I am wondering where all the "branchlove" folks were nine years ago when there was a strong movement to bring a branch to the Dempster-Dodge Plaza- to serve families who had been without a branch for the past 30 years. If their commitment to the value of branch libraries is as strong as it appears to be today perhaps their support and advocacy for equity on this issue could have tipped the scales back then------instead of this move dying for lack of political and community will.
The current state of affairs has been inequitable for over half a century -- at least since the west-central and southwest sections of Evanston were fully developed with housing after World War II.
In a time of financial crisis, should we:
A. Perpetuate the current inequitable system at substantial continuing expense?
B. Spend more to end the inequity by adding more branches and thereby deepen the financial crisis?
C. End the inequity by making everybody go to the main library?
D. Impose a special tax on those who most benefit from the current branch locations, and offer the option of creating additional special tax zones for new neighborhood branches?
The BranchLove folks reject options C and D. The budget hawks reject A and B.
Given the facts, what is the most plausible choice?
To take your position is to say that inequity should be allowed to continue forever because it is divisive to discuss it.
That's the ostrich solution, which doesn't appeal to me.
And I believe that there are only a limited number of issues on which, in recent times, Evanston has been inequitable in its provision of services. So I think your fear of a descent into inter-neighborhood warfare is greatly overblown.
It's great to see the Mayor and the City focused on the future instead of getting bogged down dealing with relatively small and inconsequential issues in this town. This is the type of innovative thinking we need to move this City forward. Exciting!
There is only one reason it would make sense for everyone in the City to pay for a branch library: if it offered library services to a broad community who otherwise would be unable to access them. This is why demographics are important in this debate: I see no indication that the majority of people in the areas surrounding the current branches are unable to get downtown.
Given your previous right-wing pro-teaparty postings, I am surprised that you advocate keeping the branch libraries.
Public libraries are, by definition, public. This means that they are run by the government, and compete (or eliminate) the private sector.
Shouldn't we close all public libraries?
They take business away from companies like Barnes & Nobles, Borders, and Amazon.
They use up tax money. Don't you want smaller government?
Most importantly, do we want the government deciding what books we can read? Do we want Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and Bill Ayers and Elizabeth Tisdahl serving as a literary 'Death Panel', deciding which books will circulate and which will not?
This whole "public library" scam is just part of a Democratic plot to take over the publishing industry and impose European socialism on America.
I don't dispute the fact that the branch libraries predominantly serve white residents who earn above median income.
What I do dispute is using this fact as a basis to close the branch libraries. If we start going down that road where does it end? To do so is divisive and pits neighborhoods against neighborhoods.
Good for Evanston, good for Hilton. We're looking forward to bringing our conference there this spring - the CMS Expo Learning & Business Conference, May 3, 4, 5th.
No one is race baiting by pointing out that the locations of the branch libraries disproportionately favor the well-to-do and white.
It's actually precisely what race baiting is.
No one is "implying that the city should stop providing a service because of the skin color of the people in the neighborhood... ."
Are you also going to try to claim that no one is implying that the city should stop providing this service because of the income levels of people in the neighborhood? Because, in case you missed it, those are the two things this post and comments discuss: skin color and income levels.
It was just a question -- why were the branches (both of them) placed where they were?
The question was asked explicitly in the context of "race": "The article is based on facts about race and income. This information does raise a question..." (emphasis mine)
I guess that the statement "the truth hurts" applies to your situation in defending the branches.
It very revealing that you assume I'm defending the branches simply because I called out blatant race baiting and cherry picking of facts. Apparently you're among those who feel that anything goes when it comes to pushing your agenda.
It's delightful that students at Lincoln can walk to the branch library just a quarter mile away.
Lincoln draws students farther away from the south branch (1.12 miles) than the farthest Washington students (1.09-1.10 miles).
Too bad that students at Washington, where 54.2 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk nearly a mile to get to the South Branch library.
Lincoln's attendance area only goes west to Sherman. There are Washington students within blocks of the South Branch. Washington school itself isn't even a mile from the South Branch, and most of the school's attendence area is to the east and north of the school.
For the record, I went to Washington for part of elementary school and went to the South Branch.
Too bad that students at Oakton, where 69 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk over a mile to get there.
The vast majority of Oakton students live within a mile of the South Branch. The only part of Oakton's attendence area that's farther than a mile away from the south branch is roughly the area south of the skokie swift tracks.
Three years ago, District adminstration claimed there was space at Willard for TWI and its Gen Ed program while keeping class sizes within district guidelines (guidelines are a maximum limit, the most schools have class sizes far below the guidelines). These assertions by the District can now be seen to be clearly false. Instead of trying to correct the overcrowding problem at Willard they are proposing to the board and option to allow Willard to become more crowded still.
How can the board or anyone in the public trust the superintendent not to allow unbounded class size growth and the sacrifice of music and art programs?
My comment from December 2006 is the first comment in the article below:
The ordinance is very welcome. I hope there will be some pedestrian reports to the police. But how about banning cell phone use while crossing major streets, like Sheridan and Chicago Avenue, Maple and Church, Ridge and Church, etc.? Pedestrians become completely unaware that the light is changing or that a bicycle is passing them or that a car already has turned in front of them before they started to step off the curb. Even without an ordinance, cell phone safety is a shared responsibility.
Incidentally, on Friday, I spotted a police car, when turning right, not yield to a pedestrian (no sirens or any other indication of urgency) AND be using a hand held communication device!
I've not seen a response from teachers or parent about what books the branch [or for that matter Main] libraries have that the children need to go there for. Have these parents ever examined the 'educational ' collection at the branches ? If the schools don't have, and the branches do, the books the students need, is that not a matter to take up with the schools---not the general public's tax dollars ? Can't the schools get them from other Evanston schools ? inter-library loan ?
Are those children, who parents claim use the branches in such overwhelming numbers, going to the branches for as a 'glorified' study hall until 8PM ? Are not schools open for after-hour study rather than children having to walk to a branch ? Do parents really believe their kids are at the branch or are they at their friend's houses and using studying as a cover ? If they use the branch as a study-hall, that covers Saturday but what about Sunday ? At the Main I see kids come in when the Loft opens---is that not a clue to parents about what the kids want---and not very many in the reading areas on the third floor ? Do parents prefer for the kids to be at the branches [or even Main] rather than being at home so parents can help with homework questions or is the branch just a way to get the kids out of their hair ? Maybe the parents should shut off their TV and study for their own careers at the same time their kids are studying. [Do the branches or even Main have staff to help with homework ?]
The closest tract 8088 comes to the site of the north branch library is two blocks. The closest tract 8092 comes to the north branch is seven blocks.
Fire officials say they can get an engine to any location in Evanston within four minutes, given the current station configuration.
They couldn't do that if there wasn't a station #4 on Washington just east of Dodge and the only south Evanston station was where station #2 is on Madison at Custer -- not far from the South Branch library.
That there are racial and economic disparities by neighborhood in Evanston is the truth. It's not divisive to note that, just inconvenient to those who wish to ignore the truth.
Your comment:
"Implying that the city should stop providing a service because of the skin color of people in the neighborhood is just unnecessary race baiting. We've spent decades getting racists to stop equating skin color with economic and social conditions, yet here we have residents of one of the country's most progressive cities bringing it back."
No one is race baiting by pointing out that the locations of the branch libraries disproportionately favor the well-to-do and white. You may not like that that fact has been clearly demonstrated and publicized but it is still a fact.
No one is "implying that the city should stop providing a service because of the skin color of the people in the neighborhood... ." I am arguing that services that disproportionately favor the well-to-do need to be examined very closely in these tough financial times. These neighborhood frills for the wealthy need to go when compared to police and fire response times.
Your comment:
"Obviously to be close to the white people and far away from any minority groups, right? After all, the south branch has been on the same block since 1917, when the city was 92-96% white. The location clearly has everything to do with race and nothing to do with the fact that Chicago Ave is a major business corridor."
It was just a question -- why were the branches (both of them) placed where they were? If you don't know the answer, no need to assume that I had some racist intent in asking the question.
Again, look at the equities of where the branches are located and why similar services have been withheld for decades from other neighborhoods. The facts indicate that the branches are extra neighborhood services for those who can well afford to drive or take a bus to the downtown library.
I guess that the statement "the truth hurts" applies to your situation in defending the branches. I appreciate Bill's efforts to bring these facts to light. I am sending this article to all of the council members to make certain that they consider these facts, rather than focusing on emotional attachments to things that we can no longer afford.
I find it interesting that the CSNA crowd wants to save the north branch library.
Perhaps keeping the branch libraries would be more justifiable, and have more political support, if more patrons used them. The CSNA and other anti-development groups have helped to prevent , delay, or downscale various development projects that would have provided a greater customer base for the north branch. Just look at that empty field at Kendall...too bad that there aren't any apartments there with families and children, who would use the branch library. Central and Eastwood is another example.
And all the anti-development people who clamored against 'selling out' Evanston's charm and uniqueness and history for development and revenue: do you see what happens when the city doesn't have revenue? It can't afford to pay for branch libraries.
And to everyone who supports low-density development and ample parking: If have low density, it means fewer people are going to be able to walk to branch libraries...so if they are driving to the library anyway, they can drive to Wilmette or Evanston Main. No need for branch libraries.
"The City ordinance exempts work-related calls by government officials from the ban..."
City officials Exempt? Typical of the city council, the aldercrooks are above the laws they enact for everyone else. The RULING CLASS RULES while the peons must kowtow and obey.
What job can ANY city official possibly have that taking an extra minute out of their oh-so-busy schedule to pull over and stop a car is too much to ask of them. Can none of them afford a hands-free device? Just add another fee to the residents, that should get the Ruling Class all the toys they seem to need.
Who will pay when some official kills some biker or pedestrian? Can the city afford MORE lawsuits? Oh, wait, yes it can... The aldercrooks will just put more non-tax fees on the citizenry.
There's nothing wrong with the law, only the lack of uniform enforcement.
the branch libraries have served the well-to-do while
That's a completely different issue than skin color, and there's a solid argument that can be made for a branch library in west evanston without invoking race. Implying that the city should stop providing a service because of the skin color of people in the neighborhood is just unnecessary race baiting. We've spent decades getting racists to stop equating skin color with economic and social conditions, yet here we have residents of one of the country's most progressive cities bringing it back.
The article is based on facts about race and income. This information does raise a question: why were the branch libraries placed where they were?
Obviously to be close to the white people and far away from any minority groups, right? After all, the south branch has been on the same block since 1917, when the city was 92-96% white. The location clearly has everything to do with race and nothing to do with the fact that Chicago Ave is a major business corridor.
Walking/biking a mile or two a day is not a big deal. I walk/bike to NU and then downtown Evanston and back to NU [1.6 mile total]everyday from by the Stadium and sometimes from downtown Evanston to the Jewel on Greenbay [2.4+ mile]. That is no big deal. It is easy to reach EPL-Main by walking/biking/bus/train. Even if I lived next door to a branch, I'd still go to the Main for their resources [certainly if I wanted a decent chance to get to a computer].
For all the talk of students using the branches, are there numbers ? The few times I've been to either branch, I've never seen a child without a parent---and even those children were under seven. Children and 'educational use' are being used as a smoke-screen by parents who want to have source of romance novels close.
If you suggest that census tract 8088 is "near" the North Branch Library then the same logic applies to tract 8092. In other words, many homes in 8092 are closer to the North Branch than homes in 8088. And, according to the map, 8092 is less than 50 percent white, and earns under the median income.
Also, tracts 8097 and 8103 are in relative proximity to the South Branch Library, and both are 70 percent or less white, if I am reading this map correctly.
Though interesting, the racial disparity argument doesn't neatly fit according to what I see on the map, especially when you consider the city is 65 percent white.
Conversely, there seems to be economic disparity when it comes to fire stations in Evanston. Four of the five Evanston fire stations appear to be in areas that earn $52,000 or more - above the median in the legend. The other fire station is in an area that earns $42,000 or more - the median, according to the provided legend.
So, why are there no fire stations in the poorer areas - under the median earnings?
Two of the fire stations are in tracts, "ranging from $105,530 in tract 8089 to $123,905 in tract 8088." Both are on Central Street. Perhaps we should close one?
Yes, I know the services of branch libraries and fire stations are vastly different, and I know the poorer areas are covered by these fire stations. My point in this exercise is to demonstrate that an argument to close the branch libraries because they do not serve a particular race or class is a false and divisive one.
As I have pointed out before, I think the city could save a lot of money by closing down one of the Central Street Fire Stations and laying off staff. At least, there should be some discussion about it.
That way, the city might have enough money ($350,000?)to keep the libraries open and who knows, maybe open another branch library or two in the less priviledged neighborhoods.
Oh, sure, we should all be walking miles each day.
But the whole premise of the branches is convenience.
If we all are up for walking miles, then everyone can walk to the main library downtown and there's no need at all for branches.
BTW, as to your estimate that it's .66 miles from Washington to the South Branch library, you might want to check your pedometer ... Google maps says it is 0.8 miles from the corner of Ashland Avenue and Main Street to the corner of Chicago Avenue and Lee Street.
The city of Evanston web site mapping section pegs the distance from the front door of Washington School to the branch library front door at .85 miles.
While I can appreciate the general basis for the argument, let's understand some distances.
The distance from Washington to the South branch library is approx. .66 miles. Well under a mile. We live on Asbury, not far from Washington and regularly walk to the downtown district, the beach, etc. These walks are really not as far or as cumbersome as some would think.
My daughter goes to Washington and they recently had a walking field trip to the library...the MAIN library downtown. So I am not sold on the idea that walking to the branch library on Chicago/Lee is really all that imposing.
It's delightful that students at Lincoln can walk to the branch library just a quarter mile away.
If you check the District 65 school report cards you'll see that Lincoln has 39.2 percent of its students classified as low income, slightly less than the district-wide average of 40.5 percent.
But let's look at the other elementary schools south of Dempster Street.
Too bad that students at Washington, where 54.2 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk nearly a mile to get to the South Branch library.
Too bad that students at Oakton, where 69 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk over a mile to get there.
Too bad that students at Dawes, where 55 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk over a mile-and-a-half to get there.
If we're talking about how to best serve impoverished children in southern Evanston, Chicago Avenue and Lee Street seems like a poor location for a branch library, now doesn't it?
(For data on "actual users" of the libraries by geography, see this story.)
This is exactly the issue - I want to live in a City where I don't have to fear violence, where I will be taken to the hospital in time to save my life if I have a heart attack, where my property is safe from burglary, fires and from damage by neglected City trees. I want to have access to library services - though I don't mind travel to do so. I want the snow plowed in winter and the streets clean in summer. I want garbage removed in a timely manner, and the rat problem addressed. I want our infrastructure maintained so that we don't get hit by another deferred maintenance bill like we did with the water/sewer system. To me, these things are far more important than "extras" like convenience libraries that serve a population perfectly able to get downtown.
Most importantly, I want to ensure that my neighbors who are struggling financially are not driven from their homes by increased property taxes. While I realize that the City is only one budget that draws from from property tax, at least it seems to understand the struggles of its constituents.
If we don't cut the "extras" to help our neighbors, then what kind of Evanston are we?
Branch libraries are NICE. But our current system does not serve those who need it most. Get rid of the branches and establish an excellent bookmobile program that will serve ALL of Evanston, not just the wealthy few who are lucky enough to live within blocks of their branch.
Simply stated, we cannot afford what we have and we certainly cannot afford to build more branches in areas that truly need them.
Nobody is denying the value of libraries, and (as you may have already heard) we have a great library downtown.
Skokie is larger than Evanston, and has chosen to focus on having an award-winning single library system bolstered by -- get this -- a bookmobile.
I am wondering where all the "branchlove" folks were nine years ago when there was a strong movement to bring a branch to the Dempster-Dodge Plaza- to serve families who had been without a branch for the past 30 years. If their commitment to the value of branch libraries is as strong as it appears to be today perhaps their support and advocacy for equity on this issue could have tipped the scales back then------instead of this move dying for lack of political and community will.
Al,
The current state of affairs has been inequitable for over half a century -- at least since the west-central and southwest sections of Evanston were fully developed with housing after World War II.
In a time of financial crisis, should we:
A. Perpetuate the current inequitable system at substantial continuing expense?
B. Spend more to end the inequity by adding more branches and thereby deepen the financial crisis?
C. End the inequity by making everybody go to the main library?
D. Impose a special tax on those who most benefit from the current branch locations, and offer the option of creating additional special tax zones for new neighborhood branches?
The BranchLove folks reject options C and D. The budget hawks reject A and B.
Given the facts, what is the most plausible choice?
To take your position is to say that inequity should be allowed to continue forever because it is divisive to discuss it.
That's the ostrich solution, which doesn't appeal to me.
And I believe that there are only a limited number of issues on which, in recent times, Evanston has been inequitable in its provision of services. So I think your fear of a descent into inter-neighborhood warfare is greatly overblown.
Bill
It's great to see the Mayor and the City focused on the future instead of getting bogged down dealing with relatively small and inconsequential issues in this town. This is the type of innovative thinking we need to move this City forward. Exciting!
Keep it up, those with responsible financial minds!
http://branchclose.org
There is only one reason it would make sense for everyone in the City to pay for a branch library: if it offered library services to a broad community who otherwise would be unable to access them. This is why demographics are important in this debate: I see no indication that the majority of people in the areas surrounding the current branches are unable to get downtown.
Al,
Given your previous right-wing pro-teaparty postings, I am surprised that you advocate keeping the branch libraries.
Public libraries are, by definition, public. This means that they are run by the government, and compete (or eliminate) the private sector.
Shouldn't we close all public libraries?
They take business away from companies like Barnes & Nobles, Borders, and Amazon.
They use up tax money. Don't you want smaller government?
Most importantly, do we want the government deciding what books we can read? Do we want Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and Bill Ayers and Elizabeth Tisdahl serving as a literary 'Death Panel', deciding which books will circulate and which will not?
This whole "public library" scam is just part of a Democratic plot to take over the publishing industry and impose European socialism on America.
Hi Bill,
I don't dispute the fact that the branch libraries predominantly serve white residents who earn above median income.
What I do dispute is using this fact as a basis to close the branch libraries. If we start going down that road where does it end? To do so is divisive and pits neighborhoods against neighborhoods.
Good for Evanston, good for Hilton. We're looking forward to bringing our conference there this spring - the CMS Expo Learning & Business Conference, May 3, 4, 5th.
It's actually precisely what race baiting is.
Are you also going to try to claim that no one is implying that the city should stop providing this service because of the income levels of people in the neighborhood? Because, in case you missed it, those are the two things this post and comments discuss: skin color and income levels.
The question was asked explicitly in the context of "race": "The article is based on facts about race and income. This information does raise a question..." (emphasis mine)
It very revealing that you assume I'm defending the branches simply because I called out blatant race baiting and cherry picking of facts. Apparently you're among those who feel that anything goes when it comes to pushing your agenda.
Lincoln draws students farther away from the south branch (1.12 miles) than the farthest Washington students (1.09-1.10 miles).
Lincoln's attendance area only goes west to Sherman. There are Washington students within blocks of the South Branch. Washington school itself isn't even a mile from the South Branch, and most of the school's attendence area is to the east and north of the school.
For the record, I went to Washington for part of elementary school and went to the South Branch.
The vast majority of Oakton students live within a mile of the South Branch. The only part of Oakton's attendence area that's farther than a mile away from the south branch is roughly the area south of the skokie swift tracks.
Three years ago, District adminstration claimed there was space at Willard for TWI and its Gen Ed program while keeping class sizes within district guidelines (guidelines are a maximum limit, the most schools have class sizes far below the guidelines). These assertions by the District can now be seen to be clearly false. Instead of trying to correct the overcrowding problem at Willard they are proposing to the board and option to allow Willard to become more crowded still.
How can the board or anyone in the public trust the superintendent not to allow unbounded class size growth and the sacrifice of music and art programs?
My comment from December 2006 is the first comment in the article below:
http://evanstonnow.com/node/1741
The ordinance is very welcome. I hope there will be some pedestrian reports to the police. But how about banning cell phone use while crossing major streets, like Sheridan and Chicago Avenue, Maple and Church, Ridge and Church, etc.? Pedestrians become completely unaware that the light is changing or that a bicycle is passing them or that a car already has turned in front of them before they started to step off the curb. Even without an ordinance, cell phone safety is a shared responsibility.
Incidentally, on Friday, I spotted a police car, when turning right, not yield to a pedestrian (no sirens or any other indication of urgency) AND be using a hand held communication device!
I've not seen a response from teachers or parent about what books the branch [or for that matter Main] libraries have that the children need to go there for. Have these parents ever examined the 'educational ' collection at the branches ? If the schools don't have, and the branches do, the books the students need, is that not a matter to take up with the schools---not the general public's tax dollars ? Can't the schools get them from other Evanston schools ? inter-library loan ?
Are those children, who parents claim use the branches in such overwhelming numbers, going to the branches for as a 'glorified' study hall until 8PM ? Are not schools open for after-hour study rather than children having to walk to a branch ? Do parents really believe their kids are at the branch or are they at their friend's houses and using studying as a cover ? If they use the branch as a study-hall, that covers Saturday but what about Sunday ? At the Main I see kids come in when the Loft opens---is that not a clue to parents about what the kids want---and not very many in the reading areas on the third floor ? Do parents prefer for the kids to be at the branches [or even Main] rather than being at home so parents can help with homework questions or is the branch just a way to get the kids out of their hair ? Maybe the parents should shut off their TV and study for their own careers at the same time their kids are studying. [Do the branches or even Main have staff to help with homework ?]
Hi Al,
The closest tract 8088 comes to the site of the north branch library is two blocks. The closest tract 8092 comes to the north branch is seven blocks.
Fire officials say they can get an engine to any location in Evanston within four minutes, given the current station configuration.
They couldn't do that if there wasn't a station #4 on Washington just east of Dodge and the only south Evanston station was where station #2 is on Madison at Custer -- not far from the South Branch library.
That there are racial and economic disparities by neighborhood in Evanston is the truth. It's not divisive to note that, just inconvenient to those who wish to ignore the truth.
--Bill
Your comment:
"Implying that the city should stop providing a service because of the skin color of people in the neighborhood is just unnecessary race baiting. We've spent decades getting racists to stop equating skin color with economic and social conditions, yet here we have residents of one of the country's most progressive cities bringing it back."
No one is race baiting by pointing out that the locations of the branch libraries disproportionately favor the well-to-do and white. You may not like that that fact has been clearly demonstrated and publicized but it is still a fact.
No one is "implying that the city should stop providing a service because of the skin color of the people in the neighborhood... ." I am arguing that services that disproportionately favor the well-to-do need to be examined very closely in these tough financial times. These neighborhood frills for the wealthy need to go when compared to police and fire response times.
Your comment:
"Obviously to be close to the white people and far away from any minority groups, right? After all, the south branch has been on the same block since 1917, when the city was 92-96% white. The location clearly has everything to do with race and nothing to do with the fact that Chicago Ave is a major business corridor."
It was just a question -- why were the branches (both of them) placed where they were? If you don't know the answer, no need to assume that I had some racist intent in asking the question.
Again, look at the equities of where the branches are located and why similar services have been withheld for decades from other neighborhoods. The facts indicate that the branches are extra neighborhood services for those who can well afford to drive or take a bus to the downtown library.
I guess that the statement "the truth hurts" applies to your situation in defending the branches. I appreciate Bill's efforts to bring these facts to light. I am sending this article to all of the council members to make certain that they consider these facts, rather than focusing on emotional attachments to things that we can no longer afford.
I find it interesting that the CSNA crowd wants to save the north branch library.
Perhaps keeping the branch libraries would be more justifiable, and have more political support, if more patrons used them. The CSNA and other anti-development groups have helped to prevent , delay, or downscale various development projects that would have provided a greater customer base for the north branch. Just look at that empty field at Kendall...too bad that there aren't any apartments there with families and children, who would use the branch library. Central and Eastwood is another example.
And all the anti-development people who clamored against 'selling out' Evanston's charm and uniqueness and history for development and revenue: do you see what happens when the city doesn't have revenue? It can't afford to pay for branch libraries.
And to everyone who supports low-density development and ample parking: If have low density, it means fewer people are going to be able to walk to branch libraries...so if they are driving to the library anyway, they can drive to Wilmette or Evanston Main. No need for branch libraries.
"The City ordinance exempts work-related calls by government officials from the ban..."
City officials Exempt? Typical of the city council, the aldercrooks are above the laws they enact for everyone else. The RULING CLASS RULES while the peons must kowtow and obey.
What job can ANY city official possibly have that taking an extra minute out of their oh-so-busy schedule to pull over and stop a car is too much to ask of them. Can none of them afford a hands-free device? Just add another fee to the residents, that should get the Ruling Class all the toys they seem to need.
Who will pay when some official kills some biker or pedestrian? Can the city afford MORE lawsuits? Oh, wait, yes it can... The aldercrooks will just put more non-tax fees on the citizenry.
There's nothing wrong with the law, only the lack of uniform enforcement.
That's a completely different issue than skin color, and there's a solid argument that can be made for a branch library in west evanston without invoking race. Implying that the city should stop providing a service because of the skin color of people in the neighborhood is just unnecessary race baiting. We've spent decades getting racists to stop equating skin color with economic and social conditions, yet here we have residents of one of the country's most progressive cities bringing it back.
Obviously to be close to the white people and far away from any minority groups, right? After all, the south branch has been on the same block since 1917, when the city was 92-96% white. The location clearly has everything to do with race and nothing to do with the fact that Chicago Ave is a major business corridor.
Walking/biking a mile or two a day is not a big deal. I walk/bike to NU and then downtown Evanston and back to NU [1.6 mile total]everyday from by the Stadium and sometimes from downtown Evanston to the Jewel on Greenbay [2.4+ mile]. That is no big deal. It is easy to reach EPL-Main by walking/biking/bus/train. Even if I lived next door to a branch, I'd still go to the Main for their resources [certainly if I wanted a decent chance to get to a computer].
For all the talk of students using the branches, are there numbers ? The few times I've been to either branch, I've never seen a child without a parent---and even those children were under seven. Children and 'educational use' are being used as a smoke-screen by parents who want to have source of romance novels close.
If you suggest that census tract 8088 is "near" the North Branch Library then the same logic applies to tract 8092. In other words, many homes in 8092 are closer to the North Branch than homes in 8088. And, according to the map, 8092 is less than 50 percent white, and earns under the median income.
Also, tracts 8097 and 8103 are in relative proximity to the South Branch Library, and both are 70 percent or less white, if I am reading this map correctly.
Though interesting, the racial disparity argument doesn't neatly fit according to what I see on the map, especially when you consider the city is 65 percent white.
Conversely, there seems to be economic disparity when it comes to fire stations in Evanston. Four of the five Evanston fire stations appear to be in areas that earn $52,000 or more - above the median in the legend. The other fire station is in an area that earns $42,000 or more - the median, according to the provided legend.
So, why are there no fire stations in the poorer areas - under the median earnings?
Two of the fire stations are in tracts, "ranging from $105,530 in tract 8089 to $123,905 in tract 8088." Both are on Central Street. Perhaps we should close one?
Yes, I know the services of branch libraries and fire stations are vastly different, and I know the poorer areas are covered by these fire stations. My point in this exercise is to demonstrate that an argument to close the branch libraries because they do not serve a particular race or class is a false and divisive one.
As I have pointed out before, I think the city could save a lot of money by closing down one of the Central Street Fire Stations and laying off staff. At least, there should be some discussion about it.
That way, the city might have enough money ($350,000?)to keep the libraries open and who knows, maybe open another branch library or two in the less priviledged neighborhoods.
Oh, sure, we should all be walking miles each day.
But the whole premise of the branches is convenience.
If we all are up for walking miles, then everyone can walk to the main library downtown and there's no need at all for branches.
BTW, as to your estimate that it's .66 miles from Washington to the South Branch library, you might want to check your pedometer ...
Google maps says it is 0.8 miles from the corner of Ashland Avenue and Main Street to the corner of Chicago Avenue and Lee Street.
The city of Evanston web site mapping section pegs the distance from the front door of Washington School to the branch library front door at .85 miles.
While I can appreciate the general basis for the argument, let's understand some distances.
The distance from Washington to the South branch library is approx. .66 miles. Well under a mile. We live on Asbury, not far from Washington and regularly walk to the downtown district, the beach, etc. These walks are really not as far or as cumbersome as some would think.
My daughter goes to Washington and they recently had a walking field trip to the library...the MAIN library downtown. So I am not sold on the idea that walking to the branch library on Chicago/Lee is really all that imposing.
Just one person's view.
It's delightful that students at Lincoln can walk to the branch library just a quarter mile away.
If you check the District 65 school report cards you'll see that Lincoln has 39.2 percent of its students classified as low income, slightly less than the district-wide average of 40.5 percent.
But let's look at the other elementary schools south of Dempster Street.
Too bad that students at Washington, where 54.2 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk nearly a mile to get to the South Branch library.
Too bad that students at Oakton, where 69 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk over a mile to get there.
Too bad that students at Dawes, where 55 percent of students are classified as low income, would have to walk over a mile-and-a-half to get there.
If we're talking about how to best serve impoverished children in southern Evanston, Chicago Avenue and Lee Street seems like a poor location for a branch library, now doesn't it?
(For data on "actual users" of the libraries by geography, see this story.)
-- Bill
This is exactly the issue - I want to live in a City where I don't have to fear violence, where I will be taken to the hospital in time to save my life if I have a heart attack, where my property is safe from burglary, fires and from damage by neglected City trees. I want to have access to library services - though I don't mind travel to do so. I want the snow plowed in winter and the streets clean in summer. I want garbage removed in a timely manner, and the rat problem addressed. I want our infrastructure maintained so that we don't get hit by another deferred maintenance bill like we did with the water/sewer system. To me, these things are far more important than "extras" like convenience libraries that serve a population perfectly able to get downtown.
Most importantly, I want to ensure that my neighbors who are struggling financially are not driven from their homes by increased property taxes. While I realize that the City is only one budget that draws from from property tax, at least it seems to understand the struggles of its constituents.
If we don't cut the "extras" to help our neighbors, then what kind of Evanston are we?
Branch libraries are NICE. But our current system does not serve those who need it most. Get rid of the branches and establish an excellent bookmobile program that will serve ALL of Evanston, not just the wealthy few who are lucky enough to live within blocks of their branch.
Simply stated, we cannot afford what we have and we certainly cannot afford to build more branches in areas that truly need them.
Nobody is denying the value of libraries, and (as you may have already heard) we have a great library downtown.
Skokie is larger than Evanston, and has chosen to focus on having an award-winning single library system bolstered by -- get this -- a bookmobile.