I don't think that eliminating the non-resident fee in a library that is
strong (good collection, room for additional program participants, enough
staff) works against development of strong local funding. I think that
libraries that are weaker (a collection that barely meets their tax paying
customer needs, being barely able to cover lunches now, full with
programming and no additional staff to do more) could be hurt if their
supporters-the tax payers-can't get that new book, can't get their kid in a
program, has to wait in line for a long time.
I also think that if you have equally sized libraries with similar services
within a reasonable driving distance so that one library isn't going to
become the major library for an entire county, that a non-resident fee may
not be necessary if services can be somewhat equalized. We didn't put a
non-resident fee into effect until we had 43% non-resident use. One other
library in the area had 60% non-resident use before implementing its
non-resident fee. That just isn't right when such large bodies of people are
not contributing substantially to the government coffers that provide the
service. Now, that was true when our city was almost totally dependent upon
ad valorem taxes-which is not the case anymore. We are sales tax junkies,
which knows no political boundary, and is heavily funded by non-residents,
and with Dell sales, a lot of Texas residents not residing in Williamson
County. Today we have 10% non-resident paying customers and we waive the
fee for anyone who has family on the lunch programs or other forms of public
assistance and living outside the city (I had to fight the attorney on that
one). That 10% does 15% of the circulation, by the way. The downside of
being a sales tax junky is the impact of a loss of sales tax revenue. In the
big picture, our measly $45,000 in non-resident fees becomes very important
to balance the budget when sales tax revenue growth drops or has no growth.
We are seeing some growth next year, but not the 17% per year we've had for
the past 3 years. We HOPE there is some growth in sales tax revenue next
year-let me put it that way.
When I proposed to my Finance Director that we eliminate the fee if Austin
eliminated their fee his response was we'd need to figure out how to replace
the $45,000 we expect in NR fees this year. The Direct Aid would be expected
to go into the General Fund to replace the $45,000-not something I think we
want to do with Direct Aid (and I have not seen any ruling on the
disposition and use of that aid, though I'm sure it exists and I've missed
it). A bit of history-- our big jump to 43% non-resident use took place when
Austin instituted their fee in the early 80's, there was no Pflugerville
Library, Cedar Park was still in the old laudromat (?) and Wells Branch
didn't exist-my, how services have changed-we can see better libraries out
there today sharing strengths, not weaknesses) The non-resident use prior to
the fee was about 30%-- just on the edge where I would have recommended a
fee. I think 20% non-resident use is tolerable. No science, just an art. On
the other hand, if we see the NR fee income start to drop with TexShare,
then we have a slow weaning of these funds in the city coffers, so a
discussion 5 years from now when we have a $10,000 revenue line item would
be more successful than a discussion about $45,000 today. That is what I
think will play out.
I have no interest in county funding as I've seen very few substantive funds
coming from county government to fund a city entity, and the city tax payer
is paying twice to use their library-the county tax and the city tax. I also
don't see many strong county library systems in terms of services, staff
compensation, and "appreciation" of the finer aspects of library service.
Large county systems such as Harris County probably defy this
generalization, but most of our county systems in central Texas, anyway,
don't have that type of support even if size is taken into
consideration-once more, those inputs include funding the library
facilities, competitive staff compensation, library materials, and
programming. In part that is sometimes due to the county systems not having
major industry to tax, a larger composition of retirees or poorer
populations reluctant to allow greater taxes to be collected, etc. Another
part is that in central Texas at least, I just don't think that the most
County governments are philosophically tuned into the importance of
libraries. The final element is that in most of my conversations in the past
with city funded libraries that did receive some county funding, all but one
director in those situations were dissatisfied with the amount of funding
received for the amount of benefit given to the non-resident. I think,
though I'm not sure, one library refused to continue to receive county
funding, but that is old information/impressions as I've not been as tuned
into what is going on in CTLS as I once was.
I'm not sure if I've adequately reflected on the questions you were raising,
Stephanie. Perhaps you have other input to provide.
Dale
---------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Include in body: unsubscribe ctls-l
For information on CTLS-L please visit:
http://www.ctls.net/document/ctls-l.htm
