Although the decision to immediately move the Rockport Library to new rented quarters is well intended (we all are concerned about the health and well being of our library staff and patrons), the facts seem to indicate that this costly and disruptive move is not necessary and is ill-advised. The plan to move out of the library was brought on by reactions to some of the findings of the recent engineering study and report made by CES Inc. The three main areas of concern are; structural issues in the attic portion of the building, safe fire egress from the second floor office and mold issues in certain areas of the building.

First, the engineer consultant from CES indicated that the attic area structure was inadequate for supporting the heavy books and magazines that were stored there. It is my understanding that these items have been removed and that the attic will no longer be used for storage. There have been confusing statements made about the structural safety of the second floor office. The CES report and CES public statements made it clear that the problems with the attic are not related to the second floor office and that there is no structural issue with the actual office area.

Second, because of a lack of ceiling height at the second floor stairwell, CES found that fire egress for someone working upstairs is an issue. With the help and advice of our fire chief, a simple temporary fire escape could be designed and built to alleviate this problem.

Third, the CES study did not actually find mold in the building but did report that conditions for mold formation do exist and further testing should be done. In fact, this spring, work was performed on the northeast end of the Madge Dodge Room (this is the area of the building that CES found the highest probability for mold formation) and although much of the interior and exterior structure was exposed during this renovation, and some dry rot was discovered, no mold was found. The prudent and responsible thing to do, at this time, would be to perform simple tests to determine if there is a mold issue and see what things can be done to remedy it.

My concern is that we are in a "fast-track" process of finding a temporary rental situation at a reported cost of $100,000 per year. By comparison it would only cost a few thousand dollars to build a temporary fire exit and possibly $2,500 to $15,000 for mold testing and remediation, which will solve these problems and allow us to stay in our current building for the one to three years necessary to properly plan and fund the new library building. To do otherwise seems like an awful waste of taxpayer money as well as an unnecessary and disruptive strain on our library's staff and patrons. Let's stay in our current building, do the temporary fixes at a reasonable cost, and use the several hundred thousand dollars of proposed rental and moving costs toward rebuilding and improving our town's library.

Jim Ruddy
Rockport