Saint Paul logo
Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
Meeting Name: Library Board Agenda status: Final
Meeting date/time: 6/1/2022 2:00 PM Minutes status: Final  
Meeting location: Council Chambers
Published agenda: Agenda Agenda Accessible Agenda Accessible Agenda Published minutes: Minutes Minutes Accessible Minutes Accessible Minutes  
Meeting video:  
Attachments:
File #Ver.Agenda #TypeTitleActionResultAction DetailsVideo
Min 22-15 11Approval of MinutesApproving the Minutes of the April 6, 2022 Library Board MeetingAdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RES 22-815 12ResolutionAuthorizing the Saint Paul Public Library Agency to Execute an Agreement with the MN Department of Natural Resources for State Park Passes.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
SR 22-98 13Staff ReportLibrary Safety StrategyReceived and Filed  Action details Video Video
SR 22-100 14Staff ReportGeorge Latimer Central Library Updates: Nicholson Commons Design Project + Innovation Lab re-launchReceived and Filed  Action details Video Video
SR 22-101 15Staff ReportLibrary Design UpdatesReceived and Filed  Action details Video Video
File #Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
SR 22-101 6/1/2022 8:24 PMRoy Neal (for others who can't post)   CM Jalali mentions misinformation—Our community collected many examples of misinformation and "steering" committed by SPPL's administration. Much of the misinformation we found via a Freedom of Information request came via private emails shared between SPPL and allies. For Ms. Penkert and CM Jalali to point the misinformation finger at Library Board Prince is misdirection, and I call them to prove it. We know SPPL has tried to steer this decision toward new construction. It's in public emails and we are happy to share them to support CM Prince's concerns about the process. We as neighbors and community members share her concerns, and were impressed she had the courage to speak her mind freely. The public process was flawed and a closed door process. It divided the community. People were excluded. All facts. Most "amb***adors" are not community members. Facts. Attacks on concerned citizens by CMS are despicable. We are asking for a fair process, NOT a pre-conceived "decision." +1
SR 22-101 6/1/2022 8:09 PMRoy Neal (for others who can't post)   A huge part of sustainability goes far beyond operational costs. Embodied carbon costs are a big part of this and are NOT accounted. That's a problem. We've pointed this out several times but have been dismissed. St. Paul's own GreenSteps community rep Kurt Schultz pointed out that it will take decades and decades (up. to 85+ years) for the new plan to make up for the damage it will do. This is unacceptable in the age of climate change and is NOT progressive. The greenest building is the one that already exists. Operational energy costs cannot make up for GHG emitted and energy waste as part of this project. We have shared many national and international studies that make this point. They have not been adequately addressed in the report, on SPPL's FAQ page, or in Ms. Andersen-Tuttle's presentation. Please address the embodied energy costs in a meaningful way. Our climate depends on honest local action. Focusing on operational costs are only a part of the whole. +1
SR 22-101 6/1/2022 8:01 PMRoy Neal (for R1558)   Bravo that both options are accessible. Hamline Elders who attended a community forum reported that they wants to see the building renovated and accessible (Option A), not sent to a landfill or "turned into an organ donor" for a new building, as is proposed by Option B. Their input should count for something. (I'm sharing for others who can't use site themselves). +1
SR 22-101 6/1/2022 7:29 PMRoy Neal   Also, wanted to share that after months of careful research and expert review, the Hamline Library building was just determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. It is scheduled for review at the upcoming August state historic preservation board meeting. If approved by independent experts, it will then be sent to the National Register in Washington DC. If SPPL proceeds with demolition of this historic building, which was funded and built by the community it serves, it will be during this process. That may send the wrong message to the community. This process began in the community. It represents hundreds of hours of volunteer time. It deserves a chance to work as it was designed to do. I urge the board to allow that independent process to happen before making a final decision on design options, since preservation is a factor in the current recommendation and deserves consideration. GreenStep Cities agreed—the greenest building is the one already built! +1
SR 22-101 6/1/2022 6:59 PMRoy Neal   I strongly object to the process used by SPPL to determine the design option for the Hamline Midway Branch Library, and the outcome. An engagement process should unite the community. SPPL's chosen closed-doors process did the opposite—it divided the community. That has not been factored into the recommendation. It had affected trust in SPPL. It marginalized people in the community, and no attempt at consensus was attempted. Neighbors want a solution we can all live with, one that is fair, open, transparent, honest. That's not what's happened. Option A would renovate and expand the historic library. More than that, it would unify the community. Instead, we got a report that unfairly compared Option A and B. Option B does not meet 2040 City Comprehensive plan on sustainability or preservation, which is a sustainable practice by nature. Ms. Pinkert told me personally at the April Open House that those things were contradictory. That's false. I urge the board to reevaluate the options. +2