Comment
Carnegie’s formula
Libraries are the connective tissue in our community. More than just places filled with books and information, libraries, particularly in rural places like ours, are living organisms reaching out to form flexible, dynamic bonds that unite the disparate and changing character of our community.
Libraries in Prince Edward County have also done an astonishing job transforming themselves in the age of the Internet. Always more than the sum of their parts, our libraries have, along with the support of Friends groups, reshaped their roles, giving these hushed halls renewed purpose and fresh vitality. This achievement has rendered our libraries as important to the health of our community today as ever. There can be no honest or meaningful debate on these facts.
Yet, the compelling necessity of a library and the role it plays in binding us as a community cannot, nor should it, shield these places from scrutiny. They exist within the dynamics of a diverse community scattered over wide geography that is also roiling with change.
All this to say, it is fair and reasonable to take stock of our libraries (add museums and town halls to the mix) from time to time. Especially when we embark on plans to expand these places—against the contours of a shrinking population.
It is entirely appropriate that we satisfy ourselves that these places work as a healthy system. We can do so, keeping an open mind that perhaps the centralized system that worked for decades may be due for an overhaul, given changing circumstances. It is okay to ask questions and to insist on good answers.
Are services in Milford, Consecon, and Ameliasburgh sufficient for their residents? Are we evolving toward a single powerful resource and community library hub? By default? What does it mean for Wellington and Bloomfield libraries to commit big dollars both in capital and rising operations costs to a central library? What does it do to our schools and early childhood programs outside of the centre?
I don’t have a ready answer to any of these questions. But it seems essential that we talk about the prospects of the spokes when we expand the hub. It is entirely appropriate that we understand the effects of our actions rather than drift, irretrievably, one direction or another.
These are not existential questions about the value of libraries, but rather a recognition that a once-in-a-generation investment in the centre has implications for the whole of the system.
Andrew Carnegie’s name was invoked in the council debate a couple of weeks ago. The American industrialist was raised as an example of insight and forward-thinking. He is a useful model in this circumstance.
Carnegie made his fortune in steel during the industrial revolution. His enduring legacy, however, is the thousands of libraries dotted around the globe that bear his name. In fact, Carnegie funded the building of 2,509 libraries between 1883 and 1929. Most were built in the US and the UK, but 125 Carnegie libraries were also built in Canada. His generosity and drive inspired other philanthropists and community-minded folks to invest in libraries. His beneficence single-handedly spurred a revolution in access to information and ideas. He is a worthy inspiration.
Carnegie’s library funding formula was simple. His money was to be used to build the library building on municipally owned land. The municipality, in return, had to demonstrate the need, and commit to staffing and operating their library free of charge to the public.
Currently, the proponents of the expansion to the library expansion have committed to raising about $1 million of the $2.7 million they now expect the project to cost. The remainder comes from variety of municipal buckets. (Some proponents of the project seem to carry around the latent notion that the library is entitled to these buckets. They are encouraged to unburden themselves from this idea.)
Carnegie committed all the capital for the building of the library. Our private sector is committing less than 40 per cent. Let’s turn to the private sector to carry more of the capital funding load. Perhaps all of it.
It would demonstrate that our community—through donations, bequeaths, and contributions—values this project and its contribution to our collective wellbeing. It also frees the municipality, as represented by council, to keep its thin resources dry to maintain the health of the overall library system.
This issue isn’t about whether libraries exist and the value they deliver. Rather, it is about expanding a viable and functioning facility in a community that isn’t growing and that can’t afford to fix its roads.
Let’s instead consider the power of Carnegie’s formula.
Comments (0)