Peter Warfield: Vote "No" on Prop. D
Vote "no" on Proposition D, the billion-dollar "hidden bond authorization."
Proposition D, the Library measure on the Nov. 6, 2007 ballot, is a civic disgrace. It is a bond authorization in disguise. And it is being sold with misinformation and worse.
Big Dollars, Harming What People Want Most
Proposition D will hurt the very things people want most in our libraries: good
collections, services and open hours. It is big - it would control more than
$1.2 billion in library spending over the next 15 years. (The current $78 million
budget times the 15 year life of the measure equals $1.2 billion, without adjusting
for inflation).
The Library and other proponents are misrepresenting Proposition D as a "renewal" of the Library Preservation Fund. In fact, Proposition D repeals the fund two years before it expires at the end of 2009 - and replaces it with many completely new terms and conditions.
The new measure is twice as long as the current one.
Proposition D Authorizes Bonds - Without Any Citizen Vote
Proposition D would authorize bonds to be issued for unspecified construction
projects and equipment - without a citizen vote. Only the recommendation of
the Library Commission and approval by the SF Board of Supervisors and mayor
would be required - for the next 15 years - not the usual bond approval requirement
of a two-thirds citizen vote.
Paying off the bonds would drain money away from the only use permitted by the current charter for the Library Preservation Fund (LPF): paying for library books, operations and open hours.
Prop. D would allow using portions of the newly-defined fund for "any lawful (library) purpose." Such purposes include construction and related equipment.
The so-called "cap" on debt payments would allow hundreds of millions of dollars in bonds to be issued if the library's budget were to increase as it has since Prop. E passed in 1994, establishing the LPF. The controller has said $4 million would support a $40 million to $50 million bond issued this year - multiply that by similar growth for 15 years and the total could reach $600 million plus.
The Library has a Record of Broken Promises
In 1988, Proposition A ($109 million bond measure) promised voters a state-of-the-art
New Main Library, big enough to hold growth in the collection for 20 years Ð
and the branches were to be upgraded for Americans with Disabilities Accessibility
(ADA) and earthquake safety. What happened?
The New Main Library's shelves were full to capacity on opening day, so city-paid consultants recommended $28 million in fixes to make it work right - so only a fraction of the branches were upgraded.
In 1994, Proposition E created the Library Preservation Fund to pay for operations,
with a priority on books and open hours. What happened?
• Hours: The Library's budget has quadrupled since 1994, but library hours
increased only once, in 1995, and have even decreased recently due to branches
closing for renovations. Now, the library has announced plans to increase hours
at eight branches in a whirlwind of activity - all timed to go into effect in
the few weeks just before the election.
• Book funding shot up to 15 percent of the budget in 1995, but then was
cut drastically. It has now risen to just 11 percent of the budget. In 2000,
Proposition A ($106 million bond measure) promised to build or renovate 24 branches
and upgrade the most earthquake-prone branches first. What happened?
With many projects falling years behind schedule and the program running $40 million to $50 million over budget, the Library Commission voted in March of this year to cut all funding for five branch renovations. The three most earthquake-prone branches, Richmond, Noe Valley and Marina, were not renovated first.
Instead, the first to open was a brand-new branch at Mission Bay, opening last year, followed by several others that were not the most dangerous. The Library Commission plans to fill the funding gap by putting forward this radical revision of the Library Preservation Fund with its hidden bond authorization scheme.
In September, the City's controller issued a scathing audit report citing management weaknesses in the bond program as a cause of additional costs and schedule overruns.
No Urgency
There is no urgency - at least four elections are scheduled before the current
Library Preservation Fund expires in 2009. Bond cost overruns could be made
up with annual funding by the supervisors from the General Fund, or by putting
a bond measure on the ballot that follows the usual rules specifying amount,
purpose, and requiring the usual two-thirds vote by citizens.
Expiration of the Library Fund would not necessarily result in budget cuts - funding levels would be set by the Board of Supervisors - or the library could place on an upcoming ballot a true "renewal" that maintains the current priorities for operations, books and hours.
Advocates' Misinformation, Smears, and Money
Proposition D advocates have not only misrepresented this repeal and radical
revision of the Library Fund - they have already started to misrepresent opponents
with false and outrageous accusations. The official rebuttal argument in the
Voter Information Pamphlet says, "Opponents want to reduce branch hours (and)
eliminate books," among other supposed objectives.
Considering the long record of the Library Users Association in advocating for more books and hours, it is a great disappointment to see that eight supervisors and the mayor signed onto this defamatory statement.
The Friends of San Francisco Public Library, with some $20 million in assets according to its most recent published annual report in 2001, have already spent considerable money on this campaign, including misleading literature that says nothing about the major changes provided by Proposition D.
Protect the current funding for operations, books and hours by voting "no" on Prop. D, the bond authorization measure that will hurt the library's funding for operations, books and hours.
Peter Warfield is executive director and co-founder of the Library Users Association.