Amazing! Unbelievably amazing! No, Scott, I would not call that student in to instruct them to simply rewrite their paper. I would compel them to find a new subject to write about. My question is this: What the hell (yes, I said that) is a COUNTY grand jury doing telling a CITY how to spend its tax dollars??? In this 'case' (pun intended), it even goes beyond that -- the grand jury is involving itself in public and social policy. Sorry, but I do NOT think that is what taxpayers and citizens expect a grand jury to be doing with its time and our tax dollars!!! Give me a break! If this is what grand juries spend their time doing, then it's time to rewrite the laws that govern their activities.

Posted by Robert E. Lee | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 9:01 pm

Let's face it, the Grand Jury system is outdated and ineffective. It is comprised of volunteers who are simply not qualified to tackle complex public issues. What are they doing advocating for a new library? That's not their job. If the Grand Jury truly seeks to reduce fraud and waste, it should issue a report recommending that the Grand Jury be dissolved permenantly. The money used to administer the program can then be redirected to worthy purposes.

Posted by Mike | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 9:28 pm

You.ve got to be kidding. The only thing missing from this Ponzi variant is a promise "...if you build it they will come". The current downtown library is a magnet for those in our society who CHOOSE to do nothing. Library staff allow these folks to "rest... oops I mean read all day", bath themselves in the restrooms and make it their home since they apparently have none. Where was the grand jury when City of San Diego politician and managers were/are raping the taxpayers? Where was the grand jury when Chula Vista excutives authorized ridiculos benefits and payoffs? There out to lunch working on a pet project for a developer. All I can says is... Enron by the sea, it's a name well deserved and repeatedly proved by indiotic reports like this one.

Posted by Bob | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 9:36 pm

So, they never got to the feasibility portion of the report simply because the wonderful library idea is not feasible -- they avoided the feasibility issue by mealy-mouthing about how nice it would be. But why isn't it feasible? Well, I heard through the fundraising grapevine more than a year ago John Moores was backing off his promise to kick in $50 million, and I (knowing that) along with Pam Hamilton (who was VP at CCDC at the time) railed Chrles Black about Moores' promise at a CCAC meeting that was reviewing the Ballpark Village proposal -- this is back when Charles Black worked for Moores prior to his jump to the Irvine Company. At the CCAC meeting, the library issue came up while discussing the Ballpark Village, and Pam mentioned something about Moore's $50 million promise, Black said Moores never made any such promise,----cont

Posted by Christopher Hall | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 9:53 pm

Great work Scott! What a joke, taking out loans for a massive downtown-central library… The people backing this idea are the same people holding on to their newspapers as a main source of information. I don't believe that libraries play a prominent role in our society anymore, decades ago they were a place of research and ideas, now most people go online for the same amount of information...I still see the value of libraries at schools and universities, as well as smaller neighborhood libraries, spread throughout our communities…to spend $200 million on an “architectural landmark” sounds like something that got our City in the hole it can’t dig itself out of…

Posted by DC | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 10:16 pm

-----cont, which prompted both of us to say “fundraisers all over town know it!” Then Black said something unintelligible, and waved his arm as if to waive us off. So the “Anchor” donation for the library was denied as ever having been promised (by Black), and with philanthropy, you can’t make rich people stick to their promises, all you can do is supplicate. And in San Diego, the worst, most difficult town in which to raise money, no amount of supplication will do. I was told some 12 years ago buy a big time fundraiser that of 6 cities he worked in, San Diego was the most stingy. He said there were 400 donors that all the local non-profits fought over; today the numbers look to have declined, and the library shall not get support from the wealthy community that would benefit all citizens.

Posted by Christopher Hall | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 10:25 pm

The County Grand Jury just rendered itself completely irrelevant. That is the most useless report I think I've ever seen come out of a government commission. Do these people not have anything better to do with their time? Their next report is going to tell us all we should be donating our cars to the city to recycle so it can build a new city hall. How about this one "The feasability of Bike to Work Day"? This is almost as bad as our city attorney holding forums to figure out how to end global warming. Stick to the job you were appointed to do!

Posted by Point Loman | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 10:51 pm

Scott, you're being needlessly unkind. There is no barrier for a County Grand Jury to look at a City issue. The report must have been merely advisory or speculative (in either case, the purpose of it is ignored by you) and it makes a point worth discussing; getting grass roots public support to help fund a useful public entity. This hasn't been tried much here; perhaps it ought to be. And while ponying up $80 million may be impossible, acquiring funds from an interested public might point to a revenue stream that this city is now too dense to make use of for other purposes. Lastly, the main branch was intended for another three stories to be built on top of the existing ones. This should be done and could be financed for much less than the $200 million mentioned in the report. Lighten up.

Posted by Alex Hamilton | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 11:19 pm

What makes me laugh is the description of the architectural design of the new main library. It is not, by any means, a world class buidling...the architect was forced in by Mayor Golding (who is proudly the seed for many of the financial problems the City has) and it is the architect and only the architect who is making money from the fiasco that is the main library project. No one has, but should, really investigated the San Diego Library Foundation, which spends more money than it fundraises (which seemms the opposite of what should happen). As with many side organizations of the City, it profits the City little and themselves more, but are quick to claim credit they haven't earned. There are good reasons the citizens are lukewarm about an ugly, expensive building and inept fundraising administrators. Shameful all around.

Posted by Leanne | reply to this comment
May 23, 2007 11:25 pm

Setting aside you thoughts about the County Grand Jury, the merits of a new downtown central library deserve you editorial support. It is time that we all recognize that San Diego is developing as remarkable urban city and it must find a way to include in the neighborhoods of Centre City those things that make a city great. San Francisco, Phoenix, and Dallas, by way of example, are cities that have made a central downtown library part of their cosomopolitan experience. Along with new parks, shops, restaurants and the inviting architecture offered in the many new downtown condominiums, a central library in East Village will add to a wonderful new community in our city.

Posted by Bill Sauls | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 12:01 am

So we want a new larger Library? How is it going to be "World Class" when the city won't staff the current system. Also, to the genius who says the Internet can do everything the library can do, have you been to a library lately? Libraries serve as information depots for things that can't always be easily obtained. Libraries are also where people who can't afford and /or don't know how to use a computer go. How about fiction readers (ever snuggle up w/ a laptop?), Children who need information from real resources for assignments, Book clubs, class visits, community meetings, story times, a place that allows large groups of mentally disabled w/ one caregiver to go, latch key kids, etc. ,etc. ,etc.. Alot goes on in our libraries, so don't belittle the service simply because you're not smart enough to use it or understand it.

Posted by Joe | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 12:02 am

Here here. There really needs to be a hard conversation about both the library and the downtown park "plan" - asking to what extent are we spending almost 1/2 of a billion dollars on infrastructure that will be heavily used by the chronically homeless population? Is that smart money? Wouldn't it be better to rethink that and, perhaaps, spend a 100 million on parks, a 100 million on a refurb of the library and a 100 million on a better shelter program? This is especially true of the east village location - it is too far away from the commercial core of the city to get much day use (contrast with Seattle where the library is in the core of the business district). THAT would have been a good topic for the county grand jury.

Posted by CMR | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 1:08 am

But Joe - that doesn't in any way explain why we need a MAIN library? Indeed, the county's library system seems to accomplish all you lay out WITHOUT a main branch. Here is a suggestion - for the things the City could benefit from - a rare book collection and an archive of interest to local historians - figure a cost savings partnership with one of our local universities. I nominate trolley accessible SDSU since they also have a good local history faculty. Send those collections there. Beef up the interlibrary loan resources - utilizing a cheap class B industrial space to help with logestics. And tjen admit we can't really afford (nor may it make sense) to have a "civic gathering spot" if that costs 200 million bucks.

Posted by CMR | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 4:12 am

Oh, you just couldn't resist taking a shot at the idea of a new Central Library after the Grand Jury had a few drinks and then issued a meshugge report. That's like shoooting fish in a barrel. The bottom line is that this tourist town will not be a city of substance until we have a proper Central Library. Why shouldn't John Moores make some friends for himself and pay for it? Or some of the hedge fund managers who live here, or the cell phone entrepreneurs? Why shouldn't the voice lead the bandwagon for some serious philanthropy to build the citizens (even the homeless ones) a new public library?

Posted by Francine for a Day | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 4:28 am

CMR...I invite you to visit the Central Library where you will learn that there is "a rare book collection and an archive of interest to local historians" as well as many other wonderful "treasures" stored in the basement. Those who read the Grand Jury report learned that there are invaluable resources belonging to all San Diegans that are inaccessible in the current outdated, undersized Central Library. Apparently the Grand Jury thought this sorry situation should be remedied.

Posted by Ivory | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 6:04 am

It is easy for the Grand Jury to spend other people's money and put the future in debt, but I don't believe they are have done anything except take information th City has provided at face value and reformatted for their report. Also, it is not the Voice Of San Diego's duty to do fundraising for the library. The library has a Development Officer, a Director, a Board of Library Commissioners, and a Board of the Library Foundation. I would like to know how much money those people, these staunch library supporters, have given in real dollars (not inkind services but hard cash) because if anyone but the Herveys have taken a checkbook out of their pockets and donated significant money to the building of the new main library, I'd be really surprised. I hope I'm wrong. I bet I'm not.

Posted by Leanne | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 6:49 am

Hey Joe - I believe I'm "the genius who says the Internet can do everything the library can do"...did you read my post?? I said I still see the value of libraries, but not the need for a massive $200 million dollar publicly funded architectural landmark ...I also never said the internet can do everything a library can...my point is that today, most people can jump online for information that 25 years ago you'd go to the library to get...

Posted by DC | reply to this comment
May 24, 2007 7:13 am

The grand jury is clearer-headed than the numbskulls who came up with the idea of rewarding union presidents for agreeing to underfund the city pension fund, and to pay millions of dollars for audits that are years late and fail to point out the illegality of the actions taken by officials who drove the city into unprecedented debt. It wasn't the grand jury that wrecked the City of San Diego financially. Ordinary citizens couldn't possibly do a worse job than San Diego's high-priced lawyers and the officials who gave them so much public money.

Posted by Maura Larkins | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 12:53 am

Thanks DC for seeing the error of your ways! I must agree with you that big public money shouldn't be used unless it's from CCDC, because they were set up to develop the downtown area. I suppose the question is, "What do we want from our libraries?" The libraries have always tried to provide the service that the community asks for(meeting rooms, separate children's areas, study/conference rooms, etc.).Support your libraries, even if you are not a new downtown library supporter, because the services and level of services are shrinking before your eyes (too bad nobody is looking). I support a new central library because it would raise the level of information available to the citizens. A strong central library creates a stronger overall system. Don't underestimate the amount of quality, professional service the people at the Central Library provide. I say, come on rich folks get behind this valuable civic project.

Posted by Joe | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 1:18 am

Hello CMR, thanks for responding. A strong Central Library supports not only the downtown area, but all the communities in the city. They act as a depository for many areas of specialization that support the varied needs of our great city, they are also able to provide more in depth reference on a specific topic than a branch library (These are only few of a million other tasks performed there). The nicest part of having a new central library would be that more of the collection will be directly accessable to the public. One must know a specific title to request to get what is needed at the County (Don't get me wrong they are doing a wonderful job, they just cannot offer that service because of cost). Most people get more of what they are looking for by examing their subject matter in person. Too much good stuff tolistinonepost.

Posted by Joe | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 1:38 am

Hey, Joe. Supports all the communities of San Diego? Yeah, how? People either have no cars and thus only public transportation to get them there (so they'd better plan for an overnight to get the return transportation) or they have cars, so where are they going to park? Get real. If you want a central library that would be accessable to all, put it in the Qualcomm parking lot. It would be a lot better than being used by cretins who want to belch beer prior to Charger games and for making more money for the Spanos family. But, oh yeah, the city is broke. It ain't got no dough, so forget it! And forget the hideous monstrosity planned for the middle of downtown, where only the homeless can use it as their bathroom.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
May 25, 2007 9:31 am

Thanks Scott, Your moment of pause made me laugh. I also agree with your analysis of the Grand Jury’s recommendation. I love the library. All funding for the library should be used to benefit the people using the library. That means having enough staff to keep the library open and assist those using the library. Funding also needs to be available for the acquistion and organization of materials. We don’t need a huge central library public building but rather and efficient storage and distribution center. Yes, a downtown library but also branch libraries and a strong internet connected library. The free flow of information dramatically increases our standard of living and ultimately our quality of life.

Posted by Susan Medak | reply to this comment
May 31, 2007 12:26 am

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.