Hawaii: Response to Kelly King

[Pat Wallace <DENWALL@AOL.COM>]

*************************************************
Forward:      My Reply to Kelly King
*************************************************
Date:  Wed, Nov 27, 1996
Subj:  Response to RPE post
From:  DENWALL@aol.com (Patricia Wallace)
To:      keking@makani.k12.hi.us

Ms. King:
Today you sent a post to RPE-L stating

>Your statement that the Hawaii BOE is doing nothing about the >complaints
regarding the outsourcing contract is erroneous.
>We have had two committee meetings thus far wherein we
>reviewed and questioned the performance targets of the
>contract.  These have been public meetings, attended by
>branch librarians and library users who were given the
>opportunity to voice their complaints. Since the library
>administration was also present, Board members made some
>requests and recommendations based on those complaints.
--------------------------------------------------------
This post reveals a certain naivete on your part about what
constitutes a  "public meeting" and an "opportunity to voice
complaints."  It is no secret to you that I correspond with
a number of current and former librarians in the Hawaii State
Library System.  It is also no secret to you that since the
issuance of the "gag order" on use of internal e-mail for
discussions pertaining to the B&T contract many librarians
from Hawaii have not felt free to speak candidly either on or
off the job about this matter and have even felt it necessary
to post anonymously to public listservs on the Internet.  My
reading of letters to the editor in your local press confirms
that Mr. Kane does not have a demeanor that puts people who
fear reprisals at ease:
-------------------------------------
David Yasuo Henna, a state library worker who professed
to be a supporter of Bart Kane refers to his "reputation
as a dictator who is so sure about his every move that
he does not ask for nor accept any feedback from the
rank and file" (Advertiser, 12-7-94)
-------------------------------------
In my post to RPE on Nov. 23rd which you respond to, I
quote a message I received from a mainland librarian
on Nov. 18th:

From  Suzanne McElfresh (suzmc@nwklib.laca.ohio.gov)
>For the most part the people who are directly involved in this
>mess are pretty much powerless and not being listened to.
>It is very frustrating when you are a professional with years
>of experience (and most likely common sense) and you are
>treated like a child who should be seen and not heard.  I think
>there are a lot of unhappy people who feel that their jobs are
>threatened if they speak out and a lot of people on the
>outside who are scared something similar will happen to
>them.
------------------------------------------------------
The following is a composite of quotes from posts sent to me last week by
several librarians in the HSPLS :

>The largest problem we have is despair.  I know we are
>getting some good ideas from librarians on the mainland.  I
>hope that we can get organized, so to speak, and find ways to
>get the BOE, legislature, professional organizations, press,
>and the population behind a movement that will ensure that
>our libraries are organized and operate to the benefit of the
>people we serve.  Originally, B&T insisted the HSPLS would
>have no say in any of the selection process.  They have backed
>down on that issue after public outcry over the contract.
>How is anyone, short of the Governor, going to sit down with
>Bart Kane and work things out?  Mr. Kane is not known for
>talking with his employees.  He does not ask for input,
>options, ideas, or anything concerning public libraries.  We
>get our news just like everyone else - we read it in the
>newspaper or we see it on TV.
--------------------------------------------------------
In view of this aura of fear  and  powerlessness, how do you
expect your recent meetings, with the Administration present,
to yield candid, representative input from current library
staff?

You state in your recent post:

>Your statement that the BOE acts only on the whim of our
>state librarian is not only offensive but inaccurate as well!

You overlook that I was conveying statements made to me by
several current and former employees of HSPLS, and not
expressing my own personal observations, so let us not
personalize.  If you take such offense at my conveying statements
made by current staff members who were brave enough to give me permission to
post their comments to the list, how do you expect staff members to express
their perceptions directly to you and Mr. Kane?  You can't have it both ways.
 Either you are willing to listen, or you are not.

The track record and recent behavior of the BOE in and of
itself creates your reputation for being less than diligent
and independent in evaluating proposals from Mr. Kane.
In my Nov. 23rd post I recounted the BOE's failure to prevent
Mr. Kane from making a major public relations blunder with
his user survey and the BOE's refusal to reprimand him for
violating privacy rights, even when called upon to do so by
library users in the press.  You conveniently fail to comment
on my query:

>In light of the information given above (See "Chickens Come
>Home to Roost" 11-23), one wonders why [Ms. King] and the
>BOE did not take the overall history of public concern over
>Bart Kane's ethics and prudence more seriously before blindly
>following his recommended unprecedented outsourcing of
>selection to a single vendor.

Do you really think the BOE can outrun the reputation it created by it's own
past actions?  This is the observation from a current employee of your recent
mode of decision-making re the Dynix contract:

>Mr. Kane gave BOE the contract for Dynix one night.  Bart
>asked BOE to approve it that night.  One board member, who
>failed to be re-elected, thought the Board should have some
>time to read it over and digest the ramifications.
>Insufficient number of board members thought it was worth
>reading.  They gave a blanket okay without reading one word.
>This BOE meeting was held January 25, 1996.  We received
>minutes of this meeting  on 22 August 1996.

On Sept 28th, you posted to RPE:

>>There will be a public panel discussion regarding the Hawaii Public Library
System's outsourcing contract with Baker & Taylor on Saturday, Oct. 19 at
10:00 a.m. at the Ala Moana Hotel.
>>This would be a good time for concerned citizens (i.e. those Hawaii
residents posting to this subject) to inquire as to problems with the system,
benefits, etc.
>> I also invite anyone with info regarding any other library systems using
this type of selection outsourcing, successful or not, to connectus (the
Hawaii State BOE Committee on Public Libraries)  to the source.
--------------------------------------------------------
One naturally wonders why the BOE, which initially approved
the contract with Baker & Taylor for 5 1/2 years duration
last Spring, was just getting around to looking into the
history of selection outsourcing and B&T as a potential
contractor in late September? You say in your recent post:

>"....the library committee has been studying the details of the >performance
targets. The impetus for doing so came from
>the committee's concerns for the welfare of our public
>library system and the desire to actively address the many
>complaints."

So now, after the fact, you are just getting around to studying
the details of the contract?  In reaction to public complaints?
Hmmm.

Now let us also look at your Sept 28 claim that the October
19th HLA meeting was a "public discussion." Here is the perception of many
staff librarians:

>"HLA conference in October was not a public
>hearing.  It was a conference that everyone paid to
>attend."  (Nov. 18)

>"This was not open to the public.  It was not tape recorded.
>There is no transcript.  It was not meaningful either."

>The October 19th event was a meeting of the Hawaii
>Librarian's Association. The technical services committee had
>decided to feature the outsourcing.  What was presented
>wasn't so much testimony as it was a panel presentation and
>audience handouts.
>"Originally, the conference session was limited to Bart Kane
>and 2 HSPLS librarians.  Somehow, between July and early
>September, the length of the session was expanded and our
>contractors - B&T, DYNIX, and Booklines Hawaii were given
>the opportunity to speak.  Why?  I do not know.  It was a bad
>idea because they gave sales pitches.  They expressed their
>joy about having this contract and how they looked forward to
>working with us.  It was a sham!  (Nov. 21)

IF you truly wish to open B&T's  performance  to  input from
your staff and from the public, you will need to be willing
to confront what their perceptions are and bend over backwards to correct the
impression of "pro forma" listening.

At the October 19th panel, this statement was presented:

OPEN LETTER TO BE SHARED AT THE HAWAII LIBRARY
ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE-- October 16, 1996)

To: Bart Kane, State Librarian
From: Pat Matsumoto, Language, Literature, & History
Section/Hawaii State Library

>Frightened employees, threatened by a RIF, did
>not dare protest or question your statements,
>and unfortunately our union was of little help.

>E-mail from several HSPLS employees expressed
>concern about lack of input from the library staff.
>There were also e-mail requests for the names
>of those who wrote the RFP (Request for Proposal)
>and the contract. There has been no answer as yet.

>Why was Baker and Taylor the only vendor that interviewed
>HSL selectors  (Aug. 1 1995)? Between the August 1 date
>and the September 1, 1995 date of the RFP, no other vendor
>contacted us. Yet, we know that at least three other firms
>responded to the RFP.

>Why is this clause in the contract addendum (March 28, 1996):
       "The state acknowledges and agrees
        that the Performance Targets set forth in
        Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part
        hereof are target goals only and Contract's
        failure to achieve any or all of them will not
        constitute an Event of Default"?

>Essentially Baker and Taylor can do as they please.
>The performance measures you talk about are meaningless.

To my knowledge, these questions have never been addressed or answered.  If
this is an accurate perception of the process whereby B&T won the contract
with HSPLS and of the performance standards in the contract, one wonders  how
much good even your current "closing the door after the horse is out"
approach to submitting B&T to scrutiny will do.

Sincerely yours,

Patricia Wallace       Denwall@aol.com
Note:  This post is from me acting as an interested student of
library science and was not authorized by any organization or
committee.
*************************************************