Weather Magnet

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

State librarian: No dog in city fight



Ontario — The Oregon state librarian said Tuesday that, while he is interested in community outreach to make the history of Ontario’s book center known in Malheur County neither he, nor the state, is looking to get involved in the current skirmish between the newly-formed library district and the city.

Oregon State Librarian Jim Sheppke said the state library’s interest is not to “get in the middle” of current talks but to simply shed light on the situation.

Currently at issue, is how much, if anything, the city should charge in rent to the newly-formed library district for the library building.

Sheppke’s role in the saga revolving around the city and the voter-approved Ontario Library District emerged last month in connection to a letter. In the letter, mailed to Ontario Public Library District Chair Donnaclaire Blankinship, Sheppke wrote that he believed leasing the library would be inconsistent with the assurance the city of Ontario made in 1966 that the building would always be used as a library.

Sheppke said he was prompted to write the letter because of what he felt was a lack of awareness regarding the 1966 agreement the city made with the state library to secure funds to build the library building. At the time, $220,000 was budgeted by the city in a bond election to build the new library. The state library board distributed a $180,000 grant to the library with the stipulation the building would always be used as a library.

“The grant application indicates that this was 45 percent of the cost of the $400,000 project,” he said in the letter.

In a phone interview Tuesday afternoon, Sheppke repeated what he said in the letter, mainly that charging the library rent would be inconsistent with the arrangements between cities and counties and other library districts.

Sheppke said when the ownership of the library “changed hands,” most other cities and counties saw fit to give the building to the newly-formed district.

“I think they do that because they realize the library building doesn’t really belong to them,” he said.

Sheppke said he believes the library belongs to the community and that, when a city or county gives the building to the new district, the city or county allows itself to focus its attention on other city needs, benefiting both sides.

“The right thing to do is just give the building to the new unit of local government,” he said.

The fact that Ontario city government has not reached the same conclusion as many other cities regarding use of the library building seems “strange.”

In a phone interview Tuesday afternoon, Ontario City Council member David Sullivan said he believed charging the library district rent has nothing to do with not allowing the building to function as a library.

“I don’t know why the state librarian is even getting involved,” he said.

Ontario City Council member Charlotte Fugate, who knows Sheppke personally because of their involvement with the Oregon State Heritage Commission, said she was a little surprised about Sheppke getting involved in “local politics.”

“But I’m pretty sure it’s because the library board went to him,” she said.

In a phone interview Tuesday afternoon, Sheppke said he has been updated on issues regarding the newly-formed library district and has been consulted on issues since the library board was attempting to create its own district.

“We’ve been in frequent conversations,” he said.

Last week, Ontario City Council member Norm Crume said that just because other cities have opted to give their buildings away doesn’t mean Ontario should. Ontario Mayor Joe Dominick has also referred to the importance of the city protecting its asset.

Though city officials have continued to maintain that $5,000 a month in rent is a flexible figure, Sheppke expressed the same opinion brought forth by Ontario Public Library District Budget Committee Chairman Paul Erlebach last month, which is that money could be used to fund other library needs.

“If the library district has to use some of their limited budget to pay rent, they may not be able to buy as many books or have as many programs,” Sheppke said.

Ontario resident Joe Maldonado, 47, also cited books and programs as one reason he did not believe the city should  charge an “unreasonable” amount of rent to the newly-formed district. He also found fault with the fact that the city will be placing some of the money into the general fund.

“It just seems like the city is just trying to get a hold of the money and use it for something else,” he said.

Library district voters can secure an opportunity to deliver feedback on the issue during a town hall session at 6:30 Thursday at Four Rivers Cultural Center.

 




Comment Blog - Note: All Comments Subject To Approval

Sheesh wrote on Mar 10, 2009 1:24 AM:

" Never thought it would be so short a time before the folks we just elected got flaky with the Crisco.

Ysy. "

Ontario Resident wrote on Mar 6, 2009 10:18 AM:

" So how can the Council members assert that the State Board has no standing to express an opinion in this matter? The State contributed 45% of the cost of the building. Were Crume, Sullivan and Domminick planning to disperse 45% of their double taxation wind fall "rent" income to the state to reimburse the state for their investment? I don't think so. That is where these morons are so deluded. Maybe they should go to the library and check out some books on civics and read about how stupid they are. Guess who spoke in favor of the rent last night at the town hall meeting. Riley Hill (campaign contributor and buddy to Domminick and Sullivan) Larry Heidbrink, (if you have read his rants on the editorial page you know all about him) and Mr Hollingsworth. Riley's statement was nearly incoherent. Heidbrink's was angry and Hollingsworth thinks the city is a business. The rest spoke in favor of the taxpayers not having to be charged again for something that they have already paid for. In a show of hands the difference in the meeting was about 200 to 4 in favor of the building being deeded to the Library District. If Crume's buddies feel as he says they do that he is right, they don't feel it enough to stand up and express their agreement in public. The other side had no problem doing that last night. "

Taxpayer wrote on Mar 5, 2009 11:21 AM:

" Amazing! Why in the world is the city doing this? They do not "own" the library, THE TAXPAYERS OWN THE LIBRARY!!!!

Ontario is being relieved of the burden of supporting the library and of paying expenses for the building itself, yet they demand more!

There can only be two justifications for keeping the building: 1) they are planning to re-open a city library sometime in the relatively near future (NOT!); or 2) they want to convert the building into a for profit rental asset. Since they will never open another library, that leaves the rental theory. That being the case, they are: A) violating the terms of the 1966 agreement with the state (by using it as a rental property -- that just happens to be housing a library by the current tenants); and B) triple taxing those citizens who: i) are still paying their full share of city taxes that have never been reduced despite no more city library; ii) paid for the building, upkeep and fixtures -- to be used as a library -- for many years; and iii) are paying taxes for the new library district.

And why doesn't the county step in and make a claim on the property (or help the new district) for all the money they dumped into the library over the years?! They have invested heavily into the library and may have leverage to force the city to do what's right.

The only thing this money grab has done is prove the elected officials have no interest in looking out for the needs of the taxpayers and ensure no one will ever vote in favor of a taxing district again for fear they will be reared by the city counsel. "

Shhhh wrote on Mar 5, 2009 3:25 AM:

" Boy for not wanting to get involved this guy sure got involved. Maybe now that he has taken care of Ontario's problems he can work on the State. "

localcitizen wrote on Mar 4, 2009 5:10 PM:

" Ontario City Council dont be gready like the CEOs and let the library have the building at a reasonable rent, maybe the maintaince cost. After all before they got the district you had to fund everything. Cant believe you can be so ruthless when you see money. "


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
February 2010
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

» 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 © 2010 Argus Observer - www.argusobserver.com. All rights reserved. | Unathorized reproduction is prohibited.