Bethlehem library bond worth read
To The Editor,
Recently, the Library posted a video on its website produced by Kristen Roberts, the Library’s Public Information Specialist with input from the Library Director and members of the Board’s Building Education Committee. I have reprinted a quote for anyone who has not seen the video:
“Five decades of deferred maintenance have brought us to a point where renovations are needed to address structural and safety issues.”
This, of course, is ridiculous. The Library, built in 1973, is 52 years old. The quote implies that, since the beginning, the Library has not been maintained to protect the safety and structural integrity of the building. Evidence against the veracity of the statement also exists in Butler, Rowland and Mays “Master Planning Report”. This report, on the Library’s website, starts its “Existing Conditions Survey” with, “[The Library] has been well-maintained and undergone periodic renovations and improvements through the decades.” This document was submitted to the Library in July of 2021.
It is likely a building the Library’s age, has issues that should be addressed to maintain the building. At a November 13th public meeting, the fire alarm system and sprinkler system were highlighted. There is friable asbestos in some tiles and roofing material. These items have not been previously addressed due to cost. These, then, are not new problems.
The “Additions, Renovations and Sitework, 10/15/2024” sheet prepared by Schoolhouse Construction Services, LLC , on the Library’s website, costs out the removal of hazardous material is $323,838.00 and the fire protection system at $368,244.00 for a total of $692,082.00. Both are necessary to create a safe environment for child and adult patrons.
Despite these issues, the Library has spent our tax money on things that have no relevance to safety and security. It appears that Bethlehem School District residents have been purposely over taxed so the Library can purchase houses, tear them down and use the land for future projects instead of maintaining the current facility. Board members have prioritized buying real estate over the safety of Library patrons.
The Library has also spent over $2 million to design a community center masquerading as a Library. Surprisingly, the Library may have up to $3 million more to spend from their General Fund. These monies could easily have gone to addressing building needs as they arose instead of proposing a $37 million community center.
Library Boards, both past and present, have taken money from taxpayers and used it as their own. They have played fast and loose with our hard-earned money. They would now like us to provide $37 million for them to mishandle as well.
If you needed a reason to VOTE NO on the $37 million bond on December 12th at the Library, this should be it. The Library Board is asking you to trust them with 37 million dollars when they have shown themselves to be fiscally unworthy of the trust we have given them in the past.
I encourage you to vote on December 12th at the Library and to think about whether the money and the need for this project are real.
Anne Moore
Delmar
