Public Statements
Statement to City Council
by Don't Bury The Library
23 June 2020
by Don't Bury The Library
23 June 2020
This is Jean Brocklebank, speaking on behalf of hundreds who are part of the Don't Bury The Library campaign to have the downtown library restored and upgraded to become a first class library in both function and form.
We're looking at two projects tonight. One is funded. The other is not.
Both projects would result in essentially the same smaller library of about 30,000 square feet, with the same amount of collections, because the mixed-use project is not yet funded. In fact Director Nemitz's Option D starts at 29,660 sf.
The as yet not even designed mixed-use project must be funded and built before the library can be added as a tenant in that structure. The roadblocks for the complicated mixed- use project are enormous. Meanwhile, the delays inherent in that project threaten to diminish the secured Measure S money, due to the decreased payback period of bond debts.
The City is facing a $10.4 million dollar general fund deficit. City Manager Martín Bernal recently stated: “We do not have enough data and knowledge about our immediate future to make reasonably adequate projections. The level of change and uncertainty is extraordinary.”
With a vote tonight - to allow our stand alone library to remain in the Civic Center - design and planning can start tomorrow, while creative fundraising by the public could continue during the construction process to provide desired enhancements.
The public record on this matter is clear. By 5 pm today, over 560 letters were received by Council, with more than 3 to 1 (434 to 135) favoring renovation of the library. If the message had been a 50/50 split, it would have identified the proposal before you as merely controversial. But with more than 3 to 1 opposed, you have been given a clear mandate to vote no on the mixed-use project.
We respectfully suggest the City play it safe financially -- by voting on a motion that can provide all three vital services that are important to the community -- housing, parking ... and the library.
Simply give the City Manager and all needed departments direction to do the following:
Thank you.
We're looking at two projects tonight. One is funded. The other is not.
Both projects would result in essentially the same smaller library of about 30,000 square feet, with the same amount of collections, because the mixed-use project is not yet funded. In fact Director Nemitz's Option D starts at 29,660 sf.
The as yet not even designed mixed-use project must be funded and built before the library can be added as a tenant in that structure. The roadblocks for the complicated mixed- use project are enormous. Meanwhile, the delays inherent in that project threaten to diminish the secured Measure S money, due to the decreased payback period of bond debts.
The City is facing a $10.4 million dollar general fund deficit. City Manager Martín Bernal recently stated: “We do not have enough data and knowledge about our immediate future to make reasonably adequate projections. The level of change and uncertainty is extraordinary.”
With a vote tonight - to allow our stand alone library to remain in the Civic Center - design and planning can start tomorrow, while creative fundraising by the public could continue during the construction process to provide desired enhancements.
The public record on this matter is clear. By 5 pm today, over 560 letters were received by Council, with more than 3 to 1 (434 to 135) favoring renovation of the library. If the message had been a 50/50 split, it would have identified the proposal before you as merely controversial. But with more than 3 to 1 opposed, you have been given a clear mandate to vote no on the mixed-use project.
We respectfully suggest the City play it safe financially -- by voting on a motion that can provide all three vital services that are important to the community -- housing, parking ... and the library.
Simply give the City Manager and all needed departments direction to do the following:
- Immediately start the process for renovation and renewal of the downtown library in collaboration with Jayson Architecture.
- Inventory and prioritize city and private properties in the downtown area for the purpose of building affordable housing with parking.
- Place Lot 4 in reserve for five years, allowing its continued use as a parking lot and weekly Farmer's Market with the strong possibility it may become a beautiful downtown commons.
Thank you.
Letter to the City Council
from Don't Bury the Library
June 21, 2020
from Don't Bury the Library
June 21, 2020
The Downtown Library Subcommittee just made a choice - not really for our downtown library - but for housing and parking. How did this happen?
From the beginning the library was used as an excuse to build support for a parking garage. The public was showered with images of huge, modernistic libraries in major cities. Many residents were immediately shocked by the bait and switch, because they had not voted to abandon their library and stick it in a parking garage. Responding to the push back, the City tossed in the holy grail of "affordable housing," a trick to generate even more support for the parking garage project.
Now that the City appears close to getting what it wants, it is already backpedaling, saying we can get more money for the library if there is more market rate housing in the project. That gem from the Economic Development Department.
Not content to wave the affordable housing flag, a mixed-use project proponent recently used the equity card in the Sentinel to suggest that only their project will provide a way to "break class and race barriers," implying proponents of library renovation do not care about affordable housing or parking services.
Most voters did not know before Measure S was placed on the June 2016 ballot that the library administration knew the money raised would not be nearly enough to repair and renovate branches, nor to build the Felton and Capitola branches about which the public was aware. Nine branches are now collectively millions of dollars short and must secure extra funding. In January two of the City's branches (Garfield and Branciforte) got $1.5 million of the downtown branch's $27 million, leaving it in even worse shape financially than it was only a year ago. On top of that another $500,000 must still be raised for those two branches.
To make sense of current plans for the downtown library, it is important to understand that both proposals submitted to the City in response to its Request for Proposals provide for essentially the same size library.
Jayson Architecture's remodeled/rebuilt library is 30,360 square feet. Group 4's is either 30,300 square feet or 29,660 square feet depending on whether the 400 parking spaces are above the library or adjacent to it. The
only way the Group 4 proposal can have a larger library is to raise additional multi-millions of dollars. Some how. Some way. Maybe.
With the Jayson remodel/rebuild project, we could immediately begin the process of implementing the logistical steps to see it proceed. The community could then get behind this project with fundraising efforts.
With Group 4, there are so many complications that it may take years to get all the mixed-use ducks in a row.
For instance, the City will have to buy and demolish the Toadal Fitness building, provide them a temporary relocation and expect the owners of the business to give up the benefits of street level foot traffic and accept a second story location for their business. The City will have to provide a new Farmer's Market location, spending millions, before it can take down the trees and begin to build anything on Lot 4. Then there is the depleted Enterprise Fund. And so forth.
Unlike some, we do not celebrate the Group 4 designs. Quite the contrary, the interiors look like a commercial airport terminal. With Group 4, there will be no street level handicapped parking adjacent to the library entrance and no entrance from the parking levels directly into the library. Jayson provides street level dedicated handicapped parking right next to two designed entrances.
Tying a new library to parking and housing unduly complicates all three essential services.
We respectfully ask for the City Council's vote to wisely proceed with the Jayson Architecture proposal, to retain our library in its historical location into the future.
Jean Brocklebank, Judi Grunstra, Michael Lewis
Don't Bury The Library
From the beginning the library was used as an excuse to build support for a parking garage. The public was showered with images of huge, modernistic libraries in major cities. Many residents were immediately shocked by the bait and switch, because they had not voted to abandon their library and stick it in a parking garage. Responding to the push back, the City tossed in the holy grail of "affordable housing," a trick to generate even more support for the parking garage project.
Now that the City appears close to getting what it wants, it is already backpedaling, saying we can get more money for the library if there is more market rate housing in the project. That gem from the Economic Development Department.
Not content to wave the affordable housing flag, a mixed-use project proponent recently used the equity card in the Sentinel to suggest that only their project will provide a way to "break class and race barriers," implying proponents of library renovation do not care about affordable housing or parking services.
Most voters did not know before Measure S was placed on the June 2016 ballot that the library administration knew the money raised would not be nearly enough to repair and renovate branches, nor to build the Felton and Capitola branches about which the public was aware. Nine branches are now collectively millions of dollars short and must secure extra funding. In January two of the City's branches (Garfield and Branciforte) got $1.5 million of the downtown branch's $27 million, leaving it in even worse shape financially than it was only a year ago. On top of that another $500,000 must still be raised for those two branches.
To make sense of current plans for the downtown library, it is important to understand that both proposals submitted to the City in response to its Request for Proposals provide for essentially the same size library.
Jayson Architecture's remodeled/rebuilt library is 30,360 square feet. Group 4's is either 30,300 square feet or 29,660 square feet depending on whether the 400 parking spaces are above the library or adjacent to it. The
only way the Group 4 proposal can have a larger library is to raise additional multi-millions of dollars. Some how. Some way. Maybe.
With the Jayson remodel/rebuild project, we could immediately begin the process of implementing the logistical steps to see it proceed. The community could then get behind this project with fundraising efforts.
With Group 4, there are so many complications that it may take years to get all the mixed-use ducks in a row.
For instance, the City will have to buy and demolish the Toadal Fitness building, provide them a temporary relocation and expect the owners of the business to give up the benefits of street level foot traffic and accept a second story location for their business. The City will have to provide a new Farmer's Market location, spending millions, before it can take down the trees and begin to build anything on Lot 4. Then there is the depleted Enterprise Fund. And so forth.
Unlike some, we do not celebrate the Group 4 designs. Quite the contrary, the interiors look like a commercial airport terminal. With Group 4, there will be no street level handicapped parking adjacent to the library entrance and no entrance from the parking levels directly into the library. Jayson provides street level dedicated handicapped parking right next to two designed entrances.
Tying a new library to parking and housing unduly complicates all three essential services.
We respectfully ask for the City Council's vote to wisely proceed with the Jayson Architecture proposal, to retain our library in its historical location into the future.
Jean Brocklebank, Judi Grunstra, Michael Lewis
Don't Bury The Library
Our Original
Blueprint for A Restored and Revitalized Downtown Library
for the 21st Century and Beyond
Submitted to the City Council on January 24, 2019
Blueprint for A Restored and Revitalized Downtown Library
for the 21st Century and Beyond
Submitted to the City Council on January 24, 2019
According to a substantial report commissioned for and received by the city, our downtown library is seismically sound (see Seismic Evaluation of the Santa Cruz Downtown Library by Fratessa, Forbes, Wong, Structural Engineers October 31, 2014).
The downtown library as an institution and community resource can easily stand on its merits. It contains 44,000 sf of usable space, though the space is in need of some reconfiguration for best use by staff and patrons. Prior to Measure S (2016), there had been no community request for it to be moved to a different location or wedded to a garage, commercial space or housing project.
OBJECTIVE: The downtown library is repaired, upgraded, and revitalized, with project components prioritized to meet the budgeted $27 million allocated from Measure S funds.
Step 1
Council directs staff to work with the Library Director to prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) to be issued statewide or even nationwide, for renovation of the downtown library.
Reconfiguration of floor plans as needed
Installation of roof top solar panels, including roof preparation work
Repair, upgrade or replace air handling system
Replacement of heating, cooling and branch ducts
ADA bathrooms
Other plumbing repairs and upgrades as needed
Electrical upgrades
New paint and flooring where necessary
Security and safety features where needed
(Escalation costs)
All Soft Costs, including:
Computers and printers
AV equipment
Library graphics and signage
Moveable furnishings and equipment
Public Art
Step 2
Council directs staff to work with the Library Director to investigate options for temporary housing of essential library services, during eventual reconstruction activities. Included in the investigation can be portions of unoccupied commercial buildings and/or a temporary structure to be installed on the current library parking lot.
Step 3
Assuming proposals are received, council directs staff to work with the Library Director to present to council and the public a prioritized list of project components if all components cannot be implemented within the $27 million restoration budget.
Conclusion
We know there is great public support for this unique opportunity to upgrade and beautify the downtown library, for all residents, present and future.
The downtown library as an institution and community resource can easily stand on its merits. It contains 44,000 sf of usable space, though the space is in need of some reconfiguration for best use by staff and patrons. Prior to Measure S (2016), there had been no community request for it to be moved to a different location or wedded to a garage, commercial space or housing project.
OBJECTIVE: The downtown library is repaired, upgraded, and revitalized, with project components prioritized to meet the budgeted $27 million allocated from Measure S funds.
Step 1
Council directs staff to work with the Library Director to prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) to be issued statewide or even nationwide, for renovation of the downtown library.
- The RFP will seek design/build contractors.
- The RFP will be issued for three months minimum, to allow adequate time for its review by interested parties.
- Contractors will be encouraged to develop phasing of reconstruction to provide for continued use of portions of the library building.
- Community meetings soliciting public engagement in the project will be required.
- RFP project specifications will include, at a minimum, proposals for the following, which will inform prioritization to stay within the $27 million budget:
Reconfiguration of floor plans as needed
Installation of roof top solar panels, including roof preparation work
Repair, upgrade or replace air handling system
Replacement of heating, cooling and branch ducts
ADA bathrooms
Other plumbing repairs and upgrades as needed
Electrical upgrades
New paint and flooring where necessary
Security and safety features where needed
(Escalation costs)
All Soft Costs, including:
Computers and printers
AV equipment
Library graphics and signage
Moveable furnishings and equipment
Public Art
Step 2
Council directs staff to work with the Library Director to investigate options for temporary housing of essential library services, during eventual reconstruction activities. Included in the investigation can be portions of unoccupied commercial buildings and/or a temporary structure to be installed on the current library parking lot.
Step 3
Assuming proposals are received, council directs staff to work with the Library Director to present to council and the public a prioritized list of project components if all components cannot be implemented within the $27 million restoration budget.
Conclusion
We know there is great public support for this unique opportunity to upgrade and beautify the downtown library, for all residents, present and future.
Statement to City Council
by Jean Brocklebank and Michael Lewis on behalf of Don't Bury The Library
September 11, 2018
by Jean Brocklebank and Michael Lewis on behalf of Don't Bury The Library
September 11, 2018
Look at this picture:
Last month this 2-story 44,000 sf building was described by Library Director Nemitz as being "so underutilized it makes me crazy."
Does it makes any sense to demolish this seismically-sound building and haul it to the dump? Is that environmentally responsible? Culturally or financially responsible?
We're not going to demo the Civic Auditorium. We didn't demo the Town Clock, City Hall or these chambers ... just because they are old.
More importantly, protecting and valuing the community's past does not preclude investing in its future or investing in downtown businesses and affordable housing.
We know the library building itself belongs to the City and its residents. But a building -- no matter how showy & modern -- does not make a library; it makes a building that houses a library. We respectfully remind Council the downtown library does not belong to you, nor solely to City residents. People from all over the County are patrons of the downtown library.
Most residents who voted on Measure S would never have voted YES had there been even a hint that the outcome would be the behemoth project presented to the City Council.
Just 5 days ago, when we saw the agenda, we learned that more behind closed doors work has now produced a Demo and Dump plan for the County's main library. Talk about a steamroller at work.
No longer just surprised and shocked, people are disheartened and disillusioned with government. If this Council votes tonite to pass every recommendation handed to it from staff, expect a collective anger to fill this room and permeate the community.
And now some good news!
#1 The City Manager told the DLAC, at one of its meetings, the parking garage is not dependent on the downtown branch being a tenant in that structure.
#2 The Library Director told the public at another DLAC meeting that it's possible to request and be granted an extension to the deadline for spending Measure S bond funds.
#3 The same amount of money to build a new library downtown can be used to transform the existing library for the 21st century.
#4 The city will receive at least another $5.5 million from Measure S, and even if Garfield and Branciforte got a half million total for rooftop solar on each building -- as they darn well should -- that means that there would be close to $28 million for renovation of our downtown library.
What exactly could that mean? Let's take a look at the Option A renovation cost estimate ($24,253,370) in the Final DLAC Report. This is before knowing we'd have another $5 million to spend. It includes all of the following:
Does it makes any sense to demolish this seismically-sound building and haul it to the dump? Is that environmentally responsible? Culturally or financially responsible?
We're not going to demo the Civic Auditorium. We didn't demo the Town Clock, City Hall or these chambers ... just because they are old.
More importantly, protecting and valuing the community's past does not preclude investing in its future or investing in downtown businesses and affordable housing.
We know the library building itself belongs to the City and its residents. But a building -- no matter how showy & modern -- does not make a library; it makes a building that houses a library. We respectfully remind Council the downtown library does not belong to you, nor solely to City residents. People from all over the County are patrons of the downtown library.
Most residents who voted on Measure S would never have voted YES had there been even a hint that the outcome would be the behemoth project presented to the City Council.
Just 5 days ago, when we saw the agenda, we learned that more behind closed doors work has now produced a Demo and Dump plan for the County's main library. Talk about a steamroller at work.
No longer just surprised and shocked, people are disheartened and disillusioned with government. If this Council votes tonite to pass every recommendation handed to it from staff, expect a collective anger to fill this room and permeate the community.
And now some good news!
#1 The City Manager told the DLAC, at one of its meetings, the parking garage is not dependent on the downtown branch being a tenant in that structure.
#2 The Library Director told the public at another DLAC meeting that it's possible to request and be granted an extension to the deadline for spending Measure S bond funds.
#3 The same amount of money to build a new library downtown can be used to transform the existing library for the 21st century.
#4 The city will receive at least another $5.5 million from Measure S, and even if Garfield and Branciforte got a half million total for rooftop solar on each building -- as they darn well should -- that means that there would be close to $28 million for renovation of our downtown library.
What exactly could that mean? Let's take a look at the Option A renovation cost estimate ($24,253,370) in the Final DLAC Report. This is before knowing we'd have another $5 million to spend. It includes all of the following:
Please table staff's recommendations tonite.
Don't Bury The Library whether in a parking garage or in a landfill.
Don't Bury The Library whether in a parking garage or in a landfill.
DBTL Statement to the June 19, 2018 City Council Study Session
We appreciate participating in your study session.
We're here on behalf of hundreds of Santa Cruz City and County residents to ask that the Downtown Library be retained at its current location -- renovated, renewed and revitalized -- right where our downtown library has stood for 115 years!
Not only would moving the library diminish it as an integral part of the City's vital civic center, the uniqueness of the library building edifice itself would be lost in the overwhelming domination of the proposed five story parking garage.
Voters who passed Measure S never had a clue they were voting for a new downtown library in a new parking structure. That was not found anywhere in the 13 page ballot measure language, nor in news stories during the campaign. Imagine residents' surprise then to learn that our existing library was to be abandoned, rather than upgraded and modernized.
Most people in the room tonite do not know that this proposed project came from the City's Public Works Director and the County's Library Director, and was presented to Council a year and a half ago, without any prior input from the public as to whether this was okay with residents.
In addition to the unfortunate beginning of this process, consider all of the following:
Finally, for the past four months other half truths have been publicized online and in print, repeated enough to confuse the public.
All of this stuff matters!
We consistently requested a realistic renovation option of the existing seismically-sound library that could stay within a $23 million budget. Unfortunately such a renovation option was quickly thrown together 4 months into the process and just as quickly dismissed by the committee, without serious consideration.
We continue to call for an independent study of what can be accomplished with renovation on the current site versus a newly built library. We've even suggested a creative nationwide contest geared toward design-build proposals. Yesterday you received our five solid recommendations for a Smart Renovation of our downtown library.
In summary, consider these words from Mayor Terrazas, speaking both conservatively and progressively when he said:
Quote: "We should show our respect for the past by....doing a better job of taking care of what we have. We don't just start over from scratch... throwing away everything from our past. Instead, we renew. We revitalize. We transform."
Okay! Let's uncouple the library from the parking garage and demonstrate that a $23 million dollar renovation of the existing Downtown Library can result in a 21st Century library with resources for everyone in our community.
Jean Brocklebank
Michael Lewis
on behalf of Don't Bury The Library
We're here on behalf of hundreds of Santa Cruz City and County residents to ask that the Downtown Library be retained at its current location -- renovated, renewed and revitalized -- right where our downtown library has stood for 115 years!
Not only would moving the library diminish it as an integral part of the City's vital civic center, the uniqueness of the library building edifice itself would be lost in the overwhelming domination of the proposed five story parking garage.
Voters who passed Measure S never had a clue they were voting for a new downtown library in a new parking structure. That was not found anywhere in the 13 page ballot measure language, nor in news stories during the campaign. Imagine residents' surprise then to learn that our existing library was to be abandoned, rather than upgraded and modernized.
Most people in the room tonite do not know that this proposed project came from the City's Public Works Director and the County's Library Director, and was presented to Council a year and a half ago, without any prior input from the public as to whether this was okay with residents.
In addition to the unfortunate beginning of this process, consider all of the following:
- Several requirements of the City's official RFQ were not met by either the architect or the Downtown Library Advisory Committee.
- Public engagement during the committee's work sessions was minimal and largely ignored.
- At the only community meeting held by the committee 6 months after it began and just 10 days before its recommendation was finalized, the public overwhelmingly opposed moving the downtown library into a parking garage. It is notable that the transcribed comments from this community meeting were not included in the Report now before you.
- The final committee recommendation was made with incomplete and inaccurate information. The flawed final report definitely misrepresents renovation options.
- To demonstrate a critical lack of transparency of this process, 26 modifications of the committee's final report — several substantive — were made behind the scenes weeks after the committee had voted to approve it.
Finally, for the past four months other half truths have been publicized online and in print, repeated enough to confuse the public.
All of this stuff matters!
We consistently requested a realistic renovation option of the existing seismically-sound library that could stay within a $23 million budget. Unfortunately such a renovation option was quickly thrown together 4 months into the process and just as quickly dismissed by the committee, without serious consideration.
We continue to call for an independent study of what can be accomplished with renovation on the current site versus a newly built library. We've even suggested a creative nationwide contest geared toward design-build proposals. Yesterday you received our five solid recommendations for a Smart Renovation of our downtown library.
In summary, consider these words from Mayor Terrazas, speaking both conservatively and progressively when he said:
Quote: "We should show our respect for the past by....doing a better job of taking care of what we have. We don't just start over from scratch... throwing away everything from our past. Instead, we renew. We revitalize. We transform."
Okay! Let's uncouple the library from the parking garage and demonstrate that a $23 million dollar renovation of the existing Downtown Library can result in a 21st Century library with resources for everyone in our community.
Jean Brocklebank
Michael Lewis
on behalf of Don't Bury The Library