For the sake of argument here, let’s stick with kids who want to pay their fines, but can’t afford it. I believe that was what the article was talking about, since those were people interviewed. Okay? The kids who don’t give a shit and can’t be bothered, those kids will just have to deal with not being able to check out books until they attempt to give a shit.
So, you think personal supervision of each individual kid, for two weeks (or however long you loan periods are) at their homes, schools, parks and anywhere else they may take their library books, would be as easy as assembling a bunch of kids into a group (picking them up if you have to, say from school), and supervising their work in a group?
What I’m suggesting is a form of glorified detention with useful work involved - hell, it may even be done through the schools - kids could earn book fine credits from cleaning the gym or working in the school garden or even something educational like writing a book report or getting certain grades. What you’re suggesting is Big Brother. One of these is science fiction, the other happens all the time with kids anyway.
There is a thing called “parenting”. You might want to look into it.
Regards,
Shodan
Not really aware of what life is like for the working poor, are we? Their parents are likely working, probably harder than you or I, just to feed their family (minimum wage in the most expensive part of the US), maybe put a roof over their heads (or not, there’s a friggingtent city in San Jose). Parenting, for them, is keeping their kids alive. Keeping their kids in library books is, unfortunately, not going to be a priority. That’s why society, as a whole, should chip in to help those kids. Or, you know, you could be like Santa Claus…
I don’t know about you - I am fully aware of what life is like for the working poor, having been part of it. Somehow or other I managed to return my library books on time.
No, their parents (or parent) are not more likely to be working harder than me - I work full time year round, and 74% of poor households in the US do not have a full-time, year-round worker.
Absolutely. We should set up some kind of an institution where they could borrow books for free. Of course, they can’t abuse the institution by not bringing the books back, but if they can get to the library to borrow the books in the first place, that shouldn’t be too much of a problem.
Regards,
Shodan
How would a public library get the money to replace non-returned books by a kid cleaning the school gym or writing a book report?
Simple - mandate that the book report be on the lost books. In order to write the report, you have to find the book. Presto! Problem solved!
Regards,
Shodan
Exactly. As I said before, coming up with a solution for something that isn’t really the problem isn’t going to work. The problem, at its root, it poor parenting. That’s why the kids lose the books or don’t return them on time, and the problem of poor parenting can’t be fixed with work or amnesty programs for the kids. And as you point out, they don’t pay to replace lost books either.
The Wayne Foundation can pay for it. Take it out of the batarang budget. Seriously aren’t those things supposed to return to Bruce’s hand?
According to the article in the OP, recovered fees represent about 1.5 percent of San Jose’s library’s budget. According to the ALA, only 11.4 percent of the budget of a library goes to buying books:
So realistically, we aren’t looking at a big chunk of the budget. Lost books should be a part of the cost of doing business for a library. Similar to how a steak house is going to have some steaks sent back or a store is going to experience theft. You put in policies to stop gross abuse and budget an appropriate amount to compensate. No business is going to drive away 40% of their users over 1.5% of their cost. And neither should the library.
Except libraries aren’t for-profit businesses. The businesses you mention adopt the policies they do in order to continue to operate profitably despite their losses. For libraries, a loss is loss and there’s no upside.
Except that library budgets are shrinking and have been for decades; check out Sampiro’s posts upthread. Those books that are never returned are also likely to be never replaced. The patrons who perpetually keep books overdue are hurting otehr patrons as well as the library. They need to be cut off for the good of their poor neighbors.
I would think providing services to as many people as they can would be an upside, but I guess other people might think differently.
Providing a service to the community is definitely an upside, but I think you’ll agree that it’s a different upside than exists in the case of for-profit businesses. And I think you’ll also agree that it’s hard to provide a service to your community when a large number within said community keep depleting you of the very product you exist to provide.
I was going to suggest they simply one-time waive the fees and from now on, loan out 1 book at a time max.
But then I read they are owed $6.8 MILLION in fees, and the Director of the Library really has no power to do anything about it.
I suggest they sell the debt to one of those places that buy debt or whatever, wipe the slate of overdue stuff, and then limit books to 1 at a time.
Zsofia:
Say what? What the hell is admirable about that, even “kind of”? That’s disgusting.
I think it’s the sheer, unadulerated brass required to BE that disgusting in public that is weirdly admirable.
So make library books out of Batarangs? Is that what you’re saying?
NM
This. And people wonder why privatization can lower costs.
It’s the same reason you have to pay the DMV extra to renew your tags online with a credit card. A for profit business would jump at the opportunity for an income stream that required no cashiers, but not for a government office. No, they have to account for every penny and it is unacceptable to pay the handling charge the Credit Cards charge out of reduced office costs. Yes, they will realize reduced office costs, but they are not allowed to pass this on to their customers (their employers). Private businesses do not have this restriction.
The library has to pay for the materials. If they experience a loss of materials, they have to justify the funds used to replace them. They can’t just say, “It’s a small part of our budget, let’s forget it”, because that small part is their justification for existence. If they don’t have books, they don’t need a staff and, ultimately, do not need a building and property.