Regents Commission on Library Services
Two-day meeting, May 10-11, 2000
Andrew Heiskell Library for the Blind and Physically Handicapped
May 10, 1:00 – 5:00 p.m.
Attendance: May 10
Commission members: Abby S. Milstein, Co-chair; Martín Gómez, Co-vice chair; Betty J. Turock, Sara Kelly Johns, John Hammond, Janet Steiner, Gerald Nichols, Harry M. Rosenfeld, Sandra Kennedy Bright
Ex officio members: Janet M. Welch, Carole F. Huxley
Staff: Jean Hargrave, Carol Linn, Patty Case
Observers: Carol Desch, Anne Simon, Nancy Zimmerman, Jim Farrell, Fran Roscello, Carol Kroll, Scott Hughes, Joe Mattie, Anne Hofmann
Recorder: Patti Chandler
Greetings
Co-vice chair Martín Gómez opened the meeting at 1:00 p.m. Mr. Gomez said that we will work quickly to complete our recommendations so that they can be presented in final form to the Board of Regents on July 13. Mr. Gómez discussed the value of the second round of hearings and thanked all who contributed to their success. The Commission also conducted meetings with directors of the three types of library systems and central libraries to discuss the role of systems and central libraries in the recommendations. There are additional meetings scheduled for May 24 and May 30 to discuss advocacy and education of the library workforce.
Implementation Costs
Mr. Hammond said he thought we had a responsibility to assign implementation costs to our proposals. Ms. Welch responded that, at Ms. Milstein’s request, she has obtained cost estimates for implementing the recommendations. Ms. Welch said that Regent Dawson had recommended that the Commission not include specific cost figures in the report. He suggested that cost figures be compiled in a separate document for use when responding to specific questions. The Commission report will be used as a long-range plan to guide policy-making. Cost figures will change over time and he is concerned that they may divert attention from important policy recommendations.
Ms. Huxley said that she would like the Regents to focus on the proposed policies and decide whether they will be strong advocates for them. We need to start by letting the Regents know what our recommendations are and what their benefit will be to the people of New York. Ms. Welch said that the figures, as provided to her by the staff of the New York State Library, will be shared with Commission members at the next meeting on May 31. There was no agreement on whether cost figures will appear as part of the report.
Library Systems
Five meetings were held in April and May to focus on issues regarding library systems and central libraries and to discuss the role of library systems and central libraries in implementing the Commission’s proposals. Mr. Hammond, Mr. Nichols and Ms. Bright led the discussion at these meetings. Mr. Nichols reported that the meetings provided useful discussions on critical issues surrounding systems. Mr. Gomez said he heard two main points regarding systems: funding issues and performance standards. Ms. Steiner said we need to be clear about the financial needs of systems and what services systems will provide. Mr. Rosenfeld said that, in asking for additional money, we must use persuasive and compelling arguments. We must identify clearly what the problems are. Mr. Nichols agreed and suggested that the Commission report should also convey this need and urgency. He suggested as the report’s title A State of Crisis: New York’s Libraries in the 21st Century.
Mr. Gómez said that the recommendation on systems needs to be reworked or subsumed under the EXCELS proposal. Ms. Turock recommended that more emphasis be placed on services and benefits to the people of New York. It was suggested that the system recommendation be integrated with the EXCELS recommendation, resulting in a stronger recommendation that emphasizes quality service to all. Mr. Hammond, Mr. Nichols and Ms. Kroll will redraft and combine these two recommendations by May 19.
Public Library Districts
Mr. Nichols said that this proposal can not succeed without strong support from the Board of Regents, the Legislature, the Governor and the New York State Library. The State Library needs to be strengthened so that it can provide leadership and assistance with implementation.
Ms. Welch said that the report would be strengthened if we could include documentation to show that libraries complying with this model are receive a higher level of support. Mr. Rosenfeld said we should stress that this new method will provide all citizens of New York with library services of a certain quality. Public officials need to be aware that a large number of citizens have inadequate library services.
Ms. Milstein raised the question of whether the report should mention the Commissioner’s regulation 90.3 on free direct access. The proposal about public library districts is directly related to this regulation.
The time frame to have compliance with the public library district model was discussed. Ms. Welch said that it would take time to phase in this plan. She expects that the problem of unserved areas can be greatly reduced, but not eliminated, within three to five of starting to implement this program. Ms. Welch pointed out that Commissioner Mills is very supportive of this proposal. Mr. Nichols will rewrite the proposal to reflect the suggested changes.
Urban Libraries
Mr. Gómez said that there are questions that need to be addressed regarding the definition and needs of urban libraries and urban centers. People reacting to this proposal have suggested the need for a rural and suburban counterpart. There are new Americans in rural areas, suburbs and small cities. Mr. Gómez suggested that technical expertise and collections for providing service to diverse populations acquired in large urban libraries could be shared with libraries in areas throughout the State. Programs and collections originally intended for urban areas could be replicated in outreach programs wherever needed.
Ms. Steiner said this recommendation would work better as a statewide proposal to generally address the needs of a multicultural society. Mr. Nichols said it was appropriate to recognize the special role of urban libraries in dealing with diverse populations. Ms. Bright suggested adding school libraries serving urban or diverse populations as a strategy for reaching parents who are new Americans.
EXCELS
Mr. Gómez turned the discussion to recommendation #4 regarding incentives for excellence. EXCELS deals with standards and measures and seeks to promote quality library services. The State Library should work with local libraries and library systems to identify appropriate plans that will address the needs of individual communities. By a group vote, it was agreed not to make compliance with the public library district model a criteria for participation in the EXCELS program.
Mr. Gómez said that the State would provide aid to allow a local library to get to a basic level of support, proposed at $20 per capita. Mr. Gómez said that once a library reached the $20 level, that aid would end and the library would then qualify for aid through the EXCELS program.. Mr. Nichols questioned the $20 figure since many poor communities tax themselves at a higher rate. Ms. Welch said the $20 figure was based on a study conducted for the Commission by Dr. James Chapin that supports using the $20 per capita as a minimum acceptable level of funding for local libraries. Dr. Chapin’s research showed that an increase to $20 per capita support brought dramatic increases in circulation. Beyond $20 per capita, the increases continued, but at a much lower rate. Ms. Steiner said we should keep the $20 level in as a measure for libraries. The group agreed to retain the $20 per capita as a suggested minimal level of funding and to add a need-based factor to the state aid funding to help libraries reach the $20 level.
The group agreed to follow a suggestion made by Ms. Johns to delete or change the two sentences on page 11.
Mr. Hammond said there are many questions to address regarding EXCELS, including what criteria will be used to qualify for aid. Mrs. Huxley said that the Board of Regents have expressed a preference to link accountability to state aid. We may have "report cards" for libraries similar to those used to rate the effectiveness of schools.
Ms. Milstein said that the Commission will not formulate standards, but we can suggest a mechanism for arriving at standards. The group voted to recommend that the Board of Regents create a task force to articulate meaningful standards for all types of libraries, library systems and librarians in New York State.
Education of the Library Workforce
Ms. Turock reported on the meeting that will take place on May 30 to discuss education of the library workforce for the 21st century. Ms. Turock has invited the deans (or their representatives) from the 7 graduate schools of library education in New York State. She has also invited Dr. Gerald Patton, Deputy Commissioner for Higher Education, State Education Department. In addition, there will be representatives from NYLA, the three types of library systems, and the New York State Library Assistants’ Association.
Areas that impact on library education include access, quality, technology, diversity, continuing education and education for leadership in library information services and beyond. Ms. Turock will submit a recommendation by May 19 to be included in the next revision of the Commission’s report. The group at the May 30 meeting will react to the recommendation and advise the Commission regarding what issues they want to address regarding library education. Distance education will be discussed as a mechanism for providing access to education for the library workforce at all levels.
Ms. Huxley said that the Office of Higher Education in the State Education Department deals with issues of distance education and noted that the Deputy Commissioner for Higher Education was among those invited. The Division of Public Broadcasting in SED is also a potential partner.
Mr. Gómez raised the issue of school library media specialists and the possibility of an accelerated program to speed the process of obtaining credentials. Ms. Steiner suggested continuing education as a topic for discussion at the May 30 meeting. Ms. Bright suggested discussing an accelerated program that could become credentialed on a teacher-assigned basis. Ms. Turock agreed to include these items in the May 30 discussion.
The meeting was adjourned on May 10 at 5:00 p.m. The two-day meeting will continue on May 11 at 9:30.
Regents Commission on Library Services
Two-day meeting, May 10-11, 2000
Andrew Heiskell Library for the Blind and Physically Handicapped
May 11, 9:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.
Attendance: May 11
Commission members: Abby S. Milstein, Co-chair; Frank Macchiarola, Co-chair; Martín Gómez, Co-vice chair; Betty J. Turock, Sara Kelly Johns, John Hammond, Janet Steiner, Harry M. Rosenfeld, Sandra Kennedy Bright, Monroe Fordham, Gail Johnstone
Ex officio members: Janet M. Welch, Carole F. Huxley
Commission Staff: Jean Hargrave, Carol Linn, Patty Case
Observers: Carol Desch, Anne Simon, Nancy Zimmerman, Jim Farrell, Fran Roscello, Carol Kroll, Scott Hughes, Joe Mattie, Anne Hofmann, Wendy Galgan, Pat Webster
Recorder: Patti Chandler
Ms. Milstein called the meeting to order at 9:30.
Education of the Library Workforce
Ms. Turock distributed a report regarding the meeting on education of the library workforce that will take place on May 30. Ms. Milstein suggests we use this meeting to focus on how education of the library workforce can further the goals of the Commission and not as a global study of library education. Ms. Turock said that participants will be given the Commission's draft to help them develop ideas on the role of education of the library workforce in implementing the recommendations. Ms. Steiner suggested review of a report on library education from a NYLA institute held in 1990 to discuss issues of recruitment, education and certification strategies prior to the meeting.
NOVEL
Ms. Welch reported that the newest version of the NOVEL proposal has more detail than the earlier drafts. It includes information of EmpireCat, the proposed statewide catalog, and a statewide delivery system for library materials. It also includes text on consumer health information.
Mr. Gómez suggested that promoting connectivity for all libraries is a public responsibility and that the Board of Regents should provide oversight to ensure that public libraries and public schools are connected. Mr. Hammond said that there has been considerable investment in the infrastructure for schools. Mr. Gómez suggested that the Regents initiate a study of how public schools in the state are wired. Mr. Gómez will develop these ideas and strengthen the language regarding connectivity for the report. Ms. Johns said Internet connections in schools are not always in the school library media center. Ms. Bright said that there is no central coordination for wiring New York City schools.
Ms. Steiner asked why corporate libraries (in profit-making organizations) are excluded from NOVEL. Mrs. Welch said this is not a policy, but it may be a practical consideration based on funding and how database vendors want to do business. Based on our experience with EmpireLink, a three-year pilot project funded with Federal money, some database vendors exclude corporate libraries from statewide contracts and, in other cases, their inclusion is very costly. This could change, however, and the NOVEL proposal shouldn't exclude libraries in profit-making organizations. It should provide general information about the type of databases that are needed. Including libraries from profit-making organizations could be promoted as an economic development initiative.
School Library Media Centers
Ms. Johns distributed information regarding the positive impact of certified school library media specialists on test scores. Ms. Johns said that there was considerable testimony promoting the idea that there should be a recommendation to mandate school library media specialists in elementary schools. (This mandate already exists for middle and secondary schools.) The group was in agreement that this would result in stronger school library programs and benefits for students, but there was controversy over whether the Commission should recommend a mandate. It was pointed out that the Commission had purposely avoided recommending mandates in any other proposals and had also avoided any personnel-specific proposals. In this instance, the existing proposal, as crafted by Deputy Commissioner Kadamus, will allocate state aid for the purpose of hiring school library media specialists and otherwise strengthening the school library media center program. Mrs. Welch suggested that we strengthen the language in this recommendation to make clear the goals of the Commission without recommending a mandate.
Mr. Rosenfeld said that we need to make available facilities and instruction to a whole range of the population that might be denied access to technologies that are available to the rest of us. He suggested we construct a strong statement without using the word mandate. Ms. Steiner suggested including a statement in the report that would say the Commission could not agree on whether to recommend a mandate. Mr. Macchiarola said that such as statement would weaken the report. Ms. Johnstone said that this recommendation should written to convey to school board members an understanding of the strength of our recommendation. Ms. Johns suggested that we say that the Regents Commission believes a strong school library media program requires a certified professional.
Ms. Milstein said our position is expressed in the first paragraph. The first line says. "The Regents Commission believes that every school in New York State should have an effective school library media program staffed by a certified school library media specialist." Commission members voted to retain the first paragraph as it is and not to recommend a mandate.
The group discussed whether the item relating to public libraries in partnership with school libraries belonged in this recommendation. It was agreed to add it to the EXCEL recommendation instead of including it here.
Literacy and Information Literacy
Mr. Gómez said we need to make a stronger case for why libraries have a role in literacy and information literacy. We need to clarify the difference between basic literacy and information literacy. Ms. Steiner said that the role of the library professional is not clear – libraries are not doing these things, but librarians are. Ms. Linn said it is not always the library professional. Sometimes library assistants or teachers perform these roles. The group agreed to incorporate Mr. Gómez’s suggestions with the existing recommendation.
Construction
Ms. Welch said a Regents proposal on public library construction, currently pending in the Legislature, would add $90 million over the next 5 years and then $10 million per year on-going to the $800,000 per year that now goes to construction. A matching grant program would spur local contributions. Ms. Milstein asked if we agreed that matching grants should provide 50% of construction project costs. Mrs. Welch said there was some discussion in testimony that this be moved to 75%. Ms. Welch said the construction money is currently distributed to public library systems on a formula basis and then to libraries within the system. It is competitive with the system board determining who gets the grants. In some part, any new funding for construction will be needs-based.
Commissioner Mills
Commissioner Mills arrived at 11:40. The Commissioner thanked the Commission for their dedication and hard work. He said that he and the Regents were enthusiastic about the drafts the Commission has done. Several of the Commission’s ideas have already gone forth as Regents initiatives. Deputy Commissioner Kadamus seized the opportunity to include a piece for strengthening school library media centers in this year’s state aid proposal.
Our challenge is to overcome the view of legislators that small investments in local libraries are sufficient. The Commission has a rare opportunity to affect library policy in the State. Ms. Steiner asked the Commissioner’s advice about including implementation costs in the report. The Commissioner advised that we should avoid anything that would date the report. The report will have a long-term impact and finances will change. We don’t want people to reject these proposals based on their cost.
Mr. Hammond said that the Regents, in the past, have not asked the Legislature for enough money for library programs. New York has fallen behind other states in providing library service. The Commissioner said the Regents have become data and policy driven. Data to show what other states are doing can be used effectively. We need to use stories, pictures and data to explain the importance of libraries and their benefits to New Yorkers.
Mr. Hammond said that there is frustration in the library community because of the disproportionate amount of money allocated for public schools compared to the small amount allocated for libraries. Commissioner Mills said we need to create a partnership with the school community and others. School reform is built on the work of previous generations. While the library community has worked hard, it has not had national and state attention. The work of the Commission is laying a foundation for important improvements for library service in the future.
Ms. Turock said that, in the last five years, libraries have realized success at the national level acting through coalitions. She recommended that the State Education Department form partnerships with the New York Library Association (NYLA) and others. Commissioner Mills advised that we talk to potential partners about the Commission report and invite the Regents and legislators to meetings and to libraries. Ms. Huxley said that we have to educate legislators about what libraries can do for the people of New York now and in the future
Mr. Gómez said the Commission is interested in knowing the status of connectivity in schools and school libraries in the State. Commissioner Mills said that many school libraries do not have Internet access. Mr. Gómez asked if the Regents are monitoring the situation regarding technology infrastructure in the State. Commissioner Mills said that the Regents are not doing this other than monitoring the use of E-rate. Mr. Gómez suggested we put something in NOVEL to set this in motion.
Commissioner Mills said that is a new level of awareness of the increasing diversity in New York City and many other communities in the State. New Americans are hungry for knowledge and skills. There is also a demand for change in schools, new library construction money and a focus on higher education.
Ms. Milstein said we are doing our best to finalize the report. Advocacy work will continue after the work of the Commission is completed. Ms. Milstein said the hearings were useful in making new connections. Commissioner Mills said there is a network of audiences that need to communicate about these issues. We need to have meetings and make full use of the press and publicity channels available to us.
After Commissioner Mills left, the group broke for lunch.
Research Libraries
Mr. Hammond provided a new draft recommendation on research, academic and special libraries based on information from the last round of hearings. Preservation, conservation and digitization of library materials will be worked into this recommendation. It will also deal with issues of access, coordination and collection development as they affect research, academic and special libraries. The research library component of the State Library can also be included in this recommendation. The group voted in favor of combining preservation and the State Research Library into a new recommendation that will focus on research, academic and special libraries.
Advocacy and Library Leadership
Ms. Milstein proposes that the recommendations on advocacy and State Library leadership be combined. Ms. Turock agreed, saying that advocacy has a home in the State Library. Mrs. Welch said there might be strength to have them joined and show connections, but they should be two distinct parts of the recommendation. Mr. Hammond questioned if the State Education Department should be perceived as playing such a major role in advocacy. Ms. Turock said they would do so in cooperation with other groups.
Mrs. Welch reminded the group that the role of the State Library in advocacy would be discussed on May 24 when a focus group would meet to discuss advocacy issues.
Mr. Macchiarola said we should say there should be statewide advocacy program and list goals for the program. A program should be developed in partnership with a list of partners without a hierarchical structure. Ms. Milstein asked for a vote on combining the recommendations on advocacy and state library leadership incorporating that suggestion. The group voted in favor of combining them.
Ten Recommendations
The group decided on ten recommendations. They are:
Title for the Report
Ms. Milstein asked anyone who has an idea for the title of the report to let Ms. Hargrave or Ms. Welch know by May 19. We will discuss the title at the next meeting.
Implementation Costs
Ms. Milstein moved the discussion to cost figures. Ms. Welch said we need to focus on development of more accurate cost figures. We need to decide if costs will be integrated into the report or as suggested a second item. Secondly, we need to decide if we want numbers that reflect the overall need and the costs at various levels of government.
Ms. Johnstone said that we need to know what the cost is to do these things and what the statewide component will be. Mrs. Welch asked if what is wanted is total cost on the State and also the local level. Mr. Macchiarola said billions will be needed. We should indicate the largest number possible. It also depends on how long implementation will take. He suggested putting cost figures in an appendix. Ms. Johnstone said that we may have a different suggestion about placement of cost figures once we see the document. Mr. Macchiarola said that we should look at all components and cost them out. Ms. Turock agrees but said that in 10-20 years, these figures will make our proposal obsolete. Ms. Steiner said the Commissioner mentioned a five-year time frame. Mrs. Welch said some of these things may not be achievable in 5 years. Should we compress them into a 5-year figure? Ms. Welch said that we can project costs for five year intervals, but request funding year by year.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
6/9/00