Pleasant Hill’s existing library, the oldest and busiest in Contra Costa County, will close in June, two years before a new library is scheduled to open nearby.
Contra Costa Supervisors voted 5-0 to stick with a longstanding plan to demolish the old library, on Oak Park Blvd. west of Interstate Highway 680, in part because it’s part of a four-way plan to transfer county library land to the
city of Pleasant Hill, and to build 34 two-story houses on the land where the old library now sits.
County officials estimate that, by closing the existing library in June, the county will save between $800,000 and $1 million in operating costs.
And keeping it open, supervisors said, would disrupt the schedule for building the houses and for improvements to nearby Monticello Ave. and Oak Park Blvd., which will be shared by the county, the city of Pleasant Hill and the Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District.
Tuesday’s approval of the old library’s closure was opposed by members of the citizens group Keep Our Library Open, whose members have been campaigning since 2017 to keep the old library open until the new one is built.
“I’ve long said the short-term pain is worth the long-term gain,” Supervisor Karen Mitchoff said. “And we just don’t have a pot of money.”
20 comments
How is the City and County going to provide for the afterschool baby sitting that the Library currently provides? And more importantly what will become of Congressman Baldwin’s portrait in the Baldwin room?
Seems like parents will need to make new arrangements – welcome to parenting.
Although, quite entertaining that you deem the fate of a portrait more important than the babysitting program.
Sounds like the people of Pleasant Hill may have some new people running around election time. Maybe a recall is in order….
New homes generate tax revenue; the library consumes tax revenue. It’s as simple as that in the eyes of the PH bean counters.
Maybe they can use all the books to fill in all the empty space at the Walnut Creek library.
Good that they are building housing and recognize the urgency of more housing. Would have been nice to increase the density of it but we’ll take what we can get.
“We don’t have a pot of money”…soooo, don’t tear down a perfectly good library….there used to be a time when people voted for politicians who had commonsense
Just a note…it’s NOT a “perfectly good library”. Asbestos abatement alone would cost more than the new library will. The roof leaks so bad they can’t fix it anymore. There are no fire sprinklers. The bathrooms might have passed ADA in 1985 but not since. The elevator hasn’t worked in like 10 years. And there is about 10k sq ft not being used but still sucking utilities.
@LibraryGirl: The ADA did not go into effect until 1990.
It’s been perfectly good in the 20+ years I’ve been going there.
I’m confused. We complain about how traffic sucks and there are too many people in the bay area, yet we are ok with tearing down a library to build more houses? This will only make traffc/human congestion worse.
Exactly, WE complain, THEY want money.
Remember this people, show up to elections and speak your mind about it.
This won’t make traffic worse. This will allow people who are doubled up or homeless to get housing. These people re already here.
It’s purely a fiscal decision, as in, “How soon can we get our hands on that lucre for selling the land for housing.” (And no, the stupid visors do not care how it affects the library users or staff).
I watched the video – the city is getting five acres of land for FREE. and no other library has received land like that before! sounds like a sweet deal, how does concord get that?
and the city’s current estimate for building alone is TWENTY NINE MILLION – that’s starkly up from their original estimate when they brought Measure K forward.
We’re right about to hit another recession and they plan on demolishing a public access library so they build more high-income houses.
The people in control never learn
The city council in Pleasant Hill should be commended for finding the funding to replace the antiquated Pleasant Hill Library.
Sadly, the current library will be closing for two years – forcing library patrons to have to travel to WC and Concord to get books, but sometimes you have a situation where you get no gain without a little pain.
The gorgeous new library scheduled to open in two years will be a real plus for the Pleasant Hill. Residents should be thankful they have council people fighting to improve the city, also fighting to steer public tax dollars back to the residents by providing amenities.
In Concord, where I live, our political leadership has been blocking the construction of a new library for years. The money is “there” to build a new library but the politicians prefer to spend it on other things, like higher salaries for themselves or massive wages for city workers.
Concord, as some know, has among the highest wages for city employees in the state of California, higher than SF, Oakland, LA, Fresno – and – throw in Palm Springs and Beverly Hills too. (see transparent California, the public service web site that tracks out of control spending on salaries for city employees up and down the state).
Longtime council person Laura Hoffmiester has been the point person on this for many years, she is dead set against building a new library in Concord. She as worked tirelessly behind the scenes to make sure no library will be built.
While there are many reasons for this, many believe the fact that Hoffmiester is a spinster – she has no children – is a key reason she is blocking a new library. Since she has no children she doesn’t understand that importance of educating children, how important it is to have quality schools and libraries available for young people.
But the biggest reason we can’t get a new library built in Concord is because Hoffmiester and other council people, like Tim McGallian and Carlyn Obringer, want to keep the “gravy train” going for city workers. These council members are in cahoots with the city worker labor unions, so much so the labor union officials function as the city councils “overseers.”
These council members, like Hoffmiester, McGallian, and Obringer, apparently take great pride that Concord has among the highest paid workers in the state of California. They don’t seen to understand that by overpaying city workers -as they continually do – they are short shifting residents for services and amenities, like the new library PH is getting.
Right now there are people organizing in Concord to possibly stage a recall of Hoffmiester, McGallian and Obringer on this single issue, on the refusal of council members to build Concord residents the kind of library they deserve. Libraries matter, they are not frills, they are vital to the health of the community. The fact that Concord continues to operate a ramshackle library is a clear indicator the city is sick, that it’s a failed city.
The planned recall, according to my sources , is going to be timed to happen right around the time city officials try and hit up taxpayers with a ballot measure which will extend the extra revenue voters gave to the city several years back, which city officials claimed was needed as an “emergency” measure. In fact, the extra tax revenue has led to higher and higher wages for city workers (*including council members), and more fantastic pensions and benefit packages, but no new library.
The fact that PH is getting this wonderful new library is a strong indicator that PH is a healthy community. The fact that we can’t get a new library in Concord, even though Concord has way more tax revenue than PH – is linked to ongoing corruption in Concord – Concord is a city steeped in corruption. The city managers office is corrupt, so is our do-nothing council, and so are these labor union bosses that run the city behind the scenes.
I’m confused by “County officials estimate that, by closing the existing library in June, the county will save between $800,000 and $1 million in operating costs.” That needs far more detail.
The city of Pleasant Hill pays rent to the county for the building. The county does next to zero maintenance. I’m not sure who pays for the utilities but recall that there is a large and very new solar array on the roof. I know that array belongs to the county and that they intend to remove it prior to demolishing the building. I have been wondering whose house it’ll get installed on…
The county also pays for the staff time to keep each branch library open for 35 hours per week. The Pleasant Hill library is open 43 hours per week with the city of Pleasant Hill paying for the additional eight hours. I assume the county will continue to pay for their 35 hours per week while the PH is operated out of alternate locations. Thus there is no cost savings there.
I believe the county will pay rent and utilities to whatever facilities host the library. I can’t imagine the replacement location will cost $800,000 and $1 million less than using the existing building.
That’s why I’m wondering what the additional $800,000 to $1 million operating cost is for to keep the library operating where it is.
POST DELETED
Please Note: Users who use multiple names will be deleted. Please choose one name so others can easily chat with you.
“I’m confused by “County officials estimate that, by closing the existing library in June, the county will save between $800,000 and $1 million in operating costs.” That needs far more detail.”
It’s been explained here many times. The county can sell the land now for much more than they would be able to in a few years, since the prices are only going down. And by building the housing faster, they will get property taxes faster.
Comments are closed.