The City Council’s summer recess has given me some time to ponder the interesting matter of the library takeover proposal. Though the City has promised it can deliver more hours and services if it takes over the library, the public has remained skeptical. I think I know why.
Even in this day and age of corrupt governance (Bell!) and mistrust of public institutions, the public values and trust a well-run government service like the County of Los Angeles Library system.
And while our City government is lean, professional, skilled -entrepreneurial even- they don’t specialize (nor have they ever specialized) in running traditional government services like libraries, police departments, fire departments and other municipal services. Indeed, the City has actively avoided taking on those roles in its 23 year history by contracting with the Sheriff’s Department, the Fire Department, the Library system, and even outsourcing the operation of the transit fleet.
And we like that. We want a City government that is lean and entrepreneurial, an organization that attracts businesses to the SCV, that encourages job creation, manages development, and tries to set the conditions for a vibrant and prosperous local economy.
So where’s the disconnect then? Why is there mistrust of an otherwise competent City’s intentions when it comes to taking over the library?
Because libraries are different. Like schools, libraries are loved by the public. The public associates all sorts of good values and virtues with libraries: learning, sharing, freedom, thinking, etc. Libraries are the most visible form of the public trust: they warehouse information and distribute it freely and without bias to citizens.
What’s more, the public likes their librarians. In the pantheon of the dreaded “public employee” label, I bet “librarian” scores highly in the public’s mind just like “teacher” and “firefighter” does.
Which brings me to my next point. Margaret Donellan Todd, the chief COLA Librarian who has vociferously disputed the City’s talking points, is a real and professional librarian. Libraries are what she does for a living. Her opponent in the public sphere is Darren Hernandez, a skilled City of Santa Clarita finance official who has been promoted through the ranks to the position of Deputy City manager. He is not a librarian; if he is successful in wresting control of our three libraries from the County, he will move onto other projects.
If the topic is “libraries” who would you trust on the matter more? A real librarian or a finance guy? Let’s change it up: if the topic is health care, who do you trust more? An insurance underwriter or a physician? An education bureaucrat or your kid’s teacher? That’s the disconnect. Perhaps the City should have consulted with or hired a real librarian to sell this idea to the public rather than just treating libraries as one more thing to optimize, one more thing to outsource like the bus system.
The City may yet succeed in taking over the County libraries, but it won’t be without a fight from the public for the reasons I outlined above. They underestimated how much the public values not just the libraries, but the librarians, the good service and yes, the tradition.
In a real sense, the City is a victim of its own success in that it has always refused to run services like these and the public, naturally, doesn’t expect them to.
Loading ...
Well put. I really like the way our City does things, but I’m unimpressed but their library proposal. It lacks imagination and inspiration. There’s nothing in their pitch that suggests they will do things better, instead they set the bar to a decidedly lower height.
Well said. If the City offered a dramatically improved experience, I’d be more open to the idea. But it seems like they’re basically proposing the same services, only with us not being a part of the County’s vast network… :/
I could not disagree more.
You make the point that schools are run by public employees and that the system works well. I counter that privately run Charter Schools are proving to be better at delivering an education especially in hardened urban areas where drop-out rates have eclipsed graduation rates.
Then you bring up a sole librarian out there countering the talking points of the City. No offense to Ms. Todd, but she is attempting to preserve her job. The fact of the matter is that government is simply unable to deliver the quality of service that it once did because it is being asked to do increasingly more. Privatization of traditionally government run projects is the result of those that have pushed to have government to do too much.
It is also important to point out here that a company with a long history of successfully running libraries and NOT city staff will be executing operations at the libraries. I agree that switching operations from the County that has experience running libraries to the city which does not would be a bad idea. But that is not what is being proposed here.
Finally, back in the days when most communities were not cities or were too small to execute operations of a library on their own, it made sense to put Counties in charge. Availability of materials and staff could be made available to libraries all over the County and special projects like book mobiles to communities without their own library were definitely something that the County could do better.
But the advent of overnight shipping, the internet and a flexible workforce have changed the dynamics of the relationship between local communities and their libraries. A private library contractor will be able to deliver a better product for less cost as the private sector often shows it can. Riverside, CA is doing it and so is Long Beach. This my friend is the direction that libraries are going in. And for the sake of quick adoption of changes in the delivery of media, we had better get on board.
I’ll be at the City Council meeting to speak in support of this proposal because, unlike Jeff, I am not hung up on this farcical impression that taking responsibility for a service away from government is a bad thing!
Kevin,
Are charter schools run for profit?
I’m trying to find some information about Long Beach outsourcing its libraries. Do you have a link? I can’t find anything. There is no indication of an outside management firm on their website and the link for employment directs to the city’s employment page.
@Kevin, I actually agree with you on this issue. The City is proposing to have a professional company in the business of running libraries and directly accountable to the City and its residents take on the task of running libraries which are supported and paid for by us.
The City has a proven record of accomplishment in designing and administering contracted services with the LASD for law enforcement, Waste Management for trash pick up , Time Warner Cable, Los Angeles County Animal Care and Control, and others. I can tell you from my personal experience these contracts are regularly reviewed and adjusted as needed, particularly if there are citizen complaints regarding service levels or other problems.
I would rather have local elected officials who are answerable to the residents and are available in our community to deal with any issues than COLA officials who are restricted by LA County budgets, policies, hierarchy, apathy, etc. deciding how to administer our money and fund our library services.
I say bring our libraries under our control and allow any savings to be used as we decide as a community to enhance our libraries and the library experience for our Santa Clarita Valley residents.
Hold on, Time Warner Cable as a good example? Waste Management?
Berta, I would rather have local control of the libraries, so long as it means local control. Taking it from one distant power have tossing it off to another is a horrible idea. I think Jeff hit the perfect pitch with this post. They are treating it like an accounting problem, detached from the substantive matters of running a library.
@mike, I disagree. Time Warner and Waste Management are excellent examples since they are contracted services administered by the City that have had substantial contract enhancements due to citizen input via City Staff much as a contract for outside library services would. Regarding Waste Management, the City has achieved reduced costs for customers; better service, local number to call for both WM and City with complaints, increased bulky e-waste etc pick ups just to name a few enhancements to the contract. Regarding the Time Warner franchise contract agreement administered by the City, better cable service level and coordination with other agencies when ripping up our taxpayer paid for streets to do service upgrades, more control on rate increases within contract period, local number both for TW and City for complaints, etc. Our local transit agency is another good example. If residents complain to City about too many missed stops, changes in routes, etc. City staff can intervene on residents’ behalf.
Call the County and see where you get. I love Mike Antonovich and think he has done a good job for us but we are still little fish in a big pond with him. Dealing with the City, we are the BIG FISH in a little pond. I prefer to be the big fish and not the bait!
Berta, aren’t the price reductions just a relief from the decade of prior gouging?
I’m kidding about the Time Warner thing. Not because they aren’t awful, they are, but aren’t the franchise agreements obsolete as of a few years ago? (I could be mistaken, but I thought this was don on a statewide level).
So we’re clear, my level of preference:
City-run, with innovations
County-run (status quo)
City-run (in the manner of the county)
City outsourced
County outsourced
@mike, perhaps WM changes were because of previous price levels but that just makes my argument all the more valid. Without the City administering the contract, residents would have had slim to no chance of negotiating an improved contract.
Using your preferred list here is mine in order of preference:
City outsourced to professional company with proven good record of accomplishment running public libraries
City-run, hiring current Librarians as City Staff and with innovations
City-run (in the manner of the county)
County-run (status quo)
County outsourced
@mike, I forgot to answer your TW question. My most recent bill still states “Unresolved Concerns: City of Santa Clarita Franchise Officer…”
This looks like a regular conversation. thanks for comparing lists.
I would love to hear a good story about a successful outsourcing of library services over a period of time, serving a city of a similar size – and not to rescue an agency on the brink, you know?
As for TW, I think the city doesn’t have a specific agreement any longer, or something like that. Someone around here ought to know better than I do.
@mike, I just did a little research. I called the City moments ago and confirmed the City of Santa Clarita Franchising Officer who deals with the Time Warner account is Kevin Tonoian 661 286-4070.
Berta, by the way, strangely silent on the Gitlin matter. Care to go on the record one way or the other?
@mike, I cannot believe you are asking my opinion but since you ask, I watched the video segment late last night. I do not remember if Roger Gitlin sent that to me or not. My impressions of the video clip are that Grady Warren is an angry and ignorant man. He talks about Mexicans and Chicanos but I do not know how he can tell what nationality any of the illegal aliens he is talking about are. He uses the words Mexican and Chicano interchangeably with illegal alien. It is possible that in his area most of the illegal’s are Mexican nationals but not all are and by not sticking to the issue of illegal immigration, and taking digs at just Mexicans he comes off as a racist. Many illegal’s come through Mexico because it is easy to cross but are from Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and many other places.
I think he is correct regarding the Democrats and the Obama administration putting the illegal aliens and those with the entitlement mentality who do not want to work of any race or ethnicity before the needs of taxpaying Americans. I think he has a right to be angry and I think he is correct that the American people are tired.
I also reiterate what I said to you before; Roger has not said anything racist in my presence because if he did I would call him on it. Just like, I would call Grady Warren on his use of the words Mexicans and Chicanos. I would repeat what I have said many times here and elsewhere, Mexican is a nationality just as Canadian is, so unless you ask them or see their birth certificate you do not know their nationality. Chicano is a label some young people put on themselves years ago to carve out an identity since they did not feel like they fit as Americans. I am an American of Hispanic ancestry. An illegal alien is a person from any country/nation who does not have legal permission to be in the USA. I also think there will be changes after the November elections.
Did I miss anything?
Berta, well put. It was genuine curiosity. In all sincerity, we don’t agree too often, but your perspective is independent and original. Thanks.
I wouldn’t use Time Warner as an example of anything. I am in the city and unable to get Time Warner for any service what-so-ever. I mean anything at all. Even though Time Warner trucks are 15 feet from my house working on boxes.
TV: My only options are Directv or Dish and only if my condo faces a certain direction. If it doesn’t you have a pay an extra fee to use a smart system.
DSL, again I am only able to get the slowest AT&T service possible, I can not stream YouTube or Hulu. What year is it again 2000? No Time Warner service is available at all.
Bad Example care to try again?
Do you think the lack of competition has anything to do why it is 2010 and my internet is slightly faster then dial up?
Berta:
Your full of it regarding the City doing a good job with Waste Management. Waste Management did everything it could to prevent competition in the trash franchises. When bids were solicited, the did not conform to the bid requirements but due to thier influence with Franken Ferry, they got a second shot, the bid requirements were modified and they got the residential service. The prices and additional services the residents got was because the City hired a consulting firm to create a state of the art agreement instead of the shit they had been using before to cover their agreement with WM.
Last year, the City gave up a significant monetary penalty against WM that was offset with additional sharps container pickups. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse!
And remember, your buddy – Frank Ferry consistently opposed letting the trash hauling agreements be bid which got the residents the better rates and services they deserved. Don’t tell me the City does a good job managing their franchises. Similiarly with Time Warner. Whenever I asked them what they could due about rate increases, they referred me to the FCC. All they City cares about is collecting a franchise fee which they would probably try to do with the libraries.
@NFIC, actually it was my “buddy” Cameron Smyth who got us a better WM deal but again with resident input and support.
NIFC is right. Even though I still support Ferry he made a HUGE mistake carrying water for WM when the City attempted a forensic audit of the contract and three council members gutsily voted for an open bid process when the forensic accountants stated that WM was not being transparent with information and this was the only hope for a fair price.
Certain council members and “movers and shakers” had a relationship of velvet “bribery” with WM where WM would spend about $100-150K a year on favorite charities for the privilege of demonstrably overcharging the residential customers by $2 million per year (you don’t even want to know what was going on with commercial customers), a nice return on investment. If you think that WM was OK with the competitive bidding process then why have all the local WM management during the fat times been purged?
Ive heard that when the current Waste Management contract is up, they will not rebid becuase Santa Clarita demanded so much extra services (bulky pickup, ewaste, etc) that they’ve lost money on this contract.
So while the City got a good deal from Waste Management, dont expect the low rates and extra services to continue with the next contract. I’m sure prices will rise or extra perks will be gone.
@ derrick, I have not heard that about WM but even if true, so what. There are plenty of other refuse companies out there looking for more work who can and will bid on a contract with us and agree to offer the level of service requested via the bid process. If WM does not bid, it may even open the door for some of the local little guys like Advantage Disposal to have a chance at winning a lucrative citywide contract and hiring more locals to do the job. I know big company Burtec was very keen last time for all of our business but only got the commercial refuse part. Burtec would probably like the whole pie instead of just a sliver. There were plenty of others too. I personally welcome the competition for my money.
I’m just saying if WM couldnt make a profit on the contract, no one can. Santa Clarita did get a good deal but I’m not expecting that to continue with the new contract. Rates will raise.
@derrick, I am not so sure about that. For instance, WM has a landfill (dump) in the AV, which means higher fuel costs for trucks to dump their loads of trash. If a refuse company owns a landfill or has dump privileges at a lower cost closer to the service area (SCV) their labor (employee over time) and fuel costs would be commensurately lower, allowing for better profit margins.
In addition, if one company potentially wins the citywide contract it makes up any loses on one side with increased volume by having the business from both the residential and commercial contracts. To further sweeten the pot, if they also build and manage the MURF, more ability to make a profit.
So in conclusion, if WM does not want to bid next time, fine. My money says let the free market work and let’s see…Competition is good.
derrick, I echo what berta said. I remember from when the contracts were put out the first time that WM was thought to be at a disadvantage vs. companies that had nearby landfills.
I should also note that WM was ousted just a couple of years ago from servicing the unincorporated areas of SCV.
Here’s another example of good City management. A friend of mine is having their street repaved by as part of the annual maintenance work for streets. The contractor dropped off their repaving machine at midnight last night! Where was the City management then?
Also, when WM’s drivers are in too much of a hurry to dump my cans and leave refuse on the street, I not only call WM but Environmental Services at the City to make sure they log it as a complaint. That way they can’t ever say again “we never received any complaints about WM”.
Tim Meyers is correct in his statement about WM. And our City Manager at the time George Carvallo wouldn’t have the balls to say that the City should bid the franchises – it took a community outcry and support first from Laurene West, then Cameron Smyth, then finally Bob Kellar to finally turn things around. Ferry and Jo Ann Darcy were on the wrong end of the vote and ethics on this one. Tim Ben Boydston even spoke out supporting WM because the Theater got free hauling from them (see Berta, I’m not TBB as you once accused me of ). And the other movers and shakers (the Flemings, the Chamber, etc) didn’t want to bid the agreement even though it turned out to save residents millions. What is good for business is not always good for the people who live here!
@NFIC, just because you mention one instance when TBB perhaps made a poor choice in his allegiance does not mean you are not him. I believe it is known as a red herring.
I really do not care who you are as long as you keep your attacks on the issues and not by making outrageous slanderous attacks without producing even a smidge of evidence. Shall I remind you that what set me off on you was your insinuation regarding Frank Ferry and comparing him to former Senator Larry Edwin Craig and the incident in a men’s room, which was simply vicious nonsense?
I do not condone vicious anonymous attacks made against anyone.
What the hell are you talking about re Ferry and Larry Craig? When you go off on these sort of tangents you lose me and I think most other folk rather quickly!
Tangent huh…
Need for Involved Citizenry says:
October 16, 2009 at 9:38 am
I agree with IHeart. Oops doesn’t cut it for a public official in my book.
One of these days, Frank will be caught doing something much more serious (like being caught taking money or tapping his shoes in a bathroom stall).
Moorpark, Riverside County, Redding and Oak Park are the municipalities that I can see are run by this company: http://www.lssi.com/news.cfm
The library proposal seeks to reroute any perceived “profit” back into the libraries just as privately-held Charter School companies do.
I hate to be a dick, but the lack of research on the part of the opposition to this project is astounding. Is that how public discourse is done these days: Don’t let the facts get in the way of opinions?
Whoa, easy there. I just asked for some substantiation on your claim about Long Beach (you offered none, BTW).
My question about charter schools was out of ignorance. Do for-profit companies run charter schools?
Aside from “perceived profit”, there is actual profit that does not go back to the libraries, but to the management company.
@Mike, obviously there must be some “profit” (excess $$$ over cost of doing business) otherwise there would not be companies who do this sort of thing. Nobody works for free (although our govt may be taking us in that direction). If a private company can offer the same services as a government run system for less money and still make a profit then somewhere along the way the government is spending more than it needs to.
nav, I was just correcting Kevin’s assertion that the profit is returned into the system. In those cases where outsourcing makes sense, of course a profit is expected.
“I hate to be a dick”….Thou dost protest too much!
Kevin, are you a library user? Do you have a county card? Do you borrow from the extensive county system? Here’s a fact: The county system runs seamlessly. Those of us who use it, love it. Why would we want to ever change it? There is NO WAY the city can duplicate or improve what the county does.
Charters in California can be run by for-profit agencies, they are often run by nonprofits. The difference in charters is measured by individual and often anecdotal examples of student achievement. Often kids that learn differently and their parents love the offerings at charter schools. Statistically charters don’t score much better than schools with identical or nearly identical demographics. So inner city affluent children, or those with heavy parental involvement at school, two predictors of academic performance, perform about the same at charters than they do at public school.
Charters are generally non-profits but many are run by for profit management companies pursuant to an exclusive contract. Think about this: A charter for troubled students runs out of a storefront, teachers meet with students about once a week to go over independent study programs, and they COLLECT the same amount of per capita money as a public school. You do the math on that business model.
There are some specialty Charter schools (like SCVi) that spend pretty much every dime on the students and run a traditional school. It is a fact that the more prevalent charters for troubled students are huge mills for spinning a lot of cash, but is this money really lost to the comprehensive schools since these students would probably not be in school anyway?
LSSI’s sweet spot is in assuming operations for libraries that are severely constrained financially. In many cases, the libraries were previously or would otherwise be closed.
This isn’t the case for Santa Clarita.
The City is answering a question no one asked.
And Kevin:
The City has absolutely NO ANSWER on how the 70k+ residents in unincorporated LACo will access services that we currently receive for “free.”
If that isn’t lack of research, I don’t know what is.
@ND, call me silly but I want government, City or any other, to anticipate ways to save taxpayer money while maintaining good municipal services and plan for future needs of residents. I do not want them to wait until we are broke or having serious difficulties with service levels to offer viable alternatives.
I know of no specific request made regarding library services but I do know COLA has continued to cut back hours and the CC branch library was open the least of all local libraries. I also know the County is going broke. The City is still running an on time and balanced budget. With the City, I can complain to five Council Members, a City Manager, an Assistant City Manager, and a whole bunch of other staff folks. County, there is Mike Antonovich and his local staff. The rest of the Supervisors could care less what happens here. I rest my case…
I can’t get Waste Management to answer their phones, but the library sure does.
@Kelly, I am sorry you are having problems with WM. I always receive a prompt response to my concerns. Try calling 259-CITY, ask for whatever department oversees the trash franchise agreement, and express your concerns. I think it is Environmental Services but I am not sure. City Staff should be able to help you resolve the WM issues to your complete satisfaction.
Nickledime: I have heard that the unincorp. citizens will receive library services at the same price as the citizens of the city. It may be a little more expensive to do that, but if you think about it, 70,000 non-residents is the same as 70.000 residents. Either way, everyone will be treated the same.
Kevin: Where was this stated? It certainly isn’t on the FAQ page. Does it apply to all services the library provides?
What about reciprocity with the other unincorp. LACo libraries in Castaic and Acton/Agua Dulce?
“If the topic is “libraries” who would you trust on the matter more? A real librarian or a finance guy?”
Ok – so switch that statement around. If the “finance guy” is saying the system is not running efficiently and wasting money would you trust the matter soley on a “real librarian”?
If the topic is cash cows would you expect the COLA librarian to say “yes you guys really are not getting all of your money back in services and can do better on your own”. Right…
But then aren’t you introducing a new argument about the efficiency of the process of staffing and sourcing a library”?
At the risk of this becoming a badly written Cliff note to the post: I thought the post was about whom should we trust to deliver our “common goods”and why city’s lack of framing this library question has lead many to distrust the city’s choice.
@ townbeet, I think there are some people who see conspiracies everywhere and no matter what will not trust the City. I am not one of those people.
COLA is a rare example of the County providing excellent value to the entire community, with highly competent employees. (I am not a library employee.) The vast majority of library patrons do NOT want a city takeover. City spokesman Hernandez has parsed his comments and tap danced around the primary issue: Promise us in plain English: “Inter-library loans will continue with the same breadth of access in the same response time at no cost to patrons.” You must give that precise assurance to SCV researchers, students and regular patrons.
RE : to Kevin: “I hate to be a dick”….Thou dost protest too much!
Kevin, are you a library user? Do you have a county card? Do you borrow from the extensive county system? Here’s a fact: The county system runs seamlessly. Those of us who use it, love it. Why would we want to ever change it? There is NO WAY the city can duplicate or improve what the county does.
@ mike, you are welcome and thanks for the kind words.
The City wants local control–of what, exactly? They can’t match the services County provides. Did anyone notice on the City web site, that they’ve already advertised for a bid for the library? Meaning…this is all a dog-and-pony show…that we need to recall the Council for doing as they please, and NOT serving US!? And not one person yet-are you listening Darren Hernandez?–has said EXACTLY what all those proposed better services will be. Outside of a few more hours, the City won’t have the $ to give us anything even approaching what County gives us.
NanandSam:
I humbly suggest that anyone not willing to get the 20 signatures necessary to serve a NOTICE of recall and then start gathering the 13,500 signatures to put a recall on the ballot just SHUT UP ABOUT RECALLS already. Go to Council meetings and whine and complain; don’t vote for them or whatever. But these recall threats are just silly!
I would like my 45 seconds back please…
http://apps.santa-clarita.com/purchasing/SolicitationItem.aspx?ID=659
The City has a real credibility problem–they’ve put out a bid BEFORE a public hearing, all the while telling us it’s FOR SURE they can do things better, cheaper. Looks like grounds for a recall. They’re obviously doing what THEY want, regardless of what WE say.
@ Charlene3854, I think asking for a bid proposal is standard procedure otherwise how could they give the public an estimate of costs involved. The bid proposal does not obligate the City in any way. It is the equivalent of a job estimate in the civilian world. Most customers will ask for an estimate before deciding on whether it is cost effective to proceed or not. The City is no different. Otherwise, how would you propose they determine what any given expense would cost?
Seems to me the City has already made their cost/benefit analysis and decided they can do everything better/cheaper. The City should not have kept this so quiet; they should have asked the community what we wanted, asked IF we were interested. Just like they did with the new Newhall library–encourage community participation. And they’ve done just the opposite. I’ll vote for recall, if this goes through. I love our libraries, just as they are.
Did anyone read the bid proposal? I mean, actually READ it? In section 4.3 the City is already giving the bidder an out on keeping the libraries open all those new hours. “However, the City is open to recommendations on the most economical and
effective distribution of operating hours that best serve the needs of the citizens
of The City of Santa Clarita.” In a for-profit company, that phrase “most economical” surely won’t be missed. And you can bet that profit maker will determine what best meets our needs.
We say keep County; they’re already keeping the doors open at our 3 libraries, in spite of cuts elsewhere.
EVERYONE needs to turn out at the August 24 hearing. We are happy with the library services we have. This council has done everything they can to keep this quiet. When the planning was begun for the Newhall library, the city asked for public participation. Now, they want to shut us up. Sry. We’re not going away. The library should be for everyone, not just those who can afford it.