This effectively ends any consideration of outsourcing library management to LSSI.

Strictly speaking, the Board could reject Haffey’s recommendation, but such an outcome is difficult to imagine, given the widespread opposition in the community to the outsourcing scheme, and the widespread support for keeping the county library public.



Here’s a snapshot of the Library Journal’s front page:

I sent an email this morning to Danny Jordan, Jackson County Oregon Administrator, and asked him if he submitted his “Other Voices” Op-Ed at LSSI’s request, and — if not — how did he happen to take such an interest in the library management issue in Nevada County?

He replied immediately:

Greetings Mr. Pelton,

Sometime around the beginning of December, 2008, I heard about the issue from a Library staff member. I then went to www.theunion.com and ran a search on LSSi. The subject returned results from the search and I read the results, and as more material was and has been added over time, I read it. My interest isn’t in Nevada County, but rather in sharing some facts about our experience with LSSi. I submitted Op-Ed because I believe it is important to speak to Jackson County’s factual experience in our personal dealings with LSSI. They had a tremendous positive effect on our ability to deliver service. From our experience, I wanted to make certain that factual information was shared about how they went about working with us to open our libraries and create an opportunity for us to operate at a reduced cost, with tremendous service and with employees that appear to be happy with the transition. I didn’t do it because of any other reason than I thought it was important to provide facts.

Sincerely,

Danny Jordan
County Administrator
10 South Oakdale, Room 214
Medford, Oregon 97501
jordandl@jacksoncounty.org

I replied to his reply, pointing out that  the LSSI issue first came up here last year, in 2009 (not 2008 … so perhaps he mis-spoke), and asked him about the reports we’ve heard that some Jackson County, Oregon librarians are unhappy because they no longer have a viable retirement program. He has not yet responded to this question.

The title of Jordan’s recent Union Op-Ed, “Public-private partnership a win-win,” is nearly identical to the title of an essay he wrote in May of 2008 for the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), which was soon thereafter critiqued by Francine Fialkoff, Editor-in-Chief of the Library Journal:

Certainly, Jackson County faced dire times. It had lost its federal timber subsidies in 2006, two library tax levies failed at the polls, and the libraries were closed and staff furloughed. Yet, one of the two proposals submitted to the county came from a local union representing the library employees, which county officials were required by the collective bargaining agreement to help the union prepare. Nevertheless, the county chose to give the contract for providing library services to private company LSSI, which had a much lower bid.

I wonder, however, how hard the county worked with the union to make the bid competitive—and how much of the impetus to go private came from knowing that, under LSSI, staff would be employed by the company, saving the county from paying money into the state pension plan and on other benefits.

Jordan noted that privatization “strengthened the stakeholder role of each of the local governments.” As a result, local libraries can increase their operating hours by “purchasing” additional hours—paying for them themselves—“in four-hour blocks of time.” That solution and other instances of cost-sharing could have been implemented as readily under county governance, too.

It is widely expected that the Nevada County Board of Supervisors will approve one of the two public plans which were endorsed by the joint county-citizens’ committees.

Keep your eye on this county webpage for the appearance of the agenda for the meeting on February 23rd. It usually gets posted a few days before the meeting.

Update: Danny Jordan wrote back and confirmed that he meant to write “2009″ not “2008.” But his reply did not include a response to my question to him about the pension/retirement issue.

I was unaware that it had disappeared until I received this email today from Norman Oder, News Editor for the Library Journal:

“Mr. Pelton,

I’m writing an article for Library Journal about the outsourcing controversy. I’ve read a bunch on Sierra Voices and elsewhere and wanted to ask you if you have any more info on the provenance of the web site Save Nevada County Libraries (which has disappeared, though pages are available via Google cache).

Could you give me a call–I’m here til about 5:30 EST today–or let me know how to reach you today or tomorrow.

Thanks,
Norman”

I called and left Mr. Oder a voice mail explaining that I have no further information about this website. I also asked him to let me know when he publishes his article on outsourcing.

If any of you have information about this now defunct website, leave your comments here and I’ll relay them back to Mr. Oder.

For what it’s worth, you can see Google’s cache remains of the website here.

Update: Mr Oder replies to my voicemail:

“My article should be online Fri or Mon.

Btw, here’s a piece I did in 2004 about LSSI:
www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA456252.htm
Letter in response: http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA485744.html “

Feb. 8, 2010 – The Nevada County public libraries are under threat of outsourcing to LSSI, a private company in Maryland State.

In October, in response to the economic downturn, the County CEO presented the BOS with a Request for Proposals for private contractors to manage the library. The only response was from Library Systems and Services Inc (LSSI). Since then, library supporters have been fighting to keep one of the nation’s finest small library systems under public operation.

These supporters, including the Friends of the Library (FOL) groups in both ends of the County, have identified the downsides of private outsourcing. They include:

Probable loss of current professional library staff.

Risking $400,000 of annual volunteer and cash contributions.

Giving LSSI control of our sales tax revenues, with no requirement that they provide budget details or specific staffing plans.

Handing over management to an out-of-state company with no vested interest in Nevada County communities.

LSSI has received mixed reviews from the library systems they manage; some libraries have terminated their contracts with LSSI early.

Consequently library supporters called for a local solution to the budget challenges. Working with Library and County staff, the Friends of the Truckee Library put together a detailed plan to meet the needs of local communities while operating within budget constraints. Their proposal:

• Keeps the library in public hands.

• Keeps all of the County library branches open with high service levels.

• Maintains the professional quality of library staffing and programming, with just one position eliminated.

• Keeps the library system operating with a positive fund balance (reserve account) for the next 5 years.

• Maintains full accountability and transparency to the public.

• Abides by the language of the voter-approved sales tax measure by retaining children’s librarians and continuing programs for kids and young adults.

This plan became Option A, now making its way through a BOS- designed process. That process included a review and recommendation by the Citizen’s Oversight Committee (COC) to keep the libraries public and operate under Option A.

An Ad Hoc committee created by the BOS also embraced Option A and another public option that fires over half of the librarians. Several Ad Hoc committee members recommended that the County Librarian should be given responsibility for making staffing decisions. But both Committees rejected the option of private outsourcing.

Next in the process is development of a recommendation from the CEO’s office to the BOS for review in February. [Editor comment: The next BOS meeting is February 23rd]

Supporters expect that the BOS will listen to their committees, the public, and others in choosing a solution that addresses the local challenge with a local solution. Option A recognizes that this recession will end, and that keeping the core staff together with control in the hands of the citizens is in the best long-term interest of a vibrant library system.

So far the community is speaking out for the elements of Option A. Both FOL groups in the County have gathered hundreds of signatures on petitions to the BOS, supporting public control of libraries. Nevada City Council passed a resolution asking the BOS for public operation of the library, as did members of the Nevada City Chamber of Commerce. The important Ghidotti Foundation has stated that their generous annual library grant would not be given to a private company. As well, many individual donors who make substantial annual contributions to County libraries have declared their unwillingness to donate to a for-profit management company. Both East and West side FOL have written the BOS to express support of Option A.

We feel that Option A, after a long and frustrating process, will result in a publicly operated library system that is fiscally balanced, stronger, and positioned to sustain outstanding services as we come out of the recession. We urge concerned citizens to contact their Supervisors and ask them to direct staff to implement Option A.

For more information on the Friends of the Truckee Library, go to http://www.truckeefol.org/

“Currently, we are working on several projects to bring in money to the library such as the Union newspaper plea, an upcoming NCTV Telethon, work with the PV Chamber of Commerce to help defray part of the costs in operating the Penn Valley Library, Sierra Cinemas fundraiser as well as an offer from the GV Elks to help.

And the library traditionally begins our Nevada County Reads programming this month. I have had many meetings to attend. Whew! I actually need to begin working on the budget for next fiscal year which will be challenging in that we do not know the direction the library will take until the 23rd.”

February 23rd, of course, is the date of the next County Board of Supervisors meeting, at which time County Executive Officer Rick Haffey should be making his recommendation on a library management plan.  The Board is widely expected to make a decision at that time.

I asked Mary Ann to describe the two Options (A & D) that were recommended by the Citizens’ Oversight Committee and the Library Ad Hoc Committee.

“As the Librarian I feel that I can say that the difference between option A and D lies in the fact that if the Board were to choose A the Library Department would be able to offer many more library services to the public, even in this difficult time, than if they chose Option D because A would provide the public with librarians with which to: 1. develop the collections in each branch library, keeping in mind the desires of the public for both adults and children, 2. offer continued adult and children’s programs (especially children’s) which is a huge part of our mission and is the heart of a fine library system, 3. be prepared to offer homework and research help to the public. These are just three of the highlights a library offers when it has qualified, talented librarians on board. Were we to scale back the librarians I can assure you that fewer of the needs of the community would be met. Option D results in laying off 3.6 librarian positions including both children’s librarian. Option A keeps all librarians save one at a reduced level.

The call of the library is to ensure lifelong learning and self-directed education beginning with the very youngest of our community members. Due to economic difficulties at this time I do understand how important it is to make cutbacks that result in the library staying within budget and I will work to that end. Both scenarios show the library department with a budget surplus at the end of 5 years.”

Finally, she commented on the 480% increase in nonsolicited donations in December.

“And about the nonsolicited donations: We budgeted only $4,875 for f/y 09/10 based on past years. The outpouring of 20K in early donations is, I believe, because library users recognize the value they place on their library, its services and programs.”

Keep your eye on this county webpage for the appearance of the agenda for the meeting on February 23rd. It usually gets posted a few days before the meeting.

By the time we moved to Grass Valley from Palo Alto a few years ago, we’d pared our collection down to about about eighty cases of books, and the labor of moving them was so great that I felt compelled to give the movers an extra-large tip. After we settled in, we gave Friends of the Library about forty cases of books, and we now have probably another dozen cases to give them. I was happy to give away a small library of a few dozen books on sustainability to the A.P.P.L.E. center, so I can go visit them from time-to-time. They are my old friends, after all.

I know full well that there are different ways to love books. I once heard Mary Ann Trygg, the Nevada County Librarian, a professional bibliophile, tell Jackie Mason in an NCTV interview, that she did not feel a compulsion to buy books, although she is always carrying one back and forth to work.

My  own particular passion for books is a bit of a mystery to me. I sometimes wonder if it doesn’t all hark back to a time when — as a small child — I would often see my father completely lost in a book. His work as a railway postal clerk (a good civil service job during the Depression) took him away from home for three days at a time, as he traveled between Oakland, California and Lovelock, Nevada, sorting mail. And when he was home between trips, he’d often be too tired to be very sociable (just as our mother warned us), so he was hard to reach emotionally. I may have spent my whole life trying to reach him through books. He died in 1980, which means he’s probably still lost in a book somewhere.

Such irrationality would seem to disqualify me from having a credible opinion on the future of books, and on whether the Internet is likely to make physical books and brick-and-mortar libraries obsolete. I would argue, on the contrary, that such irrationality in one form or another is probably at the root of all bibliophilia, and in itself may be the ultimate impediment to the complete triumph of virtual libraries and electronic books.

I spent my entire working life in a technical field, first as a systems programmer at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, then as a senior network engineer on the Stanford campus. And yet, the idea that the Internet might someday replace books and libraries has always seemed laughable to me, nothing more than a techno-fantasy, a notion that will someday be remembered as a quaint relic of those years when oil and electricity were still cheap, and the electric grid was still reliable.

On the subject of book obsolescence, I’m definitely an unapologetic Luddite.

Well, now I find another unapologetic Luddite, Will Sherman, who has studied this subject thoroughly and thought about it much more deeply than I have. He’s written “33 Reasons Why Libraries and Librarians are Still Extremely Important.”

His first three reasons were enough to convince me that I’m right to laugh at the techno-fantasy.

There is much in his essay, by the way, that copiously supports the local opponents of outsourcing, who are — in vast numbers in this county, apparently — also determined bibliophiles.

Here’s a sampling:

1. Not everything is available on the internet
The amazing amount of useful information on the web has, for some, engendered the false assumption everything can be found online. It’s simply not true.

Google Book Search recognizes this. That’s why they’re taking on the monolith task of digitizing millions of books from the World’s largest libraries. But even if Google does successfully digitize the sum of human knowledge, it is unlikely that the sum of contemporary authors and publishers will not allow their works to be freely accessible over the internet. It is already prohibited by law to make copyrighted books fully accessible through Google Book Search; only snippets. And it’ll be a long time before that must-read New York Times bestseller gets put up for free on the internet: current copyright law protects works for 70 years beyond the death of the author.

Even some public domain works are off limits. If an out-of-copyright copy includes prefaces, introductions, or appendices that are still in copyright, the whole work falls under copyrighted status.

3. The internet isn’t free
While Project Gutenberg boasts 20,000 free, downloadable eBooks on its homepage, we are promptly reminded that these books are only accessible because they are no longer in copyright.

And books are just the tip of the iceberg. Numerous academic research papers, journals and other important materials are virtually inaccessible to someone seeking to pull them off the web for free. Rather, access is restricted to expensive subscription accounts, which are typically paid for by libraries. Visiting the library in person, or logging in to the library through your member account, is therefore the only way to affordably access necessary archived resources.

10. Mobile devices aren’t the end of books, or libraries
Predictions of the End of the Book are a predictable response to digitization and other technologies, and the crystal ball of some in the pro-paper crowd seems to also reveal a concomitant crumbling of civilization.

One of the latest dark threats to paper (and society) seems to be Google’s plan to make e-books downloadable to mobile devices. The iPod version of the novel is here. Google has already scanned a million books. Japanese train commuters are reading entire bestsellers on their cell phones. The end is near.

But if the mobile e-book is a hit and a lasting phenomenon, it’s unlikely that they will be an all-consuming transition for readers. Radio lives on despite TV, film is still in high demand despite video, people still talk on the telephone despite email. People who like paper books will continue to read paper books”¦even if mobile downloads prompt the majority of publishers to release e-books instead of paper. After all, an immense backlog of printed books will still be accessible to readers.

11. The hype might really just be hype
Paper books aren’t exactly doomed, even years after the invention of the e-book. In fact, by contrasting the merits of the e-book to those of the paper book, one could argue that paper books are actually a better product.

It would be premature to write off libraries and their freely accessible books amidst predictions of e-books’ impending prominence. Society could lose valuable access to a trusted medium – even if e-books do take off.

Read Sherman’s essay in full. It’s well worth it.

He even calculates how many hundreds of years Google will take to digitize just its first 100 million books. Check it out. Really interesting.

You can pledge today by printing the pledge form and sending it to Friends of the Library (optionally with whatever you can afford). To print the pledge form, click on one of these two links:

Pledge Form (Word Doc) — OR — Pledge Form (HTML)

Notice that these links also appear above the replica of the telethon flyer on the rightside of this webpage.

by Friends of the Library and NCTV

Contact:

Lew Sitzer, Chair, Telethon Committee
478-1174
peefed@gmail.com

Paul Minicucci, E.D. NCTV
478-6000 x249
Paul@nevadacountytv.org

LIBRARY AID TELETHON” TO AIR FEBRUARY 20

Grass-roots effort to raise $100,000 to help County Library System

NCTV and Friends of the Nevada County Libraries are producing a 6-hour telethon to air on Saturday, February 20 between 3-9 pm.  It can be seen on Comcast channel 11, Suddenlink channel 16 or simulcast live at www.nevadacountytv.org.

The goal of the 6-hour telethon is to raise $100,000 to help the Nevada County Public Library system with its current budget deficit in order to keep library services local and intact.

Programming will include readings from the locally published book Open to All:  What the Library Means to Me, as well as interviews with locally known authors such as Gary Snyder, Steve Sanfield and Meg Palley.  Local musical groups including “The Anderson Family” will appear.  Premiums will be offered, challenges will be issued and segments highlighting various library programs will also be shown.

Volunteers are needed to put on this special event.  If you’re interested, please contact Lew Sitzer at 478-1174 or Paul Minicucci at 478-6000 x249.

Click on flyer above for full-size image

If you want to make an early pledge, click on one of the pledge form formats below:

Pledge Form (Word Doc)

Pledge Form (HTML)

]]> http://sierravoices.com/2010/01/library-aid-telethon-to-air-february-20th/feed/ 0 http://sierravoices.com/2010/01/countdown-to-library-decision-day-public-or-private-hands/ http://sierravoices.com/2010/01/countdown-to-library-decision-day-public-or-private-hands/#comments Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:44:38 +0000 depelton http://sierravoices.com/?p=2185 by Friends of the Truckee Library

The Current Situation:

In early February 2010, Nevada County will make a decision about the future of our library. A short time ago, the County established three committees to recommend the best management model for Nevada County libraries in the current fiscal downturn:

Citizens’ Oversight Committee (COC)

Ad Hoc Committee

County Administration Committee

After considering multiple budget options, the County presented the COC with three options for review on January 13:

Option A – A County management model based on a Truckee Friends of the Library proposal.

Option B – A County management model that closes two library branches.

Option C – A contractor operated model submitted by LSSI, a private for-profit corporation based in  Maryland.

The COC unanimously recommended Option A which:

Keeps the library in public hands.

Keeps all of the County library branches open with high service levels.

Maintains the professional quality of library staffing and programming.

Keeps the library system operating with a positive fund balance for the next 5 years.

Maintains full accountability and transparency to the public – something a private corporation is not required to do.

When the second committee, the Ad Hoc, met on January 20, County Administrators had added a fourth Option D, which keeps the libraries under public control, but cuts programs and staff – specifically Children’s Librarians — in order to keep more money in a reserve account.

The Ad-Hoc committee voted for keeping the Library under County management, and against any private outsourcing.

They were split between Options A and D. The major difference between the two is this: Option A keeps all professional staff while maintaining a positive fund balance; Option D cuts professional librarians by more than half – including all children’s librarians. Cutting children’s librarians goes against the language of Measure C (overwhelmingly approved by voters) which expressly states that the tax revenues will be used for ” Increased Children’s and Young Adults’ Programs.”

Option A, which the Friends developed with County staff, has been endorsed by both the Eastern and Western County Friends of the Library. Nevada County citizens have clearly expressed their opposition to outsourcing and their strong support for keeping all library branches open and run by professional staff.

What You Can Do:

• Support Option A – the option proposed by the Truckee Friends of the Library. It keeps the library and your tax money in public hands; maintains the quality and   professionalism of the libraries and keeps the library operating with a positive fund balance for the next five years.  In addition, Option A preserves our children’s librarians and our high caliber children’s programming.
• Call or email the five County Supervisors (listed below), including Ted Owens, our local Supervisor.  Urge them to support keeping our libraries public with the Option A budget model that maintains the levels of staff and services.
  

  Nate Beeson (District 1) Email Phone: 530-265-1480

  Ed Scofield (District 2) Email Phone: 530-265-1480

  John Spencer (District 3) Email Phone: 530-265-1480

  Hank Weston (District 4) Email Phone: 530-265-1480

  Ted Owens (District 5) Email Phone: 530-265-1480

• Send this information to your friends and associates. Urge them to support Option A. Your tax money and our beloved community library are at stake.

Thank you!

Truckee Friends of the Library