April 14, 2011 – Daily Brief

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lawmakers-pay-20110415,0,4826666.story?track=rss hooray. share the pain.

Don’t expect it to last. When you read a little further into the article, where you would expect that Brown would support the move since he’s being all budgety and stuff, instead you find that he replaced Murray, the head of the California Citizens Compensation Commission that pushed this through with some union thug. Oh yeah, Jerry is real serious about cutting costs.

There’s a big gap between being a union member and being a union thug.

Just looked at the summer reading program flyer — wonder if the City will continue with the weekly magic shows, animal shows, magicians, etc.? It is not clear on the flyer.

I regularly hold items at the Valencia library and I am glad its down to 15. I have had to wait far too long for many things reserved and I am sure people reserving 50 things at a time contributed to those long hold times. Who needs 50 holds anyway – share your toys, like we tell our kids.

Well, if they can read those 50 books in a week, I say let them have at it, otherwise I agree with you Brook. The most I have ever had was six and I probably had to wait for those because someone ahead of was holding 50 items.

This is an example of understanding how different people use the library. I do not generally max out my holds, FYI. There are times, however, when I am planning out curriculum, and need to physically see and handle possible books for study. The synopsis on-line can only tell so much — most times, it is the prose that sells me on the book, not the description. Or, maybe, I’ll need to see which book has better footnotes. Or even map our page numbers for a school year. There are also times when, say, I have 20 books checked out (yes, using them all), and that impacts how many more books I may request. It is not a matter of “not sharing,” but of access.

Again, this is something that a current County librarian could speak to — Claritans usage patterns. All our anecdotal examples are not a standard measure for city-wide usage.

And yet, the effect is the same. When you have books checked out, others don’t have access. Perhaps there should be user fees for people who need to have that many books out at a time.

That is the nature of the library — we are sharing books, so we all wait in line when someone else has a book. User fees for those who cannot afford a personal library? Because one cannot stock books in his/her house? Or does not have access to a technical or school library? Or cannot just “look things up” on the Internet? Sounds like a slippery slope. I don’t know what would be an appropriate check-out limit. I know that there have been times when I have maxed out mine, and I am sure there are circumstances when others max out theirs. Again, this an issue that someone with access to library usage patterns could address with authority. But, to arbitrarily lower the check out limits, from 50 to 15, when the City has promised “more and better” over and over and over again, feels like an “I told you so.” It makes me sad.

I understand your disappointment, but it’s hard to feel sympathy. There is sharing and there is hogging. I think 50 books is an excessively generous limit.

Way to shut down a conversation with name calling. I assure you that there are legitimate reasons for checking out/placing a hold on 50 items, none of which has to do with hogging. I would be glad to outline some specific examples, if anyone is interested. In any case, I am not looking for your sympathy. I am proposing that: A) the City promised more and better, and, instead, services are being cut; and, B) changes in library services should be based on an understanding of usage patterns, which neither the City nor LSSI has accessed. Anecdotal stories of how you use the libraries, or how I use the libraries, are not the basis for setting library policies. Libraries are intended to serve a broad community, the needs of which may be outside one’s realm of experience.

Here are a few numbers: if I have 50 items out of County’s 7 million available items, that is only .000000071% of the items. If I hold 50 items from ILN’s million unique title selection, I hold .0000005% of the items. Pretty smallishly smally small numbers. Besides, the City has said that it will stock our shelves with high demand books, so, presumably, there will not be a waiting list for any book, anyway. What’s the difference if someone checks out 50 lonely books, that no one else is reading? Oh yeah, its all about saving money: LSSI makes a profit on the backs of the people.