Library President Hill’s Public Assurances Contradicted in New Request for Architects for MLK

August 28, 2013
For IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Robin Diener
202 431-9254

Library Board President John Hill’s Public Assurances
Contradicted in New Request for Architects for MLK

In response to recent questions about plans for the renovation of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library, John W. Hill, the President of the Library Trustees said, “No decisions have been made. Everything is on the table.”

His comments came on July 27, 2013 at the regular bi-monthly meeting of the Board of Library Trustees, where Hill also noted that the Library is due to issue a report on DC’s central public library by October 1, as requested by the DC Council in the Budget Support Act.

On August 21, however, the Library issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for architects , the terms of which seem to indicate that the option for a fully public building has already been eliminated, “in anticipation of a future public private partnership,” according to “Section 4.0 Services Requested” of the RFQ .

“It concerns us that the RFQ was issued prior to the Council-mandated report and any public discussion of it,” said Robin Diener, Director of the DC Library Renaissance Project. “The RFQ language leads us to believe that the report will focus on private partnerships only for financing, and won’t meaningfully consider public-public options and the financial benefits they might confer.”

For instance, the DC Archives was allocated $42 million for a new facility but has no location as yet. New Orleans and San Francisco house their municipal archives at their central libraries and the city archives of Vancouver, BC will shortly move into the top two floors of Vancouver’s central public library.

RFQ for architects
http://www.dclibrary.org/node/37023

San Francisco City Archives
http://sfpl.org/index.php?pg=0200002601

New Orleans City Archive
http://neworleanspubliclibrary.org/spec/speclist.htm
http://nutrias.org/inv/invlist.htm

Absurd

In response to articles about the release of an RFQ for architects to renovate MLK, assertions have been made  that we oppose renovations to libraries. Honestly? No one has done more to advocate for libraries in DC than the DC Library Renaissance Project and the District Dynamos. And we have succeeded.

We led the effort to save MLK in 2006;
We led the effort to fund neighborhood library rebuilding (17 new libraries to date);
We led the effort to keep MLK library open on Sundays when Mayor Gray threatened to close it 2011;
We led the effort to get library hours increased at all branches (begins Oct 1).

For the last seven years, we have also testified to the need for a Citizens Task Force on the MLK Library.  There have been 5 chairs of DC Council Library Committee during that time (Patterson, Thomas, Bowser, Wells and Catania). We are the constant representative of the public interest in DC’s public libraries.

What we do oppose:

Undervaluation of the most valuable public land in the city (West End Library and parcels) in order to sell it at bargain rates to developer contributor friends of Jack Evans, Tommy Wells, Tony Williams and the rest of the bunch over at the Federal City Council;
Violation of Inclusionary Zoning (of Affordable Housing) Law to do so;
Privatization of the central public library of DC.

No other capital city in the world is privatizing its central library or proposing to replace it with a smaller one. Nor is there any economic imperative for DC to do so. To the contrary, the Urban Land Institute found DC to be the most financially secure city in the US, in its 2011 study commissioned by the DC Library Trustees.

Everyone wants a great central library for DC. It’s not necessary to give anything away or sell out to private interests in order to make the best municipal library in the world.

We already have a structurally sound historic building purpose designed by an iconic architect. We have plenty of money to renovate it into a leading edge 21st century facility. Make it bigger and better, but keep it public.

Add the two stories that were originally intended by architect Mies van der Rohe. Put in the DC Archives (it comes with $42 million in the capital budget but has no location). Put in a performance hall and rehearsal rooms, put in a community college, put in a roof garden, put in a book spiral, put in daycare for library users. There are myriad public, educational uses that could be centered at 901 G Street, NW.

When there are so many possibilities, why are we entertaining the same tired idea that private interests can do it better? And by the way, is there a District leader that can put this partnership into a coherent proposal for DC residents to consider? The library belongs to everyone, and the central library is the most important and most used public building we have. The privatization issue is one citizens must decide.

It would be nice if District leaders would ask the residents and library users of the District what they want. Doubtful that it would be a smaller central library, without parking, buried under eight floors of grade A office space.

DCPL Issues Request for Qualifications for Architect to Renovate MLK Memorial Library

The DC Public Library today issued an RFQ (request for qualifications) for an architect to renovate DC’s central library, MLK Memorial at 901 G Street NW.  The sudden issuance is a surprise. It was not mentioned at last night’s monthly meeting of the MLK Friends.  In addition, DCPL was charged with presenting a report to the DC Council Library Committee by this October, outlining “the project’s community and stakeholder engagement plan to identify the needs and perspectives of District residents” per the 2013 Budget Support Act.  It is not clear how architects could reasonably  respond to the RFQ when the public has not yet been consulted about its preferences for the building’s future use, including potential private partnerships, public partnerships or other co-locations, as well as the types of activities it would like to see.

As part of the Budget Support Act deliberations this spring and summer, our Project had asked that public consultation about the future of the central library be prioritized as the first matter of business by DCPL before any other planning including, partnerships, financing and design.  We predicted that DCPL would move ahead without public consent if not reigned in, and so they are.

Background  The central library was designed by iconic modernist architect Mies van der Rohe and opened to the public in 1972. The facility fell into disrepair along with the District’s branch libraries during the long years of governmental “deferred maintenance.” So much so, that over the years various officials were accused of practicing  “demolition by neglect.”  In 1999, then-members of the Board of Library Trustees worked with the Urban Design Committee of the American Institute of Architects, led by local architect Kent Cooper, to examine issues identified by the staff and library-going public and devise solutions. The AIA recommendations went unacted upon until 2005, when Mayor Anthony Williams put into a Budget Support Act mayoral authority to sell the building. Public opposition, led by a coalition of preservationists, library advocates, and our Project — armed with the AIA recommendations — derailed the vague plan in favor of a focus on rebuilding neighborhood branches. Since that time 17 new and renovated libraries have been added or transformed.

Since 2006, our Project has been calling for a Citizens Task Force on the Future of MLK. In 2008 and again in 2013, the Dupont Circle Advisory Neighborhood Commission (2B) passed resolutions in favor of a citizen task force. In 2008, DCPL informed ANC2B its resolution was premature. The March 2013 resolution has not yet received a response.

RFQ
ANC Resolution

Press Release re West End Parcels Appeal

August 9, 2013
For IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Robin Diener
202 431-9254

Court of Appeals Defers to Zoning Commission in Denying West End Appeal

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals issued a decision on August 8, affirming the standing of the DC Library Renaissance Project/West End Library Advisory Group (WELAG) to challenge a Zoning Commission order approving the Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) application of EastBanc/W.D.C. Partners to acquire and build on public property in the West End.

Despite this, the Court deferred to the Zoning Commission’s approval of the PUD, thereby completing the transfer of three public parcels—currently home to the West End Public Library, the recently-renovated West End fire station and a police station—into private hands.

In its appeal, WELAG argued that the Zoning Commission ignored the value of the public property in the no-cash land swap underlying the deal, pointing out that it does not deliver even the minimal value testified to ($30 million) by the District’s Chief Financial Officer. Under the deferential standard of review applicable to Zoning Commission decisions, the Court concluded that “The Commission acted reasonably in interpreting its own regulation to permit it to decline to look behind the land transfer.”

WELAG also argued that the Zoning Commission’s waiver of the District’s Inclusionary Zoning (“IZ”) regulations based on construction of new library and firehouse was improper since the District, not EastBanc, will pay for the new facilities through the value of the property conveyed. Housing advocates long fought to see IZ regulations—which require developers to integrate a specified percentage of affordable housing into new developments—enacted. Also, Mayor Vincent Gray announced in 2011 that the city will provide an additional $7 million subsidy to build affordable housing over the fire station, which will then be owned by EastBanc.

WELAG attorney Oliver Hall said, “This is the unfortunate trend in so-called public-private partnerships throughout the District, which ought to be called what they are: giveaways of public assets, negotiated by the Mayor’s office, approved by the Council, and paid for by District taxpayers.”

Robin Diener of the DCLRP said, “We appreciate the Court’s clear confirmation of our rights to appeal questionable decisions on the part of elected and appointed DC officials. However, without any required analysis of land value, an intrinsic element of this deal, citizens will continue to wonder why tens of millions of dollars that could have gone to renovate MLK or neighborhood libraries will not be realized by this sale of a library property.”