Public Library Advocate Peter Warfield Says "No" to Excessive Fees and Fines

Representing Indybay.org, I asked Peter to explain in greater detail:

I'm Peter Warfield, Executive Director of Library Users Association.

The library is charging $115 dollars for a lost book if it came from the Link+ system (which is used to request books from other library systems).

So Link+... what is that?

Link+ is an automated system for requesting books from other libraries when our library in San Francisco does not have a copy available.

So this fine is new?

It's relatively new. The library installed Link+ in February of 2007, about a year and a half ago. They didn't have any authorization from the Supervisors or even the Library Commission to do that. And with the installation of the system came the 115 dollar fee which the 49 libraries using that system to share resources supposedly have all agreed to (well they have agreed to) charge that as a standard fee.

Now the library also is saying that they will try to get a lesser fee for patrons who come to them and if the owning library (if the library that owns the book) allows it, there could be a lesser fee.

But under the by-laws of Link+, there is no requirement to deal on behalf of the patron, and there is no requirement that the owning library allow it. So it's entirely up to the owning library. So basically everybody is liable for that 115 dollar fee if they borrow a Link+ book.

Peter, what's the big deal? If a person loses the book shouldn't they just pay for it? Why are you upset about this new policy?

Well, because the 115 dollars is completely without regard to the cost of the book when it was purchased or the replacement cost now.

Typically, if a patron loses a book from San Francisco Public, you pay the replacement cost, let's say $15.95, plus a processing fee of 5 dollars. Or, they will let you get a used copy in good condition from a bookstore or even on the web. That could cost you even less. Maybe 6 dollars. And then they won't even charge the processing fee.

So we think it is fair to charge people the replacement cost plus some reasonable fee.

But the policy for interlibrary loan books which has long been in effect for books from other library systems is similar. The library here will follow the policy that the owning library has set, and it's typically something similar: replace the book, or pay "us" to get a new copy or a used copy, plus a small fee.

The 115 dollars is way more than most people will ever have to pay under the standard policies that have been in place within this library....

You don't think the average person can afford that, obviously.

Well whether they can afford it or not, certainly a lot of people can't. According to the Census and other statistics, there is at least 10 or 11 percent people living below the poverty line in San Francisco-- some 85,000. And then there are plenty of people on fixed incomes, or lower incomes, or working people for whom 115 dollars is a very great deal of money.

That's a big chunk of change, isn't it?

That's a big chunk of change.

The other thing is....

That would pay for all the schoolbooks and notebooks for a semester of highschool wouldn't it?

Well, I'm not up on that-- but certainly it's the food budget for a lot of people, or even families, for a week. Imagine losing five or ten of these books in a bag that you've accidentally left on a bus.

So they would have to pay for each and every one of them-- a hundred and fifteen dollars!

That's right.

Wow.

Then there are other bad consequences. For example, if you owe more than ten dollars on your library card you can't borrow books anymore, and you can't use Inter-library Loan or Link+ to get books from other systems-- or even to look at them.

That's really tough if somebody's got a term paper due, and they need to graduate.

Well, until they settle their outstanding library fees and fines-- that's over ten dollars on their card-- they are not going to be able to borrow anything.

So the Link+ system is No. 1 (it could be) a deterrent: discouraging people from using the library service, and if, God forbid, they should get caught up in it, they might not be able to pay off what they have lost-- which they could have paid off had it been a library book or an Inter-library Loan book-- under the old policy.

So they get knocked out of the system.

They get knocked out of an important part of the system which is borrowing books.

They can still come to the library to look at books and study and so on and so forth, but they can't borrow.

They can't take them home.

Right.

Do you think this is just one new policy in a string of policies, or do you think there will be more policies down the road to raise fees if this one becomes implemented?

Well, unfortunately, this one has already been implemented. Just as the other dozen fees that we are objecting to have already been implemented years ago without authorization from the Supervisors who are, under the charter, required to-- and even without Library Commission authorization.

Gotcha.

But there are some Supervisors who are taking an interest in this....

Absolutely. Chris Daly has not only said he is opposed, but is voting No. And so is Ross Mirkarimi.

The Budget and Finance Commitee on June 19 took this matter up and the five members voted very narrowly to pass it on to the full board to vote on it next Tuesday the 15th of July.

Supervisors Ross Mirkarimi and Chris Daly both voted against this legislation that would authorize all these fees. Unfortunately three supervisors who voted for it were Jake McGoldrick, Sean Elsbernd and Carmen Chu.

Is that surprising?

You know, I think everybody in town, and everybody no matter what their politics, ought to be in favor of a free library with free and equal access.

This is not really a partisanship issue... this is something that should interest everybody... you are saying....

Absolutely. I am surprised by Jake McGoldrick's vote because, alright, the measure was introduced by the mayor, and as far as I know, there are no other sponsors for it among the supervisors-- but, Carmen Chu was appointed by the mayor and Sean Elsbernd initially was... but Jake McGoldick, as I said, is a bit of a surprise.

We are hoping that he will change. We hope he will change his mind.

O.K. Is there anything else you would like to add?

There is a lot that goes beyond the fees with Link+. The selection of materials is tremendously impoverished by comparison with Inter-library Loan. For example, Link+ is a consortium of just 49 libraries in California and Nevada.

Inter-library Loan has 60,000 libraries-- more than a thousand times as many libraries-- all over the world.

Link+ only supports searching in only English [and] the library's own catalog--

and Inter-library Loan allows searching in multiple languages like Spanish and Chinese.

In terms of materials available there are 23 million books available through Link+;

1,200 million available on Inter-library Loan-- which is 1.2 billion books!

So the number of locations and the number of books and materials and the number of libraries are tremendously greater under traditional Inter-library Loan.

Now, the library isn't stopping people from using Inter-library Loan but they are requiring people to use Link+ first, and only use Inter-library Loan if Link+ doesn't have the book.

That complicates things for the patrons enormously. Patrons who don't know about Inter-library Loan may give up after they have tried link+.

So Link+ is a dumbing-down of the library, an impoverishment of the patron choices, and it also outsources work that is being done locally by local library workers who handle the manual requests-- that is what Interlibary Loan represents.

Link+ has as a primary focus the automating of the request process.

Now we have also seen Link+ requests being cancelled.

They will say, for example, "Gee, the library you thought had the book doesn't have the book." And that's it. They leave the patrons to their own devices.

This would never happen under Inter-library Loan-- where the library worker would say [about a requested item], " O.K., if it's not available at this one, where else can we get it?"

Try a different avenue.

Exactly. That's right.

They would figure out where and how to get the book or the material until finally they would send the patron a letter or an e-mail and say, "It's on the shelf waiting for you. come and get it."

They could always go all the way up to the Library of Congress couldn't they? In the past?

San Francisco Public Library could get books from any of the 60,000 libraries that are part of World Cat, which is the catalog representing the Inter-library Loan materials.

I am curious... what can people do?

I noticed that you are getting people to sign petitions here today. But, what is coming up with this issue? There is something coming up on the 15th of this month... you say, I understand?

The Board of Supervisors is voting on Tuesday July 15th at their regular meeting on whether to pass the library fees legislation which would authorize the 115 dollar fee and a dozen other fees that we also think are unreasonable: like, 20 bucks to scan a photograph; a dozen fees having to do with use of community rooms, including, for example, 30 bucks to use a microphone, 30 dollars per hour for a powerpoint presentation, and so on-- which really will deter people from using a community room which they otherwise could use for free.

Do you think... public services are slowly becoming privatized, in a sense, with all these fees and charges and so forth... taxes in a disguised form, perhaps?

Well, I think that that is true.

And it is sad that they also present a blockade for the public using a service which is already installed in all these cases and which the public has paid millions of dollars to both provide and maintain.

So, we have spent millions of dollars to have community rooms which are available to people for free.

Why then deter them by these sort of Mickey Mouse bites out of their budgets and out of their organizations? Thirty bucks here and thirty bucks there? And with the Link+?

The library has a traditional Inter-library Loan service that is of long standing.

Why privatize this with a corporation that is making money off of this?

In a sense this undermines a cooperative non-profit interlibrary loan service that has been worked out for years-- that any library basically can join.

One more question....

[A skateboarder rumbles by]

There go the skateboarders! I hope he's a reader too!

He probably is (the skateboaders are good readers)!

Hopefully not both at the same time!

Yeah, hopefully not at the same time!

You have any good news about the library lately, something that is moving in a good direction?

Well, one might say that it is a good direction that the library has tried to legalize more than a dozen fees many of which they imposed, well, all of which they imposed without any authorization from the Supervisors which is required under the City Charter Section 2.109-- and they didn't even get authorization from the Library Commission. So it might be said that at least trying to make it official and legal is a step forward in doing things in a democratic and legal way.

Setting it before people to make a decision, you are saying.

Right.

So that gives the opportunity for the Supervisors and the public to weigh in on whether or not they think this is right.

Do you think people could be calling their supervisors to let them know?

Absolutely.

We are hoping with the petition that we've got, and the flyer that's got information-- we are hoping that people will send letters, and write... call... visit their supervisors-- to tell them what they think.

Time is short because the first vote out of two is on Tuesday the 15th.

So yeah, we are hoping that people will let their supervisors know that they care about this and they don't want this legislation passed.

[A library page wheels by with a tub filled with books collected at the outside bookdrop.]

That is the second time that guy has wheeled by with books from the bookdrop. This is a very popular library isn't it?

It is a very popular library and a lot of people use it and a lot of people get a lot of good stuff out of there-- including me.

I don't know if I said that, but the library's policies have always been fairly reasonable: 10 cents a day for overdue; pay "us" the cost of replacing a book plus a five dollar processing fee.

It's hard to beat that.

The library also has tended to try and work with people if they do have a hardship in paying something. For example, I lost a book one time. They practically begged me to get them a replacement, and even suggested where I could go to get one.

They have really been nice to me on occasion. I can agree.

Yeah. And unfortunately, that option is not open with Link+. You cannot replace under the standard fee arrangement. You can't replace the book with Link+.

There is another nice feature that the library has had and that is for people who have lost the book rather than staying away from the library and worrying about whether they can find it-- the library will allow you to pay for a lost book plus the replacement fee. And if anytime in the following year that book turns up, you can bring it back to the library with your receipt and get everything but the five dollar processing fee back. That's very reasonable and nice. That's not a posibility with Link+.

So again, our library has had a history of being very reasonable with fines and fees.

And that is part of the reason why we are so apalled and shocked by some of these fees they now want to impose-- or authorize.

I am thinking maybe it's an imposition that supercedes San Francisco' control over their own public library. You know, that's what it sounds like to me.

Don't you just love this city and all the special amenities that we have here because we have a different attitude about serving the public?

Well, the citizens of San Francisco have certainly been very generous in funding our libraries through a series of measures that provide guaranteed income to the library-- most recently last year passing Proposition D and a bond program to build and rebuild and renovate libraries. So citizens have been exceptionally generous.

This is one of the most wealthy libraries on a per-capita funding basis of any library in its size catagory nationwide.

And, so that's the good part about the city and about the support the library gets and the funding that it has.

And that is another reason why the library should not impose these nickle and dime petty fees that just hurt people and deter people from use.

Thank you Peter. As always, you are very informative about the library here in San Francisco.