LAPLog

Investing in LAPL’s Future

A common refrain among public libraries is a lack of funding and resources. While that’s probably true of most public library systems and absolutely true of LAPL as a whole¹, there were a few branches that stuck out in terms of their potential for growth. There are things to love about all of these branches. But there is room for improvement as well and I’d like to see additional LAPL and community investment at these facilities.

BIG FAT DISCLAIMER: These opinions are my own and do not represent the views of the City of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Public Library, or its affiliates. I've only visited most of these libraries once and each for a short amount of time. I acknowledge that that my opinions and assessments are not based on standardized quantifiable criteria and that I do not and have never worked in a public library. That said, I visited all of the branches over a short period of time in which no major political or administrative transitions occurred. I'm comfortable putting forth my opinions in hopes that LAPL and/or the community will show these branches some extra love.

Panorama City

This is a great branch in terms of people. I chatted with a very kind long-time staff member who was a wealth of information about the branch. Since this was early on in LAPLog, I didn’t yet realize that this would be one of the few LAPL employees I’d encounter who spent the bulk of their tenure at the same branch. I think it can be valuable to both staff and patrons to allow employees to circulate among multiple branches. It’s a great way to pick up on new trends and ideas. But I think there’s just as much value in staff who are deeply embedded in or even hail from the communities they serve. This individual had deep knowledge of Panorama City–from the history of the area and branch, to the types of media patrons consume, and the services they most need and use.

However, this branch was one of the most dilapidated buildings I visited. At the time of my visit, the roof was leaking in several places and the wifi was down. Both of those issues could be attributed to the record rainfall earlier this year. But the entire building was rundown with patchy peeling paint, loose hand rails, bubbled window film, and no landscaping or green space.

Sun Valley and Junipero Serra

I grouped these two branches because I came away with a similar feeling after each–that I couldn’t discern anything specific or unique about either. These branches are located in Sun Valley and South Park, respectively. Both neighborhoods fall below the median household income for the county. These are places where I suspect the need for library services is great. While I wouldn’t describe either branch as deficient, neither offered much adult programming or services. They both lacked accessible outdoor spaces. The interiors were comfortable but not particularly inviting. Junipero Serra is one of the few branches that does not have a “friends of” group. Currently, it does not have any volunteer opportunities. The LAPL page for Sun Valley references a friends group and that links to a few ongoing volunteer opportunities.

Reassessing History

I’ve been reflecting on place names and I’m kind of shocked that Junipero Serra is still named after an arguably bad hombre. His Wikipedia article includes sections on his role in the Inquisition, physical self-punishment, and “Toppling and decapitation of Serra statues.” The problem extends far beyond this branch. I’d say at least 1 in 3 branches still display dioramas of the missions in their children’s departments. There are multiple pieces of art throughout Central Library that glorify or soften the atrocities committed by Spanish conquistadors against indigenous communities. I was going to end this on a hopeful note because I thought I’d heard about an LAPL land acknowledgement but I can’t find one and perhaps I’m thinking of something else. But maybe that would be a good place to start.

San Pedro

I loved San Pedro. It’s mentioned several times throughout the Superlatives. While it’s unquestionably one of my favorite branches, it serves too large of an area and population. While its collection is unique and varied, it contains a number of titles that are too outdated to be useful and in some cases, present inaccurate or harmful information. See: The Life Sexual.

While the local history collection is intresting and potentially useful to the community, a lot of it exists in physical files of fragile and deteriorating news clippings. Based on conversations with staff there, it appears that these items have not been digitized. There’s also a lot of obsolete technology and media such as microfiche and filing cabinets taking up space in the building. I can’t say whether those items get much use but my sense is that they do not and the space might be better utilized in other ways.

Felipe de Neve

Felipe de Neve has one of the best outdoor spaces of all of the LAPL branches. The library is situated on the edge of Lafayette Park and the park is accessible though the library’s parking lot. The building is surrounded by massive, fragrant eucalyptus trees. Behind the building, you will find a gorgeous but disused terraced patio surrounding a lovely fountain that feeds a long, shallow reflection pool that was once a lily pond. Part of the patio is locked and inaccessible to the public. The fountain and pool are dry and the entire area is littered. The scent of the eucalyptus trees is diminished due to the fact that the pond seems to be used as a giant urinal. Nevertheless, it’s still a beautiful space and it’s a shame it’s not being used to its full potential.

I’m sure there are reasons for this including liability, cost of maintenance, the public’s inability to treat public spaces nicely (hence trash and pee), etc. But it feels a bit chicken and egg that there are so many LAPL locations with usable public outdoor spaces that are now intentionally closed to the public. Do we treat our public spaces badly because so many of them are closed to us or are they closed to us because we treat them badly? Public spaces only work when they’re…public. Perhaps this comes from a naïve assumption but I feel that some of the maladies that currently affect this and other outdoor spaces can be partially addressed by letting people use them. Give park goers the chance to demonstrate good behavior and stewardship and even if they don’t, at least give them another taste of unencumbered access so they know what they’re risking if they mistreat these spaces.

The issue is even more frustrating given the fact that many of the LAPL branches that do have accessible public spaces seem to exist in more affluent neighborhoods. See Palisades and John C. Fremont.

To drive the point home, please enjoy these historical photos of the gardens at Felipe de Neve courtesy of the Los Angeles Public Library Photo Collection.

1. Per the City Controller, 1.8% of the City’s 2024 budget is earmarked for LAPL. ↩︎