Man Stops Traffic at 17th and K to Demand $200 Million
Morning Roundup: Goodbye, Abe Edition
Judge Throws Out WTU Suit Over Teacher Layoffs
Vegetate to Close at the End of the Month
Morning Roundup: Rain Won't Go Away Edition
So the D.C. Public Library system is facing a $2 million reduction in next year's staff budget. The word is that all city libraries will probably have to close on Fridays, as well as reduce hours on weekdays and close completely five kiosk branches that serve needy neighborhoods. This is bad news. Mayor Fenty has said, however, that he is committed to finding the money to keep the libraries open at their normal hours.
And in case you missed it, yesterday Marc Fisher revealed that DCPL is actually sitting "on a $2 million bequest donated expressly to improve the offerings at two of the system's neediest branches." The money, left in the will of wealthy D.C. resident Elizabeth Holden and designed to help two branches in particular -- the Francis Gregory Branch in Southeast and the Woodridge Branch in Northeast -- has hardly been spent even though the system received it nine years ago. Holden didn't want her gift to be used to overcome budget gaps, so the neat coincidence that it was for exactly the amount the DCPL budget was cut doesn't matter in reality. Still, it's tough not to take these two stories and start to feel all down on the city's library system again.
By all accounts, Ginnie Cooper, the District's chief librarian for the past two years, has had a lot of success making improvements to the system. Circulation is up 20 percent over last year. But now DCPL is facing a staff and budget shortage due to a combination of a lot of library employees having taken the mayor's citywide early retirement incentive and the fact that all vacant positions in city agencies were removed from the 2009 budget. There are fewer employees, and the library system can't hire any more. When Mayor Fenty first announced his early retirement program, he said that "It is imperative that the District recruits, retains and then develops the next generation of leaders before decades of institutional knowledge walks out the door.” We certainly hope the mayor can find a way to get the next generation of librarians into D.C. public libraries before they are forced to cut their hours.
Photo by army.arch
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
The money, left in the will of wealthy D.C. resident Elizabeth Holden and designed to help two branches in particular -- the Francis Gregory Branch in Southeast and the Woodridge Branch in Northeast -- has hardly been spent even though the system received it nine years ago.
This is what happens when you hire mid-level library administrators who are functionally illiterate. If they can't read a check, how are they supposed to cash it?
Easiest way to ensure that the libraries stay open longer hours: Stir up the 'homeless advocates' into opposition of this plan
Nahh.. they're just holding on to the check until they can figure out a way to embezzle it. Where's Harriette Walters when you need her?
I never cease to be amazed at how underused our libraries are. I got hip to the jive when I needed to establish DC residency and found out that the easiest way to do so was getting a library card.
it's getting to the point where it's clear the mayor can only rescue so much of the city at once, and it looks like the library system is being tossed overboard to make room for everyone else on the boat.
unfortunately, i don't have the time today to really get into this, but i've been involved with the holden bequest as a member of the friends of the woodridge library. the bequest was mismanaged long before ginnie cooper came on board, but we haven't seen much movement on it in the past 2 years.
take a look at the dcpl foundation's 2006 annual report here [PDF](it's really a skeleton of a report at best, and where's 2007?). the foundation isn't "doing its job" plain and simple. my guess is that francis gregory and woodridge's approx. $2 million is nearly half of the $3.6 million in "temporarily restricted" assets.
last year our secretary, verna claborne, testified before the council (below is part of her testimony):
Unfortunately, eight years later, Woodridge library has received almost no benefit from this bequest except for a disbursement over five years ago to pay for some planting and landscaping at the branch. The amount spent from
the bequest was less than $10,000. Since that time no money has been allowed to be spent from the bequest funds although the Friends have made several proposals to the Foundation administering the funds, only to be turned down. For the record, the DCPL Foundation holds the bequest funds in trust for Woodridge and Frances Gregory and according to our latest information, the Holden Funds represent 2/3 of the total funds held by the Foundation. These funds, held in trust, apparently generate the interest that has been used in recent years to provide grants to other branch libraries.
Not only has Woodridge been left out of this bounty, we feel that DCPL and the foundation have both failed to work directly and in good faith with the Woodridge Friends who are the representatives of one of the designated beneficiaries of the bequest -- the Woodridge Library Community.In fact we were recently informed that the DCPL and the Foundation had determined that only an allotted amount could be spent from the bequest so that there would be funds generated from it in perpetuity. This also means that funds to administer the bequest will be paid out in perpetuity. This certainly is not the intent of the original bequest nor do we believe that Mrs. Holden would consider this action to be in conformity with her wishes.
....The delay in Woodridge having access to and an ability to spend these funds is all the more shocking since the terms of the bequest make it clear that Mrs. Holden expected the money would be spent within ten years. Indeed, I believe she might reconsider her gift had she known the D.C. Public Library was going to sit on it.
....The original conditions of the bequest are very clear:
>1. The money should not be used to subsidize ordinary library expenses.
>2. The funds from the two bequests should be kept in separate accounts to allow for separate reporting and accounting.
>3. The D.C. Public Library is to develop plans for the use of these funds, and I quote: "in consultation with an advisory committee composed of library staff and community representatives." End quote.
The allowed uses of the funds are also clear:
>1. To add to collections, add a special section or wing, develop special programs for the benefit of D.C. public school children
..., services to support senior citizens in the region an other special interest groups and organizations.
>2. No more than 30 percent of the bequest should be spent for physical improvements.
I will be submitting these terms in whole for the record.
These terms are very clear and yet the DC Public Library has not abided by them. Therein lies a cautionary tale for other people who may wish to
include library branches in their will.
Prior to 2004 there was an active advisory committee that included Library staff and members of the public. That committee acted in good faith to develop a plan for the bequest. The committee considered a variety of proposals and as of this year, proposals were still being submitted.
Now, however, the D.C. Public Library claims the terms of the bequest have been revised so that the Library is under no obligation to consult with the community or, specifically, the advisory group.
Indeed, Ginny Cooper has also told us that the money will be kept by the Library Foundation in perpetuity and that the Library is under no obligation to spend it.
cooper inherited a system with a plethora of issues, to put it lightly. many of them will take years to fix, just as they took years to fester. but it still blows my mind how it can take nearly 10 years to follow the explicitly straightforward requests of a donor. we're still waiting for a straightforward answer.
why, oh why can other folks get a nice, clean blockquote? i promise the coding was spot on...
at any rate, verna's testimony ends at "obligation to spend it."
In other DC funding news Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) intends to terminate Washington, D.C.'s federal school voucher program, even though those vouchers are paid through a separate fund that takes no money at all from D.C.'s public schools (which already spend $10,000 more per pupil per year than the city's private schools). Del. Holmes Norton says the program undermines the public schools. You've signed on to the plan to eliminate the program. But given that the program takes no money from the city's already bloated public schools, isn't it only "undermining" the public schools if D.C. parents choose not to send their kids to them? And if that's the case, isn't that an indication that they aren't happy with the schools' performance?
Blah, meant to cite Reason on my above post.
WTF is up with the libraries and charter schools? They're getting free money and they can't get their heads out of their a$$es fast enough to spend it? Either that, or Eleanor thinks funding charters "undermines" the teachers union and those dedicated public school administrators who can't be bothered to stop eating babies long enough to actually do their jobs? Meanwhile, homeless people are still LIVING in the men's room at MLK, looking at porn on the computers, and making the hallways smell like farts, so if they ever do get that $2 million, they'll use most of it to fumigate the libraries and get rid of the goo stains.
I was just feeling up on DCPL because for the first time in three years, I've gotten email notifications that my books are about to be due.
One step forward and two steps back, I guess.
Is it possible the money was invested, to act as a de facto endowment? The interest off 2 mill for 9 years is probably considerable and where the foundation gets a lot of their funds for grant making. That's probably why they're reluctant to spend it. This way it keeps giving.
Plus, speaking as a fundraiser (not for DCPL, to clarify) from Jamie's post it seems like a whole lot of stipulations on that gift. If she had offered it when she was alive the foundation probably would not have excepted it as-is. It's hard to do such specific improvements when you can't keep a place open and safe. Donors fail to recognize that sometimes. Institutions are of course very grateful for any help they give, but they are there to help those in need and not the donor.
So DC can afford to spend nearly a billion dollars to subsidize sports millionaires, but can't find eoungh pennies to keep the libraries open. Pretty sad excuse for a national capital.
DC has public libraries?
@jaime
Criminy! I'd hate to see what you'd post if you did have time to get into it. Regardless, thanks for a nice insider's look at this issue.
@hillrat: um, yeah, i kinda get all hot and bothered over dcpl...sorries ; )