‘Move’ favored by six to one over ‘stay’
The Rutland Free Library released the results of its public input work around a possible relocation on Wednesday, March 17. Results from some 660 responses ran more than six to one in favor of relocating from the current site at 10 Court St. in Rutland City.
The library’s plan to relocate to the former campus of the College of St. Joseph was abruptly halted on March 10, when Heartland Communities of America, the developer purchasing the property, told the library it was no longer included in Heartland’s plans.
“Once we started to hear from the public, I was honestly distressed at how many people have given up on the library in its current site,” said Randal Smathers, the library director. “Dozens of people, particularly families with small children and people under 35, said they find the building unwelcoming or difficult to access.”
Smathers said he had expected much closer to a 50-50 split, given Rutland’s often-divided history. He said the lopsided results suggest the library needs to rethink its original plan to do a modest, $1.5 million renovation at 10 Court St. and either continue to pursue a move or consider a more extensive renovation. Failure to meet the expectations of the younger users in particular could result in spending a lot of money on a building that gets less and less use as time goes on.
“The feedback reinforces what I’ve heard anecdotally from friends with young kids,” said board member Stephanie Romeo, herself a mother of a preschooler and a toddler. “They do not use the library because they find 10 Court Street to be logistically challenging and lacking in inviting children’s space. There is a real disconnect between the library and this segment of our community.”
Responses were gathered from social media, from an online form posted on the library website, and from direct contacts via letters and emails. The library had been seeking public input following its announcement on Dec. 6 that the trustees were working on a plan to relocate to the former campus at 71 Clement Road in the city.
Smathers presented the results to the library trustees at their regular monthly public meeting on Wednesday evening. His takeaways:
1) Most people do not have a strong opinion about the library moving. There were almost 26,000 views of one or more of the 12 Facebook posts on the topic in the past three months, which is more than the library service area of 22,000 people. Of those, 9,181 “engaged” with the posts; so they clicked on it, shared it, commented, and/or posted an emoji. Both of those totals dwarf anything else on the library’s page. But only 2 percent of the viewers registered a response, a very small number suggesting that the location is not of primary importance.
2.) People care about the library, they are just less invested in where it is located. Rutland Free Library has almost 2,000 Facebook followers–trailing only Burlington among libraries in the state–and just under 900 users who receive the newsletter. In the three-plus months since the library relocation idea was introduced, the most-viewed posts were the initial roll-out of the plan, Heartland dropping the library, and the invitation to provide feedback. While people were certainly interested in the idea of relocation, data show they are the most concerned about the improvement and growth of library services as they relate to its location, rather than the location alone.
3) Access is the most common concern, among supporters and opponents both.
Facebook responses were 506 in support, 66 against; 42 web forms for, 16 against; and 26 emails in support with five against. Four people offered to pitch in and help move. One of the questions on the web form was whether the respondent was a library card holder. Of the 16 opponents of the move, only seven have valid library cards. Only four of those in favor do not hold cards, so verified library members who filled out the form ran seven to one in favor of a move.
“I would not draw conclusions from any one of these sources,” said Smathers. “Taken together, they form a clear picture of public response, which is that the status quo is not acceptable.”
Based on anecdotal evidence from people who responded, Smathers said most people he heard from trust the library to make good decisions; followed by people who want a change; followed at some distance by a small but very vocal group of people invested in 10 Court St. as the home of the library at all costs.
The library also opened up the CSJ site to the public in a series of tours that included Q&A directly with board members. Seeing was often believing.
“We had one woman come in who was very wary of the proposal,” said Sharon Courcelle, president of the library Board of Trustees. “She was not only convinced by what she saw, she brought her daughter back the next day.”
The formal portion of the public input process is now over, but the trustees will continue to work with the community at large as they look at siting options.
