Comments on: Library Battle in Seattle

By: Kiko

Kiko — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 10:13:41 +0000

Marrickville (in Sydney, Australia) just voted councillors out of office who were proposing a levy to build a new library building. I’m a librarian myself but I got a taste of what it’s like to carry the can. Businesses (who sorta don’t use public libraries) were to pay 6 times more than residents. Because I’m so wealthy that I live in 1 bedroom apartment above my wife’s bakery, we were supposed to pay $400 per annum for 15 years.

It’s a difficult time for libraries and I get tired of grandiose and self-absorbed behaviour. Libraries can provide real value to communities but have to demonstrate it.

By: Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries

Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 20:32:02 +0000

Seattle library levy? Other communities have successfully voted down library levies only to vote in favor of them after the library agreed to filter out porn. Seattle could do that.

In Seattle the situation with porn is so bad that, in just one example, one little girl had seen something that caused her severe and sustained physical stress and likely lifelong depression. I spoke with the mother of that little girl. Sadly, the mother believed the library’s legally false claim that the First Amendment requires it to allow porn in the public library. It’s hard to help people so convinced by the propaganda that they cannot see clearly even when their own families are directly harmed. Kudos to the ALA on the effectiveness of its propaganda.

Here are just a few stories about Seattle:

“432 Patrons Ejected from Seattle Libraries in First Four Months of 2009; Librarians ‘Assaulted, Threatened and Spit Upon’”
http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2009/05/432-patrons-ejected-from-seattle.html

“Library Leaves Pedophile Free to Molest Other Children; King County Library System Defrauds Taxpayers of $1,158,253 from CIPA Program; Media Investigation Needed”
http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2010/10/library-leaves-pedophile-free-to-molest.html

Voting down the library levy until such time as the library stops lying about the law may be the only effective means people have to override the ALA acolytes at the Seattle Public Library.

By: davidinvirginia

davidinvirginia — Thu, 02 Aug 2012 17:11:03 +0000

Now that would be interesting.

By: LibraryGuy

LibraryGuy — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 22:17:45 +0000

The question isn’t whether to support libraries (I think we all know the answer to that one), but whether to support this one in this way.
After all, these are the fools who spent 165 million dollars on that horribly impractical and ugly monstrosity downtown, and who save money every year by closing for two weeks and not paying the underlings.
Plus, it sounds like the city’s trying to pull a fast one-vote for a levy this time and take library funding out of the city budget.

By: the.effing.librarian

the.effing.librarian — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:39:07 +0000

will the ballot ask:
Short of a majority, what is the smallest percentage of masturbating homeless you would allow in the library to pass this levy?

By: Joneser

Joneser — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 16:28:07 +0000

Why not leave the library in the general operating budget and put things like the mayor’s salary and the city council’s per diems in the special levy?

By: Existential Librarian

Existential Librarian — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 15:11:40 +0000

The same situation has occurred in Springfield, MA with a city trash collection “fee” being increased to fund libraries. http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/07/springfield_city_council_boosts_trash_fee_bails_out_libraries.html