Chapter 25. To My Surprise I am Appointed Director of the Cleveland Public Library in a Tumultuous Board Meeting

Mr. Coleman addressed the members of the Library Board as follows:

This ended Mr. Coleman’s statement.

This was indeed a bombshell. Over the years the Library Board room had been the site for a number of unusual, news breaking events, but never anything like this! The Cleveland Public Library found itself on the evening of its 100th birthday branded as a racist institution for all of its one hundred years! For a few moments after Mr. Coleman had spoken there was complete silence. It, however, was broken by Mr. Livingston when he calmly said, “I move that the President of the Library Board appoint a committee, charged with the responsibility of developing a policy statement on equal opportunity for the Cleveland Public Library with guidelines for effective action programs to bring about equal opportunities within this Library, with the request that we provide the NAACP with information regarding the number of negroes represented in each category of employment within the Cleveland Public Library.” The motion was approved unanimously.

President Thompson then turned to the prepared agenda. All proceeded smoothly until, he called for new business. At this point, Mr. Klonowski said that he wished to make a statement. This turned out to be another bombshell, also not on the printed agenda, and of course another big surprise for me and I am sure for most of the people in the Boardroom that day.

Mr. Klonowski said that he had something to say about who the Director of the Cleveland Public Library should be. He came right to the point and said, “I think we have the person right here in the Library who should be the Director and the Trustees could not find a better Director if they searched the country over. Mr. Edward D’Alessandro has worked in the Library for many years, he has worked with many Directors and other very important leaders of the Library before him. He has also worked in the various areas of the Library over the years and knows its operations. As Deputy Director, he has ably directed the affairs of the Library during Mr. Lindquist’s absences and since Mr. Lindquist’s retirement. I move that Mr. D’Alessandro be appointed Director of the Cleveland Public Library.” The motion was quickly seconded by Board member John Gardner.

I was in total shock. I had not been told before hand that an appointment would be made so soon when Lockwood Thompson, Stanley Klonowski and Florence Graham had convinced me to be a candidate for the job. Only a short time ago I had been left with the idea that a number of other candidates were to be interviewed.

Following the motion and its second, Board member Robert Merritt remarked that in his opinion the search for a new Director had not been as extensive and thorough as it should have been; that persons had not yet been interviewed who would like to be; and that only four persons other than the Acting Director had been interviewed. Mr. Merritt strongly urged the members of the Board to make no decision at the time and to follow the course which had been recommended by the Cleveland Board of Education. He said that he was not prepared to vote on such a motion and would abstain.

Mr. Merritt then moved that Mr. Klonowski’s motion be tabled for a further search for a Director. Mr.Thompson advised that a motion to table did not need a second, according to Robert’s Rules of Order. A roll-call was then taken on tabling the motion to appoint me. The motion for tabling failed with all the Board members with the exception of Mr. Merritt voting No.

Mr. Thompson then called for the roll call on the motion to appoint me as Director of the Cleveland Public Library. There were six yeas. Mr. Merritt abstained as he had said he would. Mr. Thompson declared that I was officially appointed as the new Director.

Mr. Livingston then presented the following resolution:

Board member Arthur Heard moved for the adoption of the resolution. Florence Graham seconded the motion. Before there was a call for the question on the motion, Mr. Heard interjected that he had tried at the least five times to get the members of the Board of Education to meet informally with the Library Board of Trustees for discussions pertaining to matters concerning the Library without success. Mr.Klonowski added that he felt that once the Board of Education had appointed the members of the Library Board that it should have faith in its appointees!

Mr. Gardner then called for the question. President Thompson asked for the roll call. There were six yeas. Mr. Merritt again abstained from voting. The President then declared the motion carried.

So it was that I assumed the Directorship of the Cleveland Public Library on the 100th anniversary of the Cleveland Public Library, at a time that should have been one of great joy and jubilation not only for me but also for all concerned. Instead, I found myself being handed the reins at a time that gave me little cause for celebration. The mantle of leadership had been thrust upon me in a manner that I had not chosen nor expected and at a time of distrust and division between the Library Board of Trustees and its parent body the Board of Education. At the same time it appeared that a wedge had been driven into the unity that had existed in the membership of the Library Board. This did not bode well for the welfare of the Cleveland Public Library and for me. I must confess I was disheartened. That feeling filled me throughout the rest of the Board meeting.

At the close of the Board meeting. I was surrounded! Board members, Library staff and members of the media present congratulated me. This raised my spirits somewhat. However, after all had gone, I sank into my chair at my desk, mentally and physically, and emotionally drained. I sat there for well over an hour before I was able to get myself together to make the long drive home.

On my way home, I could not help reviewing all that had transpired that evening beginning with the charges that had been made by the NAACP. I must confess that in all the years I had been associated with the Cleveland Public Library, I had not paid much attention to the operations of the Personnel Department. From the time I had reached the management level, that is, from the time I became a Branch Librarian, on up the ladder, my jobs did not include any oversight of the operations of that department. That was the case even when I was Assistant Director and Deputy Director. In those positions, my specific responsibilities as described in my job descriptions were in the business and physical plant areas of the Library. The only two persons other than the Directors, and who as Assistant Directors had anything to do with personnel during my time in middle or upper management, who were specifically charged with any oversight over personnel were L. Quincy Mumford and Rose Vormelker. I could not bring myself to believe that they or anyone else connected with the Personnel Department would have condoned discriminatory personnel practices. Now that I was Director, I knew that I was going to make it my job to know
what was going on in the Personnel Office and to make sure that never again would the NAACP or any other group be able to level the kind of charge that had been made. I was sure in my own mind that I would be able to handle any problems that might arise in that regard. I also had no fears about being able to successfully manage the administrative responsibilities of the Directorship because I had been doing so as Acting Director and because I knew I could rely on the many years of experience I had had in practically every aspect of the Library’s work over the years.

What gave me real pause for thought was what was happening at the Board level. It was clear that the School Board was definitely bent on exercising control over the actions of the Library Board and it was also apparent that seeds of division had been sewn in the Library Board. You will recall that I alluded to School Board’s first attempt to control earlier in this account when I reported the School Board’s failed attempt to pressure the Library to continue funding School Library service when the County Budget Commission ordered that the School Board use its funds for that service. It was clear to me that since virtually all of the Library Board members were persons of principle and would not be controlled, that the School Board would try to gain control through its new and future appointees to the Library Board. I arrived home on the night of February 17, 1969 with that worrisome thought!

Once in the warmth and comfort of my home and family, I tried to put the best construction on what had happened that night, however, Grace and boys understood the implications of the situation as they congratulated me on my appointment. I must admit that it was not a night of celebration as it should have been! It was not until recently that I became aware of the impact that my homecoming on that evening had had on my family. Recently during a long distance telephone call with my son Paul, now a librarian at the Portland Public Library in Portland Maine. He recalled the feelings he had as a seventeen year old, regarding my appearance and state of mind when I arrived home that night.

When I returned to work the following day, I had made up my mind that I was going to make things work, to be the peace maker, to bring about unity in the Library Board and get both of the Boards to work cooperatively. The first test came during the March 1969 Library Board meeting when Mr. Livingston advised the Board that although the Board had unanimously approved to honor the NAACP’s request in the February meeting for information regarding the number of blacks represented in each category of employment within the Cleveland Public Library, that the propriety of that action had since been called into question by another member of the Library Board. He added that this required discussion.

Mr. Heard said that the Board had authorized the sharing of that information, and that there was no
need for discussion. He continued, saying, “The minutes of the February 17 Board meeting records the motion made that we provide the NAACP with information regarding the number of negroes represented in each category of employment within the Cleveland Public Library, the vote was 7 yeas and 0 Nays. There should be no further discussion on the matter.”

President Thompson asked me if the information was available. I replied that the Personnel Office had had to compile the information because the Library had not kept such information because of an existing law on the subject. I said that as ordered by the Board in its February 17 meeting the information had been presented to the Personnel Committee of the Board for its consideration. Mr. Livingston asked if there were questions of legality he would like to know what the question was.

Mr. Merritt then said the Library is a public institution which by law is required to treat all people equally and without discrimination and that one of the main thrusts of the civil rights movement has been to make it illegal to keep records based on race, creed or nationality. In fact, he said, The NAACP some years ago made a request to the Cleveland City School Board that it not keep statistics or tables on students by race creed or nationality. He said until he knew it was proper, he felt the information should be withheld.

Mr. Livingston then countered that the Library in fact, had not kept records by race or creed and that the information had to be gathered for this request. He added that there would be no such record keeping in the Library, that since the problem had been made public, the Library Board should want to answer the NAACP charges in the spirit in which they were made. He concluded, saying, “In honor we can face up to this challenge and be the stronger for it.”

Mr. Merritt replied that it might well be that the Library’s legal counsel might think giving such a list very proper and that the Board would not be criticized, that it would only be a matter of a few days to get a legal opinion.

Mr. Heard again reminded the members of the Board that a motion had been made, duly seconded and unanimously carried in a previous meeting, that the board provide the NAACP with the information. He did not feel that there should be any further discussion on the matter.

Mr. Merritt then moved that on receipt of an opinion from legal counsel that it is proper to do so, the required information should then be turned over to the NAACP. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Graham. Mr. Gardner, Mrs. Graham, Mr. Merritt and Mr. Thompson voted Yes. Mr. Heard and Mr. Livingston voted No. Mr. Klonowski abstained. President Thompson declared the motion carried.

The tone of the discussion of this matter and the four to two vote showed that I had been intuitive about what was happening to the Library Board. I now had evidence that the there were going to be strong divisions within the Board, that it might be difficult to get unanimity on other matters in the future.

The morning following the Board meeting, I wrote a letter to Mr. Frank T. Corrigan, who was County Prosecutor and the Library’s legal counsel, seeking his opinion regarding the propriety of furnishing the information requested by the NAACP, as ordered by the Board. In order to save time, I telephoned Mr. Corrigan, explained the situation to him, and asked him if I could bring him the letter officially asking for his opinion on the matter sometime that afternoon. One might ask how could I have been so bold to intrude on a busy public official in that way, and on such short notice. I was able to do so because I had been able to win Mr. Corrigan’s respect and friendship. From the time I assumed the responsibilities of Business Manager, I had not only made it a practice to seek his advice and counsel on matters that required that I do so, but also as he once told me, because I ran a tight ship when it came to the Library’s budget, contracts and other business and financial matters. So when I called him on this problem, He agreed without hesitation to see me after lunch.

I hand carried my letter to Mr. Corrigan’s office and presented it to him in person that afternoon. He was kind enough to consider my inquiry then and there. I filled him in on the details of the NAACP’s request. He asked me whether the Library had made it a practice to keep the information requested. I replied in the negative, telling him that the Personnel Office had had to compile the information at the Board’s request because of the law that prohibited the keeping of such records.

He summoned his secretary, dictated the following reply giving his official opinion immediately.

After thanking Mr. Corrigan for the speedy manner in which he had handled our request, I decided to take his written opinion to Mr. Thompson for his perusal before sending it on to the NAACP as had been directed by the Library Board the day before. When I called Mr. Thompson’s office luckily his secretary said she could get me in to see him before the end of the work day, at five o’clock. I knew he would be pleased with the letter, however, upon reading the letter, I did not expect him to take another step in the matter. He directed me to instruct Dorothy Fechter, Clerk of the Board to call a Special Board meeting to present Mr. Corrigan’s letter to the Board, to consider the letter and the release of employee information to the NAACP. I reminded him that the full Board had already done that in the March 20 meeting, and had instructed me to release the information upon receipt of Mr. Corrigan’s approval. He insisted on having the special meeting any way. As I left his office, I was puzzled as to why he wanted to gild the lily as it were. I thought, why in the world would he want to bother the full Board again with something that had already been decided?

Before I got back to my office late that day, I had concluded that Mr. Thompson remembering the strong different opinions held by some of his associates on the subject, had become so sensitive about the matter, that he felt it necessary to rehash the matter again with his fellow Board members now that he had Mr. Corrigan’s letter in hand.

The special Board meeting was held on March 27, 1969, with four of the seven members of the Board present, which constituted a quorum. Mr. Merritt, Mr. Klonowski and Mr. Gardner did not attend. Opening the meeting, Mr. Thompson asked me once again to present the statistical compilation on the composition of the staff as requested by the NAACP and to read the Board’s motion on the request along with my letter to Mr. Corrigan and his response giving approval for the release of the information. Mr. Thompson then said that since there was no question that the information should be released he now wanted the Board’s direction on how and to whom the information should be sent. At the same time, he asked Mr. Livingston if he thought that the statistics should be held until the Library could develop its Equal Opportunity Statement which also had been requested by the NAACP. Mr. Livingston replied in the negative, saying that they were two different things” One was in relation to the commitment the Board had made relative to providing the statistics requested, while the policy statement was for internal use. Whereupon Mrs. Graham moved that the information be transmitted to the Executive Secretary of the NAACP. Mr. Livingston seconded the motion. The four members present, Mrs. Graham, Mr. Heard, Mr. Livingston and Mr. Thompson were unanimous in their vote for transmitting the information, finally making it possible for me to send the information on to the NAACP, which I did without delay the next day. This
was more evidence that this board would be keeping me on a merry-go-round!

Two weeks later another special meeting of the Board was called to consider the new bids received for the building of the new branch at University Circle, the revised costs that had been presented to the Board in an earlier meeting, and to award the necessary building contracts to the successful contractors.

In Calling the meeting to order, Mr. Thompson noted that Mr. Gardner, Mr. Livingston had indicated they could not be present, however, Mr. Merritt had not been heard from. Since Mrs. Graham, Mr. Heard, Mr. Klonowski, and he made a quorum, he said the meeting could proceed. He then asked me to refresh the Board’s memory on what had gone before on the project and to present the bid tabulations.

I advised the board that the bids as readvertised were duly received at 12:00 noon, April 2, 1969, opened and read by the Clerk-Treasurer in the presence of the Architect, members of the administration and contractors as required by law. I also advised that the resolutions for the awarding of the contracts were subject to the acceptance by the contractors of an affirmative action program pertaining to equal opportunities, etc., as required by the Federal Government and acceptance of the contracts by the state Architect’s office. I mentioned that the Ozanne Construction Company which had presented the base low bid had failed to submit a bid bond as required by the specifications and bidding documents. Since this had made its bid incomplete, it had been disqualified as required by law. I then presented the remaining low bids as submitted by the John E Cleary Construction Company and the Roediger Construction Company along with the Architect’s recommendation.

As I was explaining the bid comparison sheet comparing the bids of the two companies, and the Architect’s recommendation that the low bid of $510,800.00 from the Roediger Construction be accepted, Mr. Merritt arrived.

Without having heard any of the details about the bids for the construction of the branch library building, Mr. Merritt said that he “was greatly concerned about inadequate parking facilities, difficulty of access, neighborhood safety factors, and the need for the Library as originally conceived.” He further stated that in view of these concerns and also in view of the unexpected high cost of the proposed library building, he could not vote for building the University Circle Regional Branch Library. This took the rest of the Library Board by surprise. I could see the looks of amazement on their faces. I was at a loss to explain or understand this change in thinking on his part, when just two months ago, on February 17, he had voted to approve the building of the branch as proposed. Architect Ward advised Mr. Merritt that the low bid as presented by the Roediger Construction Company was well within the revised budget which the Board had asked for in an earlier meeting when the Board had had to reject all of the bids because they were all above the construction budget. Mr. Merritt was reminded that the Board had approved the revisions in plans and the read advertisement for bids for the job, that all had been done according to the direction of the full Board. Mr. Ward added that the revised budget now being presented would adequately cover the construction costs being presented as well as all other costs to complete the building. Mr. Ward assured Mr. Merritt that parking would be adequate, that access from East 107th Street posed no problem, and as for safety, the police station was nearby.

After much discussion, Mr. Klonowski asked that the Board members “get on with the business for which the meeting had been called and vote either ’yes’ or ’no’ on the matter.” He said that the Board had already made decisions about the building of the new branch months ago, and had come together for action on the bids and that it was the only business that was to be conducted. He urged the Board members to come to some conclusion.

Mr. Heard moved that the proposed revision of the estimated budget for the construction of the branch as presented be adopted. Mr. Klonowski seconded the motion. Mrs. Graham, Mr. Heard, Mr. Klonowski, and Mr. Thompson voted yes. Mr. Merritt voted no. Mr. Gardner and Mr. Livingston were absent.

Taking one at a time, Mr. Heard then moved that the General trades contract be awarded to the Roediger Construction Company, the Plumbing contract to the Spohn Corporation, the Heating and Ventilating contract to the M. J. Kelly Company, and the Electrical contract to the Hoffman Electric Company. After each motion was duly” seconded, they were all approved by a four to one vote. Mr. Merritt not voting in each case.

This was the second time in two months that Mr. Merritt had suddenly reversed himself on two very important matters to have come before the Board, taking very strong positions that were unnerving and disturbing for the other Board members. These sudden reversals on his part gave me cause for worry as well, and were reinforcing my suspicions that he had come to the board with a preplanned agenda. Not too long after that meeting one of the Board members using a cliche told me that he thought that “there appeared to be method in Mr. Merritt’s madness.”

Be that as it may, I was determined that I was going to make things work, that I would do my best to implement the policies of the Board, develop Library programs and services that would benefit all the Library’s clienteles, with the hope that I would continue to have the support of the majority of the Board.

I was pleased that the majority of the Board had approved the building contracts for the University Circle Branch and proceeded with the next steps that had to be taken. Since a large amount of the funding for the branch was coming from federal funds through the State Library as the administrator of Library Services and Construction Act funds, I had to arrange for the required pre-conference award meeting with Frank Baldau, representative of the federal offices in Chicago, the representatives of the State Library, the architect, and the successful contractors to instruct the contractors about the necessary affirmative action program to be submitted by them pertaining to equal employment opportunities and other requirements called for by the Federal Library Services and Construction Act. This had to be done before the State Library and the State Architect would approve the building contracts.

At the same time that all this was going on we had been able to put together the small but functional branch at the Garden Valley Housing Project that we had promised that community earlier in the year. The branch was officially opened for service on April 7, 1969 with a ribbon cutting ceremony that had been planned with the Neighborhood Leadership Committee under the direction of Ann Marie Minor. In attendance and officiating, were Richard Peters, Administrative Assistant to Mayor Stokes, Councilman Charles Carr, Irving Kriegsfeld, Director of the Cleveland Metropolitan Housing Authority, Lockwood Thompson, President of the Library Board, Board members Florence Graham, Arthur Heard, and George Livingston. Several members of the Library staff joined me, along with many parents and their children, who could hardly wait for the Library to open. The Neighborhood Leadership Committee and parents provided refreshments. A huge cake appropriately decorated for the event was provided by the Quincy Savings and Loan, all of which made it a very festive occasion. This event received the following notice in the Cleveland Press of April 12, 1969:

Almost immediately, community response was very favorable. School class visits from the Charles
Chesnutt and Anton Grdina elementary schools were scheduled. They were soon followed by adult education classes. Parents, children, and teachers kept saying, “We love it!”

As one who had come from a tenement myself, I could relate with the children especially in their feelings about the library. As I look back and recall the excitement I shared with those youngsters so many years ago, I can’t help wondering how that day may have changed their lives, as my life was changed back in 1925, when the Cleveland Public Library first came into my life. I wonder how many of those youngsters have been able to live better and fuller lives because of the Library. As I write this, I haven’t been able to resist the urge to go to the Cleveland Telephone Directory to see if the Branch still exists. Sure enough, there it is in black and white, Garden Valley Branch, 7100 Kinsman Rd., telephone 623-69 76. It pleases me so much to see that it still has a place in the City Library’s network after more than a quarter of a century.

As I glance down the current roster of Cleveland’s Branch Libraries, I am also pleased to see that four other Branch Libraries that were established during my watch are still around doing their part in the cultural, educational and social life of the city. Yes, there they are, Martin Luther King Branch (formerly University Circle Regional Branch), at 1962 Stokes Boulevard, the Rockport Branch, at 4421 West 140th and Puritas Avenue, the Frank W. Walz Branch, at 7910 Detroit Avenue, and the Woodland Branch, at 5806 Woodland Avenue. All of them serve as happy reminders and mountain tops in my life and career as a librarian.

On June 12, 1969, I was able to take to the Board for approval bids that had been solicited for a Library Management Survey from a number of Management Consultant Firms. From the time I had become Business Manager of the Library system I had felt the need for a thorough in depth study of the Library’s business and management organization and structure. The last study, known as the Carnovsky Appraisal had been done in 1939. It had been done by Leon Carnovsky, who was well known and well thought of in the national Library community. At the time, I was a young reference librarian in the Sociology Division of the Main Library. I recall that I was one of the junior staff members from that division called upon by Amy Winslow and Russell Munn who had been brought to the Library by Librarian Charles Rush to do some of the leg work in the gathering of information about the Main Library for the study. My supervisor, Alma Schultz had recommended me for the assignment, telling me that it would be good experience for me. It most certainly was so.

Overall, the Carnovsky Survey was perceived to have been a well done, comprehensive study of the entire library. It covered the administrative organization and structure of the Main Library and the branch libraries and the entire spectrum of the Library’s services throughout the system. It made management recommendations for the top administrative offices, for the Main Library and the branches. It drew conclusions and made recommendations about personnel, the number of branches needed, areas over-served as well as those that were under-served, branches that should be relocated or eliminated, etc. The study resulted in a number of very important changes and improvements in the areas I have mentioned. I recall, however, that a number of the Branch Librarians felt strongly that the Carnovsky Surveyors had not been as thorough as they should have been in their study of the branch libraries and that the branches had suffered as a result of what some of the senior branch librarians described as a perfunctory look at their operations.

Since 1939, the Library had expanded with new branch library buildings and new services, all of which had resulted in added costs and problems that additional buildings and services bring. Since Carnovsky, salaries had gone up. Funds to meet salary demands had to be met by cutting the appropriations for books, periodicals, audio-visual materials as well as other appropriations. These had ballooned into major budgeting problems. World War II had brought staff shortages, which continued to be exacerbated by loss of positions that could not be filled because of increased salary costs, and then by the loss of school library personnel when that personnel and the school libraries were taken over by the Board of Education. This personnel drain had made it virtually impossible to properly staff the Main Library and the branches during vacation times. In the past, school librarians had been used to fill in for Main Library and Branch staff when on vacation.

The Cleveland Public Library as a result had reached the stage in its history in 1969 when it needed to examine its organization, operations, programs and services in relation to costs. I felt that this should be done through a management study to be undertaken by an outside firm with the necessary expertise to study the following areas of the Library’s operations in relation to its role in the County, State, and the nation:

The idea of having such a study had been approved by unanimous vote in the Library Board’s regular meeting of March 20, 1969, and the above outline for the proposed study had been approved in a special meeting held May 28, 1969.

Now on June 12, in a special meeting called by President Thompson, I was asked by him to review the background information on the proposed management study and to present the bids received from the consultants who had submitted bids. I had prepared a written analysis of the bids that had been received two days before from Booz-Allen Hamilton, Inc., Ernst & Ernst, Alexander Grant & Company, Haskins and Sells, and Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Company, which I had hand delivered myself and reviewed in person with each of the Board members the day before the Board meeting as I had done before in other cases, at President Thompson’s request, when he felt the need for quick and timely action by the Board.

I had no sooner completed my presentation of the bids in the meeting, indicating that funds would be forthcoming from the Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation to cover the $12,000 cost that had been presented as the lowest and firm bid by the Alexander Grant & Company, if we submitted our request for funds to the foundation no later than June 15, when Mr. Merritt spoke.

Mr. Merritt said that he could not vote on the Management Survey because he felt strongly that the Library should have a study that was larger in scope, that the study should be similar to the one made by Leon Carnovsky in 1939. He added that the Library might find that after it had done this management survey that it would want to do another covering the other aspects of the library, that our chances of getting additional funds from the Foundation for such a survey would be impaired. He asked for the opportunity to see a copy of the Carnovsky survey, that he wanted to study it before he could vote on the proposed management study.

To say that the other Board members and I were again amazed and perplexed at this turn of events would be an understatement. I could not believe what I was hearing. Here was a man who in March without exception had participated in a unanimous vote giving me the authority to get bids on the basis of the proposal I had placed before the Board at that time, once again throwing a monkey wrench in the works.

I felt that it was my duty to remind him and the rest of the Board that approval had been given in the Board meeting of March 20, 1969, authorizing a management survey of the Library, with the specific idea of studying its table of organization, business functions, employment and use of personnel, space utilization, etc. I recall saying that under its existing organization the Library was not functioning well, that the Library was big business, that under its existing structure, it was impossible to administer in a cost effective manner. I emphasized that it was necessary to place the Library’s budgeting and financial operations on a business like basis. I added that I did not feel that our request for funds would not be received favorably, that several years earlier the Library’s Uniform Salary Study was underwritten by the Cleveland Foundation. In fact that salary study was funded in two steps, by two separate allocations totaling $10,000.

Mr. Merritt said that he was not saying that the management study was not needed, he just wanted more time to go over everything, and to talk with the various management firms bidding on the study. He found in his experience that going into this sort of thing cold with the thought we might have to go back for funds for another study could jeopardize getting the funds, that this type 6f study might very well be a part of a more comprehensive study of the Library, which could up-date the Carnovsky Appraisal of 1939.

I reminded Mr. Merritt that the Cleveland Foundation had reacted favorably to our requests for funds in the past one way or the other, that if the Board were to decide to go for an appraisal similar to the larger Carnovsky project later on, I was sure that the foundation would look favorably on such a request as it had in the past with the salary studies. I continued saying that our immediate and urgent need was for a business and management study, that a Carnovsky type study would take more time, and cost more, probably about $100,000, and a year or more to complete.

He responded, saying that the Friends of the Cleveland Public Library would help to secure the $100,000 needed for a more comprehensive study, and it seemed to him that the Cleveland Foundation would be quicker to grant the full amount at one time rather than making two grants.

All I could say to this continued persistent, call for a larger study was that I had not understood that the Board had changed its mind about having the management study as had been approved in the Meeting of March 20. I would have to hear that from the full Board!

At this point, Mr. Heard asked, “how many Board members were present at the March 20 meeting?” Mr. Livingston replied that all seven members of the Board were present and voted unanimously on the management study. He said the Director had moved ahead according to the Board’s directive after action taken in a previous meeting. He said if the Library, was going to have a complete comprehensive study made, it meant that the Board should backup and take another look at the management study under consideration. He continued, saying, that the Director had spelled out the need for much needed changes within the Library’s business activities and organization, and the urgency of the need to make these changes. He concluded by saying that the Board should listen to what the Director was trying to tell them.

President Thompson then asked me if the Library could find the $12,000 to go ahead with the management study, with the idea of holding off requesting funds from the Foundation to do the rest of the Library study later. I replied that there was no extra money anywhere in the Library’s budget to do so, that we did not have to look elsewhere for the funds, that I had had assurances that the Cleveland Foundation would supply the funds.

Mr. Heard said the management survey as proposed offered much value to the Library; that the Board had come together to “put the whole ball of wax together and should move forward on it.” He said, “now the Board members come back for another session and do not know what they had passed previously. We seem to change our minds often lately. When we vote now, we’ll have to raise our right hand and say on Scout’s honor we won’t change our minds again.”

With that, President Thompson asked the members if they wanted to meet again next Thursday, the day of the regular meeting. Mr. Heard advised that he did not mind how often he was asked to come to the Library, however, some members never seem to be able to make it on time, and then end up making lengthy dissertations and the Board does not accomplish much; if when the Board comes together to conduct business he said he did not have time to waste listening to long speeches that bring about no results. He was looking at Mr. Merritt as he said this.

It was now clear more than ever that there were two factions on the Board, that I would have my hands full, just trying to keep peace, and at the same time try to get things done in future Board meetings, and to keep the Library moving forward.

Mr. Livingston was the one who helped bring closure to that very unproductive meeting of June 12 by calmly saying that the Director and the administrative staff had spent many hours going over in detail with management firms the scope of the management survey before the bids were presented to the Board for consideration. President Thompson picked up the cue, saying that he was somewhat embarrassed as a Board member to have given directives to the Director, and then to scrap them.

I then asked President Thompson what I should say to the firms who had bid on the management study? Mr. Heard cautioned the members to make it very clear what they expected the Director to do, as he himself certainly did not know what the Board was trying to tell the Director. I recall that this statement must have unnerved Mr. Thompson. He did not answer my question, He either lost his train of thought or forgot. I did not push it.

Mr. Livingston continuing to try to bring the meeting to an end then said that since the board was present as a quorum he moved that the Director be empowered to talk with the Assistant Director of the Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation relative to the possibility of having a comprehensive study of the Library and its services and that a new date be established for a hearing and that any assistance which could be provided by the Foundation in developing the proposal be provided to the Director.

Mr. Heard seconded the motion. The members present, Mr. Heard, Mr. Livingston, Mr. Merritt, and Mr. Thompson voted yes. Mr. Gardner, Mrs. Graham, Mr. Klonowski were absent. I was now headed back to the drawing board.

I have said that my recollection was that Mr. Thompson did not answer my question as to what I should tell the firms that had bid on the management survey I had proposed. My review of the Minutes of the Special Meeting dated June 12, 1969 verify my recollection. There is no indication there that my” question was answered. I recall calling each of the Board members the next day and got their approval by telephone to notify the firms that had bid that the Board had decided not to proceed with the survey as originally advertised. I promptly wrote each company a courtesy letter to that effect, for the record, indicating the Board’s and my thanks for their bids.

If I had had any doubts before about what was happening to the esprit de corps of the Board, they were completely dispelled by this most recent performance. Also any doubts I might have had about the divisive feelings that existed between some members of the Board, they too had been dispelled.

It was around this time that I also discovered that Mr. Merritt was having meetings with a few members of the Library staff at his home from time to time. A staff member who had been invited to his home for one of those meetings advised me that it was personally disturbing for her because she felt that it was unethical for Mr. Merritt as a Board member to be hiding secret meetings with selected staff members about Library matters behind the backs of the other members of the Board and the Library Administration, and decided that I should know about it. To this day, when I recall receiving that troubling bit of unsolicited knowledge, I wish as I did then that the information had been withheld from me. I was deeply saddened. I not only felt sad but betrayed. From that moment on I knew that my work in the Cleveland Public Library was going to be an up-hill battle. There was no longer any doubt in my mind that there was a counter agenda at work.

This was another one of those times that I wished that father was still around for me ’to consult. Since he was not, all that I could do was to remind myself again of those times when he would urge me to persevere in particularly difficult situations by saying, “Once you have begun to dance, you must finish the dance!” Those were the words I kept repeating to myself that evening as I left the office for home after one of the most unproductive and sorriest Board meetings of my library career.

As directed by the board, I lost no time in arranging for a meeting with Dr. James Norton, Director of the Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation about the Board’s change of mind and desire to have a comprehensive study of the Library and its services and the possibility of funding from the Foundation. He graciously agreed to see me on June 19, 1969 at 9:00 A.M. I recall taking Fern Long my deputy with me so that I would have a witness to the proceedings. Dr. Norton had asked his assistant Mrs. Barbara Rawson to join us in the meeting on the morning of June 19.

I carefully outlined in detail for Dr. Norton and his aide what had taken place up to that point in time on the management survey that I had proposed and the Board’s discussion and its decision to opt for a wider survey, that I should seek his thinking on the matter along with his thoughts on the possibility of funding for it from the Foundation. A thorough discussion followed. Both Dr. Norton and Mrs. Rawson were interested in the bids which had been submitted by the firms on the management survey that the Foundation had encouraged earlier. They continued to agree that what they called a “nuts and bolts” survey of library’s business management needed to be made, and the large question remained as to whether it should come before or after the broader survey.

The conference ended with Dr. Norton indicating that the Foundation was still interested in the production of a business management survey and would even consider a broad survey of library functions and operations. He expressed a strong feeling that time of Library staff must be invested in both studies. He also advised that he believed that the Friends of the Cleveland Public Library must invest both effort and funds in both undertakings if they were to be successful, that the goals of the Library should involve both public and private cooperation and funding. The understanding now was clear that two types of survey were under consideration: the shorter term management survey and the long-term management survey.

Miss Long and I were agreeably surprised and so pleased when in discussing the time table for submission of the proposals for each of the surveys to the Foundation for funding, Dr. Norton suggested that the proposal for the short-term administrative management survey be submitted first, by September 1, 1969 for consideration at Foundation’s October distribution meeting, and the proposal for the broader study be submitted as a second and separate proposal by November 1, 1969, in time for the December distribution meeting.

It was almost noon when Miss Long and I left Dr. Norton’s office and hurried back to our offices. We had to get ready for the regular monthly Board meeting scheduled for that afternoon at 4:00 P.M. I must confess that I felt vindicated that afternoon as I wrote my report of our meeting with Dr. Norton, vindicated because he had reacted to our request as I had predicted and advised Mr. Merritt and the rest of the Board earlier. Dr. Norton had not only agreed with my position that the need for a management survey was the more immediate need but also had advised us to seek the funds for that survey from the Foundation for it first, and then to seek the funds to do the larger survey later.

And so it was, at the June 19, 1969 regular Board meeting, only seven days after the horrendous special meeting of June 12, I read a one page factual report of our successful meeting with Dr. Norton and Mrs. Rawson. I must confess that although “I told you so” thoughts filled my mind at the time, I am proud to say that I resisted the temptation to even hint at it in that report. In writing this account, I went back to consult the Minutes of the June 19 Board Meeting to check my report on page 238 and the following pages to see how the members of the Board reacted to my report. There were none! The top of page 239 carries the following closing statement: “The Director said that he thought the Board would be interested in the kind of thinking that was evident in the interview with Dr. Norton.” My report was received and accepted without comment. The record shows that we proceeded to other matters on the agenda.

I am sorry to report that not too long afterward, Lockwood Thompson resigned from the Library Board. Mr. Thompson had served long, well and honorably on the Board. He had also served his country, city and his state well and with honor. He had served as an officer in the armed forces in World War II, as a lawyer in the city, and as Chief Counsel for the Ohio Turnpike Commission. He was a member of an old, well known Cleveland family. He was a book man, a true scholar and always a gentleman. He was the last of the old time Board members. His leaving saddened me. I knew that I was going to miss him. His leaving created a second vacancy on the Board. Mrs. Florence Graham had passed away earlier after an extended illness.

A special meeting was called on July 24, 1969, at which time Mr. Murray Davidson, well known civic leader from the University Circle Area was appointed by the School Board to replace Mrs. Graham, and the Board elected Arthur Heard to replace Lockwood Thompson as President of the Board. This still left the Library with a six member Board. It appeared the Cleveland School Board was taking its time filling the vacancy created by Mr. Thompson’s resignation. This was cause for worry because it threatened our ability to have the necessary quorums to hold Board meetings.

This was a special worry because of the number of projects that were ongoing at the time, the most important of which was the construction of the University Circle Regional Branch Library which was getting under way, and which would be requiring Board action on the proposals for furnishing and equipping the building, proposals that were in the offing.

By August of 1969, in line with the advice and encouragement of Dr. James Norton of the Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation on June 19, I was able to present my management survey to the Board in a special meeting on August 28, 1969. This time the five members of the Board who were present voted unanimously to submit the proposal to the Foundation by September 1, with the provision that a subsequent proposal for a study of the Library’s role, services, collections and plans for the future be submitted to the Foundation by December 1, as a second phase, as Dr. Norton had suggested. Ironically, Mr. Merritt was absent, as he had been for the meetings of June 19 and July 24. The Board Minutes of the regular meeting of September 18, 1969 indicates that he abstained from voting on the approval of the minutes of the three meetings because he was absent during those meetings. Nevertheless we were finally on the way to getting our much needed management study.

A proposal that had been brought to Mr. Heard’s attention shortly after he was elected President of the Board, was the need for an all-day retreat of Board members, administrative staff, professional and nonprofessional members of the staff. This meeting would be for the purpose of reviewing question areas and the development of new library programs, etc. Mr. Heard rose to the occasion and brought it before the Board in the September 18, 1969 regular meeting. I was so pleased because he insisted that it be the first item on the agenda, and because I saw the retreat as being a way to bring the Board and the staff together thereby improving staff/Board relations and also as a means of improving not only the esprit, de corps of the staff but also of the Board itself. It was I thought a way to bring healing to the Board and a closer, healthier working relationship between the Board and the staff as a whole.

I remember that Mr. Heard made an eloquent presentation of the proposal. I have gone back to the Board Minutes of September 18, 1969 to review what he said at the time. My rereading of it again after almost thirty years has again impressed me so much so that I have felt it necessary to reproduce it in this account.

This is what he said:

I was most pleased that the four members present, Mr. Davidson, Mr. Heard, Mr. Livingston, and Mr. Merritt voted unanimously for the proposal. I know that the absent members, Mr. Gardner and Mr. Klonowski, would have also voted for the proposal had they been there.

I was so happy that this Board meeting had started on a positive note, because later on in the meeting during that portion of the meeting known as the Director’s Report, I had the unhappy task of reporting some unpleasant news about the Library’s budget allocation for the next year. The Cuyahoga County Budget Commission had held its annual Budget Hearing on August 22, 1969, which had taken a different turn for the first time in a number of years, The Commissioners had dispensed with the usual opening statements from the nine library systems supported by Intangible Tax funds.

For the first time in years the members of the Budget Commission had asked questions about our individual library budgets while a tape recorder recorded our testimony. Mr. Frank Brennan as Chairman of the Commission advised us that our testimony was being taped in the event that the budget allocations might be appealed. It appeared as though the Commission expected that the allocations were going to be appealed or else had a premonition that appeals were in the offing. Expectation or premonition, appeals became a reality.

When I received word of the Commission’s allocations, I advised the Board that in making its allocations for the year 1970, the Commission had allocated the Cleveland Public Library $7,681,927, that this was only $237,800 short of the total request of $7,919,727. This, however, was not bad because this provided an increase of $901,927 over the 1969 allocation of $6,780,000, or 79 percent of the increase requested. The bad new was that our neighboring library the Cuyahoga County Library was planning to appeal its allocation to the State Board of Tax Appeals, thus placing the allocations to the Cleveland Public Library and the other library systems in the county in jeopardy. In making its allocation to the Cuyahoga County Library the Budget Commission had taken into consideration the $1,200,000 income that would accrue to the County Library from its half-mill levy that the County Library had decided to place on the upcoming November 4 election day. In addition the County Library grieved that its allocation of $3,817,906 for 1970 only allowed it an increase of $94,006 instead of $501,000 which was expected. Mr. Lewis Naylor, Director of the Cuyahoga County Public Library had advised me that his Board planned to appeal its allocation by October 10, with the understanding that its appeal would be withdrawn if its levy passed.

To say that this turn of events placed the Cleveland Public Library Board and me in a difficult situation is a gross understatement. We were faced with the choice of either being a defendant in the County Library’s appeal, or to also appeal which would make us a litigant against the Budget Commission, which I felt to be precarious because I believed that the Commission had dealt with the Cleveland Public Library fairly. Upon finishing my report, President Heard asked that a letter be written to Mr. John T. Corrigan the Library’s legal counsel to ascertain the library’s legal rights in this situation since Mr. Corrigan as a member of the Budget Commission would be in an adversarial position should we appeal and hence could not serve as our legal counsel in the case. Mr. Heard wanted to know if we could hire outside counsel, and what would be our deadline for filing our appeal?

I advised Mr. Heard that we had been through the appeal process twice in previous years, that in each case, Mr. Corrigan had advised that we could appeal under the law, that he had given us permission to hire and pay for outside counsel from tax funds because he could not act as our counsel as a party in the litigation; that the law also gave us thirty days from the official certificate of notice of the Commission’s allocation. Nonetheless, Mr. Heard insisted that a letter be written requesting the information again in writing. Following the Board meeting, I asked Dorothy Fechter, Clerk-Treasurer to write the letter to Mr. Corrigan requesting the same information again, which was done the next day.

On September 23, 1969, a letter was received from Mr. Abe Braun, Mr. Corrigan’s assistant in response to our letter to Mr. Corrigan concerning Mr. Heard’s questions. Mr. Braun reiterated that we had the legal right to appeal the Budget Commission’s allocation for 1970 according to Section 5 705.3 7 of the Revised Code of Ohio, that the Prosecutor’s office could not represent the library if we appealed, that as we had in the past, we could hire and pay for outside counsel to represent us in our appeal according to Section 309.10 of the Revised Code, that the deadline for the Library to appeal the decision of the Budget Commission would be thirty days after the receipt of the notification of the budget allocation to the Library, which in our case had been September 15, 1969, thus making our deadline October 15.

Upon receipt of Mr. Braun’s letter, I sought informal opinions from Mr. Jerome Curtis, and Mr. Arthur Petersilge, the attorneys who had represented the Library in our previous successful appeals before the Ohio State Board of Tax Appeals. They had managed in each case to win the additional funds that we had sought from the Budget Commission because we initially had received unsatisfactory allocations. They advised we should defend our allocation, whether as an appellee which we would be in the Cuyahoga County Library’s appeal or by filing an appeal, which would mean that the Library would be contesting the allocation by the Commission, that is if the Cleveland Public Library Board was insisting upon its complete budget request of $ 7,919, 72 7. This would mean that the Cleveland Public Library would be listing the other library systems and municipalities as appellees or defendants, just as the Cuyahoga County Library had done in listing the Cleveland Public Library and the other libraries as such in their suit. In our case we would be saying that the $237,800 we had not received in the original allocation should be forthcoming from the allocations of the other libraries, along with the $183,004 that had been allocated to the municipalities.

Armed with this information, and Mr. Braun’s letter in hand, I recall arranging to see President Heard at his office where I gave him a thorough briefing, whereupon he asked that I have the Clerk of the Board issue a call for a special meeting to be held on Monday September 29, 1969 at 3:15 P.M., first, to consider filing a notice of appeal with the Ohio State Board of Tax Appeals, second, to request the Board of Education as the taxing authority of the Cleveland Public Library to file the appeal on behalf of the Library, third, to hire outside counsel to prepare and conduct the Library’s case, or if the Board’s decision should be not to appeal, to consider hiring outside counsel to defend our position as appellee, which the Library would be under the County Library’s appeal. Mr. Heard added the latter consideration because he had remembered that in the regular meeting of September 18, I had informed the Board that I was reluctant to advise the Board to take the appeal route because the Budget Commission had given the Cleveland Public Library the lions share in the 1970 allocation. We had been allocated almost a million dollar increase ($901,92 7) over the previous year’s allocation, 79 percent of the increase we had requested, that I felt that the best course would be to endorse the County Library’s levy, that the passage of its levy would help not only the Cleveland Public Library but also the other library systems in the county. I had felt that we would be more successful defending our allocation than trying to exact the additional $237,800
that the Commission had denied us, and or going after the $183,004 that had been allocated to the municipalities, that there was a possibility that we might be cut even more should we come out at the short end of an appeal.

In the Special meeting of September 29, Mr. Klonowski alone spoke strongly against filing an appeal. His motion to that effect failed. Mr. Merritt taking the leadership in the matter advised that the Cleveland Public Library should ask for the full amount, $7,919,727.

Mr. Livingston asked, “what could happen if all libraries appealed their allocations and asked for the full 100 percent when we know that there are not enough dollars to provide 100 percent of each library’s request?” Mr. Merritt said, “the only amount there is to appeal for is the $183,004 allocated to the municipalities, that the Cleveland Public Library in appealing its allocation is really nothing more than saying to the other libraries that the Cleveland Public Library is protecting its interests.”

Following Mr. Merritt’s lead, the Board in its wisdom decided to take the appeal by” a four to two vote. Messrs. Davidson, Gardner, Heard and Merritt voted yes, and Messrs. Klonowski and Livingston abstained from voting after having continued to question the wisdom of going the appeal route.

When it came to the hiring of outside counsel to prepare and conduct the Library’s case, Mr. Gardner moved that former Board member Lockwood Thompson be hired. Mr. Merritt took the position that Mr. Thompson would not have the time to devote to the task because of his full time job as counsel for the Ohio Turnpike Commission.

I reminded the Board that Mr. Jerome Curtis and Mr. Arthur Petersilge had successfully handled the Library’s two previous appeals before the State Board of Tax Appeals. Mr. Merritt interjected that he knew a Thomas V. Koykka of the firm of Arter & Hadden who had worked with William Burton when he had represented the Library in the Public Employees Retirement case before the Supreme Court some years before. Mr. Merritt said that he knew Mr. Koykka personally, that he was an outstanding attorney, that he could handle this case, that he understood from Mr. Koykka that Mr. Burton would aid him in the case. He continued saying that he recommended that the Board consider Mr. Koykka.

At this point Mr. Gardner reminded the Board that his motion for securing Lockwood Thompson for the job had not been considered. Whereupon Mr. Livingston seconded the motion. Mr. Gardner, Mr. Klonowski and Mr. Livingston voted for Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Davidson, Mr. Heard and Mr. Merritt voted against him. Being a tied motion, it failed.

Mr. Livingston then suggested that the Board consider the attorneys that I had mentioned. Before any discussion could occur on Mr. Livingston’s suggestion, Mr. Merritt suggested that the Board defer the matter temporarily and retire as a Committee of the Whole to discuss the matter further. Mr. Heard immediately said that the Board was conducting business in an open meeting, open to the public, that he felt that the Board did not want the public to think that it had to go behind closed doors to handle its business. Mr. Davidson then quickly moved that Mr. Thomas V. Koykka of the firm Arter & Hadden be hired to act as counsel for the appeal. Mr. Merritt seconded the motion. Mr. Gardner and Mr.Klonowski voted no. Mr. Livingston abstained. Mr. Davidson, Mr. Heard and Mr. Merritt voted yes. The motion carried, making Mr. Koykka the Library’s attorney to carry forward the appeal. The die was cast.

There being no further business on the agenda, President Heard declared the meeting adjourned at 4:15 P.M. As the Board members, members of the public, and staff who had been in attendance left the board room that afternoon, as expected, reporters from the newspapers, radio and TV who had covered the meeting surrounded me. They wanted me to elaborate on why I had been reluctant to advise the Board to take the appeal route. My reply was simple, “you have heard my reasons in the meeting. My job now is to begin the appeal process as the Board has directed!”

When the room had cleared, I returned to my desk to begin planning the steps that I needed to take to get the appeal ball rolling. As I reached in my top desk drawer to get a legal size pad to begin writing, I felt so tired. I decided to rest for a while. I recall looking at the clock on the wall. It was a few minutes before 5:00 P.M. I decided to close my eyes and relax. I fell asleep sitting upright in my chair out of sheer exhaustion. When I awakened, I looked at the clock again. It was 5:30 P.M. I felt more tired than before, in fact I did not feel well at all. I decided it was time to call it a day’, so I put all my paper work away in my desk, said good night to my secretary, Mrs. Addis and started for home. The drive home that evening seemed so long. I have often thought of that tiresome drive home in the quarter of a century or more that has elapsed and wondered why I did not realize then as I do now that my body was beginning to warn me that I had been burning the candle at both ends without let-up for the past thirteen years.

I arrived home that night completely warn out. Grace took one look at me and urged me to call one of my doctor brothers. I told her that all I needed was a good night’s sleep and I’d be fine. I went to bed that night without having supper. The next morning I awoke feeling a little wan but well enough to go back to work., at which time I met with Fern Long and Dorothy Fechter and got to work on planning our appeal and beginning the arduous task of gathering the necessary documentary ammunition and exhibits that would be required by the attorneys.

The three of us along with a number of department heads and Branch Librarians worked long hours on that task. Our cooperative efforts made it possible for me to inform the Board in the next regular Board meeting on October 2 7, 1969 that we had been able to meet all of the informational needs of the Library’s attorneys and that they had completed the Cleveland Public Library’s Notice of Appeal and that it had been filed with the Board of Tax Appeals and all parties involved by October 13, two days before the deadline. I was able to give each of the Board members copies of the Notice of Appeal. I also advised the Board that Dorothy Fechter and I had met with the attorneys on October 23 to talk about avenues to follow in the tax appeal pending the outcome of the Cuyahoga County Library tax levy and about the problems that would confront both libraries in presenting the tax appeals should the Cuyahoga County Library tax levy fail. At the same time I gave each Board member a copy of a letter from the library attorneys dated October 22, covering the lawyers’ examination and views of the problems they had been alerted to.

I also advised the Board that I continued to feel strongly that the Cleveland Public Library should go on record as approving and endorsing the Cuyahoga County Library Tax levy which Was to appear on the November ballot, because I felt that it was to the best interest not only of the Cleveland Public Library but also all the other libraries in the county. I reminded the Board that the County Library had indicated they would stop their appeal process if its levy passed providing it with the additional $1,200,000 it required for the year 1970. I had prepared a brief resolution to that effect, which I had given to President Heard before the meeting. He asked Mr. Merritt to present the resolution. There being no question among the Board members about going on record as being in favor of the County Library’s tax levy, Mr. Klonowski moved that the resolution be adopted and sent to the County Library. Mr. Livingston seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

At the same meeting, I was able to report several pieces of good news to the Board. I was pleased to be able to advise the Board that the University Circle Regional Branch was 50 percent completed. I had been going out to the construction site every day, a habit I had formed when I became Business Manager and began to personally watch the progress of the renovation of the old Plain Dealer Building as a library annex, a practice that was not only a learning experience for me, but also occasionally enabled me to catch errors in construction before it was too late. I had learned to read blue prints and specifications. This made it possible for me to stop and have corrected parts of construction that were not according to the blueprints or the specifications. As a result, I had been able to catch things that were not according to hoyle from time to time.

This time, I was able to tell the Board that the metal roof deck of the new branch was scheduled to be installed during the week of October 27; that the aluminum window frames were to be delivered and installed during the week of October 27; that the exterior masonry was scheduled to be completed by November 1 that the built-up roofing was scheduled to start November 3; that the mechanical equipment for the mechanical equipment room had been delivered to the job site and that installation was to begin as soon as the roof was installed; that not only were the electrical contractors on schedule, but also overall progress was on schedule; and finally that the general contractor had set April 23, 1970 as the date for final completion of the building.

Before the Board meeting I had received word from the Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation that its Board had approved a grant of $55,000.00 from its A. E. Converse Fund in response to our request for that amount to underwrite the cost of the Management Survey that had been approved by the Board in the Spring of the year. I had passed the word on to President Heard so that he could have the pleasure of making the announcement in the Board meeting. I was pleased at the manner in which he announced it. These were his words”

I recall Mr. Klonowski saying that this was the best news yet. He then made a motion to send the Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation the Board’s “Heartiest blessings and thanks.” Mr. Merritt seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. It was then my pleasure to present the bids that I had received earlier from five management consultant firms. After I had presented detailed analyses of the five bids and shown that the lowest, best and most responsible bid had been submitted by Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc., I recommended that it be commissioned to conduct the Survey. At that President Heard urged the Board to accept my recommendation.

Mr. Merritt then moved that Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc. be commissioned to conduct the Management Survey of the Library, and that the Survey be started as soon as possible. The motion was seconded by Mr. Livingston, and was passed unanimously. With this I breathed a sigh of relief. We had finally gotten over the Management Survey hurdle, and were finally on the way to getting what we had recommended in March of the year.

The month of November in 1969 was to usher in one of the saddest and most traumatic periods of my life and in the life of my family. On November 16, after lunch, I had just finished preparing the agenda and all the exhibits for the next regular Board meeting scheduled for November 20, when I had a telephone call from Grace. She was calling me from Metro General Hospital to tell me that her sister had passed away. She tearfully told me that Edna who had been fighting the battle of breast cancer for several years had taken a turn for the worse just hours before and had been taken to the hospital before noon. Edna was Grace’s younger and only sister. She had been a business career person, living in Buffalo, New York for many years when she was first diagnosed with the disease. After her surgery and cancer treatments she had done well in her physical and mental comeback for about nine years. By Spring of 1969, the cancer had struck again this time with such severity as to make it impossible for her to cope with it alone in Buffalo. At that time Edna had come to live in our home in Cleveland in order that Grace could take care of her. Although she had the best  of care possible in our home, the disease continued to take its deadly toll.

I can’t say that Edna’s death came as a shock on that November afternoon. Grace, the boys, Edward and Paul, and I knew right along that it was inevitable. We had sorrowfully watched her deteriorate until she was a mere shadow of herself over the months that she was with us. The boys who loved their Aunt Edna so very much, were especially moved and affected by her decline. Although her death was expected, it was a blow to all of the family, as a loved one’s passing always is, no matter when or the circumstances.

Since Grace had accompanied Edna to the hospital in the ambulance, I informed my secretary about the situation. I asked her to inform the Acting Deputy Director, the staff, and the members of the Library Board that I was taking leave for the next few days, that I had to leave immediately to pick up my wife at the hospital and then to help her make the necessary funeral arrangements, etc.

Needless to say, I was away from work on November 20, the day of the regular Board meeting because that was the day of Edna’s funeral. Fern Long, as Acting Deputy Director filled in for me at the meeting. The Board meeting minutes for that day, indicates that Miss Long reported my absence by saying that it was only the second time in thirteen years that I had missed a Board meeting!

I was pleased that at the close of her report of the month’s items of interest for the Board to note, that Miss Long also featured some excellent publicity we had been able to arrange with the Cleveland Transit and the Shaker Rapid Transit systems. She showed the Board members a sample of the Car Card which was to appear in 163 CTS and Shaker Rapid Transit vehicles from November 22 to December 22 in honor of the first birthday (November 25) of the Terminal Mini Branch that we had installed in the Union Terminal Concourse the year before. The artwork for the cards had been done by Miss Rebeccah Ball of the Publicity and Exhibits Department, and the silk screen work by Milton Grant Silk Screen Studio. All the expenses for the car cards were funded by a Special Gift.

I returned to work on November 21, the day after the funeral, looking forward to the holidays, and to bringing to a close in the remaining month of 1969 a very successful centennial year. It had not only been a successful year of celebrating the Library’s one hundred years but also successful from the standpoint of projects accomplished. Much had been done during the year 1969!

Uppermost on my plate when I returned to work on November 21, besides contending with the usual paper work and oversight of the construction of the University Circle Regional Branch Library, and the preparation of specifications and contracts for many other Library requirements for the new year, such as the bookbinding contract, etc., was the continuing work required in providing the attorneys the necessary exhibits and the evidence needed for the tax appeal. The entire Library had been mobilized to do this work.

I would be doing a grave injustice to my co-administrators and the entire staff of the Library if I neglected to record here the yeoman service they all performed in connection with the prosecution of the case in what had become a cause celebre in the local, state and national Library community.

Around mid November we had heard that the Board of Tax Appeals was to hear our case on December 17 and 18. We had entered the most intensive period of our preparation for the hearing. Foolishly I was trying to keep up with all the other routine work connected with my office at the same time trying to take care of my share of the Tax Appeal load. This meant I was working 12 to 14 hour days at the office and taking a brief case full of work home at night and working until one and two o’clock in the morning.