Residents look to shut library out of MLK Park

Winter Park can’t seem to bookmark the location of its new library.

A group of Winter Park residents are on the verge of pushing a petition to prohibit the new library from being built in Martin Luther King Jr. Park – an area of green space they believe should be protected.

A committee of local residents made up of Michael Poole, Sally Flynn, former Commissioner Margie Bridges, former mayor Joe Terranova, and Charley Williams started the petition, the idea of which was submitted to the city for approval on Friday. The group needs 2,011 signatures – 10 percent of the registered voters in Winter Park from the last election – to bring the ordinance before the City Commission, who will either pass the ordinance outright or put the ordinance out to vote for the residents.

The petition push comes in the wake of a library bond referendum of up to $30 million getting passed by the voters in March, but controversy over the bond referendum language continues to swirl. Poole and other residents contend that the language of the referendum wasn’t clear as to the set location of the library.

City Commissioner Carolyn Cooper made a motion at multiple Commission meetings to have the actual location put on the ballot, but she did not receive support.

“Myself and many others feel we’re destroying green space by building in the park there,” said Poole, referencing a resolution passed by the city in 1955 stating that the park was first created in response to “the rapid growth in the population and the intensity of building in the City of Winter Park.”

“We’re for renovation or a new library – that issue was voted on by the citizens. This is about where it’s located. That was not in the referendum.”

City Manager Randy Knight said the city is still looking into the submitted petition paperwork and deciding if a petition is sufficient means to change the location of the library. The city faces a difficult situation, he said, as the bond referendum has already been passed, which he said made it very clear that the park was the intended location for the new library.

“I think it was very clear to everyone who voted out there,” Knight said.

“The City Commission voted in October that that was the location. All of the public relations information going out from the library, the city, Mr. Poole’s [political action committee] and the library’s [political action committee] all said it was going to that location.”

Other issues in the language regard the library project’s inclusion of a new civic center. An email sent by Knight to the City Commission noted that any new location would still need to combine the two facilities under the bond referendum approved by the voters.

“According to our bond attorney, if these facilities were to be located at different locations, the bond question would have had to be broken out into two separate ballot questions,” Knight wrote. “The only reason it could be in one ballot question was because it was all part of the same complex.”

“So to do what is proposed would require a new referendum with two ballot questions.”

Knight said that a location change has the potential to derail the project altogether.

“It’s hard to say,” Knight said. “It could range anything from choosing another location to killing the library project entirely.”

“To have something like this come up after the voters have already voted…it’s just a shame that it’s going to be another divisive issue.”

Knight said the city has narrowed its search for an architect for the project down to six parties, and will continue the process of planning for the new library and civic center complex in the coming weeks.