672 replies to this topic

[spanky123]

Right or wrong this is how things have been done for quite a few years, and nothing secret about it. The inter municipal agreement says that the municipalities provide the facilities, not the Library. The Library Board gets to advise the municipality if, for example, they consider the proposed site not suitable for a Library, but the municipality gets the final decision. The Library is a creature of the municipalities and they get to decide how it will be run within the provisions of the provincial Library act.

Stating that this is the way things have always been done isn't an argument. The GVPL has a pretty good thing going. They refused to answer any of my questions about lease cost or budget even though they publicly asked for questions.

They can hide behind the FOI act since they are not a public entity although a public entity grants them space.

[VicHockeyFan]

Right or wrong this is how things have been done for quite a few years, and nothing secret about it. The inter municipal agreement says that the municipalities provide the facilities, not the Library. The Library Board gets to advise the municipality if, for example, they consider the proposed site not suitable for a Library, but the municipality gets the final decision. The Library is a creature of the municipalities and they get to decide how it will be run within the provisions of the provincial Library act.

So if the Carr branch asked for any space, anywhere, at any cost, Saanich should just grant it to them? I don't understand how they get to decide where to move, when someone else (Saanich) has to pay the bills.

[eseedhouse]

Stating that this is the way things have always been done isn't an argument.

What made you think I was making an argument? I was just stating the facts as I understand them. I worked there for decades and still go to the board meetings when I can. The board meetings are open to the public and advertised on the Library web site.

The GVPL has a pretty good thing going.

How so?

They refused to answer any of my questions about lease cost or budget even though they publicly asked for questions.

Lease costs, as I pointed out previously, are not within their purview. The Library does not pay the costs of the facilities and does not pay rent for them. That is all done by the municipalities. Whether that should be so or not I make no argument about. The Library is the creation of the municipalities as mandated under the Library act. The Library agreement was negotiated between the municipalities and the Library board and governs the Library.

They can hide behind the FOI act since they are not a public entity although a public entity grants them space.

The municipalities own and pay the costs of the facilities directly. The Library never sees that bill. Your FOI request should go to the municipality that funds the branch, since they are the owners and payers.

[eseedhouse]

Lease costs, as I pointed out previously, are not within their purview. The Library does not pay the costs of the facilities

This might be a little misleading so I will try to clarify. The Library pays no rent for and does not own any of the facilities. They do pay the costs for maintenance and security, as well as stocking the branches with books and the shelving (and staff of course). The Library owns what is in the branch, but not the branch itself, and does not pay any rent on it. The cost of the physical plant is not part of the Library budget.

The ownership of the Central branch is a bit different. The Municipalities share this cost on a formula contained in the inter-municipal agreement.

In 2011 (last year for which figures are available) there were just over 3,000,000 individual visits, that is between 9 and 10 for each resident of the capital area (though of course it's not an even distribution).

6,137,988 items were loaned that year, more than 17 items for every resident. If people had to purchase then from a private store at only ten dollars per item then the Library returned 61 million dollars of reading and viewing to the population of the Capital Regional district for an outlay of just under 16 million dollars.

Not a bad return.

Financial and annual reports are available at

http://www.gvpl.ca/a...orts-and-plans/

Reports for 2012 are not yet up.

[David Bratzer]

Stating that this is the way things have always been done isn't an argument. The GVPL has a pretty good thing going. They refused to answer any of my questions about lease cost or budget even though they publicly asked for questions.

They can hide behind the FOI act since they are not a public entity although a public entity grants them space.

Hi Spanky, the GVPL is subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA). This is found in Schedule I of FIPPA, in subsection (m) of the definition of "local public body":

(m) a library board as defined in the Library Act

http://www.bclaws.ca...ct/96165_07.xml

That said, there may be exceptions within FIPPA that would allow the Greater Victoria Public Library to block the release of whatever information you are seeking...

[VicHockeyFan]

The board has voted to move to Uptown. The biggest concerns by those voting against: parking and accessibility for disabled.

[spanky123]

The board has voted to move to Uptown. The biggest concerns by those voting against: parking and accessibility for disabled.

You mean the issues that they claimed were present at their current space and could only be resolved by moving!

Judging by how thoroughly they considered and responded to my questions (not!), I can only imagine how much effort was put into this whole process once they decided that someone else got to pay for it.

[VicHockeyFan]

You mean the issues that they claimed were present at their current space and could only be resolved by moving!

Well, the vote was 8/7, and the other issue was the building systems/age/toilets problems iirc. There are 19 board members, I wonder who abstained/no-showed on such an important issue.

Judging by how thoroughly they considered and responded to my questions (not!), I can only imagine how much effort was put into this whole process once they decided that someone else got to pay for it.

[spanky123]

I wonder if we get to find out who voted and how they voted.

For the record nobody ever responded to any question I asked about the library move even though I used the exact format they requested for asking questions and was very polite!

[eseedhouse]

The board has voted to move to Uptown. The biggest concerns by those voting against: parking and accessibility for disabled.

They voted to move the Emily Carr branch to Uptown. The board itself wiii continue to meet at the Central Library (except during strikes).

[Bingo]

The board has voted to move to Uptown

I wonder how many of the patrons are seniors that go to the library to read the newspaper?

If that's the case they can save the cost of the move, as newspapers will be gone in a couple of years.

[Bingo]

Emily Carr Library is moving here.

[sdwright.vic]

^Improvements have been done to this space over the last year almost. Something fishy...

[spanky123]

^Improvements have been done to this space over the last year almost. Something fishy...

Be interested in knowing when the lease was actually signed.

[Sparky]

I wonder if we get to find out who voted and how they voted.

For the record nobody ever responded to any question I asked about the library move even though I used the exact format they requested for asking questions and was very polite!

This is just plain wrong if this organization uses taxpayer dollars to operate. Are there not meeting minutes that the public can read?

[VicHockeyFan]

This is just plain wrong if this organization uses taxpayer dollars to operate. Are there not meeting minutes that the public can read?

Looks like there is/will be.

http://www.gvpl.ca/a...board-meetings/

[Robb]

Emily Carr Library is moving here.

Seems like this is going to be a Scotiabank now. Any news on where in Uptown the Library is moving to?

EDIT: Looking closer at the plans here it seems the bank will be on the main floor and the library on the upper?

So they are moving from 8600sqft (6000 usable) to 5575 (5000 on one floor, 575 for entry)... odd.

[James Bay walker]

Because somebody owns the copyright on that book, and if you gave out 270 copies simultaneously, you'd owe that author 270 times what you paid for it.

Well, it's not actually a book but an electronic unprinted version, so, not worth anything like the $30 or so paid for the hardcover edition. I see people paying $10 or so for e-copies of books and well, I don't get it / not seeing that sort of value (but that's not important -- if there's a market for that approach, more power to them). I think such non-library e-copies of books should also have like a library system for audiobooks as paid rentals: you pay to rent your e-copy of the book for 7 to 21 days (at maybe, $1.00).

Actually, I think the CD copyright levy surcharge works pretty well (except that it applies to all CD-R/CD-RW sales which is a bit unfair if you use CDs merely for personal PC data backup and not music copying). The levies collected are distributed to the actual artists whose works you've copied onto your CD-Rs. A good concept that appears to work in practice (& removes the guilt from ripping off music artists and destroying their livelihoods by undermining their earning capacity).

jbw

ps. I'm a fan of out of copyright material sold on eBay and distributed on DVDs (got lots of old magazines and comic books that way to peruse at my leisure).

[eseedhouse]

Well, it's not actually a book but an electronic unprinted version, so, not worth anything like the $30 or so paid for the hardcover edition. I see people paying $10 or so for e-copies of books and well, I don't get it / not seeing that sort of value (but that's not important -- if there's a market for that approach, more power to them). I think such non-library e-copies of books should also have like a library system for audiobooks as paid rentals: you pay to rent your e-copy of the book for 7 to 21 days (at maybe, $1.00).

I'm not sure what this post is about, but as one who worked there for 33 years I can tell you that if there are copy restrictions on e-books it will be because the Library has signed a contract with the vendor and it is required by the contract. Why the vendor may place these restrictions I can't say, but it all comes down to money and contracts.

When it comes to electronic data vendors usually charge a premium price for better access and the Library board has to decide how much they can afford.

[James Bay walker]

... it all comes down to money and contracts.

To be sure. And let's not kid ourselves, the public library takes a serious chunk out of our annual property tax dollar (something like $80 per property we own or rent last time I looked, probably much more nowadays). I assume the library's paid the audiobook outfit a 'bulk rate' for access to so many titles (vs $20-$40/title if you went online and downloaded the same version as your personal copy), and chose a balance of number of 'copies' simultaneously available (I note they include a goodly allottment of "always available" audiobooks, presumably those are largely the ones they've no concerns about competing with their actual audiobook sales as they're rarely finding any takers for those ones at least at a purchase price level).

jbw

ps. My favourite audiobook: Kabul Beauty School, for both the story and the expressiveness of the narrator.