Rochester Public Library, April 7, 2000
Brentwood Public Library,
April 13, 2000 Additional Comments submitted to the Commission |
I have not seen the entire draft of the Preliminary Statewide Policy Recommendations to the Board of Regents; nevertheless, I wish to comment on what appears to be a very significant oversight in Policy Recommendation 4.
This is the urgent need to create in the public library system funding formula an incentive for private and foundation giving. In a word, there should be a matching factor introduced into the formula that would provide additional 11mds up to some maximum to match private and/or foundation giving. This would stimulate local giving, reduce the State's obligation from what it might otherwise be, and get many people at the local level actively engaged in tangibly supporting what they clearly love.
Since the Reagan era, there has been a massive transfer of monetary resources (speaking in relative, rather than absolute terms) from the public to the private sector. The number of foundations has probably tripled or quadrupled. The amounts of wealth in private hands has grown to colossal proportions. There should be a way to stimulate giving from the private to the public library sector and make a reality of the private-public partnership concept.
I believe that Community Colleges, for example, have a state matching-private giving mechanism. So should we. It would not take the place of public funding, but it would augment it. Or, if you will, it would take the place of the massive federal funding public libraries once were able to receive from that source.
In our own benighted, rural Appalachian area, we have been able to secure in the last 20 years about 100 grants for the System and its larger Central Library, from regional foundations - grants whose value, I would quickly and dirtily estimate to be $5,000,000. Beyond that, fund-raising from individuals for the Central Library in that same time period has probably yielded $2,000,000. In an area, as poor as this one is, this is "real money." Beyond the cash, fund giving has tied thousands of people to us as loyal, interested participants in public library development. I suggested this public/private partnership concept to Congressman Houghton recently to get Coming Public Library re-opened and he not only liked the idea, he made sure it was incorporated in the strategy for reopening.
About three years ago, then-Regent Cooper and Johnson visited our System/Central Library facility, accompanied by Carole Huxley. All were intrigued by the number of plaques on the Library's walls recognizing the financial contributions of individuals, foundations, and businesses. I remember saying that I thought it would be a great idea of a new factor could be added to the State Aid formula for public libraries that would match private contributions in order to stimulate more of the latter. There seemed to be real interest in this notion on the part of the Regents and so I wrote the following to Mrs. Huxley:
We live in a time when the rate of growth of government is shrinking, whether or not government itself is shrinking. On the other side, private wealth is being amassed at unheard of levels. Clearly, if public libraries are to keep on a level with the times, are to remain able to afford the changes needed in order to stay abreast of new technologies, new media, new training, etc., additional funding is necessary. But if tax bases are shrinking and taxes can't be increased -- indeed are decreased to keep governments competitive in terms of attracting new business, a new or additional source of funding for various programs is indicated.
Public libraries, with their rich tradition of support from private sources (Carnegie and now Gates) would seem to be ideal institutions to tap into new private wealth that might be used for public purposes.
At present, the only factor in State Aid for public libraries that takes cognizance of local effort is for the purpose of stimulating or maintaining local or regional tax monies. There is no such recognition available for private/foundation/corporate support. Such support should not merely be invited, but "rewarded" by a State Aid factor that would leverage both the State and the private donors' contributions. A formula factor like this need cost the State little and might help unleash private giving. It would also help answer the question increasingly put to libraries when requesting local public funds: What are you doing to help yourself? I believe community colleges receive state money to match private money.
Foundations are multiplying like mushrooms after the rain. Public library systems should get on this train - a train that is moving.
Thank you for your attention.
*this may need to be moved to another location in the recommendations
My name is Lucretia McClure and I am a Trustee of the Rochester Regional Library Council. I am delighted to be here today and I want to speak in support of the Commission's Recommendation Four that provides impetus for the programs of the library systems in New York State. This recommendation speaks to the issue of access to library resources by all citizens, an issue that is one of the basic tenets of the Rochester Regional Library Council's program.
Perhaps I am the only person in this room who was around when the New York Library Councils were formed in 1967. I can speak from experience about the "before" and "after" of the library world. Before the Councils were organized, the 500 some libraries in the five counties surrounding Rochester acted independently. There were no networks, no connections. Each library went its own way, without knowledge of its neighbors or concern for their well being.
The establishment of the Councils changed that. The first premise of the RRLC was that to be a member a library had to agree to share. Even the smallest library was expected to share its resources-and resources were not limited to books and journals. Libraries could share the expertise of their staff members as well. For the first time, we had connections, we began to understand that we all had similar problems, that what we could not do alone, we could do as a unified group. The Council started with interlibrary loan for that was the most immediate need. It meant that even the smallest library in Wyoming County, the least populated of the Council's five counties, had access to the collections of the 500 libraries in this region.
The Council soon went on to develop continuing education programs, to build a union list of serials, to create a catalog of monographs, and when automation came to purchase and share databases. All of the resources of Council members and the programs and resources obtained by the Council were available. What a boon this was for the citizens of the region. The Council fostered partnerships and connections. Today we are a system of networks.
The second great strength of this Council is its lay Board of Trustees. All of the programs of the Council are filtered through the eyes of citizens who represent various segments of the community. The Council has committees, open to all librarians, that form the grass roots. From these committees come ideas and recommendations that come to the Advisory Committee, also made up of librarians. The Advisory Committee reviews the proposals against the goals and objectives of the Council and makes its recommendations to the Board. The Board looks at these proposals in light of the community and asks: "Does this program benefit the citizens in the region?"
I would also like to speak on behalf of health sciences libraries, including hospital libraries. Each individual is concerned about his or her own health and we are all interested in the quality of healthcare. The health sciences libraries have formed a partnership to strengthen its members, to share resources, and to foster the importance of libraries in the healthcare arena. Hospital libraries are being merged or closed and the concern of this group has been an important factor in stressing the value of libraries offering health information, not just to the health practitioner, but to the consumer and patient as well.
I do not believe any agency in New York State gets a better return for its dollar than the Library Councils. The Council Director has become an expert in stretching the dollar for the benefit of all. We need additional funds in order to expand the programs and services that we are presently providing. Experience has proved that we in this region can do it better and more efficiently by utilizing the Council as our coordinator. I urge the Commission to support the Councils so they may continue to provide the leadership as we move into another generation of technology.
New York has some of the finest libraries in the world. Each child and each adult learner should have the opportunity to utilize these great collections as well as to learn to use the digital resources.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak today. We are all encouraged by your concern for libraries and learning.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the draft report of the Regents Commission; the draft clearly reflects much hard work, and we commend the Commission for looking at the "big picture" as well as its commitment to libraries as physical places. We believe the report could be even further improved with the following:
Role of Academic and Special Libraries: Although we infer that academic and special libraries are included as important components in both the NOVEL and NY EXCELS programs, we encourage much greater specificity in defining how users of academic and special libraries will be included in implementation of these proposals. For example, NOVEL would be strengthened if reference were made to the need to subsidize the purchase of high-end, doctoral level data bases designed to provide enhanced and efficient research. Also, the value of NOVEL for users of academic and special libraries would be significantly enhanced through the development of information portals that would permit simultaneous searching of dozens of commercial data bases, thousands of juries web sites, and hundreds of online monographic data bases. Finally, an online statewide union list of serials, supplemented with current contents module and electronic journal component could be of great use not only to academic and special libraries, but all libraries.
Also, we encourage increased state aid for two successful but underfunded programs: the state's coordinated collection development program for academic Libraries and for the state's nine reference and research resources councils, which coordinate many useful programs or academic and special libraries. Although this may occur through the NY EXCELS program, we believe supplemental funding based on increased aid applied against the Chapter 917 laws is also greatly needed.
Connectivity: We note that high speed 24X7 network connections remain very expensive in rural areas, there being a lack of both competition and telecommunications infrastructure. Dial up connections are not as useful as they once were, both because calls are metered (business rate), and because maximum dial up connection speed is less than 56 kb/sec. We encourage the Commission to emphasize the continued need for affordable robust network connections for libraries of all kinds and, more to the point, acknowledgement that NOVEL includes funding to assist systems and individual libraries pay for these quality, connections. Specifically, we would encourage the Regents to instruct the Commissioner of Education to create and implement a telecommunications connection action plan that provides access to non-school libraries through downstream connections from their local public schools, where the state has made already significant investments
State Aid in Support of Commission Recommendations: We strongly encourage the Regents to request significantly more funds in support of its recommendations than it has in the past. For example, a $12 million proposal for NOVEL seems far too conservative given the scope and nature of NOVEL and in comparison to what other states are accomplishing in this same arena. We also would encourage the Regents to acknowledge the successful programs within Chapter 917 of the Education Laws of New York State, and significantly increase funding requests for those programs.
Recommendation 6: While we do not begrudge our urban colleagues and their users increased state support, we believe that targeted, increased aid is just as necessary for rural areas. We suggest that recommendation number six be revised to include rural areas such as northern New York, where unemployment remains high and the impact of the state's economic boom is low.
Health Science Libraries: The services of health science libraries are essential in the promotion of successful medical research as well as current awareness for all medical practitioners. We encourage the Commission to include the strengthening of library and information services to health care providers, researchers, and patients through enhanced health science library services and increased funding of the successful hospital library services program in its recommendations.
Again, thank you for this opportunity to share my comments with the Commission.
Overall comment:
The value of all libraries
The third paragraph of the introduction to the Recommendations states the "belief that every New Yorker in every community across the state should have equitable access to quality library service." If we believe this (and we do) then we need to confirm the value of library services in all aspects of our lives -- and not just in public and school libraries. Hospital, academic, and corporate libraries are threatened by a lack of understanding of their role in creating a vibrant economy and a healthy community -- resulting in a lack of adequate funding.
Yet of the Commissions first six recommendations, four deal only with public libraries, one only with school libraries, and one with "all libraries". There are no recommendations that specifically help academic or hospital libraries or special libraries.
But the need is there for all types of libraries. For example, dial-up access to the Internet in a small hospital library just doesn't qualify anymore. State funds support many aspects of the healthcare industry in New York State, but where are the dollars to support hospital libraries? The New York State Hospital Library Service Program has not had an increase in funding since the Web.
Comments on Recommendation 1: NOVEL
The need for infrastructure
What is NOVEL? It is a vision of library services for New Yorkers in a networked age. How do we build NOVEL? Being a gardener, I think of creating NOVEL as I would think of starting a new garden.
For a garden to be successful, you need good soil and good drainage. You "double dig" the soil, add plenty of organic material, and lighten the soil if need be. You fertilize. You may even have to put up a retaining wall or other garden structures.
Only when the foundation is there do you begin to add the plants, starting with the trees and bushes -- the bones on which to add the "flesh" of the flowers. So first trees and shrubs, then perennials. Finally, because you can' t wait for your garden to show some results, you plant a few annuals to give you immediate satisfaction.
But if you don't build the foundation -- the infrastructure -- you'll waste your time, money and effort. The plants will struggle and eventually die.
Where am I going with this? NOVEL is like that. We need to have the electronic content -- the commercial databases, for example -- now. They are the "annuals" that give us hope. But, many libraries -- maybe even most libraries -- lack the network capability to provide a healthy and living environment for the future of NOVEL. New York needs to build that infrastructure, so the content we offer will be able to grow with the industry and with our patrons' needs.
Connection
There is no mention of SUNY Connect in the Recommendations. SUNY Connect is a NOVEL-like proposal for SUNY and CUNY colleges. It is an important statewide initiative that affects nearly 600,000 students or 56% of all the higher education students in New York. This number represents a very big market to information vendors. It could be a building block for the rest of the State. Partnering with SUNY to expand access to SUNY Connect databases would result in lower prices for everyone.
How can "NOVEL" form a strategic alliance with SUNY Connect? The New York State 3Rs are a natural avenue for this to occur. SUNY libraries are already part of the regional councils, as are private higher education institutions and public and school library systems. Adequately funded, 3Rs could enhance that among all types of libraries.
More Connections: The Role of Systems
A critical component of a successful implementation of NOVEL and the other recommendations, is the role of New York's library systems. The connections provided by library systems are what make us a "whole". The visionaries who created our network of library systems more than thirty years ago knew the value of sharing. Although the reasons for sharing, and the methods we use to do it have changed, the overall purpose has not -- strengthening and coordinating library resources for the benefit of all New Yorkers.
Library systems help libraries work together, providing benefits such as group discounts for databases, hardware, software, and telecommunications. Library systems provide information about new technologies and trends in order to help libraries plan. They provide equity of access -- so that even the smallest of libraries can benefit from NOVEL. At the same time, library systems are local organizations, able to respond quickly to local needs. They encourage cooperation creating a community of libraries.
Don't discount the value of this. The State can achieve its goals -- can reach down to every library in New York State to help every library -- through the local library systems. This aspect of New York's library systems -- the ability to reach down to the smallest and expand upward to the whole state -- is what makes them uniquely positioned to carry out the proposals of the Regents Commission.
Where are the books and how do we get them?
Where is the delivery component of NOVEL? If we create "shared catalogs of library holdings", we need to provide access to those collections. While no community wants its library resources to be depleted, we need to think of creative solutions that will provide access.
Currently offered Interlibrary Loan (ILL) services are not good enough. Many professionals will say that ILL is unimportant, that it is only a small percentage of circulation. Perhaps ILL is low because we make it difficult (a relative term) for the user. There is at least anecdotal evidence that when barriers are removed, use goes up. Where is the "get it for me" button on all our public library online catalogs?
There are models out there -- the Alberta model, for example, which provides a central repository for loaning; a revised NYSILL; even digitization for delivery. Stephen King changed the paradigm with "Riding the Bullet". Please don't forget the "books" and "book delivery" in whatever format when planning -- and funding -- NOVEL.
Comments on Recommendation 4: NY EXCELS
"Incentive aid to stimulate every library and library system to achieve service excellence" is of critical importance as we become a more customized, customer-driven society. How to measure quality library services? Many standards already exist. The Association of College and Research Libraries just published revised standards, for example. The Joint Commission on Healthcare Organizations publishes standards for hospital libraries.
How can library systems' services be measured? One suggestion I would like to make is adapted from the Urban Libraries Council User Satisfaction Survey, which I learned about at the recent Public Library Association Conference.
There could be a standard list of currently provided system services from which a library system selects 20 to be rated on by its members. (This might be cross system type or within type.) Data (demographics) on the member libraries would also be collected. The results, as compiled by the State, would give a picture for each system of those services that were highly rated and those that were less successful. The library system could be asked to develop ways to improve in areas targeted by members. Funding from the State would make the improvements possible.
Data could be collected on a statewide, system to system basis, providing for a statewide "benchmark" for all systems. Funding could be made available to raise all systems to the benchmark, as well as funding to enable the "benchmark" systems to continuously improve.
The benefit of this approach is that it allows for some local option (the selection of what to include in the survey), helps the local system measure itself against others in the State, and allows local systems to devise solutions that meet local needs and State goals.
Conclusions
The members of the Rochester Regional Library Council commend the Commission on its work. Input from the field will help you fine-tune your Recommendations. The final document will help us formulate new legislative programs that will drive new and better library services to the people of New York.
Thank you for the opportunity for this input. We look forward to continuing to work with you to achieve the Commission's vision for New York libraries.
Our concern at Pioneer Library System in providing quality library service for our patrons is network access and connectivity. We are a system of 42 public libraries in four counties, with two area codes, three LATAs and a variety of service providers. We have Bell Atlantic, Frontier/Rochester, Frontier/SenecaGorham, and Ontario Telephone, not to mention AT&T, MCI and Sprint. We are in the LATAs of Buffalo, Rochester and Syracuse. And we have a variety of connection speeds: 28.8, 56, 128K plus one T-1 line.
At present we are fortunate that 33 of our locations receive internet access through the Wayne-Finger Lakes BOCES acting as an Internet Service Provider. Their LakeNet service to our libraries costs $106,956/year and is presently offered to us at no charge (not out of altruism but because they have a federal Technology Challenge grant and they need partners). This arrangement is not expected to last beyond 2001. And the speed and bandwidths are very limited.
Two of our libraries have high speed internet access because they are adjacent to institutions which can provide it. But eight of our libraries have only dial-up connections to the internet at metered business line rates.
Meanwhile, despite these slow and expensive network connections, our libraries are busy offering internet services to their patrons. There is a huge demand for internet training, to the point that we have a full time staff member at Pioneer Library System headquarters devoted exclusively to provide this service. We have a "mobile training lab" of laptops, available to travel around the four counties, offering workshops at member libraries to train adult learners. Most of the attendees are seniors, who have no other means of trying out the internet, since many do not have computers at home. They are very enthusiastic learners and we are opening up whole new worlds to them. But slow connections and limited bandwidths are very frustrating to users. They detract from our credibility as the place to go for information.
We are currently exploring the feasibility of purchasing a shared integrated library system for our 42 members. The benefits of such a system would be many, and would enable us to provide much improved services to our users. But the cost of telecommunications may be the limiting factor in allowing us to move ahead with this project.
What are our options? Cable TV is available in only a few of our communities. Wireless communications are not yet available in all areas either. Putting together a framerelay network would be very difficult and expensive, given the multiple LATAs and multiple phone companies.
There are two issues here:
In the Preliminary Recommendations there is some mention of these issues. In Recommendation 1, Creating NOVEL: "The Commission recommends that the Regents promote policies to make high-speed access to the internet available and affordable for all libraries." And in Recommendation 4, Promoting equitable library services, it may be assumed that through the NY EXCELS program, some of the enabling or incentive aid would be available to improve network access. But unless the Regents can successfully revise public policy to give libraries preferential telecommunications treatment (as has been done in other states), and unless there is significant aid to pay the costs of high-speed high-bandwidth connections, these are piecemeal approaches.
Before, or perhaps as, we spend state money to purchase electronic resources and create virtual catalogs, we need to spend money creating a better infrastructure so that library patrons can actually have access to this content at an affordable price and speed. Perhaps this means a new state mandate requiring network service providers to provide deep discounts for libraries and to encourage the proliferation of wireless capabilities. Perhaps this means using state funds to lay more physical wire (fiber, cable, copper) for "the last mile" connections. Perhaps this means building a statewide library network. Perhaps we need to develop a plan that is a combination of these tactics. But until New Yorkers and their public libraries have convenient and affordable access to the internet, electronic databases and virtual union catalogs are merely the icing on an unbaked cake.
I am pleased to have this opportunity to comment on the preliminary recommendations of the Commission. First off, let me commend you for separating out the first six recommendations from those that deal with implementation. In doing so you have highlighted those things that will have the greatest impact on the citizens who use libraries. I originally expected that a great deal of your attention would be focused on the structure of the statewide network and how many library systems there should be. While these things are important, you have rightly reminded us that they are just a means to an end.
I also want to express my overall support for your first six recommendations. They are on track and if fully implemented, would result in a tremendous improvement in the quality of library services available to all New Yorkers. I would like to offer the following comments on specific recommendations:
Recommendation 1: Create NOVEL, the New York Online Virtual Electronic Library, to deliver high-quality, reliable digital information and provide access for all New Yorkers.
I am pleased to see that this recommendation has already being advanced by the Regents. I would like to suggest that the background for this recommendation be expanded to make it absolutely clear that every library in New York State has a role to play in an electronic environment. I would also like to suggest that the supporting information regarding the recommendation be expanded to include a reference to electronic books. This new medium, which is coming fast, will fundamentally change the way libraries purchase and provide access to books and other resources for their communities. The impact will be almost as great as the Internet. Libraries must make this transition to e-books in order to stay relevant and the State must provide assistance.
We need to head off any possible public perception that the shift to electronic resources, the Internet and e-books will mean that libraries will have no role to play in the future. On the contrary, these new formats will lead to an even greater need for libraries. The NOVEL program has the potential to ensure that libraries have the training and other resources necessary to thrive in an electronic environment.
Recommendation 3: Ensure the availability of local library service to all New Yorkers and improve local support for public libraries through the voluntary formation of Public Library Districts.
I heartily support this recommendation and truly believe that the most successful libraries are those who are directly accountable to the public via a direct vote on their budgets. New York State has chartered public libraries and granted their Boards of Trustees a number of powers designed to enable them to operate efficiently and independently from municipal government. In reality, because Library Boards have no means to levy taxes for library services, they must appeal to the local municipality for appropriations. This in turn has diminished their ability to operate independently and has in some cases, caused municipalities to treat their library as if it were a department of the town or city. This trend has thwarted the development of library service and kept libraries from reaching their full potential. Your recommendation would address this situation.
I do have one concern and suggestion regarding the implementation of this recommendation. The final bullet in your recommendation mentions that a public library system could present a countywide proposition for library services to the voters and coordinate the distribution of funds and the provision of service among member libraries of the collaborative. Personally, I believe that this approach makes much sense in Monroe County, where we have limited un-served areas and all but one of our member libraries are chartered to serve townships. We have an opportunity to develop and promote a single countywide funding proposition that could level the playing field and eliminate the disparity of funding between our member libraries. This would also eliminate any issues related to "free direct access" and Commissioner's Regulation 90.3. The creation of a county library authority could preserve the autonomy and independence of our member libraries and open the door to improved funding and enhanced services.
I believe that we need to fully explore this option before individual libraries re-charter themselves along school district boundaries. As libraries recharter, it will be exceedingly difficult to gain support for a countywide initiative. I am asking that you consider modifying your recommendation to provide stronger encouragement and incentives for libraries to join together to create larger countywide districts where appropriate. Such encouragement might be financial or regulatory in nature.
Recommendation 4: Promote equitable library services for all New Yorkers by using a need-based formula to reduce disparities in library funding, and promote service excellence through enabling incentive aid tied to community-based performance measures.
Recommendation 6: Improve the capacity of New York's urban public libraries to meet the unique needs of their diverse, densely populated communities.
Of all your recommendations, these two had the greatest appeal to the Board of Trustees of the Rochester Public Library and to the Rochester's City Administration and City Council. The City of Rochester, which currently funds ten branch libraries within the City limits, is facing a $29 million budget shortfall in the coming year. This is primarily due to a shrinking tax base and per capita income level that is well below the countywide average. While they are least able to pay for them, City residents have greater service needs, including library service, than their suburban counterparts.
The City branches currently rank last in per-capita materials expenditures ($2.03) of all the libraries in the County, and they are also at the bottom in total per-capita expenditures ($14.45). On top of this, the Library has had to submit a budget proposal that calls for reducing expenditures by $140,000 to meet the City's budget shortfall. We have had to eliminate Sunday hours at branch libraries and further reduce materials expenditures. The City is doing what it can, but clearly needs help. The two recommendations put forth by the Commission makes sense and would help level the playing field for City residents.
The challenges of urban public libraries are not confined to the five boroughs of New York. We face them every day in here in Rochester. We need more resources to mentor youth at risk, to provide literacy services, to meet the information needs of a multilingual population, to provide computer access to those with none, and to train them how to make the best use of the Internet. Our neighborhood libraries are bustling but we are having trouble keeping the doors open due to financial pressures. If the state spends one penny more for library services, it should be directed toward these two recommendations. You are to be commended and thanked for recognizing this great need and for developing a solution to address the problem.
Recommendation 5: Provide support for public library construction, expansion and renovation to ensure that New York's libraries are accessible to all library users and can accommodate advances in technology.
I strongly support this recommendation, which has already been translated into a legislative proposal by the Regents. Having recently expanded our own central library facility, we know first hand the tremendous service gains that can be derived from a new facility. Since our 1997 expansion, annual attendance has increased by 40%; we have been able to offer computer-training classes for seniors, children and their parents; and our collection is fully accessible to the public. The expansion has served as a springboard for private donations to support computer training and Sunday hours at the central library.
Our town member libraries and our city branches need to expand and upgrade their facilities as well. These needs have already been documented and I presume were instrumental in helping you to formulate this recommendation.
Your recommendation calls for a range of 50% to 75% local match for construction grants, depending on a community's ability to pay. This is a nice and needed improvement over the current 50% across the board match requirement. I would like to suggest that as an encouragement for all libraries to aggressively pursue private donations for construction projects that the 75% match be applied to the portion of local funds raised from private sources. This should apply to any library regardless of their ability to pay. This would spur libraries to develop fund-raising skills that will carry over far beyond the construction project. In our case, we raised nearly $10 million in private donations for our $28 million expansion project. But the real and lasting benefit is that we now have the expertise and structure in place that has enabled us to conduct an annual mail campaign, to secure private grants for computer training and to begin to build a much-needed endowment. Your encouragement for libraries to pursue private funds to support construction will payoff in many other ways.
I want to thank you again for giving me this opportunity to provide input as you finalize your recommendations. I also want to thank all of you for the extraordinary time you have contributed to this effort to make New York's Libraries the best in the nation.
Updated 9/12/2000 -- asm