With the county facing a projected $10 million in lost revenue next year, any and all ideas to produce money are on the table.
Including privatizing the county’s library system.
County Administrator David Hamilton said that particular option will go before the members of the budget and finance committee when it meets April 7.
Hamilton said outsourcing public library services to a private company could save the county $500,000 in operational costs without reducing services.
Recent Posts
- E-Books Can Subvert Book Bans, But Corporate Profit-Seeking Stands in the Way March 10, 2024
- Ten Stories That Shaped 2023 December 15, 2023
- War Sows Disruption at the National Book Awards November 16, 2023
- “No one else is saving it”: the fight to protect a historic music collection November 16, 2023
- No, I Don’t Want to Join Your Book Club November 9, 2023
- Iowa election 2023: Pella Public Library retains independence November 9, 2023
- A door at a Swedish library was accidentally left open 446 people came in, borrowed 245 books. Every single one was returned November 9, 2023
Recent Comments
- Examining Arab and Muslim librarians in fiction – Pop Culture Library Review on Librarian Combats Muslim Stereotypes
- St. Paul libraries face moment of reckoning – LISNews – News For Librarians on Secret and mysterious libraries
- Ellie on Just How Gross Are Library Books, Exactly?
- Prodigious1one on The Teaching Librarian Versus The Teacher
- Jason on Ten Stories That Shaped 2019
- centaurea on Libraries using Internet Trust Tools
LISNews Archives
- March 2024 (1)
- December 2023 (1)
- November 2023 (5)
- October 2023 (1)
- September 2023 (1)
- August 2023 (22)
- February 2023 (3)
- January 2023 (20)
- December 2022 (6)
- February 2022 (3)
- December 2021 (1)
- December 2020 (1)
- July 2020 (11)
- June 2020 (11)
- January 2020 (1)
- December 2019 (2)
- November 2019 (4)
- October 2019 (1)
- June 2019 (1)
- May 2019 (4)
- April 2019 (3)
- March 2019 (11)
- February 2019 (41)
- January 2019 (31)
- December 2018 (6)
- November 2018 (11)
- October 2018 (15)
- September 2018 (9)
- August 2018 (22)
- July 2018 (1)
- June 2018 (1)
- May 2018 (7)
- April 2018 (8)
- March 2018 (5)
- February 2018 (17)
- January 2018 (13)
- December 2017 (8)
- November 2017 (16)
- October 2017 (18)
- September 2017 (11)
- August 2017 (8)
- July 2017 (8)
- June 2017 (21)
- May 2017 (39)
- April 2017 (22)
- March 2017 (15)
- February 2017 (21)
- January 2017 (40)
- December 2016 (20)
- November 2016 (9)
- October 2016 (20)
- September 2016 (48)
- August 2016 (48)
- July 2016 (55)
- June 2016 (61)
- May 2016 (39)
- April 2016 (67)
- March 2016 (81)
- February 2016 (85)
- January 2016 (69)
- December 2015 (90)
- November 2015 (126)
- October 2015 (107)
- September 2015 (85)
- August 2015 (42)
- July 2015 (32)
- June 2015 (35)
- May 2015 (39)
- April 2015 (14)
- March 2015 (60)
- February 2015 (75)
- January 2015 (44)
- December 2014 (30)
- November 2014 (39)
- October 2014 (43)
- September 2014 (30)
- August 2014 (36)
- July 2014 (59)
- June 2014 (46)
- May 2014 (62)
- April 2014 (58)
- March 2014 (52)
- February 2014 (37)
- January 2014 (42)
- December 2013 (41)
- November 2013 (25)
- October 2013 (43)
- September 2013 (28)
- August 2013 (32)
- July 2013 (61)
- June 2013 (51)
- May 2013 (50)
- April 2013 (52)
- March 2013 (68)
- February 2013 (62)
- January 2013 (62)
- December 2012 (53)
- November 2012 (64)
- October 2012 (111)
- September 2012 (109)
- August 2012 (128)
- July 2012 (57)
- June 2012 (75)
- May 2012 (163)
- April 2012 (158)
- March 2012 (109)
- February 2012 (125)
- January 2012 (136)
- December 2011 (109)
- November 2011 (74)
- October 2011 (82)
- September 2011 (95)
- August 2011 (106)
- July 2011 (93)
- June 2011 (102)
- May 2011 (94)
- April 2011 (105)
- March 2011 (100)
- February 2011 (92)
- January 2011 (110)
- December 2010 (124)
- November 2010 (83)
- October 2010 (118)
- September 2010 (115)
- August 2010 (110)
- July 2010 (108)
- June 2010 (113)
- May 2010 (78)
- April 2010 (121)
- March 2010 (191)
- February 2010 (182)
- January 2010 (168)
- December 2009 (129)
- November 2009 (116)
- October 2009 (131)
- September 2009 (149)
- August 2009 (162)
- July 2009 (166)
- June 2009 (189)
- May 2009 (112)
- April 2009 (164)
- March 2009 (185)
- February 2009 (151)
- January 2009 (173)
- December 2008 (200)
- November 2008 (155)
- October 2008 (252)
- September 2008 (267)
- August 2008 (193)
- July 2008 (208)
- June 2008 (161)
- May 2008 (208)
- April 2008 (253)
- March 2008 (201)
- February 2008 (246)
- January 2008 (185)
- December 2007 (200)
- November 2007 (208)
- October 2007 (241)
- September 2007 (227)
- August 2007 (269)
- July 2007 (201)
- June 2007 (205)
- May 2007 (157)
- April 2007 (217)
- March 2007 (250)
- February 2007 (183)
- January 2007 (181)
- December 2006 (163)
- November 2006 (180)
- October 2006 (170)
- September 2006 (215)
- August 2006 (210)
- July 2006 (202)
- June 2006 (257)
- May 2006 (280)
- April 2006 (271)
- March 2006 (347)
- February 2006 (284)
- January 2006 (300)
- December 2005 (267)
- November 2005 (238)
- October 2005 (364)
- September 2005 (349)
- August 2005 (377)
- July 2005 (382)
- June 2005 (403)
- May 2005 (371)
- April 2005 (420)
- March 2005 (367)
- February 2005 (368)
- January 2005 (346)
- December 2004 (311)
- November 2004 (260)
- October 2004 (308)
- September 2004 (228)
- August 2004 (319)
- July 2004 (395)
- June 2004 (338)
- May 2004 (288)
- April 2004 (364)
- March 2004 (348)
- February 2004 (438)
- January 2004 (266)
- December 2003 (222)
- November 2003 (226)
- October 2003 (281)
- September 2003 (317)
- August 2003 (315)
- July 2003 (278)
- June 2003 (282)
- May 2003 (265)
- April 2003 (271)
- March 2003 (249)
- February 2003 (283)
- January 2003 (210)
- December 2002 (186)
- November 2002 (184)
- October 2002 (222)
- September 2002 (210)
- August 2002 (207)
- July 2002 (184)
- June 2002 (166)
- May 2002 (160)
- April 2002 (195)
- March 2002 (183)
- February 2002 (195)
- January 2002 (203)
- December 2001 (203)
- November 2001 (238)
- October 2001 (183)
- September 2001 (153)
- August 2001 (204)
- July 2001 (243)
- June 2001 (176)
- May 2001 (92)
- April 2001 (116)
- March 2001 (153)
- February 2001 (142)
- January 2001 (131)
- December 2000 (110)
- November 2000 (124)
- October 2000 (128)
- September 2000 (132)
- August 2000 (138)
- July 2000 (166)
- June 2000 (135)
- May 2000 (120)
- April 2000 (121)
- March 2000 (181)
- February 2000 (163)
- January 2000 (54)
- November 1999 (37)
another place that grew too fast
in the eighties, Hernando was one of the fastest growing counties in Florida, but it grew too big, too fast. maybe the mermaids can save them:
Privatizing
As seen by many California Libraries, “privatizing” is a good deal at first, however what we have seen, is once a private company takes over, new resources and materials are rarely purchased. My friend loves her raises which are based on her work, rather than a 3-year union negotiated contract, but in the end the customers lose.
>^..^<
Get what you pay for
I seriously wonder if it is just a situation of getting what you pay for. If budgets don’t increase to cover increased costs, the difference has to be made up somewhere. My local library, Henderson District Public Library, has been cutting back hours hard so that it can stay open and operate. It may not be the best service but it may be the only possibility outside shutting down.
If libraries were of sufficient importance to the local residents, a levy vote could be pursued. If the people were fired up enough, maybe the odds of passage could at least exist rather than not at all. Lacking the will to pursue such options may be indicative of a shift in the place of a library in US culture. While privatization is not the best of choices, for funders it is sometimes the least risky option available in a climate full of risk.
Would anybody advocate outright closure instead of privatization if new tax levies were not pursued?
________________________
Stephen Michael Kellat, Host, LISTen
PGP KeyID: 899C131F
Catch-22
If we keep them open through private enterprises eventually local municipalities lose an amount of control over their library. Eventually more and more things that probably should not be will be handled by paraprofessionals without much say or oversight in the matter. Also, if things in the community do improve the library will be automatically praised as a “success” of privatization whether or not the privatization actually helped.
Shutting libraries down completely isn’t a good option, but at least it gets attention that the DVDs and storytimes are not as free as people think. Why not just do something far more sane and put library funding in the hands of the community via ballot initiative rather then leave it up to a city hall who often is paid enough to buy their own damn materials but who want to look “fiscally conservative?” Sure, we’re had funding issues that way in Washington state, but overall we can self-correct if need be and local communities maintain overall control.
Most public libraries
Do not have budgets proportional to the percent of government employees they have working for them, or the number of government facilities that they run. Library divisions, especially those in large area, or rapidly growing areas, often have as much as ten percent of the government staff working for them, and often have as many as ten percent of the buildings owned or rented by the government in charge of them, yet they rarely get anything close to ten percent of the total government budget to run them. More often than not, they get less than one percent of the government budget to run them. Yet library directors often run into political stone walls when they try to separate off a “library taxing district” to create a dedicated property tax that is completely controlled by the library and a library board, because more often than not, libraries that have such separate taxing districts end up with more money to run those facilities than they get from the government directly.
In Hawaii, which tried the privatization method, a very costly lesson was learned by the taxpayers when the state library system terminated the contracts that allowed private contractors to even do as little as collection development for their library system.
What occurs in places where the libraries are privatized is many sources of revenue that traditionally go back into the government coffers ends up going to the private sector. Books that are leased by the libraries when they are on best seller lists get pulled out of those libraries as soon as they fall off the lists and are then sold at a dollar a pop by the contractors, putting money into the contractors profits, rather than BACK into the library budget. Books sale money goes the same route. Even public library FINES are lost as a source of government revenues and are taken by the contractor as part of these deals. Another example of what has occured in past privatizations.
Since money raised by public libraries usually must go back into the general fund for government, as privatization takes hold, government revenues see a drop.
The answer, as with Social Security, is a direct, dedicated tax that the library and librians have to lobby to get increased as necessary, which to be honest has never been often, because as population grows, property tax dollars grow the dollars amount to support library growth also grows. Separate off the money to run libraries in a dedicated tax. The public not only will then be able to directly say yes or no to cuts or increases to library budgets, but to directly influence policies in this way.
As it stands, library budgets more often than not are used as a means to keep campaign promises to “lower taxes”
The places that have privatized libraries have basically been a dismal failure. As with most right wing ideas, the idea that drives privatization is follows the typical right wing shallow mindset.
The net result of privatization of libraries as well as other services that government privatizes (like land fills) is a diminishing of services by every quantitative and qualitative measure. These ideas are more designed to create self fulfilling prophecies. That is, as the quality of service drops, and the anount of available materials drops due to the need for the private businesses to make a profit, use drops off, and the suggestion that no one uses the libraries anyway becomes true, because when the private sector takes over, the public input into collection development, and other library services vanishes, as the agency is no longer really accountable to the public at all, but to a private business, that makes its own decisions as to what is most profitable, not what is wanted by 49.9 percent of the library users.
Privatized libraries end up being a large collection of best seller novels ,and little else.
What has happened in places that have privatized. None of the promises made by the private companies were kept, Or rather, larger and larger chunks of the flat fees paid to the private companies went to the profit end of the privatization equation, and less and less went toward the service end. That is to say, price gouging enters the system through privatization.
The companies purchase ANY cheap books they can get their hands on (usually remainders bought by weight, or even private college collections of ancient and useless science or medical books from the late 19th century at a dollar per volume), virtually no recent or updated reference materials, even BASIC reference materials like current encyclopedias (privatizers purchase older and very outdated encyclopedia sets to simply create the illusion of full shelves).
Young adult and childrens services are usually ignored or of so much less quality that parents who are patrons at such libraries simply stop using the libraries.
No consideration is given to minority materials or foreign language materials to suit the needs of local ethnic minorities at all, even when those groups are not even minorities. The experience in Hawaii was catastrophic, as the idea of creating collections for ethnic Hawaiians vanished with privatization in that state.
When the private sector is given the opportunity to control government services, the net result is usually a net loss, and because it takes years to change anything in government, the cumulative loss is usually large, requiring the local government eventually to “bail out” the private businesses or to completely take them over when the company finally bankrupts out of its service obligations. The result of having the private sector have too much control over what are basically government agencies has been seen lately in the AIG, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae debacle. The free market is clearly not only broken, but it never really worked well to begin with.
In many cities, the private sector vultures are rearing their ugly heads with regard to library services. They will of course, place their own interests in making a profit over the interests of the public that uses the libraries. Libraries become a clever method by which the private sector can suck money out of the government without having anyone actually understand where the money is disappearing to for a very long time. Private libraries are subject to very similar problems that large privately held bookstores are.
We have a rather good example of how poorly privatization of publically controlled or owned services performs in the ex Warsaw bloc.
Privatization of government assets has yielded a rather poor set of results in the ex Soviet bloc. That is to say, the true owners of these assets, the public, did not see the slightes return for their ownership of the assets which were turned over to private interests.
And this is the rub. The private sector takes over providing services in building that they did not pay a red cent to build NOR pay a dime to rent. The major business expenses to start these agencies, the actual contruction of the libraries, has been paid for by the taxpayer, yet private businesses benefit by simply providing “SERVICES” with major aspects of what are traditional business expenses, brick and mortar location, storage, computer equipment and other office expenses being paid for by the taxpayer as well.
Since neither the public, nor elected officials actually understand what is involved in actually running a library as a “not for profit” institution, for profit businesses simply utilize “quantification” to show an increase in book purchases, etc, without regard to qualitative matters (that is, what percentage of the materials they purchase actually are used or circulate) The private sector is then allowed to create its own criteria for judging sucess and the one allowed to be used by libraries in the past, circulation of materials, is given second place.
Alrighty
It is probably important to remember that the Northern Alabama Space Agency, NASA, uses contractors heavily. Somehow the US space agency has survived both Republicans and Democrats insisting that they couldn’t hire any civil servants and had to contract out. The agency mainly is just a contracting and disbursing office today as things like even shuttle maintenance are handled by contractors.
You’re painting with a broad brush here. Are there ways contracts could be let so that things could be operated in an appropriate fashion? Is there any hope?
________________________
Stephen Michael Kellat, Host, LISTen
PGP KeyID: 899C131F
Sure, there is hope, but
Sure, there is hope, but clinging to that hope is ridiculous. If it normally works poorly and we do not have a brilliant idea on how to fix the system then we should not be doing it.
Contracts are malleable
Could a model contract or guidance to municipalities be issued to help solve those issues, though? Isn’t that something the ALA could actually provide leadership on? If memory serves, model contracts are out there for municipalities on all sorts of things but library services is one of the gaps.
________________________
Stephen Michael Kellat, Host, LISTen
PGP KeyID: 899C131F
Northern Alabama Space Agency???
I think you are referring to NASA– the National Aeronautics and Space Administration–right, Stephen?
Ah, somebody noticed
Such remains a euphemism within the agency for the disproportionate concentration of resources, funding, and staff at Marshall Space Flight Center in Northern Alabama to the exclusion of all other facilities. Too many programs got killed because they didn’t benefit Northern Alabama through being based at Marshall. Particularly amusing was the incident where the local member of Congress representing the area around Marshall said he wanted to tear Glenn’s microgravity drop tower out and move it to Alabama. Mind you, the drop tower is sunk 535 feet into the ground but that wasn’t about to stop him.
________________________
Stephen Michael Kellat, Host, LISTen
PGP KeyID: 899C131F
False assumptions
Reading through the comments from the story it is apparent that many are operating on the assumption that you get more for the same cost when you privatize government services. From what I have seen that is false for a couple of reasons:
1) There will need to be government staff to administer the program
2) Commercial entities can charge the government more than they can another private company due to lack of competition
So ultimately what happens is that you save money on the books but get far less in return.
Yes
For all the assertions made by conservatives that the private sector somehow performs better than government, there is little proof that this is in fact the case. around the world, there is in fact evidence to the contrary. Such as the Catholic Church in Ireland turning over its schools to the Irish Government because they found that the government could run the schools more efficiently and at a lower cost.
The French, whose civil service makes up a third of its entire labor force and GDP, and France in many years outperforms the United State when it comes to hourly productivity. More often France equals the U.S. in hourly productivity and the rest of the time is within a percent or two of U.S. productivity.
There is a great deal of evidence that the government almost ALWAYS outperforms the private sector, particularly if one takes into consideration the size of the operations that the government is engaged in. The evidence is that the private sector would actually perform very poorly if they were required to run any business or agency of similar size and scope as most government agencies.
In fact, the concept that some private businesses have gotten too large for the government to allow them to fail is more than ample proof that the private sector and the entire ideology that lies behind it has size limitations, considering how many large financial businesses collapsed because they simply were too inept to perform at the scales they were operating at. They got too large to funtion. If the largest government operation, the military was run by the private sector, the same way that AIG or Lehman Brothers were run, a few kids with spitballs could defeat the U.S. military.