the library?

Barbara Murphy

Murphy on Library Lot Development

It’s clear that we need parking, Murphy said, and that’s being built underground. It’s also clear that whatever is built next door to the library has to enhance the whole street, not just the library. Whether it’s a park or a hotel or something else, she said, it’s most important that it be kept up and run by people who are cooperative and who can work well with the library – people who understand how important it is for the library to have a safe, comfortable area for their patrons. “I’m not sure what I want next door,” Murphy said, acknowledging that there’s a lot of controversy in the community about it. “Whatever it is, it’s got to be something we can work with.”

Newman on Library Lot Development

Newman said that Murphy’s answer was very good. “We are not in change charge of that project,” she said, nor do they have a say in it. “A skunkworks could go in there next door, for all we know.” But whatever is done, it has to be maintained by another entity. It can’t be up to the library to plan the activities of a park, she said, or to deal with problems created by whatever is there. She said they are very interested in a development that would enliven the street and the downtown, and that would bring a healthy commercial development to the town.

Surovell on Library Lot Development

Surovell reiterated that the library does not own the lot. “What would I like to see there personally? A frozen custard stand, but I don’t think that’s going to happen,” he quipped. He noted that it’s the largest block in the city of Ann Arbor, and only one business on it collects sales tax. It should be vibrant and help the entire city, he said, and shouldn’t be looked at as just what’s good for the library. What’s good for the city will also be good for the library. City officials seem to be struggling with the issue, he said, but as a library trustee, he’s not been inclined to comment on the city’s business. He said he hopes the city makes a good decision that will be good for Ann Arbor.

Armentrout on Library Lot Development

Armentrout said that although the library doesn’t have a say, it is considered a stakeholder. As a stakeholder, the library has an interest in what happens in that entire area, she said. The library and other stakeholders should be involved in discussing the whole configuration of the area – the Blake Transit Center is also being rebuilt, she noted. The library board would want to see how that affects their patrons. Personally, she said she favors a civic open space on the site that would have active uses, such as events and opportunities for theatrical use. Armentrout also envisioned passive uses there, so that library users could read a book under a tree, if they wished.

Kaplan on Library Lot Development

It’s true that the library doesn’t own the land, Kaplan said, but they do have input about what goes there – for example, Library Lane and how the building can be accessed from the parking deck. She said they need a robust discussion, with input from the community as to what they would feel comfortable with. This is their library – what would they like to see in the neighborhood? She said she favors something that’s open and friendly and very welcoming, as the library will be facing whatever goes on that lot.

Digital Technology

Question: How do you see the library of the future interfacing with print-on-demand products, like Kindle, and other digital products? What services do you see the library of the future offering to its patrons?

Kaplan on Digital Technology

Kaplan said the library is on target with the databases and technology it already offers. The staff is working very hard at that, and as a board member, she’d support it too. There’s a director in charge of technology, she noted, who is doing a fine job. [Eli Neiburger is AADL associate director of IT and production.] She’s sure they will keep up with technology. Kaplan noted that there’s a cost to keeping up databases and other technology, so the library will need sufficient funding to do all that they’d like to do.

Jan Barney Newman

Newman on Digital Technology

Newman said the library has a “very technologically astute” director of technology. As it becomes possible to do more, she said she’s sure they will. A lot of things they can’t predict, she added. The library’s mission is to disseminate knowledge to the community. Whatever the technology or method, they will continue to do so, she said. It’s very important to stay alive to those options, which the current administration does, Newman said. “I’m more of a Luddite than probably a lot of people in the community,” she said, “but I’m very sure we’ll keep up with the technology and the ability to serve the public in that way.”

Surovell on Digital Technology

Surovell noted that the University of Michigan has a machine that will print on demand any book that you want. But the question of books on demand – whether they be electronic or printed – is only part of the question, and in many ways it’s a red herring, he said. The library provides so much more to the community, he said. “Ask yourself whether you’d want to live in a place that didn’t have a library, of any description.” It isn’t whether you can get books on demand or whether books will be replaced, he said. The library is the center of education for the entire community, not just for those in school or for seniors or a limited number of groups. There’s an enormous range of people studying, reading, and participating at the library, Surovell said, and there are art exhibits and a whole world of cultural excitement there. “To ask just about books is a mistake.”

Armentrout on Digital Technology

Armentrout said she listened to the AADL director, Josie Parker, make a presentation earlier in the day via streaming video, and heard her say that Amazon won’t let them have Kindle, “so I guess Kindle’s out.” [Amazon's Kindle is a device for reading electronic books and other digital products.] The library’s collections, and the distribution of those collections to the public, is their core business, she said. That’s why libraries were created. She said she would like the library to retain its collection, to the extent that it’s practical. She has great confidence that the library is already planning to move in correspondence to the technology, as it changes. But technology shouldn’t lead the changes, she added – it should accommodate them.

Murphy on Digital Technology

Libraries are so much more than just books, Murphy said. It’s the librarians themselves. The staff of the library has a role in working with patrons of all ages. They teach people how to find information and how to determine if it’s reliable. You can find anything on the web, she noted, but the library has lists of sites that have been vetted. There are things besides books, she said, such as story times, teen events, and speakers. The library has turned into more of a community resource and community center, Murphy said, than just a place to pick up a book. Whatever happens to printed media – and she hopes it will still be around – Murphy said the library and librarians have a lot more to offer.

Privatization of Libraries

Question: A private company in Maryland has taken over public libraries in many cities in California, Oregon, Tennessee and Texas. What’s your opinion about privatizing libraries? Do you foresee privatizing any library services – and if so, what?

Ed Surovell

Surovell on Privatization of Libraries

Saying he’d answer the last question first, Surovell said that answer is no. He doesn’t foresee a privatization of services as they directly affect the public. But he noted that many of the library’s services are already privatized, such as the sourcing and selection of many materials. Privatizing a library system isn’t within reason for Ann Arbor, but it might be for some communities, where resources are scarce and where for various reasons they haven’t been able to maintain a library. There are many municipalities in Michigan that have shut their libraries. “Is a privately operated library better than the library in Troy that doesn’t exist? Yes,” he said. Surovell said he’s sure that won’t happen in Ann Arbor, which has a “wonderful, vibrant, economically healthful system.”

Armentrout on Privatization of Libraries

First of all, no to privatization, Armentrout said. But it would be unlikely to happen in Ann Arbor, she added, because we’re fortunate to have a perpetual millage for the library system. In fact, the current board hasn’t chosen to use the entire amount that’s available, she noted. In some states and other parts of Michigan, Armentrout said, there isn’t a district library millage as Ann Arbor has. So a lot of decisions about privatization are probably driven by funding. For example, if municipalities are funding the library out of their general fund, it could lead to drastic measures, like privatizing. “But I see no reason to meddle with a very good system that we already have,” she said.

Murphy on Privatization of Libraries

It’s not clear what privatization means, Murphy began, noting that she had read the New York Times article to which the question referred. Like Surovell, she noted that some things are already privatized, such as payroll and certain mailings. The real issue, she said, is that they retain control of the content and operation of the library. If privatization means turning it over to a company and that people would have to pay to use the library, then no, of course not, she said. But it’s a different story if you look at things like payroll services or putting labels on books. To say that privatization is good or bad is almost meaningless, Murphy said. You have to define what it means. But largely, she added, she’s against it.

Newman on Privatization of Libraries

Newman said she doesn’t think this issue is a factor for Ann Arbor’s library system. Ann Arbor has a perpetual millage that accommodates the library’s needs, and a very efficient administration that’s operating even with reduced revenues and keeping a fully employed staff with no layoffs. There’s no way a private firm could come in and do a better job, she said. Newman said the New York Times article was very interesting, and that this is a very current question. The library administration has to be fast in adapting to change, Newman said – that’s one thing the board should be very appreciative of.

Kaplan on Privatization of Libraries

Kaplan said she appreciates the outsourcing of peripheral things, which are not core to the library’s mission, but she would be against privatizing anything that’s core to the mission. “We want public ownership of the materials, so if privatizing means giving up ownership, I’d be against it,” she said. She noted the system’s perpetual millage, and said that the library and its director have managed very well and been very frugal. There should be no reason that such a dire circumstance, like privatization, should occur, she said.

Security

Question: In the last two or three years, the downtown library has added security personnel. Are you happy with that decision? Do you feel that it’s interfered with the privacy of patrons? Do you foresee the need for security at any of the other branches? [AADL director Josie Parker, who attended the forum as an audience member, later clarified that there has been security at the downtown branch for at least a decade, and that there's been no increase in security in recent years.]

Kaplan on Security

Kaplan said she’d have to support what the board and director had done – there must have been a reason, she said, because she knows that privacy is a key issue and that the library and the director attend to that. So there must have been incidents or issues that concerned the patrons, and that those concerns were conveyed to the library. Kaplan said she would not be against increased security, if they feel it’s needed. And if they feel security is needed at the branches, then there is probably a reason. And even if it’s implemented, that doesn’t mean it will always be there. It would probably come up for review, she said.

Armentrout on Security

Armentrout said she hadn’t been aware of the library instituting more security, but she’s sure it was for a very good reason. She would support the decision that had been made. She said she doubted that there’s the same issue with branch libraries. Downtown has a different urban population, she noted.

Murphy on Security

Murphy said that, in her experience as a patron and board member, the security personnel in the library are wonderful – they don’t invade the privacy of patrons. They help people when there’s a problem. They enforce the library’s rules, whether it’s talking too loudly or sleeping or spilling a drink. They’re there because there are rules to enforce. She said she didn’t understand the question about invading people’s privacy. If security has increased, she said, she would point out that the library’s collections have increased, the number of patrons has increased, and programs at night have increased. They’ve also added the Library for Blind and Physically Disabled. Any additional staffing is in order to keep up with these increases, she said.

Newman on Security

Newman said she was not sure exactly when an increase in security occurred – it seems to have been there a long time, she noted. There has been an increase in security in all public buildings, she said, so it’s part of that same precaution. She hasn’t received any complaints about it invading personal freedoms or liberties. A lot of structural things have changed because of security issues, she noted. The stacks aren’t as high as they used to be because the staff needs visibility throughout the room, for example.

Surovell on Security

The security is there because the needs are there, Surovell said. The library is an inviting place for displays of temper, “which are not infrequent, I’m sorry to say.” In the winter, the library is warm, he said, and in the summer it’s dry. The library attracts people with their own agendas. Most public libraries have these issues, he said. Ann Arbor has big city crime, he added. There have been drug problems at times, as well as acts of violence – patron against patron, or sometimes against employees. Security is necessary and appropriate, he concluded.

Noise in Libraries

Question: In the past, libraries were places of silence and whispers, but they’re much noisier now. Is that a problem? What’s the solution to accommodate the needs of all patrons?

Murphy on Noise in Libraries

Libraries, and especially branch libraries, serve the population surrounding them, Murphy observed. The Pittsfield branch has lots of children from the surrounding subdivisions and tends to be noisier. The downtown building tends to be the quietest. Noise levels change because the times change, she said. They are no longer places just to read books. They are now places where you learn computing, take art classes, or to go story time. They’ve built each new branch with a quiet reading room, and in the newest branch, they’ve put the children’s room at the far end of the library, apart from the quiet reading area. Across the system, patrons can find whatever noise level they want, she said. They try to keep the noise level appropriate, she said – they don’t want people screaming, for example.

Newman on Noise in Libraries

Newman said she thinks the noise level is very healthy, because it reflects enthusiasm. They have a lot of young people using the library – for example, junior high kids come to play computer games, and they’re not going to be quiet. But they’ll be in a place that won’t disturb others who want quiet, she said. That’s part of the vibrancy of what’s offered to the whole public. The library has to respond to the community, Newman said, and they accommodate the needs of those who want quiet, as well as those who want activity.

Surovell on Noise in Libraries

Just as the saying goes, “This is not your father’s Oldsmobile,” Surovell said, “so it is not your parents’ library.” People who wonder about the loss of quiet are thinking of a library that’s in the past. A library is not a place for quiet contemplation and books anymore, he said. It is supported by all citizens and there’s vibrant, sometimes raucous activity. They’ve had rock bands, band wars, games sometimes so rackety that they have to be out in the parking lot. A library is where things happen, he said, and sometimes it’s noisy. They try to put the children’s area apart from the reading room, he said, but sometimes they merge.

Armentrout on Noise in Libraries

It’s already been mentioned that the solution is to separate uses and users, Armentrout said. She said she thinks some parts should remain quiet enough so that people can access materials and do research. But in the Malletts Creek library, for example, there are individual rooms that people can use to study or hold tutorials, so it sounds as though efforts have already been made to separate users, putting the quiet uses in one area and the more interactive uses in another. That seems like a good solution, she said.

Kaplan on Noise in Libraries

The libraries seem to be divided quite well, Kaplan said, so that you can find a quiet area – even for those who want to come and read a book or do knitting by the fireplace. There needs to be a quiet area, she said, and the libraries all seem to have it. Especially in the downtown branch, there are plenty of quiet areas, as you ascend the floors. The library can accommodate both the noisy and the quiet, Kaplan said, and everybody can find their place to be comfortable.

Challenges and Strengths

Question: What are the primary challenges that the library will face in the next four years, and what strengths do you bring to the board?

Kaplan on Challenges and Strengths

The challenges are interwined between giving the services the library wants to give, Kaplan said, and having the financial resources to do that. The library needs the funds to do all it wants to do. Regarding her strengths, Kaplan said she has run a department, so she’s had to deal with a budget. She also cited experiences working with people in the library and said she understands the needs of its many users. So from understanding the many needs of the library, combined with the financial needs, “I think that I can be of help,” she said.

Newman on Challenges and Strengths

The library has to have the funds to do what needs to be done, Newman said. The needs are great, because they may have to deal with the declining building, which will have to be renovated or replaced. She said she’s very interested in providing services to the community. She said she’s a former teacher and a former business owner, so she’s had the experience of managing funds and teaching children. She’s very excited about what the library can do on both of those fronts, given declining revenues. Newman said she’s not sure she’s particularly crucial to the library, because its administration is very capable. “But I’m very excited to be part of the decisions that will be made.”

Surovell on Challenges and Strengths

Surovell said the issues over the next four years are, first of all, the stability of revenues. Revenues have been declining and will continue to decline, and he said he’s in a position to understand that. Another issue is to finish the process of re-examining the main branch. But most of all, the main challenge is to maintain the vibrancy and stability of the existing staff, he said, to support the direction that the library’s been taking, and to maintain its agility in a rapidly developing world of intellectual and cultural change, in a community with dozens of languages, many different populations, and a continuing turnover of patrons – to make certain that the Ann Arbor District Library remains the Ann Arbor District Library.

Armentrout on Challenges and Strengths

Clearly, Armentrout said, the fate and resolution of how to deal with the downtown library is going to be a central issue. Related to that, another issue is how to navigate the next few years, given all the construction in the area, and how to maintain the functions of a library in the context of what’s happening in that end of town. She also expects there will be some discussion of how to maintain the library’s collections of books and other materials. Her understanding is that demand on those is already so great that there’s some talk of shortening the period of time that materials can be kept out. She said she has a breadth of experience in different kinds of government and would emphasize public input. Armentrout also said she understands that the board is not an operational board – it’s a policy board.

Murphy on Challenges and Strengths

Murphy said that to build on Armentrout’s statement, as a policy board, their most important task is to hire a director and make sure that things run smoothly, and to oversee the budget. She said she thinks they did a very good job in hiring a director. She believes her experience on the board over the last two terms is very valuable for her next term. There is a long learning curve in understanding how the library works, how the budget works, how the millage works. She noted that she was present during the building of two branches, and has learned about the library’s facilities. It’s been fun to learn, Murphy said, and now that she’s learned it, she wants to continue to share that knowledge with the board and the library. Before retiring, her previous experience was in finance, personnel, organizational development and information technology (IT). Understanding IT especially, and where technology is going in the future, will be crucial to the library, she said.

Closing Statements

Each candidate was given two minutes for a closing statement.

Kaplan’s Closing Statement

Kaplan described herself as an enthusiastic supporter of the Ann Arbor District Library. She’d be a link between the library and the community. “I will advocate for the library and be the voice of the community,” she said. Her ideas for the library include enhancing communication and interaction between the board and the public. She’d advocate for televising board meetings and providing drive-up book depositories. She said she’d promote creating advisory committees to represent the diverse community, including seniors, young parents, teens, and those with disabilities. The goal is to have active dialogues among the community, the board, director and staff on the vision for the library and its evolving role.

They’d also benefit from an open dialogue about the aging Fifth Avenue library and what to do about this building – renovation or rebuilding. The benefits and risks should involve a robust discussion with the public, Kaplan said. The public should also be involved in the library’s vision for its neighborhood, she said. What are good neighbors for the library? “The well-being of the Ann Arbor District Library is essential to our democracy and our creative future,” Kaplan said. She said she’d be an advocate for the library and would work collaboratively with district residents to develop a vision for the library as a community center for multi-faceted learning, interaction and personal growth. She referred voters to her website for more information, and thanked the League of Women Voters for hosting the forum.

Newman’s Closing Statement

Newman said she ran for the library board four years ago because she’d been involved with the library a long time, even when it was part of the Ann Arbor public school system – she had been an ex-officio member of the library board because of her participation in the Ladies’ Library Association, which was a precursor to the current library. Since being on the board, she said she’s learned so much about how the library operates and all that it offers. It’s become very important to her to stay with it. She said it’s a matter of the continuity she can provide, along with her incumbent colleagues.

To that end, she said, she wanted to mention Carola Stearns, who’s running for a two-year term. Stearns is a geologist, Newman said, who’s taking a group of geologists on a trip to the Grand Canyon’s Supai Gorge. The trip was long-planned. Stearns is a makes a lot of contributions as a board member, Newman said, and a good advocate for the library. Newman said she’d like to see the library continue in the direction it’s going – while staying open to new directions. The other issue is the maintenance and husbandry of the downtown library, she said, which will be a challenge. They need to be aware of the needs of the community, and of the special needs of the neighborhood. The library offers a vibrancy to the downtown community, she said.

Murphy’s Closing Statement

Murphy said she agreed with Newman and reiterated her comments about Stearns, saying Stearns was a good board member and always asked very cogent questions. Her forced absence shouldn’t mean that her name isn’t heard. For her own part, Murphy said she thinks she’s been a contributing member of the library board as well, and has worked hard on the committee that helped develop the library’s strategic plan. It’s been a pleasure to watch as it’s been implemented.

The library’s biggest problem in some ways will be its growth, Murphy said. In the 2008-09 fiscal year, they had 9 million checkouts and renewals. That shows how many people like and use the library, and that’s going to increase as more people turn to the library for things other than books. She said she would like to continue to see how to achieve growth, given the financial situation that the library faces. The downtown building will be an issue – the library has become a community center, and its rooms are filled to overflowing. Another thing they’ll need to look at is how to accommodate larger groups for lectures, theater pieces and classes. All of these things she finds very exciting, Murphy said. She’d like to continue working on them, “and I hope that I have your vote to do so.”

Surovell’s Closing Statement

Surovell said that during the 14 years he’s been a library trustee, a study was done that led to the decision to replace and expand their facilities. Three new libraries have been constructed, services have been dramatically expanded, and the library is now open on Sundays – it’s open 74 hours a week, he said. One year, the Ann Arbor District Library was library of the year for the entire United States. It’s a record of which he’s personally proud, but he’s most proud of the staff and the director, “those people who have made the Ann Arbor District Library an internationally known facility, and a leader in public library service, wherever libraries are known.” His hope is that he’ll be able to continue to contribute his past experience to the future of the library.

Armentrout’s Closing Statement

Armentrout said she believes libraries are the foundation of a democratic society, and she would like to see the library continue its successful outreach to all members of the community. There are many things to be proud of in the library. It’s well-managed, and has moved forward on many important fronts. The library assumed responsibility for the Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled when the county stopped supporting it. As a part-time writer, she said, she especially appreciates the library’s archiving of local history.

The library has been an essential anchor to the downtown and to the civic life of our city, Armentrout said. It’s encourageing encouraging that the library has been able to do all this within a prudent budget. She said she’s glad that the main library will remain at the downtown location, though she also enjoys the convenience of her local branch. She doesn’t support a new downtown library building, and would prefer to see it renovated and repaired. The library has been identified as a stakeholder for the Library Lot site, and she said she does not support building a hotel and conference center there. She appreciates the library’s efforts to move forward with changes in technology and publishing approaches, but she also thinks a high priority should be placed on maintenance of a wide collection of books and materials. There’s a lot of demand for that, and it’s what most people think of when they think “library,” she said.

Ann Arbor District Library staff members talk with board candidates about their roles at an information session for candidates on Wednesday. (Photos by the writer.)

Four of the seven candidates attended: incumbents Ed Surovell and Jan Barney Newman, as well as former Washtenaw County commissioner Vivienne Armentrout and Nancy Kaplan, who hosts a local talk show on community issues called Other Perspectives.

Kaplan, Lyn Powrie Davidge and incumbent Carola Stearns are running for one two-year term. Armentrout and incumbents Surovell, Newman and Barbara Murphy are vying for three four-year terms.

Terms for the three other current board members – Rebecca Head, Margaret Leary and Prue Rosenthal – expire in 2012.

The session on Wednesday was informal, following the format of a similar meeting held on July 27 for people interested in running. Head, the current board president, and AADL director Josie Parker were on hand to answer questions, as were associate directors Celeste Choate, Eli Neiburger and Ken Nieman.

Parker gave an overview of the library system, which has an annual budget of just over $12 million and operates out of five locations, including the main downtown building on South Fifth Avenue, where Wednesday’s meeting was held. AADL employs 250 people, including 100 full-time benefited workers, she said. Of those full-time workers, 52 are represented by unions.

Over the past year or so, the system handled two major projects, Parker said. In early 2009, AADL took on responsibility for the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, when the county decided that they could no longer support it. [See January 2009 Chronicle coverage: "Library for the Blind to Open Feb. 2 at AADL"]

And in January of 2010, the library took possession of the archives of The Ann Arbor News, which closed in July 2009. [See Chronicle coverage: "Library Nears Deal on Newspaper Archives"] AADL staff is processing the more than one million items in that collection, now stored in an office park on Green Road. In some ways the archives were in good shape, Parker said, but in other ways the materials were very disorganized. It will be several months before the archives are available to the public, she said.

In response to a question from Kaplan, Parker gave more details about the physical changes that the library made to accommodate the Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled. An adaptive/assistive technology lab, with equipment such as a braille embosser, was set up on the second floor west wall, in the former location of the local history room. The local history collection was moved to an alcove north of the second floor reference desk. Hydraulic tables were added so that they could adjust to user’s needs, and special software was installed on every library computer in the system so that patrons don’t have to come to the downtown building for that access.

Rebecca Head, current president of the Ann Arbor District Library board of trustees, talks with Vivienne Armentrout, a candidate for the board.

Board president Rebecca Head pointed out that since patrons can use any branch in the system, they have access to materials at more locations and there are longer hours of service than when the Library for the Blind was managed by the county.

Parker noted that much of the service is provided via mail, and the collection of materials is located in the basement of the downtown building.

Head spoke about the library system more generally, saying that she’s proud of being on the board because AADL is run so well by its director, associate directors and staff – both in terms of services and fiscal responsibility. She noted that the board had been able to lower the millage rate that the library levies, while not cutting services. [See Chronicle coverage: "Library Plans to Lower Millage"]

Armentrout observed that she couldn’t remember any other entity that had reduced taxes, and Surovell said the board was very proud of that. Fiscal discipline is important, he said. Ann Arbor is highly taxed, and they wanted to treat the taxpaying public fairly.

Parker said it was also important to remember the challenges ahead, and that because of the economy, the local tax base is decreasing, which in turn lowers revenues for AADL. The board was able to lower the millage rate, but that’s going to be an ongoing question.

The library has the ability to levy 2 mills in perpetuity – though that amount has been rolled back to a maximum of 1.92 mills because of the Headlee Amendment. [The effect of the Headlee Amendment is to limit property tax revenues so that they do not outpace the rate of inflation. Tax revenues might outpace inflation in a market where property values are increasing rapidly. The Headlee mechanism for limiting tax revenues is to discount the millage rate appropriately.]

Right now, the AADL rate levied is 1.55 mills.

Parker also explained that before AADL lowered the millage rate, it had been able to fund construction of its three branches – Mallets Creek, Pittsfield and Traverwood – entirely from millage proceeds, incurring no debt. Their branch plan had called for an additional branch to be constructed, and they had intended to replace the downtown building as well. Those plans were called off because of the economy, she said. [See Chronicle coverage: "Citing Economy, Board Halts Library Project."]

Surovell noted that the downtown building was close to 60 years old – older than the Carnegie Library building was when the Ann Arbor Public School decided they needed a new library building, and constructed the downtown branch in 1958. [The library was formerly part of the AAPS system. It split into an independent entity in the mid-1990s. The Carnegie Library building was located at the site of the University of Michigan's new North Quad residential hall, at the corner of Huron and State.]

The age of the downtown building is an issue, Surovell said, and the board has had to authorize several hundred thousand dollars of expenses to repair its infrastructure over the past two years.

The discussion also touched on how the community uses the library system. Parker pointed out that when they constructed new branches, critics said the buildings wouldn’t be needed because services could be accessed online. The numbers don’t support that, she said, noting that the system receives over 1.7 million visits annually. Circulation is roughly 9 million for a population base of 165,000 people – a per-capita circulation that’s “over the top” compared to other communities, Parker said.

She noted that for the past two years, AADL has received the Library Journal’s highest rating – five stars. The rating is based on objective measures: circulation transactions per capita, including checkouts and renewals; visits to library buildings per capita; computer sessions per capita; and program attendance per capita. AADL was the only system in Michigan to achieve a five-star rating, and only one of two libraries in the state to be rated at all. “I’m expecting something similar this year,” she said.

Nancy Kaplan listens as library staff explain their roles during an information session for board candidates. Kaplan has filed to run for a two-year term on the board.

Head noted that adding new branches hadn’t cannibalized attendance at other locations – in fact, visitor numbers at all locations had increased. More teens were also using the library, which isn’t typical for most systems, she observed.

Parker shared some thoughts about the library’s future, referring back to a retreat that the board and senior staff held in late September of 2009. At that time, staff gave a presentation about issues that libraries would face in the coming years. “If we did (the presentation) this month, it’d be different,” Parker said. “In 10 months, things have changed.”

Imminent failures of major bookstore chains, the closing of video stores and emergence of services like Netflix, issues related to the copyright of digital materials – all of these things “will change public libraries forever,” Parker said, and how AADL responds “will mark our future.”

It’s a time that offers wonderful opportunities along with great uncertainty, she said. The copyright issue in particular is a big question mark.

Armentrout asked whether Parker planned to continue writing her director’s blog. “When I have something to say!” Parker replied.

Kaplan went back to Head’s comment about adolescents coming to the library. What draws them in?

Eli Neiburger, AADL’s associate director of IT and product development, fielded that question. Teens don’t need the library to gain access to content, so the library becomes more about shared experiences for sharing content, he said. He likened it to the concept of story time that was introduced a century ago, which created a social experience for kids.

AADL’s programs for teens have covered a broad range of topics, including rock music, gaming, graffiti, and making prom dresses out of duct tape. Another example is the library’s popular LEGO contest, held on Aug. 5 at Weber’s for all age groups – this year, there were 173 entries.

Neiburger said the value of the library may be as much about the creations of its patrons as it is about consuming material by best-selling authors – though for kids who love to read, the library has a great collection for that, he noted. And by getting teens into the library for whatever reason, it allows them to see what other resources the library has to offer, and helps break the perception of the library as an artifact of the 20th century.

Armentrout asked what kinds of interactions the library has with local schools. Parker and Celeste Choate – associate director of services, collections and access – described several connections. Every second grader in the Ann Arbor Public Schools system visits the library in the fall, and they are issued a library card if they want one. In May, library staff visit every fifth grade class, trying to keep that connection as they enter middle school – that’s the age “when we lose them,” Parker noted.

Choate said the library also gets involved with AAPS through the library’s summer reading program. This year, library staff visited first- and third-grade students enrolled in the AAPA Summer Learning Institute, to introduce them to the library’s summer reading program. About 300 students completed the reading program, and each received a free book from the library. In addition, library staff introduced the summer reading program to students at Mitchell Elementary, Scarlett Middle School and the AAPS/Community Education Summer Camp, this year held at Dicken Elementary.

Choate also described the Brainfuse online tutoring service that the library offers to its patrons through a third-party company – students can connect with actual tutors to help with math, English, science or other topics. The service is available in English or Spanish.

As the hour-long session wound down, Head told candidates that she and the library staff would be happy to answer any other questions that candidates might have – contact information for all current board members was provided in a packet handed out to candidates, which also included financial statements, the board policy manual, bylaws and other information.

After the meeting, The Chronicle asked Kaplan and Armentrout why they were interested in running for library board positions. Both said that they admired the library, and were interested in finding ways of being involved in public service. Kaplan said she’s familiar with the library in part through her volunteer work with the nonprofit Washtenaw Literacy. She was interested in running for office as a way of contributing to the community, and the fact that the board races are nonpartisan appealed to her.

Noting that her mother was a librarian, Armentrout said she admires the job the current library administration and staff are doing. She said she’d read a Chronicle article about the previous information session for potential candidates, and that it seemed there might be uncontested seats. [At the time, none of the four incumbents had indicated whether they intended to run for re-election. All of them have since filed to be on the Nov. 2 ballot.]

Neither candidate mentioned the issue of the Library Lot development – nor did the topic arise during the meeting’s discussion with staff and board members. The Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority is building an underground parking structure on the city-owned lot, which is adjacent to the downtown library.

Last year, the city issued a request for proposals (RFP) to solicit projects for a possible development atop the parking structure. The AADL is not directly involved in that effort, but it’s been a topic of discussion at previous board meetings. Whatever goes on top of the parking structure will have a direct impact on the downtown library building, and any future new building that might be constructed there. In January 2010, city administrator Roger Fraser gave the library board an update on the Library Lot proposals at the board’s monthly meeting.

Two finalists were selected soon after, but since then there’s been little action on the issue. [For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: "Visions for the Library Lot" and "Hotel/Conference Center Ideas Go Forward."] City councilmember Stephen Rapundalo, who chairs the RFP review committee, gave an indication during his communications time at the city council’s July 19, 2010 meeting that there would soon be a bit of action, with the hiring of a consultant to review the two finalist proposals.

In a recent telephone interview, executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, Susan Pollay, told The Chronicle that the consultant to review two remaining proposals – for hotel/conference centers – had been hired: Roxbury Group. She held out the possibility that Roxbury Group would potentially be able to provide an assessment of the proposals to the review committee at a mid-September committee meeting. Pollay is a member of that committee.

Both Kaplan and Armentrout, when asked by The Chronicle whether the Library Lot development was a factor in their decision to run, indicated that they’d been motivated by other factors – though they’d be interested in participating in discussions about the project, if elected.

Armentrout said she’s always felt that libraries are a central part of the community. “This one is exceptionally so,” she said.

Rebecca Head, president of the Ann Arbor District Library board, spoke to a small gathering on Tuesday during an information session for potential board candidates. (Photos by the writer.)

Lyn Davidge and Greg Andrade say they haven’t yet decided whether to run, but they’re considering it. Four seats will be on the Nov. 2 ballot: three four-year terms and one two-year term. The four board members whose terms expire at the end of 2010 – Jan Barney Newman, Barbara Murphy, Carola Stearns and Ed Surovell – haven’t yet declared their intent to seek re-election.

The filing deadline for the AADL board candidates is 4 p.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 10. The positions are nonpartisan. To file, candidates must turn in an affidavit of identity to the Washtenaw County clerk’s office, along with a $100 non-refundable filing fee or a minimum of 40 valid signatures. [More details on the filing process are available on the clerk's website.]

At Tuesday’s event, board officers Rebecca Head, Prue Rosenthal and Margaret Leary spoke about the roles and responsibilities of the job. Stearns also attended, as did AADL director Josie Parker, and two associate directors – Ken Nieman and Eli Neiburger.

Current board members highlighted some of the reasons why they chose to run and what they most admire about the library system. For Leary, it’s the leadership of Parker and her staff – their fiscal responsibility, foresight and willingness to make tough decisions, especially in dealing with a tough economy. “I find very few public entities are able to do that,” she said.

One example Leary cited is the decision to call off – at least temporarily – a project to replace the district’s downtown library building. The effort was well underway when the economy “turned south,” Leary said, and Parker approached the board about putting the project on “pause.” [See November 2008 Chronicle coverage: "Citing Economy, Library Halts Building Project."]

Leary also noted that Parker has become a leader in this community on urban planning issues, as the downtown library on South Fifth Avenue is near several current and potential developments. One of those is an underground parking structure being built on the city-owned Library Lot, adjacent to the downtown library. Head noted that despite the name, it is not an AADL property. The city issued a request for proposals for potential developments to be built on top of the parking structure, but no projects have been selected. [The most recent update on that process was given by Ann Arbor city councilmember Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) at the city council's July 19, 2010 meeting.]

Prue Rosenthal, Ann Arbor District Library board treasurer, at the July 27, 2010 information session for potential AADL board candidates.

Rosenthal also praised the library staff’s leadership, especially in the context of taking on responsibility for the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, when the county decided that they could no longer support it. [See January 2009 Chronicle coverage: "Library for the Blind to Open Feb. 2 at AADL"] Rosenthal said that board members have been extremely proud of how the AADL staff has expanded and improved services for patrons who have visual or physical impairments.

Some of the questions to board members were pragmatic: How long do board meetings typically last? Art Davidge, a retired Pioneer High School teacher who attended with his wife Lyn, was viewing it in the context of Ann Arbor school board meetings, which often run past midnight. Lyn Davidge, who has volunteered worked at AADL as a substitute librarian for more than 10 years, also has experience with school board meetings – her father, Emerson F. Powrie, served as deputy superintendent for the Ann Arbor Public Schools in the 1970s. At that time, the library was part of the school system, and the library director reported to Powrie.

AADL board meetings are held on the third Monday of each month, and typically don’t run later than 8 p.m., Leary reported. Board members also serve on a minimum of one committee: budget and finance, director’s evaluation, policy or executive.

Andrade asked about the role of the board’s policy committee. Were issues taken up in response to patron requests? Head said that sometimes Parker will bring up an issue, or sometimes it comes from a board member. She noted that they deal with bigger picture issues, not day-to-day matters.

Parker added that a lot of policies are dictated by statute, either state or federal. She typically reviews policies annually, to ensure that they’re in compliance with any changes that have occurred in state or federal law. Most recently there were two changes that the board approved at their May 2010 meeting, to update the conflict-of-interest and legal compliance (whistleblower) policies.

In response to a question about legal counsel, Parker clarified that the library doesn’t use the city attorney’s staff – AADL is a separate entity from the city and the public school system. AADL is its own taxing authority, and uses the Dykema law firm for most matters, she said. AADL also issues a request for proposals (RFP) to select an auditor for their annual audit. “In every way you can be separate from other governmental units, we are,” she said.

Andrade asked how many candidates typically vie for each seat. Head said that it varies – sometimes there’s competition, sometimes not. [For the last AADL board election, in May 2008, there was no competition. Surovell was the only candidate for one two-year seat, and there were four candidates for four four-year terms: Head, Leary Rosenthal and Jean King, who subsequently resigned. Stearns was appointed to replace her until the next election. Elections have been moved from May to November to align with school board elections. See Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Library Board Moves Elections."]

There was also a discussion about attendance at public meetings, either by the library staff and union representation, or by the general public. Any individual can speak during public commentary at the regular board meetings, Head said, but staff issues are typically handled by the administration. Parker noted that there are two organized labor groups representing employees at the library – both are part of the Michigan Education Association (MEA). The board, working with a labor lawyer, negotiates and approves contracts with those unions.

Rosenthal said that the general public doesn’t usually attend the board’s monthly meetings, noting that “it’s kind of too bad!” There are no burning issues at the moment, she said, though there are plenty of items of public interest.

Parker pointed out that people don’t hold back on posting public comments on the district’s website. In some ways, that has replaced the need for people to come to the meetings. She said that library staff answer all questions online, except those that are posted anonymously.

The next information session – geared toward people who have filed to be AADL board candidates by the Aug. 10 deadline – will be on Wednesday, Aug. 11 from 6-7 p.m. at the downtown library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. in the third-floor freespace room. More information about the board is also online. Chronicle coverage of the board’s monthly meetings can be found here.

At Monday night's board meeting, the annual report by Ann Arbor District Library director Josie Parker was made as a video presentation. (The video report is available on the library's website at www.aadl.org/aboutus/annualreport.) In the foreground: board members Prue Rosenthal, left, and Rebecca Head. (Photo by the writer.)

Library board members also discussed their hopes for a development next to the downtown library. The city solicited bids for development atop an underground parking structure being built just north of the library, on land stretching between Fourth and Fifth and Division. The library has a vested interest in that project – as board members noted on Monday, the development there will affect their decision about what to do with the downtown library building.

No representative from the library is on the city’s review committee that’s currently evaluating proposals for the site. But two members of that committee did attend Monday’s board meeting, and library director Josie Parker plans to meet with city officials to convey the board’s feedback.

Bottom line: A place that’s active and that attracts a diverse group of people around the clock would be best for the library. Also needed, board members said, is some master planning for that entire area, which includes the former YMCA lot and the AATA’s Blake Transit Center.

Moving Elections – Even or Odd?

At a Dec. 16 meeting, the Ann Arbor Public Schools board voted to move their elections from May to November, and to hold them annually. Because of the library’s historical links to the school district, the library board is required to hold their elections at the same time as the school board. [For more background, see previous Chronicle coverage: "School Election Change Would Affect Library"]

The library board now must hold their elections in November, but they are not required to hold elections annually. So at their Monday meeting, the library board explored three options: holding elections 1) annually, 2) on even-numbered years, or 3) on odd-numbered years. Currently, elections for library board are held on even-numbered years – the next election had been scheduled for May 2010.

AADL director Josie Parker explained that the library wouldn’t have to pay for the election, regardless of their decision. There would always be another governmental unit on the ballot that would foot the bill.

Board members quickly ruled out the option of holding elections annually. Ed Surovell cited a huge advantage in having the elections on odd-numbered years – on those years, library issues wouldn’t be competing with congressional or presidential elections.

Margaret Leary proposed a resolution to hold elections in odd-numbered years. She then presented arguments against that option. One concern was the nature of the electorate during those off-year elections. There’s a much smaller turnout on those years, Leary noted, and those people likely would care more about the school board elections. Elections with a larger turnout might be better, she said.

Another argument in favor of even years is that it’s simpler, Leary said, since that’s already the schedule that library board elections follow. Terms for Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman, Carola Stearns and Ed Surovell end in 2010. Terms for Rebecca Head, Margaret Leary and Prue Rosenthal end in 2012.

Leary also contended that it would look better to the public if terms were extended by just a few months, not 18 months. Board members whose terms expire in June 2010 would have to extend their terms until the end of the year, if elections were moved to November of even years. If elections were held in odd-numbered years, those terms would have to be extended through December 2011 for this cycle.

Outcome: A vote was taken on the resolution proposing elections in odd-numbered years, and received no support. Prue Rosenthal then proposed a resolution calling for elections in even-numbered years, which passed unanimously.

[Aug. 10, 2010 is the deadline for filing an affidavit of identity and a nominating petition (or a $100 nonrefundable fee) to run for library board. Candidates can file with the Washtenaw County clerk.]

Library Lot: What Should Go On Top?

The city of Ann Arbor has solicited proposals for a development to be built on top of an underground parking structure currently being constructed by the Downtown Development Authority on what’s known as the Library Lot. Six proposals were submitted by the mid-November deadline. At a Dec. 18 meeting, the city’s review committee removed from consideration two of those proposals, saying that they did not provide sufficient financial return to the city. One called for a plaza and ice rink, the other proposed a community commons. [See Chronicle coverage: "Two Library Lot Proposals Eliminated"]

At the beginning of the library board’s discussion on Monday, library director Josie Parker clarified that they were not intending to act in lieu of the city’s review committee. Rather, the purpose of the discussion was to provide feedback to the city about what types of development would serve the library well, and what might harm it.

Parker also reviewed the history of the library’s own efforts to develop its downtown building, located on the northeast corner of Fifth and William. In 2004, the board adopted a strategic plan which included an objective to renovate or replace the downtown library. In late 2007, discussions began about how to proceed with that project, looking at three options: 1) building a new library on top of the proposed underground parking structure, 2) renovating part of the library’s existing downtown building, and demolishing and rebuilding part of it, and 3) demolishing the entire building and replacing it.

It’s because the board explored the first option – build a library on top of the Fifth Avenue parking structure – that they know so much about that project, Parker noted. Constraints on leaving or selling the property where the library is currently located – tied to an agreement with the public schools – was a major consideration for not building on top of the parking structure, she said. Another constraint was the footprint they’d have to work within, if they had pursued that option.

After conducting cost assessments on the other two options, board decided to demolish the existing building and replace it. However, that project was halted in late 2008, because of the economy. [See Chronicle coverage: "Citing Economy, Board Halts Library Project"]

Board Discussion

Rebecca Head, the board’s president, kicked off the discussion by saying she had concerns about the viability of the proposed projects – not just their ability to come to fruition, she said, but also their long-term ability to survive. Related to that, Prue Rosenthal questioned whether Ann Arbor could support a hotel and conference center.

Margaret Leary said she liked the idea of a hotel and conference center. She then spoke more generally about the kinds of things that would affect the downtown library. It’s crucial for the library to know what’s going on top of the underground parking site, she said, because it will affect how the library designs its own building, when that project is ready to move forward again.

And it’s not just the underground parking site, Leary added. The library will be affected by what happens to the surface parking lot at the northwest corner of Fifth and William – formerly the site of the YMCA – and by what happens at the AATA‘s Blake Transit Center, adjacent to that parking lot. What’s needed is a master plan for the whole area, she said. [For background on the AATA project, see Chronicle coverage: "AATA Board: Get Bids to Rebuild Blake"]

Talking specifically about the underground parking site, Leary said it was important for the library to keep the element of Library Lane, a proposed east-west street that would run north of the library building. It’s needed as a drop-off and pick-up spot, she said, and as a way to break up what is otherwise a massive block.

Further, whatever goes on top of the parking structure should foster economic growth for the city as a whole, Leary said. It should be a destination, drawing people 24/7, of all ages and income levels, with a variety of uses. Architecturally, it should clearly mark the site as the center of downtown, visible to pedestrians and people in cars. The site’s landscape architecture is important too, she said, and part of the area should serve as a public gathering space. That said, she added, the city needs to think hard about maintenance and programming for such a space. The analogies that others have made to Chicago’s Millennium Park or New York City’s Central Park aren’t quite right, Leary said, but those two cities do have ways to support those parks.

Barbara Murphy elaborated, saying that Central Park was in bad shape 30 years ago. It took the creation of the Central Park Conservancy, a public/private partnership, to turn things around. Murphy said the analogy that mattered wasn’t the size of the city, but rather the way a city took care of its property.

Rosenthal noted that the library doesn’t have a vested interest in exactly what goes on that site, but it has a huge vested interest in the success of whatever ends up there. If the venture fails, leaving a large, empty building next to the library, that would isolate the library from the rest of the city.

Carola Stearns said she had concerns about the proposals for a conference center. She didn’t understand the business model, or what the city would get out of it. The project has to be a money maker, she said, not a money sink.

Ed Surovell – owner of Edward Surovell Realtors – weighed in on the issue, saying that conference centers weren’t highly profitable. Its value would be that it serves other interests of the city and state, he said. In Michigan, you can count on one hand the number of places that are suitable for a conference, he said, especially a large one. There are locations in Detroit, at the Ritz-Carlton in Dearborn, in Grand Rapids, and to a lesser extent in Lansing, Traverse City and possibly the Ann Arbor-Ypsilanti Marriott at Eagle Crest. Because of its proximity to Detroit Metro airport, Surovell said, Ann Arbor would be a good place for a conference center, “and the state really does need one.”

But Stearns questioned that premise. Travel budgets that are being cut because of the economy could be reduced permanently, she said, replaced by videoconferencing. “The kinds of conferences we might be used to might not be the ones we have in 10 years,” she said.

Rosenthal wondered whether the former Pfizer facility, now owned by the University of Michigan, would be available for conferences. An auditorium there seats about 400 people, and a large cafeteria could accommodate meals for several hundred people.

Head returned to a more general theme, describing how the library has been an advocate for sustainability, and that a component of the proposals for the underground parking site was infill and density. The city has been good about developing the greenbelt and its parks, she said, but there haven’t been good infill projects. One of the tenets of sustainability is having a dense urban core, with appropriately located open spaces. But again, she said, were the current proposals financially viable?

Surovell hearkened back to his days on the city’s planning commission, and said that whenever someone wanted to kill a project they’d start talking about its economic viability. Making that judgment isn’t the role of the library board, he said. Rather, their role is to think about how the proposals affect the environment around the library, its patrons, and future investments in its own building. He reminded his board colleagues that whether they renovate or replace the library, either way it would likely be a $70 million project. And if something inappropriate is built on top of the underground parking structure, “you’re going to wind up with a sorry mess for a library location.”

Surovell returned to the issue of master planning, agreeing that development of the former Y lot and the Blake Transit Center were also important to the library’s future. The streetscape, the kind of people who’d be attracted to that part of town – all of that will factor in, he said. As an example, the block currently goes to sleep fairly early in the evening – there’s not much activity after 9 p.m., or earlier – while a hotel would be awake 24/7, he said. A hotel would need to have responsible operators, he said, but it could serve a quasi-public function, in a way that a municipal building, for example, would not. In general, he added, single-use facilities weren’t desirable.

He also criticized the design of the municipal building currently under construction by the city at the corner of Huron and Fifth. “Those are the people making the decision right now” about the development on the underground parking structure, he said.

Adding to the topic of single-use buildings, Leary said that ideally, whatever gets built would be constructed so that it could be adapted to other functions in the future, if the market changes. A hotel, for example, might eventually be turned into condos or offices. She said she’s often wished that parking structures were built with that in mind, so that when our society becomes less car-centric, those structures could be adapted for housing.

Leary summarized, saying that the discussion reflected the need for a project team on the underground parking structure site to include a superb architect, landscape architect and urban planner.

After the meeting, Parker said she’d be conveying the board’s feedback to city officials. Also attending the meeting in the audience were two members of the review committee: Susan Pollay, director of the Downtown Development Authority, and John Splitt, the DDA board’s chair.

Present: Rebecca Head, Margaret Leary, Barbara Murphy, Prue Rosenthal, Carola Stearns, Ed Surovell. Also: Josie Parker, AADL director.

Absent: Jan Barney Newman.

Next meeting: Board meetings are typically held on the third Monday of the month, with the public portion of the meeting starting at 7 p.m. in the library’s fourth floor meeting room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. Their next regular meeting is on Monday, Jan. 18, 2010. [confirm date]