Library changes, for the better?

[flowerseverywhere]

A few years ago our county library system went to a vote to hand over management to a company out of Germantown, MD. As you can imagine, it was quite a fight as people would no longer be county employees, many jobs would be handled from after, and especially librarian jobs would be lost. Also, decisions about things like media would not be local.

Two years later this this is what has happened and I have observed

space has expanded as the many administrative offices have been converted to patron use and there is more digital content.

hours have expanded

the bookmobile has been discontinued

there seem to be more romance type novels, but I could be wrong about this. Also, it may be what people want.

there are fewer craft type books (although this may be due more to the explosion of online resources of patterns, instructions and photos)

there has been an expansion of the computer and technology equipment available, including a 3d printer.

So so this was a conundrum. Lose some local jobs in order to run a library more efficiently, at the same time giving up local control. Personally, I see many good changes. Progress does have some drawbacks though with local job loss.

[LDAHL]

Sounds liked it worked out well in this case.

I think that that with some possible exceptions in public safety and human services, there are a lot of local government functions that can be effectively outsourced. I doubt the average taxpayer much cares about who cuts the paychecks if the potholes are being filled and the garbage is collected. If anything, in this age of pension envy, there may be some sentiment to keep government payrolls to a minimum. The local job loss issue is real, but probably of most interest to public service workers and their unions, but they have been seeing diminished influence as various jurisdictions have been eliminating residency requirements and closed shops.

[LessStuff]

I think libraries are having a hard time staying open (like newspapers). Our libraries have added (more) computers and now have lots of movies on DVD. When I go there, it seems like many people are surfing the net or playing games online, or are checking out movies. I'm not sure how many books actually get read anymore. That said, our kids have and continue to check out lots of books, as do my wife and I. The thing I like best is they made inter-library transfers free (used to be $1), so now we can get a book from any of our dozen or so countywide libraries, though it can take up to a week to arrive.
I'm not sure what the answer for libraries is, but the future is challenging...

[Ultralight]

I graduated from library school with my MLIS in 2010. Most people I graduated with were unable to find a job in a library. A few did, you know, here and there. But it took them a year or two. And the gig may have been only part-time or not as an actual librarian, just as an assistant.

But the majority of folks never landed a library job at all. They just worked as temps in offices or some such.

[ZanaHart]

Interesting thread. I'm a librarian by background, got my MLS (before the information science age, UltraliteAngler) in 1969 when "you can always get a job as a librarian" was still true. I've worked at several different libraries and library systems, and most recently was on the library board of the Northern Saguache County Library District. This is a rural two-library district with pretty heavy use of all sorts.

I don't keep up with library news a lot and hadn't heard about that management company in MD. But I would bet that it has librarians on staff!

[rodeosweetheart]

All the libraries that we have used have a heavy local flavor, so it would make me worried about losing that, to out source library decisions.

[LDAHL]

I graduated from library school with my MLIS in 2010. Most people I graduated with were unable to find a job in a library. A few did, you know, here and there. But it took them a year or two. And the gig may have been only part-time or not as an actual librarian, just as an assistant.

But the majority of folks never landed a library job at all. They just worked as temps in offices or some such.

Do you think that's due to a general decline in reading, increased automation of traditional librarian functions, Amazon, changed budget priorities and consolidation or some combination of factors?

[Ultralight]

Do you think that's due to a general decline in reading, increased automation of traditional librarian functions, Amazon, changed budget priorities and consolidation or some combination of factors?

I think it is a combination of those, and probably a few other things too. In several of my library classes back in grad school I got this sense from the professors and fellow students that we were in this apocalypse of the library as an institution. It was like we were autoworkers in Detroit as it rusted out...

[oldhat]

Outsourcing public service jobs to for-profit companies is not something I'm generally in favor of, since it continues the erosion of the middle class by replacing good-paying jobs with the cheapest employees the for-profit company can find. It's true that a town might save some tax money by doing this, but it's not good for the long-term economic health of the community. People who work for a town, by and large, spend their paychecks in that town. When public services are run by a for-profit, that profit doesn't benefit the local economy; it goes into the pockets of the company's owners or stockholders.

[Ultralight]

Outsourcing public service jobs to for-profit companies is not something I'm generally in favor of, since it continues the erosion of the middle class by replacing good-paying jobs with the cheapest employees the for-profit company can find. It's true that a town might save some tax money by doing this, but it's not good for the long-term economic health of the community. People who work for a town, by and large, spend their paychecks in that town. When public services are run by a for-profit, that profit doesn't benefit the local economy; it goes into the pockets of the company's owners or stockholders.

Mark my words: We will not learn this lesson until it is far too late.

[LDAHL]

In my experience in working in local government, there are basically three approaches to delivering public services more efficiently:

Automate manual processes. Replace the hundred year old plat books (and the custodians) with a database of scanned images the public can access over the internet. The challenge here is replacing large numbers of clerical staff with fewer but more highly skilled professional and technical people (and retaining them in competitive job markets).

Consolidate services to eliminate duplication and spread overhead costs over a broader base. There are more police chiefs and property tax assessors in Wisconsin than in California. You could probably save a lot in those areas by delivering those services on a regional or metropolitan basis, but you need to deal with a lot of self-interested, parochial opposition in local and state politics to make it happen.

Outsource services that can be provided more efficiently by specialist firms. If someone else can provide oil changes or psychiatric evaluations at a lower cost, it’s hard to justify maintaining the capability in-house for all but the largest governments. The challenge here is getting competitive bids and writing good contracts. It often makes sense where possible to maintain multiple public and private sources to maintain competition.

I understand the desire to maintain well compensated local jobs, but that would be a hard sell with the voters if it comes at the expense of higher taxes. I don't see a lot of sentiment out there for big government payrolls. If anything, the prevailing view of public employees is pretty negative.

[Ultralight]

In my experience in working in local government, there are basically three approaches to delivering public services more efficiently:

Automate manual processes. Replace the hundred year old plat books (and the custodians) with a database of scanned images the public can access over the internet. The challenge here is replacing large numbers of clerical staff with fewer but more highly skilled professional and technical people (and retaining them in competitive job markets).

Consolidate services to eliminate duplication and spread overhead costs over a broader base. There are more police chiefs and property tax assessors in Wisconsin than in California. You could probably save a lot in those areas by delivering those services on a regional or metropolitan basis, but you need to deal with a lot of self-interested, parochial opposition in local and state politics to make it happen.

Outsource services that can be provided more efficiently by specialist firms. If someone else can provide oil changes or psychiatric evaluations at a lower cost, it’s hard to justify maintaining the capability in-house for all but the largest governments. The challenge here is getting competitive bids and writing good contracts. It often makes sense where possible to maintain multiple public and private sources to maintain competition.

I understand the desire to maintain well compensated local jobs, but that would be a hard sell with the voters if it comes at the expense of higher taxes. I don't see a lot of sentiment out there for big government payrolls. If anything, the prevailing view of public employees is pretty negative.

Apocalyptic.

[freshstart]

+2 to old hat

the library feels like the last untouched agency threatened by outsourcing. I doubt a for-profit will maintain the local flavor with material tailored to the community the library is in. Mine has tons of unique programming and lending materials. Our staff are from our community and can answer just about any question you have about it. They are poorly paid, I don't mind paying more in taxes so they can receive county benefits. My library has always been called the Free Public Library and I want to keep it that way. Maybe it's me, but much of what once were county and state jobs that have been given to the biggest bidder, have not fared well for the community. Charter schools were a huge failure here. Leave my library alone.

[Rogar]

I became friends with the librarian in the technical library of my former employer. A few years ago the company totally eliminated the librarian positions, but left the library open for research. My friend then went to work as a librarian in the technical library of a government research facility that had 6 librarian positions. Just last week 3 of the librarians, half the staff, were laid off (my friend survived). I'm not expert enough to comment on all public libraries, but I have a strong suspicion that some or many may not have kept up with the mass amounts of digital information and systems available. Things that make research much easier to do from one's own desk, digital books and magazines that can be downloaded at home, and library systems that don't require specially trained people to hunt down publications and books. I'm a big lover of books and old books. In the hard copy form. It's sort of a sad trend, but libraries are the low hanging fruit for budget cuts. In the OP, it actually sounds like the public service from contractor improved significantly including modernizing things to provide more value to the public. As a tax payer, I would rather see this than have the libraries hang on as dinosaurs going down the road to obsolescence.

[LDAHL]

Apocalyptic.

Was it apocalyptic when we transitioned from an economy that required most of us to work as farm laborers?

I don't think baking inefficiency into government as a make-work measure by keeping taxes high offers much as an economic development tool. One less local dollar going to government means one more dollar available for local investment or consumption.

[Ultralight]

Was it apocalyptic when we transitioned from an economy that required most of us to work as farm laborers?

I don't think baking inefficiency into government as a make-work measure by keeping taxes high offers much as an economic development tool. One less local dollar going to government means one more dollar available for local investment or consumption.

I'd say it was part of a long apocalypse that started at the dawn of "civilization." ;)

[iris lilies]

Recently retired from the public library world, I am neither pro or con outsourcing library functions. It may be good, it may be not so good, it may be awful, all depends on the contracts and parties at either end.

The big outsourcing efforts stared decades ago, and in my area of Libraries --cataloging and processing. About 1975 large computer systems were built to allow libraries to share a catalog record in digital form, and while much wailing and knashing of teeth undoubtedly took place back then, it's hard for me to argue with efficiency.

OP glad your local library's experience does not appear to,be a disaster.

[LDAHL]

I'd say it was part of a long apocalypse that started at the dawn of "civilization." ;)

I'm very fond of civilization. I'm guessing most of the people pining for noble savagery would scream bloody murder if you gave it to them.

[Ultralight]

I'm very fond of civilization. I'm guessing most of the people pining for noble savagery would scream bloody murder if you gave it to them.

Oh yeah, take us out of civilization and dump us in the wild and we'd totally lose it.

But I think with a slow, steady re-wilding we'd be better off.

[LDAHL]

Oh yeah, take us out of civilization and dump us in the wild and we'd totally lose it.

But I think with a slow, steady re-wilding we'd be better off.

What would you dispense with first? Law? Literacy? Medicine? Agriculture?

[Ultralight]

What would you dispense with first? Law? Literacy? Medicine? Agriculture?

This is a thought exercise?

[LDAHL]

This is a thought exercise?

Sure. I'm curious about how you'd put the genie back in the bottle.

[Ultralight]

Sure. I'm curious about how you'd put the genie back in the bottle.

I am always open to a thought exercise.

If I had a magic wand I think I'd first get rid of all the TVs, then all the fast food restaurants, then all the cars (except ambulances and those needed for people with medical problems that make them immobile).

[Lainey]

Outsourcing public service jobs to for-profit companies is not something I'm generally in favor of, since it continues the erosion of the middle class by replacing good-paying jobs with the cheapest employees the for-profit company can find. It's true that a town might save some tax money by doing this, but it's not good for the long-term economic health of the community. People who work for a town, by and large, spend their paychecks in that town. When public services are run by a for-profit, that profit doesn't benefit the local economy; it goes into the pockets of the company's owners or stockholders.

+1
I don't want to see our vital public services with an added layer of for-profit management. This meme that privatization is automatically better is really tiresome.

Read about the privatization of the water system in Atlanta GA for starters. Read about the for-profit prison systems. And we all need look no farther than our for-profit health insurance system. Enough.

[LDAHL]

I am always open to a thought exercise.

If I had a magic wand I think I'd first get rid of all the TVs, then all the fast food restaurants, then all the cars (except ambulances and those needed for people with medical problems that make them immobile).

So it would be something like 1910 with air conditioning?

[Ultralight]

+1
I don't want to see our vital public services with an added layer of for-profit management. This meme that privatization is automatically better is really tiresome.

Read about the privatization of the water system in Atlanta GA for starters. Read about the for-profit prison systems. And we all need look no farther than our for-profit health insurance system. Enough.

:+1:

[Ultralight]

So it would be something like 1910 with air conditioning?

Maybe something like that. But that would just be the first wave of the wand.

[LDAHL]

I don't want to see our vital public services with an added layer of for-profit management. This meme that privatization is automatically better is really tiresome.


It can be done badly, or it can be done well (as was apparently the case with the OP). It's not a panacea, but it can work when the provider's profit margin is lower than the public overhead.

[Ultralight]

It can be done badly, or it can be done well (as was apparently the case with the OP). It's not a panacea, but it can work when the provider's profit margin is lower than the public overhead.

I would call this rather shallow thinking, no offense.

[LDAHL]

I would call this rather shallow thinking, no offense.

It's just maximizing the service delivered for the taxpayers' money. There's no mystical significance attached to who fills the pothole.

[kib]

I've decided if I had a magic wand I'd take it very slowly. My first pass: from now on, every night, everyone on earth gets a wonderful night's sleep. Deep and relaxing, and the kind where you have a nice dream that has you waking up glowing and even laughing in the morning. No consequences whatsoever - no one gets murdered or raped or freezes to death in their sleep, or even fired for taking a full 8 hours.

ETA: I think if you are trying to build strong community, there is significance to who fills the potholes and who writes the checks. If you live in a large place where the connection between individuals is a lot less immediate, perhaps not so much.

[freshstart]

I've decided if I had a magic wand I'd take it very slowly. My first pass: from now on, every night, everyone on earth gets a wonderful night's sleep. Deep and relaxing, and the kind where you have a nice dream that has you waking up glowing and even laughing in the morning. No consequences whatsoever - no one gets murdered or raped or freezes to death in their sleep, or even fired for taking a full 8 hours.



I'm down so far, would you like to run for President, lol? I'd work on World hunger and knocking diarrhea and HIV from 7 and 8 of the top ten killers World wide. Of course my memory won't site the source of the article, but providing safe drinking water to the world and eradicating death by diarrhea are in a surprisingly do-able range of financial cost.

[Gregg]

If I had a magic wand I think I'd first get rid of all the TVs...

Whether you consider TV the ultimate evil in the dumbing down of our society or simply a different delivery system for what used to come in books I don't think it would be hard to make a case that its played a part in the demise of the book business (including the library system).

[Tenngal]

let's see, we are giving up local control along with local jobs. This is a no win situation. There will be a loss of service, knowledge and personal attention.
We've seen it all before.

[Gregg]

Was it apocalyptic when we transitioned from an economy that required most of us to work as farm laborers?

Just a few generations ago a grain farmer with a few sons or a hired hand could farm 20 or 30 acres. With modern machinery the same collection of people can farm thousands of acres and the production per acre is several fold what it was then. I don't see us going back to the future any time soon.

One of the more interesting challenges facing us in the future, IMO, is what will people actually do with their time? As the machine age, the computer age, robotics, AI, et al, continue to consolidate and accelerate there will be less and less need for human labor. With a society that still bases compensation on production where will that leave the majority who doesn't own the machines? Will it be considered a welfare state if labor is not required and education is free (because there is nothing else to do) so most of the population is sitting around quoting Aristotle and peeling grapes in opposition to the current stereotype of making babies and smoking crack? Will the Donalds of the future deny entry to the deadbeats of the 99% even though there are no options to be/do anything else?

[Ultralight]

I'm down so far, would you like to run for President, lol? I'd work on World hunger and knocking diarrhea and HIV from 7 and 8 of the top ten killers World wide. Of course my memory won't site the source of the article, but providing safe drinking water to the world and eradicating death by diarrhea are in a surprisingly do-able range of financial cost.

Trust me, you'd eventually find major fault with my leadership. For instance, I'd like us all to go back to living in Teepees and such within 5 generations. haha

[Williamsmith]

A cure for Alzheimer's Disease....starting with our politicians.

[jp1]

Whether you consider TV the ultimate evil in the dumbing down of our society or simply a different delivery system for what used to come in books I don't think it would be hard to make a case that its played a part in the demise of the book business (including the library system).

I can't find historical, pre-TV numbers to compare to but I'd hardly call a $28 billion industry one that has demised:

http://publishers.org/news/us-publishing-industry%E2%80%99s-annual-survey-reveals-28-billion-revenue-2014

And for the tv haters out there worried about the future generations not knowing how to read a book, the children's and young adult categories had the biggest growth. From the article: "The area of largest growth for the trade category was children & young adult, which had double-digit growth in both revenue (20.9%) and units (13.5%). Children & young adult fiction surpassed the adult fiction market with 843 million units and 746 million units sold respectively."

[LDAHL]

let's see, we are giving up local control along with local jobs. This is a no win situation. There will be a loss of service, knowledge and personal attention.
We've seen it all before.

You retain local control as long as you write the contract. Most of the jobs remain local as well (although with a different colored paycheck), although you might lose some administrators, which is typically the point of the exercise. I'm not convinced you get a better degree of "personal attention" from a public employee than a private employee. Smaller numbers of midlevel bureaucrats might be a "hit" to the middle class, but lower property and income taxes would be a benefit.

[LDAHL]

I can't find historical, pre-TV numbers to compare to but I'd hardly call a $28 billion industry one that has demised:

http://publishers.org/news/us-publishing-industry%E2%80%99s-annual-survey-reveals-28-billion-revenue-2014

And for the tv haters out there worried about the future generations not knowing how to read a book, the children's and young adult categories had the biggest growth. From the article: "The area of largest growth for the trade category was children & young adult, which had double-digit growth in both revenue (20.9%) and units (13.5%). Children & young adult fiction surpassed the adult fiction market with 843 million units and 746 million units sold respectively."

Personally, I'm finding more good stuff on TV now than at any other point in my life. I'm not sure why so many look at it as such a shibboleth of stupefaction. It seems to have become a symbol for "stuff we don't like", like SUVs, big box stores or golf courses.

[LDAHL]

Just a few generations ago a grain farmer with a few sons or a hired hand could farm 20 or 30 acres. With modern machinery the same collection of people can farm thousands of acres and the production per acre is several fold what it was then. I don't see us going back to the future any time soon.

One of the more interesting challenges facing us in the future, IMO, is what will people actually do with their time? As the machine age, the computer age, robotics, AI, et al, continue to consolidate and accelerate there will be less and less need for human labor. With a society that still bases compensation on production where will that leave the majority who doesn't own the machines? Will it be considered a welfare state if labor is not required and education is free (because there is nothing else to do) so most of the population is sitting around quoting Aristotle and peeling grapes in opposition to the current stereotype of making babies and smoking crack? Will the Donalds of the future deny entry to the deadbeats of the 99% even though there are no options to be/do anything else?

It's certainly a possibility, especially as "low-skilled" keeps getting defined up. If it happens like that, we will probably settle somewhere on a spectrum between perpetual grad school and a nation of day traders.

[JaneV2.0]

I think privatization is fine for electronics and high-end shoe manufacturers; the commons, not so much. Whenever greed--excuse me, shareholder interests--gets involved, quality suffers, wages fall, and the lowest common denominator prevails. Washington recently voted to privatize booze sales. Hundreds of state workers were laid off, alcohol prices skyrocketed, and service and selection vanished. If I were a big booze consumer, I'd be livid.

[JaneV2.0]

Personally, I'm finding more good stuff on TV now than at any other point in my life. I'm not sure why so many look at it as such a shibboleth of stupefaction. It seems to have become a symbol for "stuff we don't like", like SUVs, big box stores or golf courses.

I've never gotten that, either. Broadcasting could certainly produce more varied fare than it does, but there are more choices now than ever. IMO, it's just another source of content, and it does some things--nature and travel documentaries, for example--splendidly.

[miradoblackwarrior]

As a public librarian, I'd like to add my two cents. Just because the paycheck had a different origin, doesn't make this idea "good." As a rule, librarians studiously fight for the privacy and libertarian rights of every individual, citizen or no. With privatization, the information retained in library records will go out to the highest bidder--all part of the profit-making business. That means that if you try check out a book that the private corporation doesn't want you to have, red flags will go up, and your civil liberties will be just a little more eroded. I see privatization schemes as a means to cutting the freedoms of patrons, as the company chooses the books it wants to buy for the citizens, and trims the services, bit by bit, all for the bottom line. Welcome to 1984.

Our previous director entertained publishers wanting to buy our materials "for us." That little scheme would have cut several jobs (mine, included), as we would no longer have a purpose to work at our library. Our director at the time was more interested in her own bottom line than the benefits of our patrons. I can only surmise that these publishers had their own purposes, without the benefit of experience and review resources, to make their "suggestions." I am no fool--I know what would have appeared on our shelves. Why this former director chose to threaten the livelihoods of several staff members to adopt this so-called "better" model remains unclear. Fortunately, she moved on to another library before these schemes could be established.

Yes, libraries have always been the lowest fruit on the tree when it comes to municipal budgets. However, we are also the busiest when times grow difficult. Once a library goes private, the patrons will lose, bit by bit, step by step. As it is, we are slowly adapting to new technology which, fortunately, is not well-received by our patrons. I expect it is the wave of the future.

It disgusts me, but I am powerless to stop it. With the changes coming into focus, I can see cashier-like employees checking out books, using scanners, the patron slipping their cards in little slots. No more conversations with librarians, no more the trust that our patrons empirically know when they come through our doors, knowing that we do not judge, nor report their activities. My relationships with my patrons was the first reason I went to library school in the first place. Now, as I near retirement age, I am filled with disgust and trepidation. The public library is slowly slipping away, all for the price of the bottom line.

[Gregg]

Personally, I'm finding more good stuff on TV now than at any other point in my life. I'm not sure why so many look at it as such a shibboleth of stupefaction. It seems to have become a symbol for "stuff we don't like", like SUVs, big box stores or golf courses.

I have to agree. In the past we've usually found one or two shows in any given year that we enjoyed enough to try to follow. Now we have to exhibit a little self control because there are several options available on most nights that we would likely enjoy. I attribute that to the proliferation of high quality independent sources and the big boys recognizing the need to compete with them. Capitalism at work! :) It can also be viewed, in the best of times, as a procreation of the arts and it is art that's available to almost everyone. And just like literature, for every great American novel there are plenty of hacks so it is still up to the patrons to exercise some discretion.

[LDAHL]

I think privatization is fine for electronics and high-end shoe manufacturers; the commons, not so much. Whenever greed--excuse me, shareholder interests--gets involved, quality suffers, wages fall, and the lowest common denominator prevails. Washington recently voted to privatize booze sales. Hundreds of state workers were laid off, alcohol prices skyrocketed, and service and selection vanished. If I were a big booze consumer, I'd be livid.

The cost of tipple shot up because of new taxes imposed on retailers and distributors, not because the Costcos of the world couldn't compete with government efficiency.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/30/two-years-after-liquor-privatization-booze-in-washington-state-costs-more/

[LDAHL]

As a public librarian, I'd like to add my two cents. Just because the paycheck had a different origin, doesn't make this idea "good." As a rule, librarians studiously fight for the privacy and libertarian rights of every individual, citizen or no. With privatization, the information retained in library records will go out to the highest bidder--all part of the profit-making business. That means that if you try check out a book that the private corporation doesn't want you to have, red flags will go up, and your civil liberties will be just a little more eroded. I see privatization schemes as a means to cutting the freedoms of patrons, as the company chooses the books it wants to buy for the citizens, and trims the services, bit by bit, all for the bottom line. Welcome to 1984.

Our previous director entertained publishers wanting to buy our materials "for us." That little scheme would have cut several jobs (mine, included), as we would no longer have a purpose to work at our library. Our director at the time was more interested in her own bottom line than the benefits of our patrons. I can only surmise that these publishers had their own purposes, without the benefit of experience and review resources, to make their "suggestions." I am no fool--I know what would have appeared on our shelves. Why this former director chose to threaten the livelihoods of several staff members to adopt this so-called "better" model remains unclear. Fortunately, she moved on to another library before these schemes could be established.

Yes, libraries have always been the lowest fruit on the tree when it comes to municipal budgets. However, we are also the busiest when times grow difficult. Once a library goes private, the patrons will lose, bit by bit, step by step. As it is, we are slowly adapting to new technology which, fortunately, is not well-received by our patrons. I expect it is the wave of the future.

It disgusts me, but I am powerless to stop it. With the changes coming into focus, I can see cashier-like employees checking out books, using scanners, the patron slipping their cards in little slots. No more conversations with librarians, no more the trust that our patrons empirically know when they come through our doors, knowing that we do not judge, nor report their activities. My relationships with my patrons was the first reason I went to library school in the first place. Now, as I near retirement age, I am filled with disgust and trepidation. The public library is slowly slipping away, all for the price of the bottom line.

I like my local library a lot, although it's been many years since I needed any contact with a librarian. It may be in the future that apart from a few back office technical specialists they will become fairly rare. Much like bank tellers. I do agree that in tight fiscal situations most governments put libraries in the tier of nice to have but not essential functions such as golf courses, museums or ice rinks. Public Safety, Highways and Human Services will always get the lion's share.

As to the superiority of incorruptible public servants over churlish corporate minions, I would have to say that based on my experience in government that it depends on the specific situation which approach is best.

[Ultralight]

"The rise of capitalist practice and morality brought with it a radical revision of how the commons are treated, and also of how they are conceived." --
Noam Chomsky

[Lainey]

And once these services are privatized, good luck getting that reversed if it doesn't work out. As in, hey you promised charter schools would be superior to public schools, and surprise, it turns out the statistics say they are not.
So can we turn that back in to a public school? ha ha ha

yes, public schools are on my mind because a relative has now worked in a public school in Phila for 5 years without a raise. There's no school nurse, no air conditioning, no teacher's aides, barely any supplies, and here's a new one: the 3rd grade hasn't had a teacher all year so they just make those kids sit in any classroom with available seats - 1st grade, 5th grade, doesn't matter. How is a for-profit charter school going to "fix" this? It doesn't.

[Ultralight]

And once these services are privatized, good luck getting that reversed if it doesn't work out. As in, hey you promised charter schools would be superior to public schools, and surprise, it turns out the statistics say they are not.
So can we turn that back in to a public school? ha ha ha

yes, public schools are on my mind because a relative has now worked in a public school in Phila for 5 years without a raise. There's no school nurse, no air conditioning, no teacher's aides, barely any supplies, and here's a new one: the 3rd grade hasn't had a teacher all year so they just make those kids sit in any classroom with available seats - 1st grade, 5th grade, doesn't matter. How is a for-profit charter school going to "fix" this? It doesn't.

Shocking but not shocking.

[LDAHL]

And once these services are privatized, good luck getting that reversed if it doesn't work out. As in, hey you promised charter schools would be superior to public schools, and surprise, it turns out the statistics say they are not.
So can we turn that back in to a public school? ha ha ha

yes, public schools are on my mind because a relative has now worked in a public school in Phila for 5 years without a raise. There's no school nurse, no air conditioning, no teacher's aides, barely any supplies, and here's a new one: the 3rd grade hasn't had a teacher all year so they just make those kids sit in any classroom with available seats - 1st grade, 5th grade, doesn't matter. How is a for-profit charter school going to "fix" this? It doesn't.

I certainly agree with you that a poorly funded, poorly managed charter school can perform as badly as a poorly funded, badly managed public school. That is not, however, a very convincing argument in favor of either model. I do think the problems of some of our large urban school systems go way beyond management models or outsourcing decisions.

In my family, we elected a third model and send our daughter to a private (Catholic) school. In our case, it has worked out very well. I have had people tell me that is wrong, arguing that unless enough people provide their kids as hostages schools won't get the "proper support". My response is that my child's best interests weigh more heavily with me than their theories of social justice.

[freshstart]

As a public librarian, I'd like to add my two cents. Just because the paycheck had a different origin, doesn't make this idea "good." As a rule, librarians studiously fight for the privacy and libertarian rights of every individual, citizen or no. With privatization, the information retained in library records will go out to the highest bidder--all part of the profit-making business. That means that if you try check out a book that the private corporation doesn't want you to have, red flags will go up, and your civil liberties will be just a little more eroded. I see privatization schemes as a means to cutting the freedoms of patrons, as the company chooses the books it wants to buy for the citizens, and trims the services, bit by bit, all for the bottom line. Welcome to 1984.

Yes, libraries have always been the lowest fruit on the tree when it comes to municipal budgets. However, we are also the busiest when times grow difficult. Once a library goes private, the patrons will lose, bit by bit, step by step. As it is, we are slowly adapting to new technology which, fortunately, is not well-received by our patrons. I expect it is the wave of the future.

It disgusts me, but I am powerless to stop it. With the changes coming into focus, I can see cashier-like employees checking out books, using scanners, the patron slipping their cards in little slots. No more conversations with librarians, no more the trust that our patrons empirically know when they come through our doors, knowing that we do not judge, nor report their activities. My relationships with my patrons was the first reason I went to library school in the first place. Now, as I near retirement age, I am filled with disgust and trepidation. The public library is slowly slipping away, all for the price of the bottom line.

ITA with what you are saying. I want librarians picking our materials, not publishers. I want librarians who fight like those 5 fought and won when library records were going to be part of the Patriot Act. They were my heroes.

We already have automatic check out machines and rarely are they used, I'm happy to see, people actually wait in line for a human. When I went from being the person who borrowed the most ILL books and stopped in several times weekly to never coming in when I got sick, they noticed. When I came back a year later, they gathered together and hugged me and asked where the heck had I been, they thought I had died, lol. I was probably the most PITA patron with all that ILL stuff, yet they always were sweet as could be to my children and me. They recommend things they think I will like or point out a good program coming up. They matter in our community. I will be devastated if my library goes private, I see nothing good coming of that.

[freshstart]

Trust me, you'd eventually find major fault with my leadership. For instance, I'd like us all to go back to living in Teepees and such within 5 generations. haha

yeah, about that, I meant Kib. Sorry, I want indoor plumbing, vaccinations and tivo, lol