Though flawed, I’m happy the New York Times decided to do an article on our library takeover/privatization matter. Aside from blowing up the City’s notion that our libraries were in imminent threat of collapse (“Cracks are forming people!” screamed Marsha McLean), the article talked more about LSSI, the company we’ve hired to take over our three libraries starting July 1, 2011.
For instance, we got a nice character profile of Frank Pezzanite, the CEO of LSSI who -apologies in advance, there’s no way to put this nicely- comes off as a real asshole in the article. Here’s what the guy the City of Santa Clarita has chosen to entrust with our public goods had to say about library workers:
“A lot of libraries are atrocious,” Mr. Pezzanite said. “Their policies are all about job security. That’s why the profession is nervous about us. You can go to a library for 35 years and never have to do anything and then have your retirement. We’re not running our company that way. You come to us, you’re going to have to work.”
Does anyone in the SCV who has visited a library think our librarians our lazy and shiftless? Whenever I step into the Valencia library, I see staff extremely busy, checking items in and out, helping patrons find materials, escorting and teaching children about libraries and such, and being friendly and helpful.
Are they well-paid? Do they have nice pensions? Sure. But that doesn’t bother me. In fact, I want more jobs like that right here in the SCV and the City says it does too, but the lazy government worker meme is apparently Mr. Pezzanite’s main selling point when he swoops into communities and sells gullible local governments on the miracles of privatization.
I wish the New York Times had described in more detail how much our librarians are paid now and how much the LSSI workers who will run our libraries next year will be paid. Alas, they didn’t go there.
But maybe they didn’t have to. Paying the workers less is kind of the point, it’s the reason for the whole deal. An NY Times commenter on the story brings up a great point:
So to be clear, this privatization scheme is about one thing and one thing only: steal the salaries and pensions of public employees and turn them into private profits.
Pretty much. When the Council carefully debated this issue, considering options and asking many in-depth questions bulldozed their way to a decision back in August (Bob Kellar excepted), they were careful to emphasize that the library takeover was not about the employees, who we all love and respect. Laurene Weste in particular said “We all love our librarians. This isn’t about them.”
Right. We love them so much that by July 1, 2011, we’re going to make them apply to get their old jobs back working for a guy who thinks a priori that they’re lazy and shiftless. That’s how we do it in the SCV, the land of library lovers.
Quick show of hands: who wants to line up and give free volunteer hours to Frank Pezzanite’s for-profit SCV Library system?
Loading ...
Well put Jeff. I think the article missed some of the details about how this went down because the story, as it matters nationally, is that this is a new idea and that this is the first time that a healthy library has been taken over by a private company. If I’m not mistaken, it’s also the largest public library system to be taken over.
My opinion of this matter crystalized a long time ago, but I really didn’t expect the CEO to come off *that* foolishly. He sounded like John Stewart when he does the Jersey Mob voice. “Yeah, it’s like there’s somethin’ f’ing sacred about these libraries, I don’t get it. What you need to do is get in there is crack a few heads, make a few bucks”.
To say our councilmembers come across as clueless is an understatement. I wonder if they had any inkling that the boss of our new library company is so flippant. I wonder if it mattered.
I believe the Riverside County system was the largest to be taken over. There was a formal bid process to do so, and to my knowledge, I don’t believe it was unhealthy at the time.
As of right now, this article – the one in the NY Times on the Santa Clarita Libraries being taken over – is the second most emailed article on the NY Times website.
Wow.
One enlightening piece from the article is that LSSI is owned by private equity firm Islington Capital Partners. That adds more credence to those concerned about the profit motives of the operating entity and its parent.
On the Riverside bid and on the LSSI website, the Pezzanites discuss their depth of knowledge and educational background on library services.
In fact, Mr. Pezzanite and his wife sold their company to Islington and now serve at their mercy.
Even if you are a supporter of this change and LSSI, Islington can arbitrarily decide to shakeup LSSI management tomorrow and the repercussions to employees and patrons would be massive.
Looks like Riverside was in trouble, not sure if it was in crisis. Certainly not symptom-free, as ours are (more or less), but yeah, appears that Riverside Co. is a much larger system then ours, though I think I heard that we will be the largest city.
#yeahthat’stheticket
Excellent point Nickel Dime.
It is not just about turning middle class jobs into low paying jobs. That is certain to happen. It is also certain that LSSI executive salaries will increase as a result of their company growing larger. The profits going to LSSI will not benefit our local economy.
The questions of what we will get under the new system as taxpayers were not answered before the vote was rushed through. The County should have been given time to put together their own proposal for consideration, and there should have been a contract proposal from LSSI put before the public as well so that we taxpayers (and the CityCouncil) could compare and get the best deal.
The bigger amount of money involved is the revenue stream from having our own Library system. We no longer have to spend 30 million dollars to fund the Newhall Library from Redevelopment Funds. Those funds can now be spent to develop the block across street that the City just purchased, or perhaps to build a bridge to cross the tracks at Lyons and railroad.
It should be clear to anyone now that the purpose for the takeover was to free up a revenue stream to build and pay off the Newhall Library, so that the redevelopment money currently dedicated to that undertaking could be used for other non-library purposes which on balance might be a good idea but don’t pretend the library is not going to be half ass from now on. The sitting council members and city staff prior to this undertaking had an extremely vague idea of how residents actually used the county library system, and I think were quite frankly shocked about the opposition.
Exactly…………….it’s always been about the money.
“It is also certain that LSSI executive salaries will increase “….. Certain?
You have this inside information TBB? Do share.
SCVFan:
In a mercantile exclusive franchise situation, the franchise holder will almost always seek a “rent.” I don’t fault LSSI for acting in their own self interest. I do fault the City Council for giving them the keys to the cash register.
The comments on the NY Times concerning the Santa Claria library article now number 599. I read the NYT every day, and I have never seen this many comments on a “human interest” story.
Comment 61 on the NYT really surprised me. It’s worth further investigation by Santa Claritans. The commenter is named Einstein:
“This article is pretty lousy reporting.
LSSI is a foreign company with a subsidiary in the U.S.
LSSI UK Ltd. – The only specialist library management organisation in the UK.
http://www.LSSI.com/uk.html “
NYT Comment 185 by Oofa in Seattle. I do learn something new every day:
“It’s illegal in California to volunteer for a for-profit company without fair pay. A simple complaint to NLRB will shut that down (as well as require back pay for the volunteers) and if they had to pay their volunteers even minimum wage let’s see how profitable libraries become. Additional liability for volunteers injuries should drive their insurance up as well. Can’t believe the union lawyers haven’t pushed this one.”
I wonder if that law applies to Friends of the Library type groups. Create a non-profit owned by the City, and then have people volunteer for the non-profit, and just happen to work on City property. Silly Legislators and unions. There’s always a way to structure a deal to get around any problem.
I wonder how “interns” are paid…
Below are the salaries for LA county librarians. Doesn’t seem outrageous at all, considering they are well educated and play a vital role in education.
Librarian I $4126.73 – $5412.45
Librarian II $4356.27 – $5713.73
Librarian III $4599.45 – $6032.64
Librarian IV $4856.00 – $6368.91
Librarian V $5126.91 – $6723.55
http://www.colapublib.org/careers/
Wow, and the Santa Clarita City Manager only makes $293,000 a year…Maybe the City can afford to pay him more after all is said and done.
Interestingly, LSSI is making the rounds today, with their CEO being interviewed on KNX 1070 and both he and our Pro Tem McLean on KPCC 89.3 AM.
Given their CEO’s comments in the NY Times today and the misrepresentations from their CFO last week on a San Diego blogsite that attempted to paint LSSI’s Santa Clarita takeover effort as a terrific example of broad public outreach and support, I think we have a pretty good idea of the type of people we’re dealing with and what we can expect. If the LSSI takeover could stand on its on merits, then their belittling comments and misrepresentations to other communities would not be necessary. Unforuntately, they avoided the crucible when our council rolled over for lip service and some people from Lake Shasta.
I agree with Tim that the council does not understand (and underestimated) the public’s usage of our libraries. I also do not believe that they truly understand how we will grapple with the loss of the $25 assessment our citizens voted in for the COUNTY library system. They got what we got: an explanation from staff. If there was other credible written information on these and many other questions raised, then why was it not made available to a public that repeatedly requested it?
I remain very concerned about the financials of this plan and I have little confidence that the monies saved will be used appropriately. Hasty process combined with chronically non-transparent district budgets leave me convinced that what we heard and what we’ll get will be two very different things – if not at the start, then soon thereafter. The Santa Clarita Transit contract comes to mind. If that happens with the LSSI contract, what options will residents have? We will not re-enter the county cheaply.
David:
This whole thing is just bone wearying. Laurie Ender is going to be re-elected pretty much no matter what. If the County stops assessing the parcel tax the City will have a vote to re-institute the tax and it will pass by like 60% and the revenue stream will be available.
I still state that the only marginally effective stand is concerted irritation. How come their aren’t 20 SEIU “thugs” who are also local registered voters that are willing to serve a recall petition on the four offending City Council members (one at a time would be best) and re-serving it when time expires on the 13,500 actual signatures needed so that those four are under a constant “threat” of recall?
At least one good thing to think about: The City Council will at some point have to approve the referendum to replace the County parcel tax. If Laurie Ender fancies herself the next Sarah Palin any future Republican primary opponent can conflate her yes vote on the referendum as a yes vote on a tax increase.
If Laurie Ender fancies herself the next Sarah Palin any future Republican primary opponent can conflate her yes vote on the referendum as a yes vote on a tax increase.
If you are suggesting this based on the “no new taxes” political climate, are you really so confident the city could pass a NEW library tax with 60% in favor?
Extremely! I would bet every wonderful hair on your head, which are legion!!!
Ender is going to be reelected no matter what? That says more about us then it does about her. People get the government they deserve.
Well put DG.
Thanks, but I didn’t say it, Einstein did. I just read a lot.
How many of us can live here on one SCV salary?
Most of what we have are McJobs filled by AV people since we need to commute to earn a living.
Too much of this “I have mine, screw you!” when it comes to pay and benefits. Those bitching the loudest likely have themselves set up nicely.
This story is now #1 on the New York Times website. One commenter has an excellent idea, requesting the New York Times to initiate a full-fledged investigation of the SCV city council’s actions. If only!
‘Ndrangheta
Google it.
Equating the Keystone Council with organized crime is a gross insult – to organized crime.
Not the Council. Think about other people.
Yes the council. Or are you saying that they are to stupid it be held responsible for their actions? What does that say about us who keep reelecting them?
NYT has closed comments at 587. They say it ain’t over until it’s over. I don’t think it’s over. The certain thing in this matter is that this plan was put together, like lining up dominoes, and then in July 1 got knocked over. We don’t know why. We don’t know what or who or when. I have read the Request for Proposals and the the Response by LSSI—it is boilerplate. I have read the pathetically inept, poorly thought out, and incomplete Evaluations by City staff of the RFP. I have read the 1999 Library Study, it does not apply, and it cannot be used by any rational person as a reason for anything. I am trying to make sense out of this, but I am certain that there is no obvious sense to be made of it.
The NYT or the LA Times could do an investigation. Or we can start asking questions and not stop until we get good answers.
But maybe the most important questions is, if the current City Council can so quickly and certainly make such a decision about our Libraries, should these people be on our City Council?
“But maybe the most important questions is, if the current City Council can so quickly and certainly make such a decision about our Libraries, should these people be on our City Council?”
Here Here!
Here to hear the unbelievable http://www.scpr.org/programs/patt-morrison/2010/09/27/ Listen in small doses if your brain is strong but your heart is weak. Remember they can’t hear you, so there is no point at yelling at your computer screen.
Hear how Marsha McLean does not explain how LSSI is going to be better controlled “under the auspices of the City Council”. Question: Is additional City Staff going to be hired to provide contractual oversight for this contract, or is that an afterthought that hasn’t been thought yet”?
Hear Frank Pezzanite laugh and not explain how he plans to profit from this contract, (while providing better service), because he “wouldn’t want to get into much detail” because he has competitors. Question: What competitors? His company was the sole proposer and apparently the sole source provider in the country. If his company fails then the City can either take over the Library and add almost 100 City staff, or return to the County with its tail between its legs. Or more likely, pay LSSI more to get it right.
You’re good at reading the tea leaves Michael.
600 comments? Who do they think they are, SCVtalk?
I am having a hard time with this issue because I do not live in the Awesometown. But, what is the complaint? That service will be reduced? Workers will make less? Taxpayers are saving money? I believe you guys need to focus on the service issue and not throw multiple issues against the wall.
John:
1) It was rushed, an incredible head spinner. Public didn’t even have time to understand the consequences, ask questions.
2) There is a notable lack of detail on pertinent issues, such as whether or not residents outside city limits will have full, free access.
3) It wasn’t/isn’t broken.
4) Because of #1-3, the public believes there was an ulterior motive for the change. That smacks of a lack of transparency.
In the end, there may be a very good reason for the change – it just isn’t evident and the case made by 4 of the city councilmembers isn’t convincing to anyone (well, save for 2 who spoke in favor of the change).
In the end, maybe there really is a Santa Claus.
By “very good reason” I mean “we f-ed up the Newhall Library operating plan.”
Welcome to the bigger pond, Daddy Joe(9grande). Stay on your toes.
Darn, you found me out! But there is no big pond, only little fish and a city council with a big hook.
The taxes will be the same either way, but there is high likelihood that the city, in its haste, thought it would be getting a certain chunk of the tax revenue, but it probably won’t.
The consensus across the board is that our local libraries are well run by experienced experts. Satisfaction is extremely high among those who use the libraries. So there is certainly a component of this debate that is sympathetic to the people who will be losing their jobs. This may not resonate with everyone, I understand that. There is concern from all corners over the type (and number) of employees that will be replacing these career librarians.
But more importantly is our separation from the LA County system, which is the largest in the world. At present, you can get just about anything very quickly, delivered for free to the Valencia branch, for example. No questions asked. Under the new system, there will be access, but it will be through a slower and more expensive inter-library loan system through which the County can decide just how they are going to cooperate.
I shouldn’t forget to mention that there are no plans for the city to have any employees with a job dedicated to libraries. By all appearances, the key decisions about the library will be made by LSSI.
In all, I think it comes down to this: the city wanted a brand civic building in the heart of Newhall. They called it a library because that meant the County had to staff it. The County can’t staff a huge new library, so the city’s only option to staff the Newhall library without cutting hours elsewhere is to do it on the cheap.
Now what has people upset more than anything is that the council went through this entire process in a matter of weeks and with a single vote, despite every appearance of near-unanimous public opposition.
So the elected officials decided what was better for the people? OMG! That would never happen in the federal government!
Just wondering if you so loudly voiced your opinions when Obamacare was shoved down our throat with the same amount of haste and public anger? Cap and tax? Stimulus? Second stimulus (small business bill joke)
I am sure all of you were screaming for the injustice to stop then. Come on fellas, at the very least, be consistent.
Do you even realize how inconsistent you look?
But then again you are the smarter party and you do like to profess your superior intelligence. So, you must know.
Was there something in the Healthcare bill about Libraries? Or did you just need to type “Obamacare”?
I think we should try to have a focused, non-partisan, reasonable and reason, and adult discussion of this issue.
How’s that for a new idea?
No, I just find it amazing that people can be outraged by some conduct and not outraged by the exact same conduct? Ideological blindness ?
“exact same conduct”?
HCR was one of the pillars of Obama’s candidacy.
We spent months discussing it.
Idealogical blindness sometimes involves stretching for an analogy. Or worse, focusing all ones energy in one direction. Makes the Bush haters seem tame.
It’s only your view that the conduct is the same. “Ideological blindness” is a strawman. Let’s try and have a focused and adult conversation. If you want to argue that we all need to work together to develop and use new means to make government at all levels more transparent and responsive, we should all agree to that. Let’s stop politicizing everything and discuss facts and not talking points.
Yes John, the exact same conduct. There’s no difference at all.
Has anyone else noticed how quite the county is being about all of this? I think that they are afraid of the city of Santa Clarita. They are scared to death that the Keystone council might change their minds.
What a windfall for the county! The city is demanding to buy the Valencia library and the inventory of that library as well as the inventory in Newhall and Canyon Country. The city also insists on taking over the expense of running the 3 libraries, while continuing to pay the county for access to their system – as well they should, since WE WILL HAVE THE SAME ACCESS TO THE COUNTY SYTEM. The only difference is we well have to travel a little further to pick up and drop off books and stuff.
And should we worry about the unlucky souls in the unincorporated areas of SCV who don’t have the Keystone council to look after them? I think not. With all the money the county will be making on this deal, I’m sure they will find a way to take care of them. I’m thinking of moving to an unincorporated area myself. What the council doesn’t seem to realize is that they are not just leaving the county system, they are going into competition with it – AND PAYING FOR BOTH SIDES! I don’t think I wish to spend my declining years among people who can elect these miscreants and then call themselves “awesome town” without rolling on the floor laughing.
Ironically, the creators of the Awesometown campaign are building in unincorporated LA county.
So they outsourced that too. What a shock.
Daddy Joe G, you’re not going to see the City’s or the County’s deal terms, until their contract is made public, which I expect will not occur until much closer to July 1, 2011.
The key issue to watch is how the City will finance its purchase of the one library building and the books and equipment at all three. The smart money is saying this whole exercise has far more to do with restructuring the City’s balance sheet and little to do with “cracks in the library system” or some such nonsense.
No wonder we have this city council.
Thanks Jeff for realizing that librarians aren’t shiftless and lazy. (And no, I’m not one.) But I believe in giving credit, and our local librarians work tirelessly to keep us happy.
I went to a local bookstore last week, and shuddered to think this is what we’re going to end up with–a clerk who could look up a title, but that was it. The selection was worse than poor; if it doesn’t sell, it’s off the shelf. Same with LSSI–if a book doesn’t check out at some artificial number they set, out it goes. We all know (ok, except for Laurie Ender) that’s not how a library works.
We filed a public records request to look at all the documents concerning LSSI and the City. What surprise that the City is claiming attorney client privileges. Bunch of rat-ba…rd crooks. Recall is looking better and better.
Really. What did you ask for?
We asked to see the correspondence between LSSI, the City council, and Darren Hernandez–we wanted to know when LSSI actually started their campaign.We also wanted to see all the library committee notes–the committee that made all the library takeover decisions. These are public documents. Apparently you have to sue to see them. We’re thinking the City doesn’t want us to know just how long ago LSSI was given the OK to move in.
Why are the activities of our public servants on our behalf not public? How can their be attorney client privileges? Is there something to hide?
Went to a private meeting with Antonovich this afternoon, but to no avail. His staff had a mix-up on the date — one person had arranged our free parking for the day, confirming our scheduled date, another had has booked for 10/28. It was disheartening.
Here is my prepared statement that I intended to verbally deliver to Antonovich; instead, I just left the printed statement with his staff.
My name is Lori Rivas. I am a 17 year resident of Santa Clarita.
As a homeschooler of four kids, my family makes extensive use of the county library system, depending especially on receiving inter-library loan requests for my children’s education.
I question the council’s motivation to pull out of the county system, as everyone I know — all heavy users of the county library system — is quite satisfied with the current system. With additional fees and longer waits for inter-library loans, the actual users are going to pay more, get less, and everyone loses except the higher management.
At last night’s city council meeting, Marsha McClean claimed that those who are opposed to leaving the county library system are “spreading one-sided stories, not giving all the details.” (1) I had to laugh out loud, because this is exactly my point — we do not HAVE all the details. The city council has put the cart before the horse, without seeking community input, without securing those library benefits which are so important to us.
My personal concerns center around free access to outside library collections of books, audio-visual items and other resources. This free access is not secured under the city council/LSSI plan. (2) (3)
Currently, my inter-library loans are only limited by the 50 book capacity of my library card. This generous supply of books from other libraries is not secured under the city council/LSSI plan. (2) (3)
I do not pay any fees for the privilege of borrowing books from outside libraries. Free inter-library loans are not secured under the city council/LSSI plan. (2) (3)
I depend on the three-week check out period, with 2 renewals, equaling a total of 12 weeks of free materials use, even for inter-library loans. This check-out and renewal period is not secured under the city council/LSSI plan. (2) (3)
My inter-library loan requests are generally fulfilled within a week, meeting my children’s attention on a given subject. This quick delivery system is not secured under the city council/LSSI plan. (4)
The County library system offers an integrated computer system to search all libraries for available information, including a pictorial search page specifically for children, and offers automated due date notifications. This efficient computer system is not secured under the city council/LSSI plan. (5)
I make heavy use of out-of-print, rare and classic books, which are nearly always available within the County library system. Such a broad and deep selection of books is not secured under the city council/LSSI plan, nor can out-of-print books be purchased and added to a new system. (2) (3)
Other library systems under LSSI pay, per item, for inter-library loans. Other library systems under LSSI have a 3-book limit and one-week check out period on interlibrary loans. Fulfilling interlibrary loans in other systems run by LSSI is dictated and governed by the lending library’s rules and willingness to fulfill requests. (2) (3)
Darren Hernández and Laurie Ender are both on record favoring the purchase of dozens of copies of current best sellers for the LSSI run libraries. I do not want bookshelves over-stocked with books such as _Twilight_ at the expense of less popular, but better written, books. With materials purchases made under political and untrained over-sight, I fear the loss of lesser-known, controversial, or unpopular books. (2) (3) (6)
The Santa Clarita City Council has flagrantly and aggressively ignored these public concerns, pushing through an agenda that does not have wide-spread public support. Please join with us in our efforts to remain within the Los Angeles County library system.
FOOTNOTES
1. Marsha McLean, closing comments at Santa Clarita City Council meeting, 9/28/10
2. http://www.moorparklibrary.org/circulation.asp
3. http://www.shastalibraries.org/spl/index.php?ref=Policies%2FCircPolicy
4. http://www.the-signal.com/section/36/article/32637/
5. phone call to Moorpark City Library (805-517-6370), 9/29/10: I asked how to search on-line for a book not available within the Moorpark system, was directed to the Ventura County library website, and was told that I would need a Ventura County library card to request book. I then asked if I could conduct an interlibrary loan through the Moorpark library, and was told that I would have to come in and fill out the paperwork, which would then be submitted as an inquiry for book availability from another library.
6. http://www.scvtv.com/html/citycouncil082410-1of6btv.html
And here is the statement my 9yo daughter independently prepared to deliver to Antonovich:
I think that the city council is being like King John of England and I also think that when a person is elected that they have to sign something like the Magna Carta or a copy of it.
I “enjoy” the ability to get inter-library loans at no cost. What this actually means is that I have access to 7.1 million books, and I have no idea of how many other online resources. I have even downloaded current books to my ipod from my computer in a matter of minutes.
Lori, what I enjoy, to you is a necessity. Thank you for sharing you research and expressing the true value of the County Library for us all.
Pingback: LSSI – Santa Clarita library document dump and more comments | SCVTalk.com
Remember, Marsha McLean said “no charges.” So if you want that book, go ahead and interlibrary loan it. Send her the bill….
And if I want to borrow 50 items through an interlibrary loan? And if I need them within a week? How will she swing that? I am sure that she has a plan.
Clarification — the date mix-up was an inadvertent email error, and had nothing to do with Antonovich’s staff. Don’t want to lay blame where there is none.
Greetings From Bellencia, formerly Valencia, where City Council does what City Council pleases because it can.