Not surprisingly the library is starting to receive some comments and media coverage on its forthcoming furlough. Based on what I’ve seen and heard it’s time to update information and offer some clarifications to questions and comments that have been made.
Question #1 plus variants: Why did you choose Christmas week to furlough the entire staff? Why didn’t you stagger the furloughs so some library service would be available? Why not close for three individual days over the course of the year?
Answer(s): Christmas week is the slowest usage week in the year. Daily statistics indicate an average drop of 20% in volume during Christmas week. When compared to a robust volume month like February or March the volume difference is closer to 40%. The ability to communicate information about a staggered furlough is daunting and ultimately does a disservice to users. The public feedback earlier this decade when all library outlets had different open hours was very loud and very negative. Professional judgment and our ability to communicate with customers indicated closing Christmas week, as opposed to three random days through the course of the year, was the better choice.
Question 2: Why are you shutting down your web page when it costs nothing to maintain?
Answer(s): The web page is being shut down for two reasons. First, every keystroke requires support and there will be no one available to offer that support should technology fail. Second, if the web page were available it would create two classes of customer. Those who have computer and Internet access at home would still be receiving service and those who do not would be totally disenfranchised.
Question 3: Why are the bookdrops going to be closed?
Answer: No one will be available to empty bookdrops or check in books during the furlough week.
Question 4: Is the forthcoming furlough a political ploy to generate pressure on the City to restore funds?
Answer: The consistent goal of the library has been to create as little pain as possible for our customers and accommodate budget reductions imposed by the city. If we wanted to be political there are far better targets than the lowest volume week in the year.
Question/Assumption: The furlough dates were selected for staff convenience.
Answer: Management and union staff worked together to select a time that would create the least havoc for our customers. By working collegially we were able to avoid layoffs, preserve children’s, adult, and outreach programs, and meet approximately $55,000 of the library’s $300,000 reduction.
Question: What will happen next year when the budget reduction is higher?
Answer: That’s a topic that will be addressed in a later blog.
Happy Holidays or Bah Humbug…you choose.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
Regionalization #9
If regional libraries are ever going to become a reality in Iowa, legislative change will be required. Ideally libraries could serve as a model for merger for other governmental services where far greater savings could be realized.
Currently the only tool available to libraries to offer services beyond their traditional boundaries is the 28-E agreement. While the 28-E is a good start it puts far too much control in the hands of people who have a vested interest in the status quo and none in the hands of everyday citizens. Ideally what is formed is a library district with independent taxing authority.
Library districts are not new. There are several states, some of them Iowa’s neighbors, that have provision for the development of library districts. Illinois, Colorado, Missouri, Michigan, and Oklahoma are five states that have provided a different path for library development.
There are two common elements about district library legislation. First, once a district is formed it becomes a totally independent governmental entity. Simply stated the library is not subject to direction from cities, counties, or school districts. By the same token a district library works without a net. The protection offered by a parent organization disappears.
Second, in a district setting, library funding is decided by citizens. Generally legislation provides a financial cap and a library board is required to receive approval at the ballot box to set both a time and level of support. If voters say no a district library can either seek a lower level of support or decide to disband.
District libraries work. I have worked for county, city, and district libraries throughout my career. The most successful service delivery is always at the district level. The reasons are simple and straightforward.
Because district libraries are independent they have the freedom to develop their own strategic and tactical plans and not be burdened trying to incorporate a parent organization’s goals and objectives. District libraries can react to change far more quickly. There is just less bureaucracy to navigate.
Financially, district libraries are better positioned to address the ebbs and flows of support. Even when funding decreases the flexibility offered by independence allows greater opportunity. District libraries do not have to compete with other departments for scarce resources.
If there is any doubt on the last point just look at Michigan libraries. Since 1990 over 1/3rd of Michigan’s libraries have chosen to become districts. No one would argue that Michigan has been one of the hardest hit states in the current recession. Despite this, Michigan’s district public libraries seem to be weathering the storm.
For the last several months I have been blogging about regionalization. I strongly believe its time to amend laws written over 100 years ago and introduce some new legislation that allows for library independence. There are ample models available they need to be modified to reflect Iowa’s uniqueness, embraced and implemented.
Currently the only tool available to libraries to offer services beyond their traditional boundaries is the 28-E agreement. While the 28-E is a good start it puts far too much control in the hands of people who have a vested interest in the status quo and none in the hands of everyday citizens. Ideally what is formed is a library district with independent taxing authority.
Library districts are not new. There are several states, some of them Iowa’s neighbors, that have provision for the development of library districts. Illinois, Colorado, Missouri, Michigan, and Oklahoma are five states that have provided a different path for library development.
There are two common elements about district library legislation. First, once a district is formed it becomes a totally independent governmental entity. Simply stated the library is not subject to direction from cities, counties, or school districts. By the same token a district library works without a net. The protection offered by a parent organization disappears.
Second, in a district setting, library funding is decided by citizens. Generally legislation provides a financial cap and a library board is required to receive approval at the ballot box to set both a time and level of support. If voters say no a district library can either seek a lower level of support or decide to disband.
District libraries work. I have worked for county, city, and district libraries throughout my career. The most successful service delivery is always at the district level. The reasons are simple and straightforward.
Because district libraries are independent they have the freedom to develop their own strategic and tactical plans and not be burdened trying to incorporate a parent organization’s goals and objectives. District libraries can react to change far more quickly. There is just less bureaucracy to navigate.
Financially, district libraries are better positioned to address the ebbs and flows of support. Even when funding decreases the flexibility offered by independence allows greater opportunity. District libraries do not have to compete with other departments for scarce resources.
If there is any doubt on the last point just look at Michigan libraries. Since 1990 over 1/3rd of Michigan’s libraries have chosen to become districts. No one would argue that Michigan has been one of the hardest hit states in the current recession. Despite this, Michigan’s district public libraries seem to be weathering the storm.
For the last several months I have been blogging about regionalization. I strongly believe its time to amend laws written over 100 years ago and introduce some new legislation that allows for library independence. There are ample models available they need to be modified to reflect Iowa’s uniqueness, embraced and implemented.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Regionalization #8
As previously threatened I want to talk about how a regional library might be governed and funded.
While there are many ways to establish a library board I believe that an elected board drawn from participating municipalities on a ward type basis would serve the interests of all participants best. If there are nine partners in a regional library there need to be at least nine members of the Board, one from each participating municipality.
Why an elected board?
1. Any regional library needs to be an independent corporation. Those who are elected owe their position to the public, not a group of municipal politicians.
2. Those who have chosen to compete for public office at the ballot box make a different commitment than those who seek appointment.
3. Board members of an independent corporation will have an expanded fiduciary responsibility.
4. There is no such thing as a board member who, for all practical purposes, is appointed for life.
5. Elected officials need to be responsive to their electorate, and I believe they are more apt to take a global view to library service delivery than appointed officials.
The critical work of an initial board will be developing a fair and equitable funding formula that recognizes that both size and wealth matter. Before that can be done a library board needs to know what resources will be available and how they will be generated.
I believe the best way to generate funds is to ask the taxpayer for a dedicated revenue stream. Most states that allow libraries to have directed funding depend on property tax. A percentage of sales or income tax would work equally well.
Dedicated funding offers the greatest opportunity for success. First, it could allow members to tax at different levels. If community A wants its library to be open 72 hours a week and have a very robust programming and outreach effort, it may be able to support it with a 3 mill tax. However community B, whose property values are lower, may need to seek 5 mills of support for the same delivery. Or community B could opt for the lower level of delivery and pay 3 mills. Either way the public gets to make a decision about the level of service they want and feel able to support. Second, it removes libraries from a competition for funds they cannot win. Police and fire funding will trump library funding in a municipal environment on a consistent basis. Third and I think most importantly, citizens are empowered to make a decision on the success and survival of an entity that survey after survey in community after community is most highly rated.
Next time, which may or may not be the last on this topic, I want to talk about legislation that would have to be amended or introduced.
While there are many ways to establish a library board I believe that an elected board drawn from participating municipalities on a ward type basis would serve the interests of all participants best. If there are nine partners in a regional library there need to be at least nine members of the Board, one from each participating municipality.
Why an elected board?
1. Any regional library needs to be an independent corporation. Those who are elected owe their position to the public, not a group of municipal politicians.
2. Those who have chosen to compete for public office at the ballot box make a different commitment than those who seek appointment.
3. Board members of an independent corporation will have an expanded fiduciary responsibility.
4. There is no such thing as a board member who, for all practical purposes, is appointed for life.
5. Elected officials need to be responsive to their electorate, and I believe they are more apt to take a global view to library service delivery than appointed officials.
The critical work of an initial board will be developing a fair and equitable funding formula that recognizes that both size and wealth matter. Before that can be done a library board needs to know what resources will be available and how they will be generated.
I believe the best way to generate funds is to ask the taxpayer for a dedicated revenue stream. Most states that allow libraries to have directed funding depend on property tax. A percentage of sales or income tax would work equally well.
Dedicated funding offers the greatest opportunity for success. First, it could allow members to tax at different levels. If community A wants its library to be open 72 hours a week and have a very robust programming and outreach effort, it may be able to support it with a 3 mill tax. However community B, whose property values are lower, may need to seek 5 mills of support for the same delivery. Or community B could opt for the lower level of delivery and pay 3 mills. Either way the public gets to make a decision about the level of service they want and feel able to support. Second, it removes libraries from a competition for funds they cannot win. Police and fire funding will trump library funding in a municipal environment on a consistent basis. Third and I think most importantly, citizens are empowered to make a decision on the success and survival of an entity that survey after survey in community after community is most highly rated.
Next time, which may or may not be the last on this topic, I want to talk about legislation that would have to be amended or introduced.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Regionalization # 7
Successful regionalization of service requires independent governance and a unique funding stream. Without these two elements I believe regionalization will fail.
Governance is, if anything, even more critical than funding. Every partner in a regional venture requires representation. Questions to ask include:
· Should representatives be elected or appointed?
· Should these individuals represent the interest of their communities or overall library service?
· Should votes be weighted by population and/or budget contribution?
· If the governing board is large how much, if any, authority should be ceded to an executive committee?
·
There are probably other areas that should be explored but those listed above are critical.
Some might question whether representation from all partners is essential. Technically the answer is no. At least in theory, a group of small libraries could be represented by a single individual. However my experience tells me that the more seats at the table, the higher the level of trust that can be built. Meetings will take longer and take some unexpected tangents but a strong board chair can often assure productive sessions.
Both elected and appointed boards work well. If a choice is made for an elected board, then a quasi ward system would have to be employed. The critical issue is who the people are on a board, not how they got there. I believe that representatives have to represent both the interests of their constituencies as well as quality library service delivery. This can best be achieved by weighting some votes, probably those directly linked to finances and having most policy votes subject to equal community wide scrutiny. If votes are to be weighted, both population and budget contribution need to be taken into account. Once a regional library is firmly established an Executive Committee that reflects the demographics of the partners should be established to, at a minimum, approve monthly agendas and establish a preliminary review of finances.
A regional library requires financing. Either the monies come directly from the public via a dedicated tax that voters have approved at the ballot box or through annual appropriations from those municipalities that have chosen to form a regional library. Ideally regional libraries would be supported by a direct tax. Unfortunately the legal ability to fully fund a library, using this method, exists in less than one-third of all states and Iowa is not one of them. That leaves municipal appropriation or introducing new legislation.
Municipal appropriations offer more control to individual members of a regional library but may lead to very inconsistent service delivery. A community that is growing is more apt to invest in library services than one that is static or declining. What this points to is that any regional library must establish financial and service baselines to which all members must adhere. Even with baselines there will be some inconsistencies in delivery. However, they offer a safety net to the public that say the quality of library service will never fall below a certain level.
Over the course of the next few blogs, I hope to talk about how a regional library might work, the level of funding that would be required, and some of the baselines that need to be established.
Governance is, if anything, even more critical than funding. Every partner in a regional venture requires representation. Questions to ask include:
· Should representatives be elected or appointed?
· Should these individuals represent the interest of their communities or overall library service?
· Should votes be weighted by population and/or budget contribution?
· If the governing board is large how much, if any, authority should be ceded to an executive committee?
·
There are probably other areas that should be explored but those listed above are critical.
Some might question whether representation from all partners is essential. Technically the answer is no. At least in theory, a group of small libraries could be represented by a single individual. However my experience tells me that the more seats at the table, the higher the level of trust that can be built. Meetings will take longer and take some unexpected tangents but a strong board chair can often assure productive sessions.
Both elected and appointed boards work well. If a choice is made for an elected board, then a quasi ward system would have to be employed. The critical issue is who the people are on a board, not how they got there. I believe that representatives have to represent both the interests of their constituencies as well as quality library service delivery. This can best be achieved by weighting some votes, probably those directly linked to finances and having most policy votes subject to equal community wide scrutiny. If votes are to be weighted, both population and budget contribution need to be taken into account. Once a regional library is firmly established an Executive Committee that reflects the demographics of the partners should be established to, at a minimum, approve monthly agendas and establish a preliminary review of finances.
A regional library requires financing. Either the monies come directly from the public via a dedicated tax that voters have approved at the ballot box or through annual appropriations from those municipalities that have chosen to form a regional library. Ideally regional libraries would be supported by a direct tax. Unfortunately the legal ability to fully fund a library, using this method, exists in less than one-third of all states and Iowa is not one of them. That leaves municipal appropriation or introducing new legislation.
Municipal appropriations offer more control to individual members of a regional library but may lead to very inconsistent service delivery. A community that is growing is more apt to invest in library services than one that is static or declining. What this points to is that any regional library must establish financial and service baselines to which all members must adhere. Even with baselines there will be some inconsistencies in delivery. However, they offer a safety net to the public that say the quality of library service will never fall below a certain level.
Over the course of the next few blogs, I hope to talk about how a regional library might work, the level of funding that would be required, and some of the baselines that need to be established.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Regionalization #6
Library regionalization offers some additional benefits to library users at both the management and policy level. When I refer to management I’m using the term broadly and including personnel selection and supervision, contract development and oversight, financial controls, marketing, and library leadership positions.
When staffs from all area agencies are brought together under a single entity the ultimate goal should be a uniformity of service delivery at a very high level. This is ultimately accomplished by establishing system wide performance standards (either negotiated in a union environment or established collegially if collective bargaining is rejected) and investing in ongoing staff development. This is easier to accomplish on paper than in practice.
Most library directors believe that they have a good staff that serves their public well. Some libraries are more dependent on part-time staff while others have a higher ratio of librarians to clerks. Everyone has a different salary and benefit structure. A substantial amount of time will have to be invested to make a staff merger work and there is little doubt that everyone won’t be totally satisfied. This does not mean it can’t be done.
From the public’s point of view one of the advantages of consolidation should be a minimization of duplication. How many library directors or other “back room” functionaries without significant public service responsibility are required to run a regional system? My answer would be fewer than we have now. The good news, and this tends to be true across the United States, is that there are an awful lot of directors, myself included, who will be looking at retirement in the none too distant future.
Some back room consolidation will simply result in better delivery or control. A marketing department that serves a broad region may need to make different choices but should not be exceptionally more expensive to operate. A business office, and I’m assuming a regional library would be a separate corporation, may well have to employ an accountant but overall should be quite lean.
The library users really benefit when policies and procedures are consistent throughout a region. Why should libraries reinvent the wheel on issues like Internet Use and Behavior Policies? I believe our customers would welcome a uniform approach to circulation periods for materials, a universal decision on the daily cost of an overdue fine, and a consistent policy on when borrowing privileges are suspended. A side benefit is that “serial abusers” of library services are easily identified in a regional environment.
Next time I hope to talk a little about potential governance of a regional system and how such an entity might be funded.
When staffs from all area agencies are brought together under a single entity the ultimate goal should be a uniformity of service delivery at a very high level. This is ultimately accomplished by establishing system wide performance standards (either negotiated in a union environment or established collegially if collective bargaining is rejected) and investing in ongoing staff development. This is easier to accomplish on paper than in practice.
Most library directors believe that they have a good staff that serves their public well. Some libraries are more dependent on part-time staff while others have a higher ratio of librarians to clerks. Everyone has a different salary and benefit structure. A substantial amount of time will have to be invested to make a staff merger work and there is little doubt that everyone won’t be totally satisfied. This does not mean it can’t be done.
From the public’s point of view one of the advantages of consolidation should be a minimization of duplication. How many library directors or other “back room” functionaries without significant public service responsibility are required to run a regional system? My answer would be fewer than we have now. The good news, and this tends to be true across the United States, is that there are an awful lot of directors, myself included, who will be looking at retirement in the none too distant future.
Some back room consolidation will simply result in better delivery or control. A marketing department that serves a broad region may need to make different choices but should not be exceptionally more expensive to operate. A business office, and I’m assuming a regional library would be a separate corporation, may well have to employ an accountant but overall should be quite lean.
The library users really benefit when policies and procedures are consistent throughout a region. Why should libraries reinvent the wheel on issues like Internet Use and Behavior Policies? I believe our customers would welcome a uniform approach to circulation periods for materials, a universal decision on the daily cost of an overdue fine, and a consistent policy on when borrowing privileges are suspended. A side benefit is that “serial abusers” of library services are easily identified in a regional environment.
Next time I hope to talk a little about potential governance of a regional system and how such an entity might be funded.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Letter to the editor
The following letter, which is jointly signed by Board President Susan Voss and myself was sent to the Des Moines Register today:
Open and honest communication has been at the heart of the Des Moines Public Library’s entire ten-year facilities improvements plan, so you can imagine our dismay at today’s editorial in the Des Moines Register regarding the community’s participation in the Franklin Avenue Library’s planned renovation.
The library is eager to meet with the Urban Design Review Board to clear up any miscommunications about the project and we are confident that City Engineering and the project’s architect will promptly address any oversight.
More than a year ago, the library began a series of five public meetings, inviting input from community members, neighborhood associations, library users, city council members, county staff and elected officials, and anyone else that was interested in the plans for improving our busiest branch. We heavily publicized these meetings through neighborhood association newsletters, posters in all of our libraries, in-house publications such as our quarterly newsletters, our bi-monthly calendar of events, news releases to the media which covered the meetings, in print, TV and radio. We featured the meetings on our web site and included full descriptions of the project. Our staff even took the time to stuff handouts in the hundreds of items on hold for our customers, to ensure that we were reaching as many people who had an interest in the project as possible.
Following each meeting, the architects carefully considered the comments they received from the public, adjusted plans, and shared their changes at subsequent meetings. Throughout the process, the library answered questions, shared information, and enjoyed a positive atmosphere in all communications between the public and the architects. There was never an attempt to hide the project and anyone that is a regular visitor of the Franklin Avenue Library would have to have walked past the proposed model to check out a book or use any of the library’s many services.
We regret any miscommunication and look forward to further input from all interested parties. Our ultimate goal is for the Franklin Avenue Library to continue to meet the needs of its users and fulfill its vital role within our community.
Open and honest communication has been at the heart of the Des Moines Public Library’s entire ten-year facilities improvements plan, so you can imagine our dismay at today’s editorial in the Des Moines Register regarding the community’s participation in the Franklin Avenue Library’s planned renovation.
The library is eager to meet with the Urban Design Review Board to clear up any miscommunications about the project and we are confident that City Engineering and the project’s architect will promptly address any oversight.
More than a year ago, the library began a series of five public meetings, inviting input from community members, neighborhood associations, library users, city council members, county staff and elected officials, and anyone else that was interested in the plans for improving our busiest branch. We heavily publicized these meetings through neighborhood association newsletters, posters in all of our libraries, in-house publications such as our quarterly newsletters, our bi-monthly calendar of events, news releases to the media which covered the meetings, in print, TV and radio. We featured the meetings on our web site and included full descriptions of the project. Our staff even took the time to stuff handouts in the hundreds of items on hold for our customers, to ensure that we were reaching as many people who had an interest in the project as possible.
Following each meeting, the architects carefully considered the comments they received from the public, adjusted plans, and shared their changes at subsequent meetings. Throughout the process, the library answered questions, shared information, and enjoyed a positive atmosphere in all communications between the public and the architects. There was never an attempt to hide the project and anyone that is a regular visitor of the Franklin Avenue Library would have to have walked past the proposed model to check out a book or use any of the library’s many services.
We regret any miscommunication and look forward to further input from all interested parties. Our ultimate goal is for the Franklin Avenue Library to continue to meet the needs of its users and fulfill its vital role within our community.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Regionalization #5
Is it viable and/or desirable to create a regional system in Central Iowa? Why would Des Moines, with its long history and recent 40 + million dollar investment in library buildings want to abandon its identity and work with suburban libraries? Why would neighboring communities want to participate in Des Moines’ ongoing financial woes? Further, experience says that each library believes that they understand and deliver service to their community at a higher level by existing as an independent entity. Despite probable objections and recognizing that customers are well served in Polk County through reciprocal borrowing, I believe end users will receive improved service through formal regionalization.
Virtually every customer survey tells librarians that the primary reason that people use libraries is to borrow materials. The deeper the collection, both in variety and number of copies, the more satisfied the user. Currently Des Moines invests approximately a million dollars a year in materials. Libraries serving substantially smaller populations have correspondingly lower budgets. However, if all budgets were merged ultimately more material would be available for all users.
No matter how robust a materials collection may be customers need to know, with an apology to Jean Paul Sartre, of an item’s existence. Within a library setting this means what is purchased has to be cataloged, processed, and linked to an integrated library system (the electronic version of the old card catalog.) Currently libraries in Polk County are responsible for their own cataloging and processing and have an electronic catalog unique to them. From both a customer and taxpayer point of view this is inefficient.
Customers want to know what is available and where it resides. Today the only way that information is available is by accessing several different catalogs. If time is money libraries need to plead guilty to wasting both for end users. Taxpayers, whether they are users or not, want to see their monies extend as far as possible. Logic says that consolidating acquisitions, cataloging and processing and marrying the process to a uniform online catalog has to improve efficiency.
There are two decisions that will need to be made to effectively consolidate collection budgets and catalogs. The first is to let all collections “float.” What this means is a borrower can check out an item from Agency A and return it to Agency B. Traditionally the item would be returned in delivery to Agency A. When items float they stay where they are returned. There are a number of permutations of floating collections, most notably new materials stay at their home agency for a specified period before they become floating items, but implementation of the concept improves overall access to more people. The second is an investment in a robust delivery service. This is an additional cost but it should be more than offset by savings.
Next time I want to briefly explore policy and management advantages of regionalization. I’ll follow that with what I believe stands in the way and make a few suggestions on how to address the issues.
Virtually every customer survey tells librarians that the primary reason that people use libraries is to borrow materials. The deeper the collection, both in variety and number of copies, the more satisfied the user. Currently Des Moines invests approximately a million dollars a year in materials. Libraries serving substantially smaller populations have correspondingly lower budgets. However, if all budgets were merged ultimately more material would be available for all users.
No matter how robust a materials collection may be customers need to know, with an apology to Jean Paul Sartre, of an item’s existence. Within a library setting this means what is purchased has to be cataloged, processed, and linked to an integrated library system (the electronic version of the old card catalog.) Currently libraries in Polk County are responsible for their own cataloging and processing and have an electronic catalog unique to them. From both a customer and taxpayer point of view this is inefficient.
Customers want to know what is available and where it resides. Today the only way that information is available is by accessing several different catalogs. If time is money libraries need to plead guilty to wasting both for end users. Taxpayers, whether they are users or not, want to see their monies extend as far as possible. Logic says that consolidating acquisitions, cataloging and processing and marrying the process to a uniform online catalog has to improve efficiency.
There are two decisions that will need to be made to effectively consolidate collection budgets and catalogs. The first is to let all collections “float.” What this means is a borrower can check out an item from Agency A and return it to Agency B. Traditionally the item would be returned in delivery to Agency A. When items float they stay where they are returned. There are a number of permutations of floating collections, most notably new materials stay at their home agency for a specified period before they become floating items, but implementation of the concept improves overall access to more people. The second is an investment in a robust delivery service. This is an additional cost but it should be more than offset by savings.
Next time I want to briefly explore policy and management advantages of regionalization. I’ll follow that with what I believe stands in the way and make a few suggestions on how to address the issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
