Initiative for the rescue of the Most library - statement from the mayor of the city
The Mayor of the city, Mgr. Jan Paparega, on behalf of the city council of Most, communicated the result of the discussion regarding the petition for the preservation of the Most library through his letter, in which more than two thousand people expressed their disagreement with the closure of the library in its current building. The mayor's letter can be found in the attached PDF document. In the press release, we publish the response to the mayor's letter from the members of the petition committee and the members of the initiative for the preservation of the Most library.
“We perceive the petition as a fundamentally different opinion of part of the public regarding the intention to relocate the city library,” stated the mayor in his letter. However, the mayor did not indicate which part of the public shares an opinion with the city council. The council did not delve deeper into the petition and its significance in the letter. In our opinion, the council has effectively rejected the significance of the number of signed petitioners, which has no parallel in Most.
In his response to the petition, the mayor focused only on defending the library services in the Repre building. He particularly points out good practices from abroad with merged operations and assures that smaller spaces do not hinder modern library trends. The uncertain fate of the current library is completely ignored by the city council except for the fact that reconstruction is not possible for technical reasons, as there would allegedly be nowhere to relocate the library's operation during the reconstruction. In defending the redevelopment of Repre, he entirely overlooks the very high costs arising from converting part of the cultural house's space into a library. We would like to point out that there is no alternative assessment of the investment and operating costs for repairing Repre with and without the library. We believe that the council did not consider all the arguments presented. Therefore, there is reason to doubt whether the City Council is making rational decisions. With its inflexibility, the city council is likely trying to justify the expense for an expensive project preparation, the proposal of which was never discussed with the public in a public hearing. The fact that the preservation of the Repre building conditions the relocation of the library from its current valuable building is at the very least non-conceptual. The council has remained silent regarding the fate of the current library building after the books are moved out.
A petition with such a high number of expressions, nor the two organized demonstrations, evidently plays no role in the council's decision-making. The city leadership likely wants to engage with the public only in a form that suits it – surveys and competitions. However, it has refused to adequately respond to a specific and strong public prompt on important issues.
The decision on the reconstruction of Repre is to be determined by a grant opportunity and a favorable offer from a potential construction supplier. The will expressed by the people is apparently nothing the city council feels it should take into account. This creates a peculiar situation, as the council is supported by parties that have promised support for preserving the library in its current building. We firmly believe that these parties will stand by their position and will not allow the relocation of the library.
More information >
“We perceive the petition as a fundamentally different opinion of part of the public regarding the intention to relocate the city library,” stated the mayor in his letter. However, the mayor did not indicate which part of the public shares an opinion with the city council. The council did not delve deeper into the petition and its significance in the letter. In our opinion, the council has effectively rejected the significance of the number of signed petitioners, which has no parallel in Most.
In his response to the petition, the mayor focused only on defending the library services in the Repre building. He particularly points out good practices from abroad with merged operations and assures that smaller spaces do not hinder modern library trends. The uncertain fate of the current library is completely ignored by the city council except for the fact that reconstruction is not possible for technical reasons, as there would allegedly be nowhere to relocate the library's operation during the reconstruction. In defending the redevelopment of Repre, he entirely overlooks the very high costs arising from converting part of the cultural house's space into a library. We would like to point out that there is no alternative assessment of the investment and operating costs for repairing Repre with and without the library. We believe that the council did not consider all the arguments presented. Therefore, there is reason to doubt whether the City Council is making rational decisions. With its inflexibility, the city council is likely trying to justify the expense for an expensive project preparation, the proposal of which was never discussed with the public in a public hearing. The fact that the preservation of the Repre building conditions the relocation of the library from its current valuable building is at the very least non-conceptual. The council has remained silent regarding the fate of the current library building after the books are moved out.
A petition with such a high number of expressions, nor the two organized demonstrations, evidently plays no role in the council's decision-making. The city leadership likely wants to engage with the public only in a form that suits it – surveys and competitions. However, it has refused to adequately respond to a specific and strong public prompt on important issues.
The decision on the reconstruction of Repre is to be determined by a grant opportunity and a favorable offer from a potential construction supplier. The will expressed by the people is apparently nothing the city council feels it should take into account. This creates a peculiar situation, as the council is supported by parties that have promised support for preserving the library in its current building. We firmly believe that these parties will stand by their position and will not allow the relocation of the library.
More information >
The English translation is powered by AI tool. Switch to Czech to view the original text source.
0 comments
add comment
