In a decidedly non-Pittsburgh recommendation, The Carnegie Library task force has suggested that if residents are as gung-ho to keep libraries open as they claim to be, then put the question of raising a new tax or diverting an existing revenue stream from City coffers to support the libraries before the voters. How wonderfully novel for the Burgh: a group actually recognizes that there is no free lunch and that going to the state legislature or the philanthropic community is unlikely to produce the money that will be needed over the long term.
In the past it has been all too easy for folks to demand goodies with emotional pleas of how important those goodies are for the community while having no idea of where the money will come from other than an amorphous "stash" someone is holding. And when pressed, the answer is always, "the government wastes money, let them save some and give it to our project."
However, rarely will they go before a legislative committee or council and say for all the world to hear, "cut xyz program and give us the money." And that’s because xyz program has its own advocates and supporters. Thus, the task force was very wise to say to the people of Pittsburgh that if they want more funds for the libraries it is up to them to ask council to put the question to a referendum and then do the campaigning to convince voters that it is crucial for libraries to be kept open and thriving.
Perhaps just making an enormous grass roots effort to convince council to take the referendum step would be sufficient to encourage the members to redirect some funds from less worthy programs. In the words of the old adage, "it is better to light one candle than curse the darkness." Bemoaning inadequate funding for the libraries and the inevitable reductions in service is only meaningful if one is willing to pay a little more for the libraries or work to convince City government that something else it spends money on is less worthy.
