I learned that the current library on Stolp and Benton is too small, has insufficient parking, and is in need of repairs and updates that could cost as much as $15 million. If torn down, there’s also the possibility that the crazy “S” curve on Benton and Stolp can be straightened. Spending $30 million, therefore, now seems reasonable and appropriate from the perspective of making a new replacement. Spending that same amount to fund the new plan is (how can I put this gently?) nuts. However, the new vision wins because it contains most of the keywords that excite spenders - new, innovative, cutting edge, technology, community, connections, business growth, and so on. They “sound” great but can someone put a specific definition to any of them?
In the end, after hours of presentations, I conclude that the powers behind this current game want the tax money and they figured out a way to create and sell an exciting emperor that “has no clothes”. I’m fairly savvy on technology and I can tell you that I heard nothing concrete. Sure, the plans are modern, cutting edge, and allow for almost infinite flexibility - but of what? There’s disdain over “old school” techniques (hard printed outlines of a Powerpoint presentation). Except for the building itself, its size, the parking, and so on, I only see dreams of potential, not descriptions actual.
Personally, I favor spending on actual plans. Sure, it is prudent to plan for contingencies (additional growth, parking, security, etc.), but we seem to be planning for something nobody is certain about that uses technology that is but a dream. I think Aurora can build a very nice library that is efficient, easy to use, and has room for expansion and change when and if it becomes necessary.
Finally, it looks that our mayor is suggesting that the Old Waubonsee building be converted from an unusable school to a fresh usable school (technology center?). Doesn’t it appear that he has opened the door to more spending that would actually set up a facility to compete with the library for the same services that were presented in their current vision? That possibility should frighten the library board and the taxpayers.
Sadly, the train has already left the station - the one for the dreamy technology vision. It can only be halted by a City Council that sees the problems associated with the current debacle and decides to vote against the recommendations of their Finance Committee. What’s the chances that will happen - especially as so many have already committed their YES votes?
Now's the time for our aldermen - and mayor - to step forward and act on behalf of a city that needs a new library building - downtown. They should defeat this "plan" on Tuesday, April 10, 2012 and send it back to be simplified and clarified. That shouldn't take long because those are the plans they had before politics got in and created the present snafu.
