Multimedia News

World AIDS Day: Observing a global epidemic
20 photos
Children from the Andile School choir sing du...
This weekend in sports
20 photos
Venezuela's boxer Jorge Linares, left, exchan...
Holiday gift ideas: Toys, games and more
20 photos
A child holds a newly released mobile phone c...
Black Friday frenzy
20 photos
Early bird shoppers run into a Target store i...
Mumbai massacre
20 photos
A police officer watches the Taj Hotel, Mumba...

Library renovations put on hold

Mar 2, 2007 3:00 AM (641 days ago) by Joshua Sabatini, The Examiner
This story ranks Not ranked
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
Plans to renovate five city libraries have been put on hold.
(Joshua Sabatini)
Plans to renovate five city libraries have been put on hold.
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - An ambitious program to overhaul The City’s public library buildings has hit a snag with construction cost overruns and delays that have now forced the postponement of five branch renovation projects.

The postponement is unlikely to draw criticism as plans for the branches have also been altered to bring much grander than originally conceived improvements, in some cases newly constructed larger buildings.

At the polls in 2000, San Francisco voters approved a $106 million bond to help fund the so-called Branch Library Improvement Program, which included the renovation of 19 library branches and four construction projects. The program is now short by between $34 million and $50 million.

Faced with the shortfall the San Francisco Public Library Commission unanimously voted Thursday to postpone the renovation of the Golden Gate Valley, Merced, Bayview, Ortega and North Beach branches and use the $18 million sitting in these project budgets to help fund the completion of 11 other branch library projects.

This story continues below
Advertisement

“If we don’t get more money, those [five] projects will be canceled,” Library Commissioner Larry Kane said.

“I support the delay. We need a larger library,” said Ian McLean, an Ortega Branch user. “Both my children, one in middle school and one in elementary, can wait for the right library in that area.”

Fran Martin, chairwoman of the Visitacion Valley Planning Alliance, was pleased the commission’s decision secured enough funding for a new branch library in her neighborhood. “It’s pretty clear, if you go look at what poses as a library right now, it’s time we got something that isn’t second best.”

The commission’s decision came with the expectation that additional funding will come through. A proposal picking up steam is a ballot measure this November asking voters to extend the term of the library fund they approved in 1994 that earmarks a percentage of city revenue for operation of the library system. The fund expires in 2009. Voters would also be asked to authorize The City to issue bonds to be paid back through the fund’s revenue. This bond could cover the program’s shortfall “without affecting any current service level in the library,” according to Ben Rosenfield, assistant city administrator.

“We’re going to rely on this revenue bond come November. And if there’s opposition … that bond may fail and these projects will not get done,” Kane said.

To date, two branch libraries — West Portal and Excelsior — have undergone renovations as part of the program and reopened. The Sunset Branch is expected to reopen on March 31 after closing down in September 2005 for $1.5 million worth of renovations. Library users of this branch will see a revamped children’s area, an area for teenagers, better lighting, new public restrooms and free wireless Internet access.

Library renovations

Five library branch renovation projects were put on hold Thursday.

- Bayview

- Golden Gate Valley

- Merced

- North Beach

- Ortega

jsabatini@examiner.com

Add a Comment


Name: (required)
Comments:
characters left
Comments are regulated by the Terms of Use.

Comments from Examiner Readers

2:28 PM MST on Tue., Sep. 18, 2007 re: "Huge shortfall for library renovations in S.F."

Native San Franciscan said:
I support funding for our libraries. Most people do. That’s not the issue. The issue is our tax dollars being spent wisely and in a cost effective manner. The City and County of San Francisco is one of the most inefficient and wasteful spending machines I’ve ever seen. The budget for the City and County of San Francisco is $6 billion dollars, a budget bigger then that of 20 states. But does the Muni run on time? Are the streets clean? Are the parks well maintained? How can San Francisco spend so much money and its public infrastructure look so bad? That’s the question we should be asking City Hall.

153 agree | 159 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

12:26 PM MST on Tue., Sep. 18, 2007 re: "Huge shortfall for library renovations in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
Yes Moscone Park comes to mind. The library (white contractor) was 8 months behind schedule. The rec center is 4-5 months ahead of schedule (minority contractor). Not trying to troll. Just the facts. The library contractors would disappear for days. The rec center they contractor is there 12hrs every day mon-sat.

153 agree | 159 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:38 AM MST on Tue., Sep. 18, 2007 re: "Huge shortfall for library renovations in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
This is just the tip of the political iceberg. If they are twenty months late on each project that adds up to decades of delay, and with $50 million overbudget, it is safe to conclude that they never intended to be on schedule and on budget. This is just another circuit in the merry-go-round of "more money" to pay for the broken promises of last time. The truth is that the library has become a cesspool private philanthropists and construction contractors who have been draining millions from the city and by now have shown open contempt for accountability or the public benefit. This is another example of Mayor Newsom's cronyism coming to the surface. It is time to make the public library, public again.

149 agree | 128 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:23 AM MST on Tue., Sep. 18, 2007 re: "Huge shortfall for library renovations in S.F."

Gretchen said:
A bond for $106 million was approved to fund a set number of projects. Now it seems that another $50 million is needed. That's nearly a 50% increase in the planned cost! That just isn't acceptable. Yes, we should probably fund it because libraries are an integral part of any society, but we need some accounting oversight on these projects so that they don't go 50% over budget! There needs to be a project plan with each task identified with an associated cost. When the money is spent, stop. If $100,000 is budgeted for community meetings, then don't spend any more than that! Budgeting means you may not be able to include expensive trims, or fancy fixtures. It also means that you may not be able to work overtime and pay overtime rates. What we need to to is approve additional financing. What we should do is say "Halt", you've spent your money and some projects won't get finished. Who has been monitoring this project and protecting the taxpayers? How could this happen?

153 agree | 157 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:15 AM MST on Tue., Sep. 18, 2007 re: "Huge shortfall for library renovations in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
San Francisco's libraries serve so many needs. They provide services for kids, families, seniors, and immigrants that go far beyond providing books. Our libraries make our city great and deserve our continued support.

145 agree | 141 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
6:45 AM MST on Tue., Sep. 18, 2007 re: "Huge shortfall for library renovations in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
No wonder Barry Bonds had so much success here and the Giants never one. This city is addicted to bonds and it will end up the same way the Giants did. Paying alot of money and getting nothing for it!!! Evcept the politicans of course!!

152 agree | 109 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
5:09 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007 re: "S.F. libraries may dip into preservation fund"

Examiner Reader said:
San Francisco continues be be the "City that knows how." It is gratifying to know that the city leaders understand how important our libraries are in each neighborhood. I have visited Mission Bay and the renovated branches. The renovations are spectacular and I am thankful that these projects were completed with such thoughtfulness to original architectual detail. Library officials are to be congratulated for their thorough and splendid work!

218 agree | 214 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
4:21 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007 re: "S.F. libraries may dip into preservation fund"

Examiner Reader said:
It is encouraging to see city and community resources being spent on something that benefits so many people of all ages and income levels in so many areas of the city ...and that will do so for decades to come.

210 agree | 190 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:50 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007 re: "S.F. libraries may dip into preservation fund"

Examiner Reader said:
I am proud of San Franciscans for supporting our neighborhood libraries. Committing to rebuilding our branch library system reflects our values. The Mission Bay Library is helping to build a new community. The Excelsior, Sunset, and West Portal Libraries are now seismically safe, well equipped, and providing great library services to people of all ages and interests. Let's applaud this program to renovate our branch library system. Great libraries build strong communities.

198 agree | 199 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:37 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007 re: "S.F. libraries may dip into preservation fund"

Examiner Reader said:
Our public libraries are the hearts of the city's neighborhoods - community centers, recreational facilities, schools - all rolled into one. EWhere else can you check out new DVDs, use computers, learn English or search for an apartment, all for free? The libraries deserve our support because they, in turn, support the community.

216 agree | 193 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Advertisement