Looking Inside the Cover of the Book Debate

 On a sunny day on 41st Street in Oakland, round the corner from Piedmont Avenue, Richard Grassetti of Oakland paused to leaf through some used books for sale on tables outside the library branch.

Yes, Grassetti said, he had heard of the dispute over .

He said Piedmont should pay its share so the system is equitable, but he wasn’t sure what that amount should be. The way library systems make library cards available to residents of other municipalities is fair only if neighboring cities both have libraries, which is not the case. Piedmont has no municipal library system.

The Piedmont Avenue Branch Library, where Grassetti was looking over the used books, is one frequented by Piedmont residents. Grassetti noted that the library is often crowded and Piedmont residents contribute to the congestion and should pay their fair share.

Last year, 2,668 Piedmont residents used their Oakland library cards to check out 87,687 items, according to library statistics.

A 10-year contract concluded in 2008 had Piedmont paying $350,000 a year to the Oakland library system. Piedmont city officials said they offered a new five-year contract increasing 5 percent each year from that base. At a meeting last year, Oakland sought $395,000, but communications broke down and the two sides never came together on a new contract.

At present, the city of Piedmont is making no payments to the Oakland library system.

Oakland officials cite a budget pinch that, among other things, to a different building because of steep rent.

You can compare Grassetti’s comments to a summary of the responses to Patch’s last article about the library dispute:

• Two people wondering why Piedmont doesn’t have a municipal library.
• At least three respondents pressing for a fair and equitable fee paid to Oakland.
• A commenter says it would be too much capital outlay up front for Piedmont to start a library, with not enough left over to build a collection of materials.
• An Oaklander is stunned by the brazenness of Piedmonters. Why doesn’t Piedmont make a good faith contribution while the cities argue over the level of funding?
• A Piedmonter says it’s embarrassing that Piedmont is effectively freeloading.
• A responder says good libraries are like a good municipal investment making for a stronger community, with few immediately tangible returns.
• One responder wondering “what a library is for again” in this age in which he checks out books online and reads them in the pleasant atmosphere of a WiFi café.

I’ve simplified our Patch Partisans’ arguments here — read the full comments by hopping on link to our previous article and scrolling down to the comments at the bottom.

On the issue of equitability, we can crunch some numbers. “California Library Statistics 2010” from the California State Library examines municipalities’ library spending from fiscal year 2008-2009.

Expenditures per capita 2008-09 range from the Lassen Library District at $4.79 (which is, apropos of not much, less than the no. 9 combo at Burger King) to $273.88 in Carmel.

Oakland is right around the upper third of that list at $48.93, well over the statewide mean of $34.69. For comparison’s sake, there’s San Jose at $37.83, San Leandro at $67.57, San Francisco at $96.90 and Berkeley at $132.91. It’s a big range.

If you divide the $395,000 that the city of Oakland was seeking from the city of Piedmont last year into the 2010 census figure of 10,667 for Piedmont, you get $37.03. Realize that the numbers are not directly synced because we’re mixing a 2010 census count with fiscal 2008-09 numbers, but the comparison gives you the lay of the land.