PLANET: Do you support the library’s decision? Why or why not?

WALTO: As I understand it, the library trustees felt that the library needs to avoid any perception of supporting [or] assisting a controversial cause.

Perfect. Notice Walto doesn’t answer the question. He dodges, completely. He fakes left and tricky-dribbles right — a (ugh!) “politician” caught in the act of not wishing to be counted, not wanting to take a stand, not willing to push the issue one way or another. He is the town manager, true, and not the mayor. All the more reason for him to guide the town into a more enlightened policy represented by Article 22 on the agenda for the Monday, May 4, election. But no. He wants to wimp out.

THE PLANET contacted library director Rob DiFazio. This issue exploded when DiFazio was on vacation in South Carolina — another of those Daltonian coincidences, we’re sure. A word about DiFazio. Sources tell us he’s a “new hire whose background was [the] Albany Medical Center library. He’s a babe in the woods where public library and provincial town influence is concerned.” Sources say he had “that deer-in-the-headlights expression” when this issue came to light. He told THE PLANET:

Generally speaking, the Library doesn’t allow outside groups to use our space, as we don’t have any private/closed off meeting areas. We’re a relatively small building, and as such, when we do host programs they tend to impede the normal flow of traffic/use.  As such, we generally stick with more traditional programs, such as story hours, book discussions, etc…  I decided to agree to the Berkshire Voters For Animal Rights request because I did consider it to be an important issue.  Unfortunately, we received significant backlash from several people.  I was on vacation in South Carolina at the time, so I didn’t deal directly with anyone, but I know complaints were received by library staff, town officials, select board members, and library trustees.  To the best of my knowledge, no threats were made, but it became apparent that holding the event would cause a significant impediment to our regular operation.  As such, the library trustees felt it would be best to cancel the event, since our primary responsibility is to maintain our normal operation.  I’m confident that if we did have the facilities to hold events in rooms/areas outside of our normal traffic areas, the event wouldn’t have been cancelled.

I certainly agree that we have an obligation to ensure the free flow of information.  However, our primary obligation is to ensure that our patrons are able to use our facility in an unimpeded manner.  I believe that is the reason several other area venues decided not to provide space for the film.  We aren’t planning to rescind our decision to cancel the showing, but we are planning to acquire a copy of the film for our collection.

——– 000 ——–

This, too, is a political response, careful to seem to agree with our points all the while saying (not in so many words) that “we caved to the loudmouths of one man and a few of his friends.”

DiFazio’s e-mail reveals the following:

(1) The library certainly DOES have the facilities to host such an event. The agreement to hold the film in the first place proves that.

(2) He agrees that it is “an important issue.”

(3) He admits to receiving “significant backlash.” That is code for “bullying” and “threats.”

(4) He says “no threats were made” but is careful to qualify “to the best of our knowledge.” Cute.

(5) DiFazio states “it became apparent that holding the event would cause a significant impediment to our regular operation.”  THE PLANET reads this statement, too, as code for saying, “We were told by The Lions, presumably McGinnis, that is we showed the film, there would be real trouble.”

Vote ‘Yes’ on Article 22, Daltonians!

Well, there it is. Our Day at the Circus.  We entered this story late, not having decided where the truth could be found. We did our research, talked to a lot of folks, and quickly learned that the truth is with Berkshire Voters for Animals and not with one clueless man who managed to bully the officials of an entire town.

That sets up a perfect opportunity for Daltonians to send two LOUD messages by voting “yes” on article 22. With that vote, Dalton will say:

(1) We DO NOT CONDONE and WILL SUPPORT the torture of animals.

(2) We hereby reclaim the town, in the name of We The People, from the hands of a bully.

It shall be a glorious night.

Have a great weekend, everybody.

———————————————————————————————–

“Yellow tigers, crouched in jungles, in a dark hour.” — Cream, “White Room,” (1968).

“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”

LOVE TO ALL.