Regionalism and Libraries
I'm divided (ha ha) on the issue. The division is between the urban enthusiast in me, and the librarian in me. On one hand, I see the benefits of shared services. On the other hand, there's the possible Barnes-and-Noble-ization of the region's libraries.
Out of the wide range of services that a municipality provides, I think that there are some that probably are more, I don't know, personal. Libraries are one of those services.
For the uninitiated, here is an ultra-brief description of how libraries get filled up with books.
Books just don't arrive on the shelf. Someone has to order them. If the library is a large one with many branches, it would be chaos for librarians in every branch to be ordering books. So there's usually a centralized collections department that orders for the whole system. Oftentimes, librarians in the branches get a say about what gets ordered, but often, the collections department, who may or may not have any experience with the communities served by the branches, (and who may or may not have any experience working with the public at all), is the ultimate decision-maker. The end result is that all the branches end up receiving varying quantities of more or less the same stuff.
In a smaller library, it's usually the librarians who have contact with the public who do the ordering of books. The collection gets specialized to the needs/desires/demands of the immediate community.
(There are exceptions to this, of course. Cleveland Public Library, for one. Cleveland Public Library has an hugely diverse collection.)
So if you take away local control and squish all the libraries under one bookish umbrella - say, the Cuyahoga County Library system - you could end up with a more homogenized collection: a lot of choices, perhaps, but not a lot of selection. I say could instead of will because it depends on what that new Pangaea-esque library system's collection policy would be. I won't lie -- the trend now in public libraries is to buy more of what's popular -- John Grisham, The Secret -- than what's useful, traditional, or a "staple of literature."
Why? Because libraries have limited budgets.
Funding for libraries is generally doing one of two things: shrinking or stagnating. In Ohio, libraries get more state funding based on how many items they circulate. Do you see where this is going? If the library buys more popular items, they get more circulation, and the library gets more money.
What's wrong with that? you might ask. Well, the trouble is - and this is where the Library Establishment and I seem to disagree - that while DVD-borrowing patrons might think of the library as a "free Blockbuster," book-borrowing patrons do NOT think of the library as a "free Barnes and Noble." They expect the library to be a repository, at least sort of a complete archive of the human record. They expect the library to have things that they can't find at Barnes and Noble (e.g., obscure plumbing manuals), or which they can't afford to buy tons of at Barnes and Noble (e.g., children's picture books).
A consolidated library system in Cuyahoga County would have to take that into consideration.
Labels: Cleveland, Libraries, Regionalism