You bring up so many points that I can't respond to all of them -- However,
the end of your message relates to one of the points that I make. If a city
library is dissatisfied with the amount of money that the county provides to
it -- then how does it work to the library's benefit to say: "Oh, you give
us such a pitiful amount of money that you should just keep it. Don't
bother us with it. We plan to serve your people for free and would rather
do it without your money."
Thanks for engaging in the dialog.
--Stephanie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dale Ricklefs [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:49 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: TexShare Card/Direct Aid clarified
>
> 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
---------------------------------------------
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
