Weather Magnet

News
Print this story  |  Email this story  |  [+] Text Size [-]  

Library board wants building for free



Ontario — The Ontario Public Library District endorsed a letter to the Ontario City Council at its meeting Wednesday night regarding the future of the city-owned library building.

At a special meeting Jan. 22, the council decided to create a contract to charge the library $5,000 a month for use of the building and agreed to pay half of the cost for replacing the elevator in the facility and the heating and cooling systems should the need arise. This rental agreement would last 10 years if approved by the library board and is slated to be reviewed every eight years.

City officials have repeatedly said this proposal is an initial offer and is by no means set in stone.

The response letter, composed by Ontario City Public Library District Donnaclaire Blankinship, requested the City of Ontario gift the library building to the newly-formed district. It was signed by Blankinship, Ontario Public Library District Board member Amy Couture and Ontario Public Library District Board member Sharon Jones.

“As we all realize, the building at the center of this discussion cannot be used for anything other than a library, which relieves the city of any other use, or commercial value,” Blankinship said as she read her letter into the record.  In the letter, Blankinship also referred to another letter, this one written by Oregon State Librarian Jim Scheppke, who recommended the city gift the building to the Ontario City Public Library District. Ontario Public Library District Board Budget Committee Chairman Paul Erlebach presented the letter to the City Council at its work session Feb. 12. The state librarian letter also stated the City of Ontario assured the state library  the library building would not function as anything else but a library in exchange for a $180,000 grant using Federal Library Services and Construction Act funds in December 1966.

The money, which totaled 45 percent of the cost of the $400,000 project, was furnished with an assurance from the City of Ontario it would be used to construct a facility that will continue to be devoted to public library purposes until such time as it is replaced by a new facility.

“Given this assurance, it would appear that the building needs to continue to be used as a public library, unless a different facility were to be built or leased for the Ontario Library District,” Scheppke said in the letter.

“We also have the verbal opinion of the State of Oregon Attorney General, who concurs with Mr. Scheppke,” Blankinship read.

Blankinship requested a quick closure to the issue, which would allow the library district to move forward with its June 30 deadlines.

The board also discussed a planned public forum, which is slated to involve the City of Ontario and the Ontario City Public Library District. At the Ontario City Council meeting Tuesday night, Ontario City Recorder Tori Barnett asked Ontario Mayor Joe Dominick if he had any specific date for the meeting planned. Dominick replied he and other council members would have to consult their schedules. Dominick also said Tuesday night that the public forum should occur within the next two weeks.

After the Ontario City Public Library District meeting, board members said they planned to attend this meeting.

“We’ll be there with bells on,” Jones said.

Erlebach said he believed the meeting would be a good one.




Comment Blog - Note: All Comments Subject To Approval

Mr. Savala wrote on Mar 4, 2009 12:47 PM:

" I have been thinking about the state of our city and its changing demographics and needs. This is my families 5th year in our city. Notice I said our because I have no intention of leaving.

Since being here I have watched many businesses close including a mall, observed what appeared to be the demise of both the aquatic center and the library of which both their existence today are tenuous at best.

What is apparent to me and many others both those who speak and those who do not is that the city government at large seems not to care, save that their names are in print associated with the appearance of action.

I voted for change after doing the best research available to me as a new citizen of Ontario. It appears my vote was wrong.

When we have an economy such as we have with little to offer our youth by way of education and activities the fault lies with the judgment of the people who voted in the present government. So if it is my fault then I must try to correct it.

City Council, why are you attempting to pick pocket the people you serve through this proposed Library Tax? Is it not provide monies for your self interests? To say it goes to the general fund is laughable and demeaning to those of us who realize what is meant by the general fund by which you mean a black hole of unaccountability.

I wonder why their is no YMCA or such like place for our families and youth. Why are so many businesses refused entrance? Are you afraid of competition and growth to the over rated and inferior products you provide the citizenry?

I speak for many when we thought that having a few business men on the city council would be good for growth of the city. Alas, you have proven yourselves charlatans and unworthy of the public trust you now have.


Citizens, if such a tax should pass there should be an account set up for a community center in which the funds go so as to build it or back a private interest in said endevour. In such manner the people still retain control of the money taxed.

Forgive the length of my writing however, Ontario is a great city with much potential but we are losing the ability to harness the potential through inept and corrupt leadership. We can do better. We must do better! Our future generations depend on decisions we make today! "

Fred wrote on Mar 4, 2009 8:50 AM:

" I am with Mr. Savala, very well put and thank you for your input. "

Mr. Savala wrote on Mar 3, 2009 1:46 PM:

" I think it is a waste of time to engage in personal attacks and name calling under the guise of anonymity which may be commendable in some circles but in a nation of curageous and articulate denizens it makes one appear to be less than they often wish to appear.

I have no doubt that the city council with the wisdom endowed within them and the communinal trust bestowed upon them came to the startling conclusion that what the citizens of our fair city most wanted and needed is a Library Tax.

Understandbly they could not call it thus but rather have used the innocuous sounding word called, "RENT." What geniuses reside in our council. Surely anyone would agree to this idea.

The glaring fault of logic is that it is paid for and that nobody pays rent on something they already own. It is apparent that the library is necessary to our community in regards to education and to gain a rudimentary understanding of the basic facts of governance.

Instead of a recall maybe the city council should be mandated to donate a 50% portion of their salaries towards this wonderful idea they have come to.

Ridiculous you say. So is paying rent on a building built with granted funds and on which nothing is owed in the interest of public education.

Random thoughts....good day! "

Just Dont Understand wrote on Mar 2, 2009 11:56 AM:

" HEY JOE...IT'S TIME TO START A RE-CALL PETITION, AGAINST YOU AND YOUR BUDDIES.

MAYBE YOU SHOULD WAKE-UP, AND GET YOUR PROVERBIAL HEAD OUT OF YOUR BACK-POCKET..YOUR NOT DOING YOURSELF NOR THE RESIDENT'S OF OUR CITY ANY GOOD..
WELL GUESS THERE MIGHT BE AN EXCEPTION TO THAT...TIS CALLED LINING YOUR OWN POCKET... "

Who Cares wrote on Feb 25, 2009 6:22 PM:

" I don't use the Library and really did not care if it closes. This is a business community not really suitable for residentual. When forming the Library District this should have been addressed. If not by the City, the City should eat it. If the Library District drop the ball then they need to figure out how to take care of it. "

Haus wrote on Feb 24, 2009 2:18 PM:

" Little Joe you have known the library was fomring a District for years, why didnt you let them know the city wanted a ridicoulus amount for rent before the election? They could then negotiated a fair rate and put it in their budget and let the citizens decide if they wanted to support the expenditure. There you go again showing your youth and inexperince at running a large organization, God help us. "

Salty Dog wrote on Feb 23, 2009 5:20 PM:

" It was jsut a matter of time before old Joe messed his nest. Ontario you elected him now deal with him, he is all yours and we love it. "

Ruth wrote on Feb 21, 2009 11:34 PM:

" And 'Free! Free! Free!' you don't seem to understand that this is not a private company or a business trying to get something for nothing. This is a group of citizens, taxpayers, if you will, trying to rescue a public institution. They are doing the City of Ontario a favor and should be recognized as such. Our library has been underfunded and understaffed for a long time. It's going to take some work and some money to bring it up to date. Nobody who recognized civic progress should stand in the way of this. "

Ruth wrote on Feb 21, 2009 11:27 PM:

" You know, citizens stepped up and took on the responsibility of supporting the library, because that's the only way it could continue to exist. (Do we all agree that a public library is an asset to any community?) Now that the city has shed this burden, they find ways to make it difficult for the ones who have taken it on. There's something wrong with this picture. "

Larry wrote on Feb 21, 2009 8:57 PM:

" Joe and his entity do not care about the quality of life here. He has stacked committees with friends, businessmen, and developers, most of them under the guise that they care about Ontario. If they cared about the quality of life, they would live here! Most of them think of Ontario as a place to do business no matter the costs to others!

It is my honest and sincere opinion the power was beginning to shift from these special interests a few yearsback. Joe, not getting the attention he wanted ran a successful campaign of deception on his way to office with the library issue being one of them.

Now as far as free free free? I wonder how many handouts these business owners take for free from our government. The library has, is, and always be a service, no a for profit organization.

When slop and his buddies get done, the average resident looses because they will still be subsidizing he and his business buddies shopping mall!

Beware the unelected political entity, a couple of them now in prominent positions on the committees! "

A major disconnect Joe wrote on Feb 21, 2009 4:43 PM:

" You have been so disingenuous from the get-go on this that it's almost like you are against even HAVING a library. Prove to us you aren't Jim Risch or Bill Sali. "

Free Free Free wrote on Feb 21, 2009 11:50 AM:

" Your are right, "this is just so asinine" that a public building, and the operators want it FREE! Ontario taxpayers paid for the building, now a new group wants it FREE! Free Free Free, must be all democrats. At least the city should recoup the cost of the building, so rent to own. How about $3000 a month for 5 years to pay back what CITY OF ONTARIO citizens, not you whinny county democrats. And remember, for the last 3 years CITY residents kept it open, and NO county people, paid a single red cent to use it or keep it open. So now, because the CITY wants to recoup some $$, you are all whinny! Something for nothing, either city employees, or democrats. You always want free. "

Bill Peterson wrote on Feb 21, 2009 10:03 AM:

" Interesting that our City Fathers run for election based on cutting cost and not raising taxes. They did not want to continue to fund a portion of City/County Library. But as soon as the Community votes for a tax basis for the Library they desire to have $60,000 of those tax dollars in form of rent. They seem to apply the same philosophy to the Golf Course, and the Swimming Pool. They are in effect destroying the quality of life for our citizens. Until they have the courage to address the revenue side of their problem, they will go down in our cities history as the fathers of our community's decline. "

A wrote on Feb 20, 2009 3:15 PM:

" I usually always have alot to say on here, but this is just so asinine I am at a loss for words at the moment. "

Larry wrote on Feb 20, 2009 2:54 PM:

" Dominick replied he and other council members would have to consult their schedules. Dominick also said Tuesday night that the public forum should occur within the next two weeks.


Well Joe...you opened your corkhole and boy you bit off more than you can chew. Why don't you send that sidekick nut prince of yours out for damage control? It sounds like you are to CHICKEN and not man enough to face the public BAWK BAWK BAWK.

There was a better way to keep the library open but nooooooooooooooooooooooo that way was not good for Ontario. Come out come out wherever you are!

Lol

Tree huggers rock! "

EncourageReading wrote on Feb 20, 2009 12:38 PM:

" May I ask why The City of Ontario feels justified in charging $5000/month rent for a building it built with Grant money received specifically for the purpose of building a Library? What the HE**! What does the City of Ontario intend to do with this extra $60,000/year that will genuinely benefit the citizens of Ontario more than a well-run, functioning library? One can't help but think that the City of Ontario and Mayor Joe Dominick are apparently not interested in improving the city of Ontario so much as they are interested in improving their own power/pocket-books... Help the Public Library, and encourage reading by doing the right thing Joe! Gift the building. "


TERMS OF USE

Those who post comments are accountable for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they furnish. While we encourage writers to utilize this service on our Web site, we also strongly suggest they treat it as public forum where good taste counts. We reserve the right to decline for approval objectionable material from these blogs.

Writers that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments - such as racists language, threats or comments unrelated to the story - will not be approved for the blogs. Also, entries that are unsigned or "signatures" by someone other than the actual writer will not be approved.

While writers can still post anonymously, we strongly suggest that they do not do so.

Opinions, guidance and other information expressed in Argus Observer story blog comments and on the Argus Observer blogs represent the individuals' own views and not necessarily those of the Argus Observer. The Argus Observer furnishes this type of forum and does not endorse and is not accountable for statements or advice from anyone other than an designated Argus Observer spokesperson.


(optional)
   

All Newspaper Ads
Place a classified ad

Community Calendar
November 2009
S M Tu W Th F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30

» This Week's Events
» Submit an Event
Click to View All Events

Business Directory
Find a business near you
Business Type

OR Business Name

Web Search
Google
 

Find out about our RSS feeds and what they are.

Copyright © 2009 Argus Observer - www.argusobserver.com. All rights reserved. | Unathorized reproduction is prohibited.