Regents Commission on Library Services
Minutes
New York State Library
July 14, 1999
Attendance
Co-chair: Abby S. Milstein
Co-vice chairs: Paul W. Crumlish, Martín Gómez
Members: Sandra Kennedy Bright, Monroe Fordham, John Hammond, William L. Jefferson, Sara Kelly Johns, Gail Johnstone, Edward McCormick, Gerald Nichols, Janet Steiner, Betty J. Turock, Sarah E. Thomas
Ex officio members: James S. Dawson, Carole F. Huxley, Janet M. Welch
Staff: Jean Hargrave, Carol Linn
Facilitator: Donna Meixner
Recorder: Patti Chandler
Observers: Richard Cate, Marian Crounse, Carol Desch, Mara Elliott, James Farrell, Dottie Hiebing, MaryElizabeth Jones, Susan Keitel, Liz Lane, Barbara Lilley, Pat Mallon, Maureen O'Connor, Fran Roscello, David Smingler, Patricia Webster, Nancy Zimmerman
Greetings
Abby Milstein opened the meeting at 9:00 am.
Library Systems
To begin a discussion of library systems, Janet Welch provided some background on the characteristics of the three types of library systems in New York State: the 23 public library systems, the 9 reference and research library resources systems and the 42 school library systems.
The purpose of library systems is to link libraries and to provide services that are higher in quality and more cost-effective than could be provided by individual libraries. Library systems are chartered by the Board of Regents and funded by New York State. Annually, about $70 million goes to public library systems and about $7 million go to both school library systems and the reference and research library resources systems. The Board of Regents, through the New York State Library, is responsible for administering system funding and regulating system services.
Typical system services include resource sharing, interlibrary loan, initiatives to expand access to collections, consulting, and continuing education. Law and regulation provide some consistency among systems, but there is flexibility to create programs that meet local needs. This flexibility allows creative solutions to meet local needs, but can also result in wide variations in services across the State. Issues for consideration by the Commission include system structure and leadership.
Mr. Nichols said that although there is some duplication of services, the benefits of the systems, as they exist now, outweigh the problems. Ms. Milstein said that any bureaucratic structure needs periodic review to evaluate its efficiency. Ms. Turock said we need to look at what we want systems to do in the future and evaluate how future services will fit with existing system structures. Some library services of the future may have no space-related significance and may be most efficiently administered centrally.
Ms. Steiner said that testimony at hearings from members and directors spoke to the value of systems. Although there may be some problems that should be addressed, nothing will be gained in restructuring systems. Mr. Nichols suggested that systems might improve and achieve greater consistency in their services by working more closely with the State Library and acting as agents of the State Library in delivering services. He said that systems may feel that they have two sets of "bosses": the State and local officials.
Ms. Milstein suggested that the systems be included in recommendations about standards. Mr. Gómez asked how the Commission can engage system leaders in the work of the Commission. Mr. Hammond replied that systems are already involved. System leaders submitted testimony at Commission hearings and have indicated that they are willing to work with the Commission.
Mr. Gómez asked for suggestions about how additional cooperation and partnership between and among systems might be promoted. Mr. Nichols suggested incentives for mergers and cooperative services. Mr. Nichols said that if systems are given a role, direction and support, they will be effective agents for change. If funding doesn't accompany new rules, implementing changes will be a problem. Regent Dawson said that he hoped the Commission will develop proposals that will bring new money to systems. In order to get additional funding, systems must demonstrate they will do more.
Focus on library users
Ms. Thomas suggested that all recommendations focus on New Yorkers and their needs. This is compatible with the Commission's charge to provide access to quality library service for every New Yorker.
Public libraries coterminous with school district boundaries:
Regent Dawson said the advantage of linking public library service areas to school district boundaries is that school districts cover every square inch of New York, but this is also true of municipalities. He asked for a discussion about why the school districts model should be used instead of municipal boundaries.
Mr. Nichols said that libraries are educational institutions and it makes sense to use the same structure used by public schools in New York State. In addition, the school district public library model is very successful in achieving adequate funding for libraries. It allows for direct community involvement through a public vote. The municipal model does not call for a public vote. State aid for school districts is based on wealth and this method could be adapted to state aid for libraries. Ms. Steiner said that this model could lead to better cooperation between public and school libraries. Mr. Farrell said there would be overlaps if municipal boundaries were used.
Regent Dawson observed that we need data from Library Development to determine if library budgets do increase when this model is adopted. Mr. Crumlish said the decision to adopt this model should be made on the local level. We can provide assistance, information and incentives to encourage public libraries to make this change. Also, there will be flexibility--a library can adopt the qualities of a school district public library even though it has not formally adopted that structure. Mr. Hammond said the recommendation should not be a mandate. Libraries should be encouraged to move to this structure through incentives.
Who would object to this recommendation? Municipalities may object because of perceived loss of control. Some may misinterpret it to mean that small rural libraries may be eliminated. Another negative is the enormous amount of restructuring that will have to be done with existing libraries. Ms. Elliott said that a fiscal mandate would be imposed on communities that do not currently have library services. People who are not currently taxed for services will be taxed if this structure is in place. Trustees who are now appointed may object to a public vote for trustees.
Mr. Farrell said that NYSALB (New York State Association of Library Boards) can help to implement this change. He recommended forging partnerships with groups like NYSALB and the Association of Towns and the Conference of Mayors to get their help in implementing recommendations.
The membership agreed that this idea should be developed further. Ms. Milstein will report to the Regents tomorrow that the Commission is moving in this direction.
Statewide E-Library Card and Virtual Library
Ms. Milstein said that the idea of a statewide card would be a popular recommendation. Strong preference for this idea was shown in the results of the statewide telephone survey. The proposal to create a virtual library of New York State will continue the digitization of library materials that has already begun and expand on a core of shared databases, building on the model of Empirelink. Mr. Hammond agreed that this is a strategic way to move toward universal service. He suggests a two-phase implementation. Phase 1 could provide virtual access from homes and other locations, in-house use of all collections and might also include interlibrary loan requests from homes and offices. Phase 2 could be direct borrowing from other collections.
Ms. Johnstone said we could move toward making an ever-greater pool of digital resources, which would be advantageous to New Yorkers and individual libraries as well. Ms. Johns said it would be very important to define what the statewide borrower's card would provide and include detailed instructions for its use. Ms. Elliott said that the recommendation about digitizing collections could have an important impact on education for grades K-12. The idea that these digitized resources, including primary resources, can enhance school curriculum is very appealing
Mr. Crumlish suggested that technology makes it possible to use a card to track net lenders. It would be possible to find out which libraries had been used by persons outside their area and to factor this into the state aid formula for libraries. Reimbursement to public libraries could be made for those who lend more than their users borrow from other libraries. It was agreed that implementation of phase 2 would require a method to reimburse net lenders.
Ms. Steiner suggested that the statewide borrower's card presents an opportunity for improved library marketing. By offering the public a virtual card, we would have a tremendous opportunity to promote services that already exist, like interlibrary loan and EmpireLink.
Ms. Turock said that when Ms. Milstein presents this idea to the Regents tomorrow, the focus should be on what it will become. It has a futuristic appeal as well as a current appeal. Ms. Welch said tomorrow we need to deliver a message, but we don't need a complete package. We want to inform the Regents about ideas that are under discussion and development. Mr. Crumlish said that our presentation to the Regents might include these three key ideas to let them know the direction in which the Commission is moving: 1) public libraries coterminous with school district boundaries, 2) school library media specialist in every school and 3) statewide borrowing (E-Library) card.
Role of State Education Department
Richard Cate, the State Education Department Chief Operating Officer, spoke with the Commission about the Department's priorities, the role of the Governor's office and the Regents budget process.
Recommendations
The group looked at the organization of the recommendations. Mr. Gómez and Mr. Crumlish suggested that the recommendations be reorganized to fall into the following three categories: Library Service for All New Yorkers; Partners in Education; and Quality of Library Services. Mr. Gomez suggested forming a group that would focus on efficient and effective library services. He suggested that this group consider recommendations on best practices, standards, credentials, accountability and state, local and SED leadership on these issues. Members agreed.
Shared Storage
In discussing recommendation #3 (adequate facilities for 21st century library services), it was agreed to incorporate a statement about a "shared storage facility".
Access to collections
In discussing recommendation #7 (ensuring that all residents should have access to all collections), Ms. Thomas said our goal should be to build collections and share freely. There are two issues: access and a delivery system. Mr. Crumlish said that incentives could be used to promote access and sharing of collections. It was agreed that this recommendation should stand alone.
Partners in Education
In discussing recommendation #9 (certified School Library Media Specialists in every public school building), Mr. Gómez said some parts of recommendations #10, #11 and #13 might be merged with this to include recommendations about information literacy, new librarians and library school curriculum. It was agreed that these recommendations will be reviewed to eliminate jargon and redundancy.
Center for the Book
It was decided to leave the item about the Center for the Book with the recommendation about "stronger ties with education" rather than moving it to the recommendation on advocacy.
Library Education
In discussing recommendation 13 (support and continue to enhance the expertise of a highly skilled workforce to meet the needs of all new Yorkers), Mr. Gómez suggesting combining the items about scholarships to focus on increasing cultural diversity within the profession. There was agreement that there is a need for more diversity in the profession and that training about recruiting minority students should also be part of the program. Mr. McCormick said the solution lies in education and staff-training, rather than scholarships. It was agreed to keep the two scholarship programs separate, with one program specifically targeted to minority students. Regent Dawson discouraged the group from proposing a "Regents Scholarship" because the Regents have no funding.
There was a discussion of continuing certification requirements for librarians and incentives to attend continuing education programs.
Advocacy
Mr. Gómez said that the recommendation on funding (recommendation 12) has been revised to focus on advocacy. A statewide advocacy program will be important to achieve the implementation of the Commission's recommendations. The advocacy program should include connections with all possible partners, such as professional organizations and grantmakers. The Regents and the State Library need to be effective advocates for the libraries of the State. The State Library needs a mechanism to make stronger connections and create external partnerships for fundraising and support.
Recommendation #14 (the role of the State Library) will be expanded to include the State Education Department, with more emphasis on EMSC (Elementary, Middle, Secondary and Continuing) and the Research Library. The Commission needs to look at staffing issues and the roles of the State Library and EMSC.
Next Steps
Ms. Milstein proposes that we continue with the task force system we have in place and start to create a web of adhoc committees. The task forces will be retained and the task force leaders will make specific assignments to move forward the work of the Commission. Ms. Milstein will report on the Commission's progress to the Regents Cultural Education Committee tomorrow, July 15, 1999.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:55.