Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Notice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges clearer public notices, criticizes library remodel plans
Summary
A Great Falls resident told the library board the public is being misinformed about meeting notices and raised concerns about renovation plans, including alleged removal of a pictured "saintly black librarian" and changes to the children's area; the board did not take immediate action.
Richard Irving, a Great Falls resident and library cardholder, told the Great Falls Public Library Board of Trustees on April 28 that the board’s public notices have been inconsistent and difficult for the public to find, and urged the board to adopt clearer policies to ensure accessible meeting information.
“I raised concerns about inconsistent or unclear public notices,” Irving said, arguing the library’s printed mission and its communications practices appear to conflict. He told trustees the board should apologize and correct its procedures so the public can reliably know meeting times, dates and purposes.
Irving also criticized the library’s fundraising and remodeling campaign, saying plans have changed since earlier public input sessions and that proposed relocations of the children’s section would make that area less visible to patrons. He further alleged that renovation plans would remove an image he described as a “saintly black librarian” and replace it with recognition of a major donor; he presented these as his concerns rather than established facts.
He additionally questioned why the design would introduce more glass into the building, citing an assertion that the original structure was built in part to withstand nuclear blasts; that claim was presented as Irving’s opinion and was not substantiated during the meeting.
Board Chair Anne Bulger reminded the commenter his three minutes had expired and closed the public-comment period. The board did not add a transparency-policy item during this meeting; Irving urged the board to place clearer public-notice rules on a future agenda.
The board’s immediate response was limited to enforcing the public-comment time limit. The board later continued with routine business, including approval of minutes and financial reports.
