It’s a bit long. I suggest that the goals be culled so that true long-term strategic goals (such as accessibility for all) form the core and the rest of it is acknowledged as standard best practices of library management. It will make for a leaner and easier to read plan. For example, reviewing programs and services, items related to staff development, and enhancement of already existing programs don’t strike me as long-term strategic goals but management goals. A capital campaign to renovate the library system is a long-term goal, on the other hand, as is looking for innovative ways to develop new revenue streams and creating an advanced digitized framework for library services.

The plan lacks two components: a transparent process, informed by outreach to the public, for the physical renovation, rebuilding, expansion, consolidation and reconfiguring of each of the libraries within the BPL. The current process for it is opaque and unfair. Why one neighborhood gets new libraries and not another is incomprehensible to outsiders and invites cynicism about the process having become politicized. This is why both in Seattle and Washington DC ALL libraries were renovated, not just a few at a time.

The other component missing in the plan is to transform the governance of the Library Board. The board should consist of trustees who as candidates have been vetted by another public entity (city council?) in a public process to determine whether they are the best people to protect, first and foremost, the financial, cultural and civic interests of the BPL and its patrons. There should be term limits, to make room for new generations of Bostonians who reflect the academic, cultural, geographic and economic changes the city has been affected by, and will continue to be affected by.

With kind regards,

Marleen Nienhuis,
founding president,
Friends of the South End Library