| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pro-our existing lib-32n2
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue, Dec 15 2015, 11:36 am EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
 |
|
| Quote: | The anti-library people see no concern.
|
Should this read "anti-new library building" instead? All the people I know who do not want to build a new library are still pro-library, they just don't want a new building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
anon-s6p5
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Dec 15 2015, 3:32 pm EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| Yes, anti-new library. Not anti-library. I too don't know anyone anti-library. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anon-ppq2
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Dec 16 2015, 8:52 am EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
Good points:
"All the people I know who do not want to build a new library are still pro-library, they just don't want a new building."
"Yes, anti-new library. Not anti-library. I too don't know anyone anti-library."
A question: If the present location is no longer available for whatever reason (school needs the space, the school no longer wishes to be a landlord), then what would be a solution for a new home for the public library? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anon-45qn
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Dec 16 2015, 11:05 am EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| I would think then there would be a group of people swayed to build and another group push to share with Monroe or Plainsboro. For years, Monroe had no library and shared with Cranbury. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anon-ppq2
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Dec 16 2015, 1:51 pm EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| RE. sharing with Monroe and Plainsboro. As of right now, we can use Plainsboro and Monroe libraries. If you mean, eliminate our library, that would take a town-wide vote. I guess a referendum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anon-476s
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Dec 16 2015, 2:22 pm EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| anon-ppq2 wrote: | | RE. sharing with Monroe and Plainsboro. As of right now, we can use Plainsboro and Monroe libraries. If you mean, eliminate our library, that would take a town-wide vote. I guess a referendum. |
The question was what if the location was not available. If the school kicked out the library it does not mean an automatic new library building.
If there are no state laws and I don't know there are given a number of libraries have sadly closed then likely the governing body would need to decide what to do. Whether that means referendum, regular vote, etc...
In truth, I'd like a referendum to see where people stand on building and supporting a new library. I am not sure I know that answer today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anon-6696
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Dec 16 2015, 4:49 pm EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| I don't understand why the new library building supporters have always been so strongly opposed to any referendums. They have been proposed for years. If they have raised money from as many Cranbury households as they have said, that should represent a strong majority of all Cranbury voters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anon-4610
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Dec 18 2015, 5:23 pm EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| anon-6696 wrote: | | I don't understand why the new library building supporters have always been so strongly opposed to any referendums. They have been proposed for years. If they have raised money from as many Cranbury households as they have said, that should represent a strong majority of all Cranbury voters. |
Perhaps they are secretly aware that most of their donors did so out of a sense of polite neighborly obligation and not necessarily out of a desire to build a new book barn. Sadly, I hear that some of the most ardent fundraisers have themselves made meager financial commitments to the cause. Honestly, I'm getting weary of the library turning every Cranbury event, from Cranbury Day to the Lion's Club Pancake Breakfast, into a fund raiser for their Book Barn. When are they going to get back to the business of being a great community library for today's residents? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pam-0292
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2015, 11:06 am EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| Jan Murphy-0o99 wrote: |
I'm physically present here, every day, in real time. I invite you to come in and speak with me personally and I will happily explain to you why I think Cranbury needs a new library. But knock off the crap on this forum. |
No real time for librarians Mullen, Dera or Murphy. Director Mullen sees fit to schedule three certified librarians to all work at the same time! It would benefit the patrons and support staff to have one certified librarian present for all hours the library is open. But that would inconvenience Mullen, Dera & Murphy who put in time to suit their personal preferences.
From a previous post on this site:
Director Mullen salary $77,500; with full benefits
Youth Librarian & Community Outreach Coordinator Murphy salary $57,000; with full benefits
Part Time Tech & Teen Librarian Dera; salary $39,000 for 20 hours per week; and paid time off.
Since you mention it you do not work real time. You are frequently absent and often on personal phone calls. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jan Murphy-8ss4
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2015, 8:17 pm EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
To the previous poster: my invitation still stands. I'd be happy to discuss your concerns face to face. Instead, it appears that you prefer stalking me. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that.
If you continue to remain anonymously defaming me, don't be surprised if I initiate whatever steps I can to ascertain who you are, or to do what I can to feel safe at my place of employment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anon-q2q6
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Jan 2 2016, 12:20 pm EST Post subject: Re: Library's surveillance policy is discussed |
|
|
| Jan Murphy-8ss4 wrote: | To the previous poster: my invitation still stands. I'd be happy to discuss your concerns face to face. Instead, it appears that you prefer stalking me. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that.
If you continue to remain anonymously defaming me, don't be surprised if I initiate whatever steps I can to ascertain who you are, or to do what I can to feel safe at my place of employment. |
Hi Jan,
I'm not the previous poster, but I'm not sure someone's casual observations about your work hours and habits would constitute "stalking", particularly as a public employee working in a public place. However, if you feel threatened you should protect yourself.
Regarding the previous poster's concerns, it is understandable that people would questionable whether a full time children's librarian is the best use of library resources in town the size of Cranbury where most of the kids are in school, the library is in the school and the school has its own librarian. Perhaps you would be willing to share your perspective on that topic... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
