HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05051987 - 2.2 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
May 5 , 1987 2i Z
Adopted this Order on , by the.following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers , Fanden, Schroder , Torlakson, McPeak.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
SUBJECT:
In the Matter of Establishing) RESOLUTION NO. 87/260
a New Schedule of Fines for )
Overdue Library Materials )
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVE THAT:
WHEREAS the late return of library materials continues
to be a serious problem in the County Library .system, and
WHEREAS there has been no increase in the daily fine
rate in more than thirty years , and
WHEREAS the costs associated with assuring prompt return
of library materials has increased dramatically,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that effective July 1, 1987
the following fines for the late return of library materials be
established:
Adult book 10¢ per day
Maximum per book $5.00
Maximum pier return $25.00
Children s .books 50 per day
Maximum per book $1.00
Maximum per return $5.00
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Librarian is
hereby authorized to establish fees and/or fines for specialized
services and materials , as needed.
1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTEDt MAY 51987
PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
*14
By , Deputy
Orig. Dept.:
cc: County Administrator
County Library
RESOLUTION NO . 87/260
TO- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM Ernest Siegel, County Librarian Contra
Cosa
DATE: April 3, 1987
SUBJECT: LIBRARY REVENUES
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
That -the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached resolution estab-
lishing fines for the Contra Costa County Library.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
An increase in fine revenues which cannot accurately be predicted
at this time, is anticipated.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND:
In early November 1986 the County Administrator requested that the
Library re-examine its fine policy in response to the Board' s
desire to maximize revenues and to offset to the fullest extent
possible and reasonable the high cost of the automated system,
which will substantially increase fine revenues through capabilities
which our present system lacks. The Library approached this task,
not, with reluctance, but with caution that we not identify library
fines as a dependable source of revenue rather than its proper
function as a means of insuring the prompt return of books.
There are additional pitfalls , such as instituting fine policies
which result in procedures which cost more to maintain than the
revenues they bring in, or which raise barriers to library service,
especially to children. Other requirements or desirable elements
in=a library fine policy are:
• fairness
• enforceability
• consistency with prevailing practice in other jurisdictions
• compatibility with good public relations
It is some indication of the awkwardness of this task that I can
think of no fine policy including our present one that does not run
afoul of more than one of these criteria.
The Library imposes a number of miscellaneous charges other than
fines. Most of them yield such small amounts a to be not %th
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT- XX. YES' S:FGNA.TURE::,
RECOMMENDATION. OF COUNTY" ADWIWtSTRATOR RECOMMEND'A.T'I:ON! OF' BOARD, C.OMMiIITTEE:
APPROVE OTHER:
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON a'Y f A.PP'ROVED� A.S; RECOMMENDED' _ OTHER' .
The Board REQUESTED the County Administrator and Librarian to
develop an amnesty period during the month of June for the
return of library materials .
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
II HEREBY CERTIFY THAT' THfS: I:S A. TRUE,
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT �+ AND' CORRECT' COPY OF' ANi ACT'IONi TAKEN.
AYES: NOES-:, AND! ENTERED, ON, THE; MINUTES; OF' THE BOARD,
ABSENT ABSTA l Wr OF' SUPERV IiSORS ON( THE; DATE; SHOWNI.,
CC: County Administrator ATTESTED, May 5 , 1987
County Librarian --- --
PHIL. BATCHELOR:, CLERK, OF THE: BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS; AND,COUNTYADMINISTRATOR
M'3'82/7-83 BY „DEPUTY
Library Revenues
Page 2
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND continued
our attention other than to note in passing that we attempt to
recover out-of-pocket expenses. An exception is the charge made
to the public for photocopying, recently increased from ten to
fifteen cents per page, which is more or less competitive with
commercial services and which is a modest revenue producer.
Library fines and fees produced an income of $100,000 in FY 85/86.
This was an increase of almost $20 ,000 over the previous year,
owing largely, we think, to our use for the first time of a
commercial collection agency which handled a number of significant
cases for us at a cost of $6. 25 per offender. This method not
only resulted in recovery of the books and fines for the cases
referred, but seems to have had an effect on borrowers who wished
to avoid being referred to the agency.
Most of this income represents adult and juvenile fines of 5¢ per
day, up to a maximum of $3..00 per adult book and $10.00 per inci-
dent. Maximums for children are 50¢ per book, $2. 50 per incident.
The adult maximums were raised by the Library in 1982. An
increase in adult fines to 10¢ per book per day is the only
feasible increase in the opinion of the Library staff. It could
be instituted at any time with due notice to the public, although
staff feels strongly that it .would be best to wait until the
automated system is operational. The reason for waiting lies in
a number of conditions imposed by our present system and our
budgetary limitations: We have a basic circulation period of
only two weeks. This was recently reduced from a three week period
in the interest of increasing the availability of books in a time
of lower acquisitions . It is a shorter loan period than is granted
by most public libraries.
We are unable to send notices to borrowers until books are 4-6
weeks overdue. It is generally understood that notices are a
courtesy extended by the Library and the responsibility for knowing
when books are due rests with the borrower. Nevertheless , even at a
nickel a day', fines may mount to the maximum before the borrower
receives a notice. Earlier sending of notices would entail sub-
stantial additional costs.
Only borrowers who willingly abide by the rules would be affected
by the increase. Those who leave overdue books on the return desk
and run or who use the book drops durin closed hours would still
be getting off free, because we do not cannot) maintain fine
records for these patrons. The proposed system is capable of
addressing all three of these problems .
We strongly- recommend against any increase in the daily fine of
5¢ per day per juvenile book. Those Bay Area libraries which have
gone to a 10¢ daily adult fine, with the exception of Livermore,
charge no children' s fines at all. We strongly object to an
increase in fines which might discourage children from further use
of the library, or cause parents , as often happens , toforbid
children to use the library.
We have discussed an additional increase in the per-book and per-
incident maximums for adult borrowers. Many libraries allow fines
to accumulate up to the price of the book. This raises an entirely
new set of workload and public relations problems . People paying
the price of a book then feel they are entitled to keep it, or
balk at paying the list price of a book they perceive as used,
when, in fact, the actual replacement cost may be much more than
the recorded price. These factors are mentioned only to offer some
idea of the complex problem we are dealing with. It is significant
that maximum fines are only collected at the Central Library two
,/
Library Revenues
Page 3
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND continued
to four times a month, too small a number to make an increase
worthwhile from a revenue standpoint.
The new automated system will make it possible to:
• send overdue notices in a timely fashion
• maintain records of fines owed and not paid at the time
of return
• prevent patrons with overdue books or outstanding fines
from further abuse of the system.
A further issue raised during budget discussions for the 1986-87
budget was that the Library explore other avenues for increasing
revenues, such as appeals to philanthropy and the generosity of
library patrons. During the past year the Library has continued
to work with Friends of the Library groups to raise funds through
book sales (often on a continuing. basis inside the library) and
other fund-raising activities . This on-going effort has been
producing about $30,000 per year system-wide, usually in the
form of more library materials , or new equipment which the budget
cannot accommodate.
I have pointed out to the Board during the past two years that
Project Second Chance, our highly successful adult literacy program,
would soon have to face up to a withdrawal of the Federal and
State funding which established it, and that we would need to
look for local funding, either County or private, or see the end
of the program while the need is still great. Realistically, .
I think the prospect of significant philanthropy is risky. We
have received gifts of as much as $2000 from such corporate givers
as Chevron and Long' s Drugs , and we are still nowhere near the
$701000-$100,000 per year that the program needs . At the same
time, we have formed a citizen board of directors , who along
with key staff are getting training in the complex art of fund-
raising and we expect to get better at it. I have maintained that
any major fund-raising effort undertaken by the Library should be
concentrated on this one program. It is awkward for the Library
to enter into competition with agencies traditionally dependent
on charity for the philanthropic dollar. I do not think we should
compete with ourselves. However, I would also point to the extra-
ordinary effort, and impressive results , of the citizens of San
Ramon in raising funds for the book collection of that community ' s
new branch library.
I urge that the Board of Supervisors await the results of the
fine increase proposed on the attached, and these fund-raising
efforts before additional revenue-producing activities are imposed
on the Library.