Three. We endorse the report to the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, known by the title "Alternatives for Financing the Public Library," May 1974. The key recommendation of that report is that the Federal Government should provide approximately 20 percent of the funding for public libraries-page 69-and that the budgets for libraries should rise by at least 100 percent in the next several years-page 61. Since the total expenditure for public libraries is now on the order of $1 billion, the Congress should appropriate about $200 million for this purpose, and as budgets rise, look to a staged increase in the next few years to an annual level of about $400 million in Federal aid. LSCA title I aid is now less than $50 million and has been declining. In summary, what the council seeks is a radical review of library aids in the national interest. Vastly increased stores of knowledge are not now available to the general public; illiteracy and semiliteracy are on the rise. Even impotrant hearings before Congress are generally unavailable to the citizens of our country. We see a great danger ahead-an uninformed citizenry manipulated by a very-well-informed elite with a monopoly on the sources of knowledge. The public library is the only existing countervailing force to those developments, and it is too weak to exert substantial influence. The Council believes that the Congress should intervene to rectify this growing imbalance. The cost will be small, the benefits great. The national interest will be well served by the effort. For the moment, we are content, however, with a simple extension of LSCA in its present form. It is up to us in the next year to propose a specific program through the American Library Association which will accord both with our perceptions and with the congressional purpose. I close by reminding this committee that in creating the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (Public Law 91345) Congress affirmed that "library and information services adequate to meet the needs of the United States are essential to achieve national goals. . ." These services are at present inadequate, and Congress can take the leadership to make them adequate. [Material submitted for the record follows:] [New York Times, Nov. 27, 1975] NATION'S LIBRARIES FACE ECONOMIC PINCH (By C. Gerald Fraser) In an outlying area of the Bronx, the city's newest branch library has no books and no librarians; it has never been used. Completed seven months ago, it has been shuttered ever since, the silent symbol of a low priority city service— the public library system. Lacking the visible vitalness of a police precinct, a fire house or a hospital ward, the three library systems in the city are in what one official called a state of suspended animation, awaiting word on how deeply the budget knife will cut. And a similar situation exists across the country. Branches in the city are on the verge of closing, hours have been reduced, librarians and aides have been discharged, bookmobiles have been taken off the streets and fewer books and periodicals are being purchased. Ironically, this comes at a time when use of the libraries is increasing, a trend that is noticeable nationally and is similar to the increase marked during the Depression of the 1930's. In the city, the New York Public Library-82 branches in Manhattan, the Bronx and Staten Island clocking more than 20 million users a year-has been told to cut 8 percent, or $1.2 million, from its budget of $22.5 million. Edwin Holmgren, director of the branch libraries, said that this meant that 8 to 12 branches would be closed, there would be a reduction of hours in the ones remaining open and more than 100 persons would be dismissed. But none of this is certain, and the cuts could go deeper, depending on the final Federal-statecity settlement of the city's fiscal crisis. Mr. Holmgren would not say which branches would close. But he said that the criteria were closeness to other branches, a building's condition, usage and the existence of alternative facilities. All this, he said, is only the latest round in four years of budget cuts. Last July 1 the library dismissed 180 persons, 60 of whom were hired back. The Brooklyn Public Library is ready with a plan to pair 38 branches-that is, to use one branch's staff to run two branches, each of which will be open approximately half a week. The Brooklyn library is planning to discharge 59 persons. In Queens, a court agreed with charges in a suit filed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The suit contended that most of the 11 branches slated for closing were in predominantly black areas and consequently, the closings were discriminatory. After the court's dicision, Milton S. Byam, Queens Borough Public Library director, came up with a plan to pair branches. But this has also been scrapped, and city officials have told him to hold off on closings any and the scheduled dismissal of 56 persons until further notice. Nationally, the inflation is hurting library systems as much as the recession. Eileen Cooke, the Washington-based representative of the American Library Association, said that libraries "haven't even held ground, we've lost ground in terms of buying power." MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTIONS UP Miss Cooke said that the average book price had gone up from $12.65 to $14.09, magazine subscriptions had increased from an average of $17.71 to $19.98 a yearand the $17.71 figure was a 9 percent increase over the preceding year. More and more book money is going into periodicals, she said, and research libraries believe that the purchase of scholarly journals-some of which may cost $65 a year-should be the last item eliminated in order to prevent gaps in collections. Library services are expanding, Miss Cooke explained. Libraries also buy films, phonograph records, tape cassettes; they run tutorial programs, dial-astory programs for children, picture collections and job and neighborhood information centers. "Every dollar into postage," she added, "is a dollar less for books. Electric bills are going out of sight." In Detroit, Clara Jones, city's director of libraries, said: "We've lowered thermostats and in our hallways, for example, I think every third light is on.' In Atlanta, Carlton Rochell, director of the library system, said that closings of branches were under consideration for 1976. This year, residents in four areas where branches were scheduled to be closed appealed to city hall and won a reprieve. "The worse the times get," Mr. Rochell said, "the more use the library gets. We've had more than 23 percent over-all increase [in usuage] this year over last year. The best year in the history of this library," he said, "was 1931." Betty Leroy, Los Angeles director of libraries, said that city was "kind of holding on." "We can now buy the same quantity of books that we did a year ago or before. We can't buy more, but we're keeping up." In New York State, according to Murray L. Bob, director of the ChautauquaCattaraugus Library System in Jamestown and president of the New York Library Association, said that state aid for libraries was "in pretty poor shape." There has been one substantial increase in 10 years, he said. Dinah Lindauer, assistant to the director of the Nassau County Library System, said that the reference book budget had been "cut down to the bone just to keep our subscription." She said also that Suffolk County librarians referred to a recent discharge of 49 persons as the "Wednesday night massacre." Mrs. Jones, of Detroit, who is also president-elect of the American Library Association, said that the public should not let its libraries go by default. "America leads the world in library organizations. The best-organized libraries are in this country. This is where the record of our civilization is kept and, fortunately, ours is not an elitist library system." URBAN, ACADEMIC LIBRARY ADMINISTRATORS DRAFT POSITION PAPER FOR FEDERAL FUNDING IN LANDMARK MEETING Twenty-four administrators from the nation's urban and academic libraries met at a unique meeting initiated by the Urban Libraries Council at Park Rapids, Minn., recently, to consider their rapidly worsening financial plight. The subject was Federal funding. The problem, obviously, is lack of it. Discussion was serious, urgent and often spirited. At the end of their two-day session, they adopted a position paper outlining "what needs to be done on the Federal level to save the nation's libraries, an irreplaceable national asset, from further, serious deterioration." Of significance was the fact that the Park Rapids "Conference on Library Funding" represents perhaps the first time-certainly one of the very few times a national cross section of urban and academic library administrators have interfaced on this vital problem. "While I wasn't surprised, I was pleased to learn we are in total agreement on what needs to be done and how we should do it," said one attendee. "Yes, I guess it would be proper to call us an ad-hoc committee," agreed Ervin J. Gaines, director of the Cleveland Public Library, and Melvin R. George, library director, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, who co-chaired the gathering. "We are few in number, but we believe we speak for the vast majority. We see our meeting as a positive start towards closer, more effective cooperation between urban and academic library administrators to inform the American public, and our national government, of the seriousness and the urgency of the situation." Gaines and George pointed out that two landmark pieces of Federal legislation affecting libraries will expire in 1976: the Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) and the Higher Education Act. "Therefore, we are pledged to promote our objectives in every suitable manner and are determined to take them to Congress in 1976." In its position paper, the Conference on Library Funding asks Congress to address itself to three areas of concern : Direct assistance to every public and academic library; Particular assistance to key library resources at strategic locations in all parts of the nation; and Support for inter-library communications systems and resource sharing enterprises. "We are firm in our conviction that the Federal government must take the lead in accelerating the achievement of these objectives," the position paper says, “and to that end we propose the following: 1. That the Federal government reverse its policy of attempting to reduce Federal aid to libraries. 2. That the Federal government set as its goal, to be reached in a reasonable time, support to academic and public libraries equal to 20 percent of the cost of operation. 3. That the Federal government establish incentives which will increase the share of our collective wealth that is assigned to support library and information services by 100 percent within the next decade. 4. That Federal appropriations be distributed to appropriate state agencies in proportion to the population, taking into consideration geographic factors of the distribution of that population, and that the states be required to do likewise within their boundaries. 5. That the states be required to give direct support to libraries, retaining only enough of Federal revenues to develop the program for communications systems and inter-library flow of information. 6. That states be required to raise their support levels to twice those of the Federal funding. 7. That in the process, there be no abridgement of local control." Conference attendees generally agreed that while elements in this seven-point proposal "might seem to some to be excessive," there was no point in "watering anything down to make it more palatable." Said one: "We're in a crisis stage. Yes, we are. The needs listed in our position paper are a minimum." American Library Association executive director Robert Wedgeworth, an observer at the conference, noted that only about 1 percent of general Federal revenue sharing funds have gone towards the support of libraries. "It's tough to compete with what the public sees as more pressing urban needs, like more firemen and policemen," he said. Echoing Wedgeworth's feeling was Jack G. Duncan, counsel, Sub-Committee on Select Education, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, who also was a conference observer. "Congress has to control the budget," he said. "And when things are tight, just about the first thing to get swiped at are social services, including education. Unfortunately, but it's a fact of life-libraries have very little in the way of 'constituent demand'. I would suggest that you make your case known as widely as possible." Conference co-chairmen Gaines and George concurred: "That's exactly what we plan to do." The conference's position paper was preceded by a background paper outlining reasons for the conference and stating that city librarians, trustees and academic librarians found themselves in accord on several points: 1. That the library crisis is not local or regional, but national in scope. 2. That it is not confined to any single type of library. 3. That the crisis cannot be resolved by local effort. 4. That if the crisis long continues, irreversible damage may be done to the national social fabric. "We perceive that what is required is a program simple in design but profound in its implications," the background paper says. "We trust that our declaration provides a field upon which we can deploy the forces for dynamic political action.” [Park Rapids, Minn., Oct. 13-14, 1975] CONFERENCE ON LIBRARY FUNDING DECLARATION In 1970 the Congress of the United States established the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. At that time the Congress affirmed "that library and information services adequate to meet the needs of the people of the United States are essential to achieve national goals." We subscribe to that Congresisonal declaration. We also believe that the intent of Congress is not being met and that the time is at hand to give the words strength and substance. Libraries are acknowledged on every hand to be crucial to the national welfare. Yet their capabilities are diminished daily by the fiscal crises of our cities and states. The largest and noblest of our libraries, as well as the smallest, are in jeopardy. The spreading crises threaten academic and public libraries alike. National intervention is called for. Library service is indivisible and the social needs to which libraries answer are no respecters of age, wealth, educational attainment or geographical and political boundaries. The need for information is everywhere and simultaneous. We think that library capability can be secured if the Congress will address itself to three areas of concern: Direct assistance to every public and academic library; Particular assistance to key library resources at strategic locations in all parts of the nation; Support for interlibrary communications systems and resource sharing enterprises. We are firm in our conviction that the federal government must take the lead in accelerating the achievement of these objectives. To that end we propose the following: 1. That the federal government reverse its policy of attempting to reduce federal aid to libraries; 2. That the federal government set as its goal, to be reached in a reasonable time, support to academic and public libraries equal to 20 percent of the cost of operation; 3. That the federal government establish incentives which will increase the share of our collective wealth that is assigned to support library and information services by 100 percent within the next decade; 4. That federal appropriations be distributed to appropriate state agencies in proportion to the population, taking into consideration geographic factors of the distribution of that population, and that the states be required to do likewise within their boundaries; 5. That the states be required to give direct support to libraries, retaining only enough of federal revenues to develop the programs for communications systems and interlibrary flow of information; 6. That states be required to raise their support levels to twice those of the federal funding; 7. That in the process there be no abridgement of local control. BACKGROUND For several years the Urban Libraries Council, a voluntary organization of libraries from urban centers of the nation, has been concerned about the failing effectiveness of city libaries. To test that opinion and to try to determine whether the faltering capability of our nation's city libraries had spread, as the Council believed, beyond the borders of major cities and beyond public libraries, the Council called a conference at which all of us, the undersigned, were participants. The meeting was convened during two days, October 13 and 14, 1975, at Park Rapids, Minnesota. The conferees, made up of city librarians, trustees and academic librarians, found themselves in accord on several major points: 1. That the library crisis is not local or regional but national in scope; 2. That it is not confined to any single type of library; 3. That the crisis cannot be resolved by local effort; 4. That if the crisis long continues, irreversible damage may be done to the national social fabric. We believe that we are representative of a wide spectrum of public opinion. Although few in number, we believe that we speak for many and that we can command the public opinion necessary to political action. We perceive that what is required is a program simple in design but profound in its implications. We have prepared a document which we trust meets the dual requirements of simplicity and profundity. We are unanimous in endorsing this program. We pledge ourselves to promote it in every suitable forum, determined to take it to Congress in 1976, a symbolic year for the nation and for its libraries. Two landmark pieces of legislation are due to expire in 1976-the Library Services and Construction Act and the Higher Education Act. We believe that these two acts should not expire, but we also believe that they must be transformed. We trust that our declaration provides a field upon which we can deploy the forces for dynamic political action. Urban Libraries Council ATTENDEES Dr. Arthur C. Banks, President, Greater Hartford Community College, Hartford, Conn. 06106. Randolph A. Brown, Secretary, Urban Library Council, Louisville, Ky. 40202. Mrs. Mary Crisman, Director Emeritus, Tacoma Public Library, Tacoma, Wash. 98402. Ervin J. Gaines, Director, Cleveland Public Library, Cleveland, Ohio 44114. Harold F. Herring, Trustee, Huntsville Public Library, Hunstville, Ala. 35801. Alex Ladenson, Chicago Public Library, Chicago, Ill. 60602. Right Reverend Edward G. Murray, Vice Chairman, Urban Library Council, Cambridge, Mass. 02138. Paxton Price, Librarian, St. Louis Public Library, St. Louis, Mo. 63103. |