Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Library Facing More Cuts

If the City Council does nothing to modify Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs' proposed budget for the Plainfield Public Library, the library will be forced to lay off four fulltime employees and two part-time employees, reduce one custodian to part-time and demote two fulltime employees.

That was one of four scenarios projected Tuesday as Library Director Joe Da Rold and library board President Anne Robinson described the library's many services and the impact of budget cuts. Robinson said Plainfield residents pay only $35.54 per capita for the library, down from $42.75, which she said is lower than every surrounding community. But they can get computer training, gain literacy and look for jobs there, in addition to using the library for traditional uses such as research and reading.

In the last budget year, the library received a surprise bill for $158,000 to cover benefits that had already been included in a union contract. A similar bill is in the mayor's proposed budget. Robinson described the many adjustments the library was forced to make while still keeping up services.

Council members were mostly sympathetic to the library's plight and appreciative of what it does for the community. City Council President Annie McWilliams noted that the New Jersey Library Association named Da Rold Librarian of the Year, which brought a round of applause from the council and residents attending the meeting. Councilman Rashid Burney praised the library as not just a service, but a core service.

But Councilman William Reid said the city is under a tax cap and increasing the library's budget would "move the tax on taxpayers up."

Though acknowledging the current tough times, Da Rold said, "When residents are hurting, they are using the library the most."

(Disclaimer: My son works part-time at the library.)

--Bernice Paglia

8 comments:

  1. I hope the Council has the backbone to do the right thing this time around. Last year they allowed the Mayor's cuts to remain in place and that hurt the library.

    ReplyDelete
  2. those without a vision go after true community services such a the library...
    When the knife is being thrown about wildly with no real plan this is what occurs. The city of Plainfield needs a true manager and leader. But, we don't have one. The city is being backed into a corner, but not only is the lack of planning for the future by past administrations to blame for this ( technology upgrades and efficiencies that other cities and companies adopted years ago )we have a Mayor uses an ax where a scalpel is needed. We voted her in..we pay the price.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did councilman Reid also ask about Recreation?

    ReplyDelete
  4. All this and the library is spending who knows how much on renovating the childrens library. Where is that money coming from?? Believe me, I love the library and its programs, but really?? Now??

    ReplyDelete
  5. If Councilman Reid recused himself from voting on contracts with vendors who kickback campaign loot to the several political campaign committees of which he's the treasurer, there would be less of a bite on taxpayers' wallets. He is certainly one of the more corrupting influences on the Council. First Ward voters should wake up from their slumber and stop letting the mild-mannered Councilman drive them to the cleaners.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The money for the children's room renovation is from recent capital campaign private donations, not from the municipal budget. No taxpayer money will be used.

    And on the subject of taxes, Councilman Reid misstated the impact that restoring the library's budget to last year's level would have in Plainfield. The average cost would be $20.00 per taxpayer for the entire year.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you for the info on the funding. It is appreciated. Nice to see that some people still like to give money to a good cause!

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Library should not suffer any more cuts--it is one of our city's most valuable resources and has already taken big hits. NO MORE, PLEASE!

    ReplyDelete