Journal articles on the topic 'City planning – Kansas'

Kansas State University (KSU) is a land-grant institution, with nine colleges and 23,000 students. The 668-acre main campus is located within the City of Manhattan, Kansas, which has a population of approximately 45,000. Through a bottom-up process the university has been seeking to integrate sustainability in student life, curriculum, operations, research, and engagement.

In 2016 Kansas City installed a marker that celebrated its role as host to the first meeting of the National Planning Conference of Homophile Organizations in 1966. The marker was the first to commemorate this historic gathering of gay rights activists as well as the first to recognize Missouri’s LGBTQ history. This article charts the effort to install Kansas City’s marker as a case study of the issues involved in documenting LGBTQ history. What began as a community collecting initiative quickly evolved into an effort that included students, city officials, and a federal heritage area. The authors—a founder of the community collection initiative, a public history educator, and a public history student—demonstrate how those involved attempted to navigate questions of ownership and shared authority. Ultimately, the authors ask public historians to see themselves as potential allies to, rather than authorities of, the communities with which they work.

This study explores the socio-spatial, economic, and policing inequities experienced by Latinxs in the Kansas City metropolitan using geographic, census, and police data as well as qualitative analysis of interviews and workshops. Data show there has been an expansion of Latinx enclaves over time in the metropolitan area and suggest that enclaves function as both a protective factor for Latinxs against socio-structural hardship and also render them highly visible as targets for disproportionate criminalization. To redress the latter, we offer planning recommendations for community development and policing that promote socio-spatial equity in law enforcement practices while adapting to demographic shifts.

En Estados Unidos no hay religión oficial, ni confesionalismo, ni Iglesia de Estado, pero la religión tiene un peso superior a otros países occidentales. La ciudad más poblada de Missouri, Kansas City, es un ejemplo de diversidad religiosa, en cuyo escenario destaca una catedral católica. Estudiamos la evolución del edificio y modelo de gestión patrimonial a partir de una metodología cualitativa y de la realización de entrevistas a religiosos y gestores culturales. Un modelo que puede transformarse como consecuencia de los procesos de recentralización y gentrificación que están afectando al Power and Light District, el barrio donde ésta se localiza. In the United States, there is no official religion, no confessionalism and no Church representative of the State. Nonetheless, religion plays a more influential role than in other Western countries. The most populous city of Missouri is Kansas City, and it is an example of religious diversity, with a Catholic cathedral standing out against its urban background. This article examines the building’s evolution and model of heritage management, based on a qualitative methodology and interviews with religious figures and cultural managers. It is a model that might see changes as a result of the process of recentralization and gentrification currently undergone by the Power and Light District, the neighbourhood where the Cathedral is located.

En Estados Unidos no hay religión oficial, ni confesionalismo, ni Iglesia de Estado, pero la religión tiene un peso superior a otros países occidentales. La ciudad más poblada de Missouri, Kansas City, es un ejemplo de diversidad religiosa, en cuyo escenario destaca una catedral católica. Estudiamos la evolución del edificio y modelo de gestión patrimonial a partir de una metodología cualitativa y de la realización de entrevistas a religiosos y gestores culturales. Un modelo que puede transformarse como consecuencia de los procesos de recentralización y gentrificación que están afectando al Power and Light District, el barrio donde ésta se localiza. In the United States, there is no official religion, no confessionalism and no Church representative of the State. Nonetheless, religion plays a more influential role than in other Western countries. The most populous city of Missouri is Kansas City, and it is an example of religious diversity, with a Catholic cathedral standing out against its urban background. This article examines the building’s evolution and model of heritage management, based on a qualitative methodology and interviews with religious figures and cultural managers. It is a model that might see changes as a result of the process of recentralization and gentrification currently undergone by the Power and Light District, the neighbourhood where the Cathedral is located.

Background: The effectiveness of cardiology-led palliative care is unknown; we have insufficient information to conduct a full trial. Aim: To assess the feasibility (recruitment/retention, data quality, variability/sample size estimation, safety) of a clinical trial of palliative cardiology effectiveness. Design: Non-randomised feasibility. Setting/participants: Unmatched symptomatic heart failure patients on optimal cardiac treatment from (1) cardiology-led palliative service (caring together group) and (2) heart failure liaison service (usual care group). Outcomes/safety: Symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, performance, understanding of disease, anticipatory care planning, cost-effectiveness, survival and carer burden. Results: A total of 77 participants (caring together group = 43; usual care group = 34) were enrolled (53% men; mean age 77 years (33–100)). The caring together group scored worse in Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (43.5 vs 35.2) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (35.4 vs 39.9). The caring together group had a lower consent/screen ratio (1:1.7 vs 1: 2.8) and few died before approach (0.08% vs 16%) or declined invitation (17% vs 37%). Data quality: At 4 months, 74% in the caring together group and 71% in the usual care group provided data. Most attrition was due to death or deterioration. Data quality in self-report measures was otherwise good. Safety: There was no difference in survival. Symptoms and quality of life improved in both groups. A future trial requires 141 (202 allowing 30% attrition) to detect a minimal clinical difference (1 point) in Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale score for breathlessness (80% power). More participants (176; 252 allowing 30% attrition) are needed to detect a 10.5 change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score (80% power; minimum clinical difference = 5). Conclusion: A trial to test the clinical effectiveness (improvement in breathlessness) of cardiology-led palliative care is feasible.

The resurgence of streetcars in American cities has presented planners and civic leaders with a novel means of transportation and redevelopment for cities, many of which have a history of failed regional transit votes and suburban domination of regional planning bodies. To overcome these political and financial obstacles, supporters have engaged in a host of creative strategies to satisfy or bypass streetcar critics. Using a case study of four American cities with recently built streetcars (Atlanta, Cincinnati, Kansas City, and Tucson), this paper explores these strategies from the perspective of streetcar supporters. Results indicate streetcar projects in these cities were pursued in part because each city had faced at least one failed rail-transit vote in recent years (usually involving light rail). Supporters of streetcar plans anticipated vocal citizen opposition based on those past failures; however, in most cases this did not materialize to the expected degree. This suggests that narrowly focused and lower-cost streetcar projects can avoid the contentious opposition of pricey regional light-rail proposals by offering a different product and/or seeking fewer local dollars. Results also indicate widespread distrust for regional planning structures and a willingness of local boosters to bypass those entities and apply directly for federal funds. Although not all four cities ended up with the streetcar they envisioned, the findings nevertheless document an eagerness on the part of proponents to seek transit projects that transform public opinion, circumvent a burdensome regional planning process, and take advantage of a national funding environment willing to fund streetcars in urban areas.

From 1850 through approximately 1920, wealthy entrepreneurs and elected officials created “grand avenues” lined by mansions in New York City, Chicago, Detroit, and other developing US cities. This paper examines the birthplaces of grand avenues to determine whether they have remained sustainable as magnets for healthy and wealthy people. Using data from the US EPA’s EJSCREEN system and the CDC’s 500 cities study across 11 cities, the research finds that almost every place where a grand avenue began has healthier and wealthier people than their host cities. Ward Parkway in Kansas City and New York’s Fifth Avenue have continued to be grand. Massachusetts Avenue in Washington, D.C., Richmond’s Monument Avenue, St. Charles Avenue in New Orleans, and Los Angeles’s Wilshire Boulevard are national and regional symbols of political power, culture and entertainment, leading to sustainable urban grand avenues, albeit several are challenged by their identification with white supremacy. Among Midwest industrial cities, Chicago’s Prairie Avenue birthplace has been the most successful, whereas the grand avenues of St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, and Buffalo have struggled, trying to use higher education, medical care, and entertainment to try to rebirth their once pre-eminent roles in their cities.

Prairies or grasslands together with areas designated as agricultural lands are one of the largest types of land cover and land use that exist today. While prairies provide habitat to a wide variety of animals and organisms, and agricultural lands support human populations, these lands, especially those in the immediate vicinities of large urban areas, are giving way to urbanization at alarming rates. In particular, prairies are often viewed as wastelands because their benefit to the effective functioning of the urban ecosystem is often not fully understood. On the other hand, many agricultural lands are being converted for several urban uses because of the high economic returns from their sale. In this study, we classified SPOT (Satellite Pour l’Observation de la Terre) satellite data of the study area using the supervised maximum likelihood classification approach in order to investigate the loss of prairies and agricultural lands due to urban expansion in six sub-watersheds in the Kansas City metropolitan area of the States of Kansas and Missouri in the U.S. Based on the classified maps, we computed the magnitude and rate of urban expansion, and the proportion of loss in prairies and agricultural lands that was a result of urban expansion. Results from the 22-year study revealed that in all six sub-watersheds, agricultural lands and grassland were depleted at alarming rates with no sustainable effort to conserve them. These results provide baseline information that can support a data-driven and sustainable path for urban expansion in the examined sub-watersheds.

This manuscript focused on analyzing electric vehicles’ (EV) charging behavior patterns with a functional data analysis (FDA) approach, with the goal of providing theoretical support to the EV infrastructure planning and regulation, as well as the power grid load management. 5-year real-world charging log data from a total of 455 charging stations in Kansas City, Missouri, was used. The focuses were placed on analyzing the daily usage occupancy variability, daily energy consumption variability, and station-level usage variability. Compared with the traditional discrete-based analysis models, the proposed FDA modeling approach had unique advantages in preserving the smooth function behavior of the data, bringing more flexibility in the modeling process with little required assumptions or background knowledge on independent variables, as well as the capability of handling time series data with different lengths or sizes. In addition to the patterns revealed in the EV charging station’s occupancy and energy consumption, the differences between EV driver’s charging time and parking time were analyzed and called for the needs for parking regulation and enforcement. The different usage patterns observed at charging stations located on different land-use types were also analyzed.

Surface urban heat islands (SUHIs) are influenced by the spatial distribution of green space, which in turn can be influenced by urban planning. When studying the relationship between structure and function it is critical that the scale of observation reflects the scale of the phenomenon being measured. To investigate the relationship between green space pattern and the SUHI in the Kansas City metropolitan area, we conducted a multi-resolution wavelet analysis of land surface temperature (LST) to determine the dominant length scales of LST production. We used these scales as extents for calculating landscape metrics on a high-resolution land cover map. We built regression models to investigate whether–controlling for the percent vegetated area–patch size, fragmentation, shape, complexity, and/or proximity can mitigate SUHIs. We found that while some of the relationships between landscape metrics and LST are significant, their explanatory power would be of little use in planning for green infrastructure. We also found that the relationships often reported between landscape metrics and LST are artifacts of the relationship between the percent of vegetation and LST. By using the dominant length scales of LST we provide a methodology for robust biophysically-based analysis of urban landscape pattern and demonstrate that the contributions of green space configuration to the SUHI are negligible. The simple result that increasing green space can lower LST regardless of configuration allows the prioritization of resources towards benefiting neighborhoods most vulnerable to the negative impacts of urban heat.

The MIT Media Lab City Science Group reshapes and reevaluates well-being as an emerging key indicator due the social challenges that cities are facing, such as inequality, police violence, and breaches to safety and security. Well-being in urban environments has been studied extensively, yet most research focuses on one aspect of well-being rather than multiple dimensions of well-being. Existing well-being indices that are used to compare well-being between different countries or to set a standards for well-being consider a variety of aspects that affect well-being, yet they are not specific to urban environments. When considering that no holistic and comprehensive research has been specifically conducted on well-being in urban environments, we research the relationship between the built features of an urban environment and well-being. In this paper, we propose a Well-Being Index composed of five urban indicators—Community Connectedness, Safety & Security, Physical Health, Mental Health, and Diversity—which are each described by a set of urban attributes that enhance well-being. Each attribute is quantified using a calculation formula. In addition to quantifying well-being, the Well-Being Index emphasizes specific urban features that urban planners should consider for future decision-making. We apply the Well-Being Index to predict well-being in Boston, Massachusetts, and Kansas City, Missouri, and we speculate that Boston has higher levels of well-being in terms of the city’s urban features. Based on our results, we provide suggestions for future choices in urban planning and design to improve the areas of well-being that we were able to identify with the Well-Being Index. We emphasize that the Well-Being Index can be applied to any city in the world, and can inform future decision-making for building urban environments through the CityScope platform; a novel methodology of interaction and collaboration by using a data-driven platform that simulates the impacts of interventions on urban ecosystems prior to detail-design and execution.

Take an incredible true adventure; add a lot of estimation and hands-on measurement; stir in parts of reading, writing, history, geography, and science; and one has the recipe for a powerful mathematics lesson. Shipwreck at the Bottom of the World is an extraordinary true story by Jennifer Armstrong. The book follows the story of Ernest Shackleton and 27 men who set out in 1914 to become the first people to cross Antarctica. Instead, their ship, the Endurance, became trapped in the ice and sank, leaving the crew who had no way to communicate with the outside world to find a way back to civilization. They made their way across ice floes and wild seas to an island where 22 of the men made camp to wait. Shackleton and 5 of his crew then set out in a 20-foot boat to cross 800 miles of ocean to find help. Nearly 2 years after the expedition began, the last of the crew were rescued, and all 28 men survived! For a week, in lieu of regular mathematics class and the time when teacher Karen Grokett normally reads to her sixth-grade students at Chase County Middle School in Strong City, Kansas, we went on a daily mathematics adventure. By doing a little planning and by inviting questions to encourage student inquiry, the lesson took on a remarkable life of its own.

The capacity of a freeway segment is a critical factor for planning, design, and operational analysis of freeway facilities. This research aimed to perform a comparison among well-known freeway capacity estimation methods in order to investigate their application, as well as their advantages and disadvantages. Single estimate capacity methods such as the Van Aerde method, and breakdown probability methods, such as the product limit method (PLM), the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method, and the sustainable flow index (SFI) method, were applied at six merge bottleneck locations in the Kansas City area. The results from all methods were compared and the advantages and the disadvantages of each method were discussed. The HCM results showed a significant variability in the estimated breakdown probability function and the resulting capacities. The HCM method was also found to be sensitive to the breakdown probability ratios as a single breakdown observation can significantly shift the fitted distribution and the corresponding capacity estimate. The PLM model provided the highest capacity estimates, followed by the Van Aerde model capacities. The Van Aerde capacities were also found to be closer to the average pre-breakdown flow rates. Finally, the PLM and the SFI method showed consistent performance in comparison to the remaining methods, and flexibility in being applied on different sites with various characteristics.

Peritoneal ultrafiltration (PuF) has been employed for severe heart failure (HF), but evidence for its benefit is lacking. The Peritoneal Dialysis for Heart Failure (PDHF) study was a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial which aimed to investigate this issue. The trial stopped early due to inadequate recruitment. We describe methods, trial activity, and lessons learned. The trial aimed to recruit 130 participants with severe diuretic-resistant HF (New York Heart Association [NYHA] 3/4) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 3/4 on optimal medical treatment for ≥ 4 weeks from 6 UK centers. Participants were randomized to either continuation of conventional HF treatment or to additionally receiving PuF (1 overnight exchange using Icodextrin dialysate). Primary outcome was change in 6-minute walk test (6MWT) between baseline and 28 weeks (end of trial). Secondary outcomes were changes in patient reported quality of life as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, short form 36 (SF 36) health survey results, hospitalization, and mortality. Over a 2-year period, 290 patients were screened from which only 20 met inclusion criteria and 10 were recruited. Reasons for ineligibility were fluctuating estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), suboptimal HF treatment, frailty, and patients being too unwell for randomization. Barriers to recruitment included patient frailty, with some participants considered only when they were at end of life, unwillingness to engage in an invasive therapy, and suboptimal coordination between cardiology and renal services. This is a challenging patient group in which to perform research, and lessons learned from the peritoneal dialysis (PD)-HF trial will be helpful in the planning of future studies in this area.

With the increase in global urbanization, satellite imagery and other types of geospatial data have been extensively used in urban landscape change research, which includes environmental modeling in order to assess the change impact on urban watersheds. For urban hydrological modeling, as a focus of this study, several related research questions are raised: (1) How sensitive are runoff simulation to land use and land cover change patterning? (2) How will input data quality impact the simulation outcome? (3) How effective is integrating and synthesizing various forms of geospatial data for runoff modeling? These issues were not fully or adequately addressed in previous related studies. With the aim of answering these questions as research objectives, we conducted a spatial land use and land cover (LULC) change analysis and an urban runoff simulation in the Blue River watershed in the Kansas City metropolitan area between 2003 and 2017. In this study, approaches were developed to incorporate the Hydrologic Engineering Center Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) model with remote sensing, geographic information systems (GIS), and radar rainfall data. The impact of data quality on the model simulation outcome was also analyzed. The results indicate that there are no significant differences between simulated runoff responses in the two study years (2003 and 2017) due to spatial and temporal heterogeneity of urbanization processes in the region. While the metropolitan area has been experiencing remarkable urban development in the past few decades, the gain in built-up land in the study watershed during the study period is insignificant. On the other hand, the gain in vegetated land caused by forestation activities is offset by a decrease in farmland and grassland. The results show that increasing spatial data resolution does not necessarily or noticeably improve the HEC-HMS model performance or outcomes. Under these conditions, using Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) rainfall data in the simulation provides a satisfactory fit in hydrographs’ shapes, peak discharge amounts and time after calibration efforts, while they may overestimate the amount of rainfall as compared with gauge data. This study shows that the developed approach of synthesizing satellite, GIS, and radar rainfall data in hydrological modeling is effective and useful for incorporating urban landscape and precipitation change data in dynamic flood risk assessment at a watershed level.

The problem of poverty continues to be a major problem throughout Indonesia's history as a State. The distribution of the poor is also uneven in all regions in Indonesia. In the theory of poverty mentioned that the factors that influence the emergence of poverty problems originated from limitations in terms of economic, whether physical capital (income) or human capital. Therefore, poverty reduction target oriented planning is needed, so that the poverty reduction and economic disparity can be achieved by target. This study aims to analyze the factors that affect poverty and economic inequality to know the characteristics by applying data mining algorithms to determine the grouping of poverty and economic disparities in Central Java in 2015. In the grouping of poverty factors, the object of research that will be used are variables affecting poverty and economic disparity.The group analysis used data mining approach with Kansans and Kohonen Self Organizing Maps (SOM) algorithm.The result of analysis based on WCSS graph and cluster number validation is determined by cluster number 5 with Semarang City as cluster 1, Kudus is in cluster 2, cluster 3 contains 5 cities, in cluster 4 containing 6 districts and 22 other districts are in cluster 5. Keywords: Poverty, Economic Gap, Clustering K-means, Self Organizing Maps (SOM),central java.

This article critically reviews the literature on the relationship between global capitalist accumulation and placemaking and community building of Latinos in Kansas City. We use the social structure of accumulation (SSA) framework to analyze connections between these bodies of scholarship to provide a socio-spatial history of Latinos in Kansas City. We identify three SSAs: a monopolistic SSA (1870s–1930s), a Keynesian SSA (1940s–1970s), and a neoliberal SSA (1980s–present). Our findings show the impacts of each SSA on Latino communities in Kansas City. They also show the agency, flexibility, and resilience of these communities as they faced daunting challenges.

Books reviewed in this article: Kevin Fox Gotham, Race, Real Estate, and Uneven Development: The Kansas City Experience, 1900–2000 Paul S. Grogan and Tony Proscio, Comeback Cities: A Blueprint for Urban Neighborhood Revival Chester Hartman, Between Eminence and Notoriety: Four Decades of Radical Urban Planning Eric Klinenberg, Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago Paul Stoller, Money Has No Smell: The Africanization of New York City

The paper provides evidence for the racialization of urban neighborhoods in Kansas City Missouri, USA and the ways in which voluntary associations of citizens work to resist and reduce conditions of urban vulnerability. The paper presents data from historical patterns of racially-biased real estate practices, including redlining, and demonstrates how these patterns continue to shape the politics of vulnerability in the region today. Three neighborhood profiles provide evidence of the ways in which local neighborhood associations are organized to respond to both social and spatial conditions of vulnerability. In contrast to the estimates of low community resilience in these neighborhoods, the author demonstrates that neighborhood empowerment is an important counterpoint to concentrated vulnerabilities.

Abstract Objective To partner with and understand the health of Somali Bantu refugee women, small group sessions were designed and conducted using a community-based collaborative action research (CBCAR) approach. Health topics identified by this community were presented in 42 sessions with eleven women. Follow-up individual interviews with the women were used to ask questions about health experiences and plan for future health education. The objective of this qualitative study was to provide refugee women with knowledge to help them adjust to new health challenges in the United States, and to share personal narratives in a safe environment. Results The process of sharing health information with the women resulted in a collaborative exchange of culture and community. Individual interviews allowed women to voice their opinions outside of the influence of their community elders. CBCAR is an effective tool to involve refugee communities, and other populations small in number, in addressing their unique health challenges. Results from this study demonstrated that small group sessions and a CBCAR approach can be effective in sharing knowledge within small communities of refugee women. Findings from the study will assist in the future planning of health education programs for refugee women and their families in this community.

This paper provides a qualitative examination of the implementation of a value capture–funded streetcar investment in Kansas City, MO. Using semi-structured interviews, I show that the local benefits of value capture financing go beyond revenue-raising. Local officials used value capture to limit the public approval process to residents who supported enhanced transit and to redefine the metrics of a successful transport investment in terms of land development impacts. This strategic, and unexpected, use of value capture underwrites property-led economic development that uses infrastructure investments to signal public-sector priorities, in terms of both geography and populations.

The Kansas City, Missouri Police Department sought to reduce violent crime with an evidence-based approach to problem analysis and intervention planning. Informed by hot spot analysis and risk terrain modeling, police and their community partners implemented a place-based crime intervention program focused on key attractors and generators of the environmental backcloth. Target and comparison areas were selected for an outcome evaluation. During the 1-year program time period, violent crimes decreased significantly by over 22%. There was both a significant spatial diffusion of benefits and significantly fewer police officer-initiated actions resulting in arrests or citations. Crime prevention was achieved without an abundance of law enforcement actions against people located at the target areas. Implications for policy and practice are discussed within the contexts of police responses to urgent crime problems and data analytics.

AbstractThe progressive nature of heart failure (HF) coupled with high mortality and poor quality-of-life (QoL) mandates greater attention to palliative care (PC) as a routine component of HF management. Limited evidence exists from randomized controlled trials supporting the use of interdisciplinary palliative care in the progressive course of HF. The early palliative care in heart failure trial (EPCHF) is a prospective, controlled, nonblinded, multicenter study of an interdisciplinary palliative care intervention in 200 patients with symptomatic HF characterized by NYHA ≥ 2. The 12-month EPCHF intervention includes monthly consultations by a palliative care team focusing on physical and psychosocial symptom relief, attention to spiritual concerns and advance care planning. The primary endpoint is evaluated by health-related QoL questionnaires after 12 months of treatment. First the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy palliative care (FACIT-Pal) score evaluating QoL living with a chronic disease and second the Kansas City cardiomyopathy questionnaire (KCCQ) measuring QoL living with heart failure will be determined. Secondary endpoints are changes in anxiety/depression (HADS), symptom burden score (MIDOS), spiritual well-being functional assessment of chronic illness therapy spiritual well-being scale (FACIT-Sp), medical resource and cost assessment. EPCHF will help evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of palliative care in symptomatic HF using a patient-centered outcome as well as clinical and economic endpoints. EPCHF is funded by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF, 01GY17).

Image 1: A Little Free Library. Image credit: Nadine Kozak.IntroductionLittle Free Libraries give people a reason to stop and exchange things they love: books. It seemed like a really good way to build a sense of community.Dannette Lank, Little Free Library steward, Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin, 2013 (Rumage)Against a backdrop of stagnant literacy rates and enduring perceptions of urban decay and the decline of communities in cities (NCES, “Average Literacy”; NCES, “Average Prose”; Putnam 25; Skogan 8), legions of Little Free Libraries (LFLs) have sprung up across the United States between 2009 and the present. LFLs are small, often homemade structures housing books and other physical media for passersby to choose a book to take or leave a book to share with others. People have installed the structures in front of homes, schools, libraries, churches, fire and police stations, community gardens, and in public parks. There are currently 50,000 LFLs around the world, most of which are in the continental United States (Aldrich, “Big”). LFLs encompass building in multiple senses of the term; LFLs are literally tiny buildings to house books and people use the structures for building neighbourhood social capital. The organisation behind the movement cites “building community” as one of its three core missions (Little Free Library). Rowan Moore, theorising humans’ reasons for building, argues desire and emotion are central (16). The LFL movement provides evidence for this claim: stewards erect LFLs based on hope for increased literacy and a desire to build community through their altruistic actions. This article investigates how LFLs build urban community and explores barriers to the endeavour, specifically municipal building and right of way ordinances used in attempts to eradicate the structures. It also examines local responses to these municipal actions and potential challenges to traditional public libraries brought about by LFLs, primarily the decrease of visits to public libraries and the use of LFLs to argue for defunding of publicly provided library services. The work argues that LFLs build community in some places but may threaten other community services. This article employs qualitative content analysis of 261 stewards’ comments about their registered LFLs on the organisation’s website drawn from the two largest cities in a Midwestern state and an interview with an LFL steward in a village in the same state to analyse how LFLs build community. The two cities, located in the state where the LFL movement began, provide a cross section of innovators, early adopters, and late adopters of the book exchanges, determined by their registered charter numbers. Press coverage and municipal documents from six cities across the US gathered through a snowball sample provide data about municipal challenges to LFLs. Blog posts penned by practising librarians furnish some opinions about the movement. This research, while not a representative sample, identifies common themes and issues around LFLs and provides a basis for future research.The act of building and curating an LFL is a representation of shared beliefs about literacy, community, and altruism. Establishing an LFL is an act of civic participation. As Nico Carpentier notes, while some civic participation is macro, carried out at the level of the nation, other participation is micro, conducted in “the spheres of school, family, workplace, church, and community” (17). Ruth H. Landman investigates voluntary activities in the city, including community gardening, and community bakeries, and argues that the people associated with these projects find themselves in a “denser web of relations” than previously (2). Gretchen M. Herrmann argues that neighbourhood garage sales, although fleeting events, build an enduring sense of community amongst participants (189). Ray Oldenburg contends that people create associational webs in what he calls “great good places”; third spaces separate from home and work (20-21). Little Free Libraries and Community BuildingEmotion plays a central role in the decision to become an LFL steward, the person who establishes and maintains the LFL. People recount their desire to build a sense of community and share their love of reading with neighbours (Charter 4684; Charter 8212; Charter 9437; Charter 9705; Charter 16561). One steward in the study reported, “I love books and I want to be able to help foster that love in our neighbourhood as well” (Charter 4369). Image 2: A Little Free Library, bench, water fountain, and dog’s water bowl for passersby to enjoy. Image credit: Nadine Kozak.Relationships and emotional ties are central to some people’s decisions to have an LFL. The LFL website catalogues many instances of memorial LFLs, tributes to librarians, teachers, and avid readers. Indeed, the first Little Free Library, built by Todd Bol in 2009, was a tribute to his late mother, a teacher who loved reading (“Our History”). In the two city study area, ten LFLs are memorials, allowing bereaved families to pass on a loved one’s penchant for sharing books and reading (Charter 1235; Charter 1309; Charter 4604; Charter 6219; Charter 6542; Charter 6954; Charter 10326; Charter 16734; Charter 24481; Charter 30369). In some cases, urban neighbours come together to build, erect, and stock LFLs. One steward wrote: “Those of us who live in this friendly neighborhood collaborated to design[,] build and paint a bungalow themed library” to match the houses in the neighbourhood (Charter 2532). Another noted: “Our neighbor across the street is a skilled woodworker, and offered to build the library for us if we would install it in our yard and maintain it. What a deal!” (Charter 18677). Community organisations also install and maintain LFLs, including 21 in the study population (e.g. Charter 31822; Charter 27155).Stewards report increased communication with neighbours due to their LFLs. A steward noted: “We celebrated the library’s launch on a Saturday morning with neighbors of all ages. We love sitting on our front porch and catching up with the people who stop to check out the books” (Charter 9673). Another exclaimed:within 24 hours, before I had time to paint it, my Little Free Library took on a life of its own. All of a sudden there were lots of books in it and people stopping by. I wondered where these books came from as I had not put any in there. Little kids in the neighborhood are all excited about it and I have met neighbors that I had never seen before. This is going to be fun! (Charter 15981)LFLs build community through social interaction and collaboration. This occurs when neighbours come together to build, install, and fill the structures. The structures also open avenues for conversation between neighbours who had no connection previously. Like Herrmann’s neighbourhood garage sales, LFLs create and maintain social ties between neighbours and link them by the books they share. Additionally, when neighbours gather and communicate at the LFL structure, they create a transitory third space for “informal public life”, where people can casually interact at a nearby location (Oldenburg 14, 288).Building Barriers, Creating CommunityThe erection of an LFL in an urban neighbourhood is not, however, always a welcome sight. The news analysis found that LFLs most often come to the attention of municipal authorities via citizen complaints, which lead to investigations and enforcement of ordinances. In Kansas, a neighbour called an LFL an “eyesore” and an “illegal detached structure” (Tapper). In Wisconsin, well-meaning future stewards contacted their village authorities to ask about rules, inadvertently setting off a six-month ban on LFLs (Stingl; Rumage). Resulting from complaints and inquiries, municipalities regulated, and in one case banned, LFLs, thus building barriers to citizens’ desires to foster community and share books with neighbours.Municipal governments use two major areas of established code to remove or prohibit LFLs: ordinances banning unapproved structures in residents’ yards and those concerned with obstructions to right of ways when stewards locate the LFLs between the public sidewalk and street.In the first instance, municipal ordinances prohibit either front yard or detached structures. Controversies over these ordinances and LFLs erupted in Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin, in 2012; Leawood, Kansas, in 2014; Shreveport, Louisiana, in 2015; and Dallas, Texas, in 2015. The Village of Whitefish Bay banned LFLs due to an ordinance prohibiting “front yard structures,” including mailboxes (Sanburn; Stingl). In Leawood, the city council argued that an LFL, owned by a nine-year-old boy, violated an ordinance that forbade the construction of any detached structures without city council permission. In Shreveport, the stewards of an LFL received a cease and desist letter from city council for having an “accessory structure” in the front yard (LaCasse; Burris) and Dallas officials knocked on a steward’s front door, informing her of a similar breach (Kellogg).In the second instance, some urban municipalities argued that LFLs are obstructions that block right of ways. In Lincoln, Nebraska, the public works director noted that the city “uses the area between the sidewalk and the street for snow storage in the winter, light poles, mailboxes, things like that.” The director continued: “And I imagine these little libraries are meant to congregate people like a water cooler, but we don’t want people hanging around near the road by the curb” (Heady). Both Lincoln in 2014 and Los Angeles (LA), California, in 2015, cited LFLs for obstructions. In Lincoln, the city notified the Southminster United Methodist Church that their LFL, located between the public sidewalk and street, violated a municipal ordinance (Sanburn). In LA, the Bureau of Street Services notified actor Peter Cook that his LFL, situated in the right of way, was an “obstruction” that Cook had to remove or the city would levy a fine (Moss). The city agreed at a hearing to consider a “revocable permit” for Cook’s LFL, but later denied its issuance (Condes).Stewards who found themselves in violation of municipal ordinances were able to harness emotion and build outrage over limits to individuals’ ability to erect LFLs. In Kansas, the stewards created a Facebook page, Spencer’s Little Free Library, which received over 31,000 likes and messages of support. One comment left on the page reads: “The public outcry will force those lame city officials to change their minds about it. Leave it to the stupid government to rain on everybody’s parade” (“Good”). Children’s author Daniel Handler sent a letter to the nine-year-old steward, writing as Lemony Snicket, “fighting against librarians is immoral and useless in the face of brave and noble readers such as yourself” (Spencer’s). Indeed, the young steward gave a successful speech to city hall arguing that the body should allow the structures because “‘lots of people in the neighborhood used the library and the books were always changing. I think it’s good for Leawood’” (Bauman). Other local LFL supporters also attended council and spoke in favour of the structures (Harper). In LA, Cook’s neighbours started a petition that gathered over 100 signatures, where people left comments including, “No to bullies!” (Lopez). Additionally, neighbours gathered to discuss the issue (Dana). In Shreveport, neighbours left stacks of books in their front yards, without a structure housing them due to the code banning accessory structures. One noted, “I’m basically telling the [Metropolitan Planning Commission] to go sod off” (Friedersdorf; Moss). LFL proponents reacted with frustration and anger at the perceived over-reach of the government toward harmless LFLs. In addition to the actions of neighbours and supporters, the national and local press commented on the municipal constraints. The LFL movement has benefitted from a significant amount of positive press in its formative years, a press willing to publicise and criticise municipal actions to thwart LFL development. Stewards’ struggles against municipal bureaucracies building barriers to LFLs makes prime fodder for the news media. Herbert J. Gans argues an enduring value in American news is “the preservation of the freedom of the individual against the encroachments of nation and society” (50). The juxtaposition of well-meaning LFL stewards against municipal councils and committees provided a compelling opportunity to illustrate this value.National media outlets, including Time (Sanburn), Christian Science Monitor (LaCasse), and The Atlantic, drew attention to the issue. Writing in The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf critically noted:I wish I was writing this to merely extol this trend [of community building via LFLs]. Alas, a subset of Americans are determined to regulate every last aspect of community life. Due to selection bias, they are overrepresented among local politicians and bureaucrats. And so they have power, despite their small-mindedness, inflexibility, and lack of common sense so extreme that they’ve taken to cracking down on Little Free Libraries, of all things. (Friedersdorf, n.p.)Other columnists mirrored this sentiment. Writing in the LA Times, one commentator sarcastically wrote that city officials were “cracking down on one of the country’s biggest problems: small community libraries where residents share books” (Schaub). Journalists argued this was government overreach on non-issues rather than tackling larger community problems, such as income inequality, homelessness, and aging infrastructure (Solomon; Schaub). The protests and negative press coverage led to, in the case of the municipalities with front yard and detached structure ordinances, détente between stewards and councils as the latter passed amendments permitting and regulating LFLs. Whitefish Bay, Leawood, and Shreveport amended ordinances to allow for LFLs, but also to regulate them (Everson; Topil; Siegel). Ordinances about LFLs restricted their number on city blocks, placement on private property, size and height, as well as required registration with the municipality in some cases. Lincoln officials allowed the church to relocate the LFL from the right of way to church property and waived the $500 fine for the obstruction violation (Sanburn). In addition to the amendments, the protests also led to civic participation and community building including presentations to city council, a petition, and symbolic acts of defiance. Through this protest, neighbours create communities—networks of people working toward a common goal. This aspect of community building around LFLs was unintentional but it brought people together nevertheless.Building a Challenge to Traditional Libraries?LFL marketing and communication staff member Margaret Aldrich suggests in The Little Free Library Book that LFLs are successful because they are “gratifyingly doable” projects that can be accomplished by an individual (16). It is this ease of building, erecting, and maintaining LFLs that builds concern as their proliferation could challenge aspects of library service, such as public funding and patron visits. Some professional librarians are in favour of the LFLs and are stewards themselves (Charter 121; Charter 2608; Charter 9702; Charter 41074; Rumage). Others envision great opportunities for collaboration between traditional libraries and LFLs, including the library publicising LFLs and encouraging their construction as well as using LFLs to serve areas without, or far from, a public library (Svehla; Shumaker). While lauding efforts to build community, some professional librarians question the nomenclature used by the movement. They argue the phrase Little Free Libraries is inaccurate as libraries are much more than random collections of books. Instead, critics contend, the LFL structures are closer to book swaps and exchanges than actual libraries, which offer a range of services such as Internet access, digital materials, community meeting spaces, and workshops and programming on a variety of topics (American Library Association; Annoyed Librarian). One university reference and instruction librarian worries about “the general public’s perception and lumping together of little free libraries and actual ‘real’ public libraries” (Hardenbrook). By way of illustration, he imagines someone asking, “‘why do we need our tax money to go to something that can be done for FREE?’” (Hardenbrook). Librarians holding this perspective fear the movement might add to a trend of neoliberalism, limiting or ending public funding for libraries, as politicians believe that the localised, individual solutions can replace publicly funded library services. This is a trend toward what James Ferguson calls “responsibilized” citizens, those “deployed to produce governmentalized results that do not depend on direct state intervention” (172). In other countries, this shift has already begun. In the United Kingdom (UK), governments are devolving formerly public services onto community groups and volunteers. Lindsay Findlay-King, Geoff Nichols, Deborah Forbes, and Gordon Macfadyen trace the impacts of the 2012 Localism Act in the UK, which caused “sport and library asset transfers” (12) to community and volunteer groups who were then responsible for service provision and, potentially, facility maintenance as well. Rather than being in charge of a “doable” LFL, community groups and volunteers become the operators of much larger facilities. Recent efforts in the US to privatise library services as governments attempt to cut budgets and streamline services (Streitfeld) ground this fear. Image 3: “Take a Book, Share a Book,” a Little Free Library motto. Image credit: Nadine Kozak. LFLs might have real consequences for public libraries. Another potential unintended consequence of the LFLs is decreasing visits to public libraries, which could provide officials seeking to defund them with evidence that they are no longer relevant or necessary. One LFL steward and avid reader remarked that she had not used her local public library since 2014 because “I was using the Little Free Libraries” (Steward). Academics and librarians must conduct more research to determine what impact, if any, LFLs are having on visits to traditional public libraries. ConclusionLittle Free Libraries across the United States, and increasingly in other countries, have generated discussion, promoted collaboration between neighbours, and led to sharing. In other words, they have built communities. This was the intended consequence of the LFL movement. There, however, has also been unplanned community building in response to municipal threats to the structures due to right of way, safety, and planning ordinances. The more threatening concern is not the municipal ordinances used to block LFL development, but rather the trend of privatisation of publicly provided services. While people are celebrating the community built by the LFLs, caution must be exercised lest central institutions of the public and community, traditional public libraries, be lost. Academics and communities ought to consider not just impact on their local community at the street level, but also wider structural concerns so that communities can foster many “great good places”—the Little Free Libraries and traditional public libraries as well.ReferencesAldrich, Margaret. “Big Milestone for Little Free Library: 50,000 Libraries Worldwide.” Little Free Library. Little Free Library Organization. 4 Nov. 2016. 25 Feb. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/big-milestone-for-little-free-library-50000-libraries-worldwide/>.Aldrich, Margaret. The Little Free Library Book: Take a Book, Return a Book. Minneapolis, MN: Coffee House Press, 2015.Annoyed Librarian. “How to Protect Little Free Libraries.” Library Journal Blog 9 Jul. 2015. 26 Mar. 2017 <http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2015/07/09/how-to-protect-little-free-libraries/>.American Library Association. “Public Library Use.” State of America’s Libraries: A Report from the American Library Association (2015). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.ala.org/tools/libfactsheets/alalibraryfactsheet06>.Bauman, Caroline. “‘Little Free Libraries’ Legal in Leawood Thanks to 9-year-old Spencer Collins.” The Kansas City Star 7 Jul. 2014. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article687562.html>.Burris, Alexandria. “First Amendment Issues Surface in Little Free Library Case.” Shreveport Times 5 Feb. 2015. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.shreveporttimes.com/story/news/local/2015/02/05/expert-use-zoning-law-clashes-first-amendment/22922371/>.Carpentier, Nico. Media and Participation: A Site of Ideological-Democratic Struggle. Bristol: Intellect, 2011.Charter 121. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 1235. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 1309. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 2532. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 2608. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 4369. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 4604. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 4684. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 6219. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 6542. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 6954. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 8212. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 9437. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 9673. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 9702. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 9705. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 10326. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 15981. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 16561. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 16734. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 18677. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 24481. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 27155. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 30369. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 31822. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Charter 41074. “The World Map.” Little Free Library (2017). 26 Mar. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourmap/>.Condes, Yvonne. “Save the Little Library!” MomsLA 10 Aug. 2015. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://momsla.com/save-the-micro-library/>.Dana. “The Tenn-Mann Library Controversy, Part 3.” Read with Dana (30 Jan. 2015). 25 Feb. 2017 <https://readwithdana.wordpress.com/2015/01/30/the-tenn-mann-library-controversy-part-three/>.Everson, Jeff. “An Ordinance to Amend and Reenact Chapter 106 of the Shreveport Code of Ordinances Relative to Outdoor Book Exchange Boxes, and Otherwise Providing with Respect Thereto.” City of Shreveport, Louisiana 9 Oct. 2015. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://ftpcontent4.worldnow.com/ksla/pdf/LFLordinance.pdf>.Ferguson, James. “The Uses of Neoliberalism.” Antipode 41.S1 (2009): 166-84.Findlay-King, Lindsay, Geoff Nichols, Deborah Forbes, and Gordon Macfadyen. “Localism and the Big Society: The Asset Transfer of Leisure Centres and Libraries—Fighting Closures or Empowering Communities.” Leisure Studies (2017): 1-13.Friedersdorf, Conor. “The Danger of Being Neighborly without a Permit.” The Atlantic 20 Feb. 2015. 25 Feb. 2017 <https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/02/little-free-library-crackdown/385531/>.Gans, Herbert J. Deciding What’s News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 2004.“Good Luck Spencer.” Spencer’s Little Free Library Facebook Page 25 Jun. 2014. 26 Mar. 2017 <https://www.facebook.com/Spencerslittlefreelibrary/photos/pcb.527531327376433/527531260709773/?type=3>.Hardenbrook, Joe. “A Little Rant on Little Free Libraries (AKA Probably an Unpopular Post).” Mr. Library Dude (9 Apr. 2014). 25 Feb. 2017 <https://mrlibrarydude.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/a-little-rant-on-little-free-libraries-aka-probably-an-unpopular-post/>.Harper, Deb. “Minutes.” The Leawood City Council 7 Jul. 2014. <http://www.leawood.org/pdf/cc/min/07-07-14.pdf>. Heady, Chris. “City Wants Church to Move Little Library.” Lincoln Journal Star 9 Jul. 2014. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://journalstar.com/news/local/city-wants-church-to-move-little-library/article_7753901a-42cd-5b52-9674-fc54a4d51f47.html>. Herrmann, Gretchen M. “Garage Sales Make Good Neighbors: Building Community through Neighborhood Sales.” Human Organization 62.2 (2006): 181-191.Kellogg, Carolyn. “Officials Threaten to Destroy a Little Free Library in Texas.” Los Angeles Times (1 Oct. 2015). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-little-free-library-texas-20150930-story.html>.LaCasse, Alexander. “Why Are Some Cities Cracking Down on Little Free Libraries.” Christian Science Monitor (5 Feb. 2015). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2015/0205/Why-are-some-cities-cracking-down-on-little-free-libraries>.Landman, Ruth H. Creating the Community in the City: Cooperatives and Community Gardens in Washington, DC Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, 1993. Little Free Library. Little Free Library Organization (2017). 25 Feb. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/>.Lopez, Steve. “Actor’s Curbside Libraries Is a Smash—for Most People.” LA Times 3 Feb. 2015. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-0204-lopez-library-20150204-column.html>.Moore, Rowan. Why We Build: Power and Desire in Architecture. New York: Harper Design, 2013.Moss, Laura. “City Zoning Laws Target Little Free Libraries.” Mother Nature Network 25 Aug. 2015. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.mnn.com/lifestyle/arts-culture/stories/city-zoning-laws-target-little-free-libraries>.National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Average Literacy and Numeracy Scale Scores of 25- to 65-Year Olds, by Sex, Age Group, Highest Level of Educational Attainment, and Country of Other Education System: 2012, table 604.10. 25 Feb. 2017 <https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_604.10.asp?current=yes>.National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Average Prose, Document, and Quantitative Literacy Scores of Adults: 1992 and 2003. National Assessment of Adult Literacy. 25 Feb. 2017 <https://nces.ed.gov/naal/kf_demographics.asp>.Oldenburg, Ray. The Great Good Place: Cafés, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. New York: Marlowe & Company, 1999.“Our History.” Little Free Library. Little Free Library Organization (2017). 25 Feb. 2017 <https://littlefreelibrary.org/ourhistory/>.Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001.Rumage, Jeff. “Little Free Libraries Now Allowed in Whitefish Bay.” Whitefish Bay Patch (8 May 2013). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://patch.com/wisconsin/whitefishbay/little-free-libraries-now-allowed-in-whitefish-bay>.Sanburn, Josh. “What Do Kansas and Nebraska Have against Small Libraries?” Time 10 Jul. 2014. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://time.com/2970649/tiny-libraries-violating-city-ordinances/>.Schaub, Michael. “Little Free Libraries on the Wrong Side of the Law.” LA Times 4 Feb. 2015. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-little-free-libraries-on-the-wrong-side-of-the-law-20150204-story.html>.Shumaker, David. “Public Libraries, Little Free Libraries, and Embedded Librarians.” The Embedded Librarian (28 April 2014) 26 Mar. 2017 <https://embeddedlibrarian.com/2014/04/28/public-libraries-little-free-libraries-and-embedded-librarians/>.Siegel, Julie. “An Ordinance to Amend Section 16.13 of the Municipal Code with Regard to Exempt Certain Little Free Libraries from Front Yard Setback Requirements.” Village of Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin (5 Aug. 2013).Skogan, Wesley G. Police and Community in Chicago: A Tale of Three Cities. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.Solomon, Dan. “Dallas Is Regulating ‘Little Free Libraries’ for Some Reason.” Texas Monthly (14 Sept. 2016). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/dallas-regulating-little-free-libraries-reason/>.“Spencer’s Little Free Library.” Facebook 15 Jul. 2014. 25 Feb. 2017 <https://www.facebook.com/Spencerslittlefreelibrary/photos/pcb.527531327376433/527531260709773/?type=3>.Steward, M. Personal Interview. 7 Feb. 2017.Stingl, Jim. “Village Slaps Endnote on Little Libraries.” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 11 Nov. 2012: 1B, 7B.Streitfeld, David. “Anger as a Private Company Takes over Libraries.” The New York Times (26 Sept. 2010). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/business/27libraries.html>.Svehla, Louise. “Little Free Libraries—The Possibilities Are Endless.” Public Libraries Online (8 Mar. 2013). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://publiclibrariesonline.org/2013/03/little-free-libraries-the-possibilities-are-endless/>.Tapper, Jake. “Boy Fights Council to Save His Library.” CNN 4 Jul. 2014. 25 Feb. 2017 <http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/04/boy-fights-to-save-his-library/>.Topil, Greg. “Little Free Libraries in Lincoln.” City of Lincoln, Nebraska (n.d.). 25 Feb. 2017 <http://lincoln.ne.gov/City/pworks/engine/row/little-library.htm>.