There was also a list presented of the various things that the board has taken into consideration over the years in its quest to find adequate space for its holdings and patrons, including the “overwhelming desire of the public to keep the library in the town center,” parking, cost, design (possibly green), handicapped accessibility, community meeting rooms that could include space for computers, tutor sessions, movie nights and more.
When the mic was turned over to the public, Ethan Jackman asked about the “draft minutes of your August 22 meeting, where you had a proposal on the table to tear down the existing building and construct a new building. That vote was tabled because there weren’t enough trustees present, but you’re making it sound like you’re reaching out to the public when you were this close to taking down the building. Can you elaborate on that: how big the new building was going to be? What is the footprint of that property?”
Loewenthal said that he was correct, that there had been a study and a proposal put forth, but that it was “tabled for two reasons: Yes, we did not have enough trustees present to take a vote; but, given the magnitude of the proposal, we wanted to take a step back and talk with the community before moving forward. We’re wide open to your ideas.” She said that the building that the board was considering to build after tearing down the existing structure would be approximately 9,000 square feet on a third of an acre of property that the library owns.
Kate Collins said that she “would like to see a library that could have a community room, a place for so many of our community organizations to meet, like the Girl Scouts, Book Club…” She added, “When I moved here 20 years ago, the library was the first place I went to. It’s where I met friends, felt welcomed and really became part of this community. I’m sorry, I’m getting emotional. But we need a bigger library and I want to see it stay in the hamlet. Our businesses rely on the library. It’s a destination spot right in the heart of our town.”
Peter Brooks said that he felt that the board was “overreacting” to the vote in 2010. “The plan was voted down by a very small margin in December, and now you’re going the other direction by asking the public to come up with its own plan. I don’t know anything about building a library. I wish that you could come to us with one or two plans and say, ‘What do you think of this?’ rather than asking us to come up with a plan.”
Loewenthal responded, “We may be overreacting, or maybe we’re just trying to engage the public more. That was one of the concerns in 2010, besides the vote being held in December: that there wasn’t enough public involvement from the beginning. So we don’t want to make that mistake again. This is all of our library. That said, once we hear from the public, this board is prepared and knowledgeable to bring a plan or two plans forward.”
John Bordi, a 65-year-old resident of Highland, suggested that his 90 acres on North Road (just behind the post office) “may present large possibilities for a new library. You could build a progressive library with computer rooms, conference rooms, an auditorium, a farmers’ museum, a playroom for children, a much-needed local history room, a visitors’ center, a shuttle to the Walkway and to our local pick-your-own farms. We could have an outdoor park with walking paths, a children’s playground, an amphitheater for concerts. I say, ‘Think big, think future!’”
The board thanked everyone for coming out and encouraged them to come back to the next two public forums on the future of the library: on Oct. 3 at 6 p.m., with a tour of the library offered at 5:30 p.m., and again on Thursday, Nov. 7 at 6 p.m., also with a tour offered prior to the meeting.
To learn more about the library go to 30 Church Street, or call 691-2275 or visit it on the Web at www.highlandlibrary.org.
