This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.

Time to be Honest

“Building” or “site”? One word makes a huge difference in Madison’s downtown’s future. Residents who care about the legacy we leave for the next century need to pay attention to the Academy and library sites.

In the Oct. 27 column “Updates and Ideas for The Academy School,” First Selectman Tom Banisch used the word “building” twice. Those in the know, know that the building will be demolished, which allows a new library to be built in the historic, community side of town. Otherwise, the Academy site’s destined to become stores and housing. This isn’t a bad idea. Building a new library at the Academy site and turning the present library property over to developers (retaining the iconic corner building) is a better idea.

Parking’s a consideration—45 additional library spaces help, but they’re more than doubling the library size. Many want cultural uses in this intellectual infrastructure. The present library site competes with the art cinema and other commercial space for parking. Not at the Academy site.

The cost is similar.

We already have empty commercial space—why change the historic side’s character to add more? As announced, selling Our Lady of Mercy School could provide a large addition to high-end housing on the tax base.

While a trust owns the library, most of its funding comes from taxpayers. I encourage readers to make their voices known. Neither the library board nor any other not-for-profit can do this for us. This isn’t like street paving, which can be redressed later.

State funding is likely to follow. State Senator Ted Kennedy, Jr., asked me when I raised the funding issue with him, “What does the community want?”

The library expands either way. It’s time to be honest with our community about possibilities and get the library quickly on the right track.

Emily Eisenlohr

Madison