0.9 Chapter seven: retrenchment and the struggle for survival, 19  (Page 12/20)

Most sobering, however, was the reaction of the Society's neighbors. In an effort to involve and inform the local community about the Society's progress and to alleviate concerns regarding deaccessioning and real estate development, the Society convened a special meeting of the local community board, which was attended by many neighborhood residents. It was immediately apparent that few people, if any, were prepared to subsume their own interests for the sake of saving the institution. Instead of recognizing that everyone must make sacrifices, the general tone of the questions and comments was highly critical and focused on past actions rather than on present and future opportunities for cooperation. "Why aren't there more signs outside?" "How can you choose to sell off materi­als that were donated to you? That's violating a public trust!" "Why haven't you tried harder to get money from the city?" "Why are your expenses four times higher than similar institutions in the city?" Wilbur Ross, who made the initial pre­sentation of the advisory committee's recommendations, became the lightning rod for much of the criticism, which only demonstrated how little people truly understood the Society's history and situation (after all, Ross had been involved with the Society for all of two months). In any event, it was clear that there was little hope that local residents were going to play a constructive role in helping the Society resolve the real estate development question.

On another front, Luis Cancel continued to voice his objections to the deac­cessioning plan, erecting a potential roadblock between the Society and gov­ernment support. Eventually Cancel agreed to accept the views of the advisory committee, and a joint statement was released in late March in which the com­mittee and Cancel agreed on detailed procedures for the deaccessioning process. Cancel was satisfied that "the procedures provide a proper framework so that this unique situation does not set a precedent for other institutions in financial diffi­culties to deaccession their collections in order to meet operating expenses." For his part, Ross said, in a press release, that the committee was "delighted that we have resolved Commissioner Cancel's initial concerns regarding the Report. We are now more confident than ever that the Society's financial requirements will be met."

Indeed, the first step toward meeting the Society's financial requirements was taken when, in early April, the state appropriated $6.3 million for the Society. The money was to be split between capital renovations ($5 million) and transitional financing ($1.3 million). The funding was contingent on an equal matching appropriation by the city of New York and required that the Society submit "an acceptable financial stabilization and development plan describing the steps it will take to achieve financial self-sufficiency, protection of its libraries and collections and expansion of its services to the public."