Dear Colleagues,
I have received quite a few comments on the proposed model for state funding to public libraries. The comment period will run through the end of March, so please continue to comment (whether positive or negative) with specific suggestions for what, if anything, you would change and how.
Since I have had limited opportunities to get out and converse with members of the library community and clarify some things about the model since it was posted for comment, I have decided to put out a frequently asked questions (FAQ) document in order to make some clarifications of the model and its intentions. This clarification FAQ can be found at http://www.michigan.gov/hal/0,1607,7-160-17445_19270-186673--,00.html.
Thank you for your involvement in this process.
-Nancy
~~~~~~~~~~
Nancy R. Robertson
State Librarian
Library of Michigan
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I am the director of a class V public library. While our cooperative was extremely helpful in our library becoming automated we have reached the point where our needs surpass what the cooperative can reasonably provide for our libraries. I have also found, that I am often able to obtain materials and/or services at a cheaper rate directly than I can through the cooperative. I fully support the proposal to eliminate state funding for cooperatives and to allow libraries to decide if they want to enter into non-governmental agreements with neighboring libraries. I think giving the funds directly to the libraries allows them to decide what is most needed by the community they serve. My only reservation with the state proposal is that the transition period proposed is much too long and it seems much more complicated than necessary.
It's pretty clear that the advocates for abolishing funding for cooperatives represent a minority of Michigan libraries. To change the funding formulas in a way that would harm the majority of libraries to appease a vocal minority is both short-sighted and misguided. The advocates for this change constantly talk about how such a change would benefit their local library. But they have yet to demonstrate how this change would benefit Michigan libraries and more importantly, Michigan library users.
The previous comment brings up a good question. "How this change would benefit Michigan libraries and more importantly, Michigan library users."
I can't answer for anyone except our library.
It appears that the proposed plan will result in between $4000 (if 80% is allocated) and $9000 (if 100% is allocated) in extra income for our Class IV library. While not a tremendous windfall in a library with a $1.2 million budget, it would be a welcome change from the series of small (and not so small) revenue cuts we have seen over the past few years. I am confident that we will be able to put the money to better use if we receive it directly.
For years, we have handed over about $6000 to our Coop (SMLC) annually. We did this not because we received services from the Coop with equal value, but because we didn't get the money if we didn't give it to the Coop so there was no reason to not to. We did get some benefit.
Other libraries in our Coop have expressed a need for the services of the Coop and indicated that the Coop was a wonderful deal for them. I do not doubt that. It just wasn't working for us. The proposed plan accommodates that dichotomy. If the Coop is working for you, you can participate. If it doesn't, you don't have to.
I was very pleased to see that the most that was being proposed as being held back for statewide services is 80%. As my earlier e-mail implied, I was concerned that State Aid would be largely diverted toward MeL projects. I have no problem with 20% going to MeL projects. I think they are valuable services. We are going to need more money in the future for them, and we will be in a better position to go to the legislature for additional money if we are already spending a portion of allocated money on those services. Legislators might otherwise rightfully ask, "if libraries aren't willing to spend "their" money on it, why should we spend "our" money?"
Nancy Studebaker
Niles District Library
How does that help the libraries where the cooperatives provide services that the libraries want and need? They'll have less money to fund those services and with some libraries choosing to opt-out of the cooperatives, a smaller pool of funds to maintain the services to those who need it. Is a less than 1% increase in funding worth endangering a system that works for the majority of libraries?
The removal of the fiscal incentive for cooperative membership is a grave concern for our small, rural library. If this proposal results in larger libraries withdrawing from cooperatives – smaller libraries will be left at a distinct disadvantage since they are dependent on cooperatives for vital services, yet have limited resources – even when pooled as a group. We would like to see some monetary incentive remain for cooperative membership. In particular, the current governor’s thrust on intergovernmental cooperation makes this a high priority for all local governmental bodies and removing this incentive seems counter-productive.
Ray Arnett
Fremont Area District Library
This FAQ includes assurances that “core services” will include services such as cataloging, the integrated library system, and local delivery. We are concerned that services such as these be explicitly included in the finalized plan of service. As a small library, we are highly dependent on a cooperative arrangement for these types of vital library services and we are concerned that any plan includes language that will not be misinterpreted in the future to exclude these areas of expenditures.
March 26, 2008
Nancy Robertson, State Librarian
Library of Michigan
702 W. Kalamazoo St., PO Box 30007
Lansing, MI 48909
Ms. Robertson,
I have several concerns about replacing or changing PL 89, State Aid to Public Libraries Act, especially as currently presented.
I have grave concerns for the needs of smaller, frequently financially challenged public libraries. Their needs are greater for support than for the larger libraries that have a professional staff, training budgets and the resources to find solutions to problems. Setting a base amount for the smaller libraries needs at the expense of the larger libraries is an acceptable solution to me as a director of a Class VI library.
However, sending those dollars directly to the library may not have the necessary impact. There will be a great temptation to use those funds for items differently than services provided by the Cooperative to the eventual detriment to public service. The preference would be to set part of the base amount directly to the Cooperative, thus ensuring that the Cooperative would exist and offering their vital services. As a Class VI library we use many, but not all of the services as a cooperative would. However, some of these are very vital to the smaller libraries. Rather than abandon the current system, it should be revised and improved. Accountability and state wide standards of cooperative functions should be included in any change.
I approve that public library funds are not being used by the Library of Michigan to fund electronic resources. Moreover, I am emphatic that no dollars dedicated to Public Libraries be diverted for use by the Library of Michigan. Once started it will eventually become part of their funding and not for Public Libraries.
Understandably, the law has not been revised since 1977. I witnessed changes in another state regarding their systems. Mandates were changed to have multi-type cooperative, creating greater support for all libraries. There was a reduction of cooperatives for greater efficiency. The result was a strengthening of libraries and not casting the small library to fend for themselves. As a result of strong state support, less than 6% of the state had tax supporting public libraries. The current proposal is not an improvement to the level of library service to the individual Michigan resident. It is a funding shift. We need an initiative to unite the different types of libraries to improve services to all our citizens.
Please consider the vital importance of libraries at this time to meet the information needs of our citizens. Over the last two years here in St. Clair County we have seen dramatic increase in library use. Our computer training classes have waiting lists and our public use of computers is rising steadily. Circulation statistics have increased for 27 straight months. Libraries are needed and used more than ever in economically distressed times. Please, do not take draconian action unless it will be an improvement in services to our citizens.
Thank you for taking time to consider these comments.
Sincerely,
James F. Warwick, Director
St. Clair County Library System
Post a Comment