I think it depends on whether the library expects to re-open.

If the closing library is part of a system, the assets would be disbursed to other libraries or stored until reopening.

If the library is expected to close permanently, it would be up to the local governing body. Probably the shelving and equipment would be sold, maybe the books in a massive open to the public or perhaps in lots as an auction.

Any way you look at it, it would a sad, sad thing.

That may not be the case soon :(

I guess I wonder something too (and it’s probably a stupid question):

If a branch closes, what happens to all the books there? Do they sell them or disburse them to other branches?

Should poor kids in Oakland have access to awesome libraries? Of course! Do we give awesome libraries for poor kids in Oakland priority over decent health care for poor kids in Oakland, or good education for poor kids in Oakland, or safe streets for poor kids in Oakland etc, etc? I am not so sure…

That’s the thing: you can’t budget by saying “This thing is good…it must not be cut!!” That thinking is why California’s budget is screwed up. You must budget by saying “This has priority over that”.

Kelly@42: If I were in Ohio, I’d be all for that. But would the savings be enough to prevent library cuts?

Latter: OK, you got me.

Former: “high” tax… right. MA sales tax is 5%, lower than most. But yeah, for some thing e.g. smokes I would make the drive to Salem NH (over their shitty roads) to save $25 on a carton, but now I just make my own.

True story: former cow-orker decided he was fed up with “Taxachusetts” so he moved just over the NH line. His property tax more than doubled, he still had to pay MA income tax as a non-resident employed in MA, and now he gets to pay for private school because the public one is shitty and broke. WIN!

Not that I’m a small-government, pro-business zealot, but I would think that being in the bottom five would be a wake up call that maybe we should get out of the bottom if we want to see some job creation.

So maybe instead of cutting the library they could ask themselves, what exactly is it that we do that bothers employers so much? Maybe they’ll find something better to cut in the answer to that question.

Yeah, as another California resident, it’s hard to take a 30% library cut seriously.

Uh, as a California resident, I would take a 30% library cut very seriously indeed. Perhaps you’re all snuggly at home with your broadband and your printer and your walls of books, but not every Californian has those things – or can afford those things. Yes, of course we are facing all kinds of horrible cuts, but I truly, really don’t understand this one-upsmanship of “you think THAT’s bad….”

My particular hometown likes to pride itself on its school system, but we still had to vote 3 or 4 times on a school levy to make some necessary updates. The library levy, on the other hand, passed easily on the first vote. Yes, it was bundled with a couple of other things in terms of overall community service upgrades, but the levy was mainly to expand the library building.

But then again, we are a growing county/city in Nebraska. I’m sure if you talked to some of the more rural counties/communities that are bleeding population, they’d have a different story to tell. Local funding is great when there’s support and it works, but it’s also a trap when you’re in a downward financial spiral, as most of the country is right now.

this is clearly preaching to the choir on a blog like this, but i’d absolutely cut parks and recreation services before libraries. Just like I’d cut out the travel and convention bureau before I’d cut the schools or fire department. All of those services are nice (and I know, I know, cutting tourism just increases the loss of jobs, etc), but there’s nice to have and there’s essential public services. Free or low-cost access to information is an essential public service.

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/1997/08/04/tidbits.html

Granted, the times and particular branch of government involved were different. But once again we see skewed priorities: Cut libraries by 30% statewide—but don’t touch the Football Hall of Fame in Canton. (I hadn’t known that the Pro Football Hall of Fame was state-funded. Do we really need to publicly subsidize football at all?)

Also, those of us who are economic conservatives have to remember that there are some things that government really does do better. I don’t want to see the government running General Motors or Citigroup. But strong public schools and publicly funded libraries are as American as apple pie.

Moreover, while many branches of government *are* wasteful, most libraries operate lean and mean. I visit my local library every week, and I have yet to see a librarian on a coffee break. Nor do my librarians drive to work in Lexuses.