Lancaster Library Faces Cutbacks Despite Plan to Expand : Antelope Valley: County budget woes may force a reduction in hours at busy branch. Construction of a larger facility has been delayed by design changes.

Residents of this high desert city love their library and have made the 30-year-old facility one of the busiest in the Los Angeles County system.

But in recent years, the romance has been a rocky one.

When the city’s population skyrocketed in the 1980s, the old library had no room to expand, leading to long checkout lines and clogged aisles.

Plans for a new Lancaster branch, almost three times larger, were unveiled in 1993, with an opening date set for March, 1995. But that building, delayed by bureaucratic disputes, does not yet have a single brick in place.

Worse, county officials coping with a severe budget crunch say they may soon have to cut the existing library’s service hours nearly in half, making it even tougher for students and other residents to do research or check out a novel.

“It’s sad,” said Amy Phillips, a 24-year-old Lancaster child-care worker who was checking out several books on Native American culture on a recent afternoon. “I bring my younger brother and sister in here to try to get them interested in books. I think people should read, rather then spend so much time watching television.”

The need for more space in the 18,700-square-foot library is evident. Because its shelves are now filled to capacity, librarians must constantly remove old materials to make way for new books. A local cable television company recently donated a computer with Internet access, but last week the library staff was having trouble finding room to install it.

*

As though its own space problems were not serious enough, the library has also been helping the congested county courthouse across the street. Twice a week, a Lancaster Superior Court judge hears civil cases in the library’s meeting room.

The library, which is part of the 87-branch county library system, already had its hours cut once, frustrating users. In the summer of 1993, the library, which had been open seven days a week for a total of 64 hours, had its hours slashed to 28 a week, spread over just four days.

This caused longer lines at the circulation and reference desks, a reduction in children’s programs and a scramble for parking spaces and seats, longtime patrons say.

*

“That was terrible,” said Theresa York, 52, of Lancaster. “I’ve gone to a library since I was 6 years old. It was always open. I could not believe that in this country, which is so rich in resources and opportunities, that they would cut back on libraries when they’re so needed.

“Old people come here. Young kids come here. They depend on the library.”

County library officials put the blame on state legislators, who diverted funds previously allocated to libraries.

To replace that money, county officials last year proposed a new property tax, to be collected and used only in communities served by county library branches. The average homeowner in these areas would have been charged $28.50 per year.

In a 4-1 vote, Lancaster City Council members last year agreed to let the county collect the tax for one year. And for the long term, the city put a measure on the ballot to ask local voters if they were willing to continue paying the tax.

Then, matters got complicated. Before the city’s voters had their say, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors announced it had found surplus funds.

In November, the Lancaster Library was allowed to resume seven-day service, for a total of 60 hours a week.

City officials were angry that they had gone to the expense of putting the now-unnecessary measure on the ballot. And to make matters worse, the measure was defeated by a ratio of 2 to 1, probably at least partly because it was seen as no longer immediately needed.

But now the need seems real. The county bailout funds are, county officials say, almost exhausted. County Librarian Sandra F. Reuben recently told Lancaster officials to brace for another round of service cuts. She said the library would have to reduce its hours unless it was willing to pay for additional hours with city funds or charge residents a special library tax.

*

These choices received a grim reception last week from the Lancaster City Council.

The council members unanimously rejected the tax plan, saying their constituents sent a loud message on last November’s ballot measure.

Mayor George Runner said he also adamantly opposes using any city funds to restore library hours cut by the county. Once the city begins helping the county with library costs, he said, such requests for money will never end.

“We’ll just become their sugar daddy,” the mayor said. “I’d hate to walk down that path.”

Other council members have suggested that Lancaster look into buying the library and running it as a city facility.

But local officials say that option would be very costly and require state legislation.

For the moment, Lancaster council members have put off a final decision until county officials decide how many hours, if any, must be cut.

“It sure doesn’t look good,” admitted Chuck Billodeaux, manager of the Lancaster Library. But, he added, “I was happy they said they wanted to leave the door open to helping the library in some way.”

*

In the meantime, city and county officials were blaming each other for delays in building a new, larger library in the city’s downtown area.

Lancaster officials say the county asked for costly, time-consuming design changes just as the city was ready to build. County officials say these delays could have been avoided if the city had consulted them earlier in the planning process.

The design issues are settled and the city will open construction bids June 15. If the bids are within budget, construction could start in mid-July and conclude a year later.

Billodeaux, who has spent eight years pushing for the new facility, is anxious to see it built, even though it may not initially be open seven days a week.

“I don’t think the need’s any less to have the new building, even though we’re faced with this other problem of operating costs,” he said. “I’d rather have the building there for when the good times come again.”