Financial Argument for Downsizing the Library Does Not Add Up

The Boston Public Library has proposed to cut 25% of the staff and close 15% of the branches to fill a budget gap that is less than .2% of the city’s total 2011 budget. What we have not been told, by anyone, is how this plan saves any money at all.

First, consider the Central Library and Library Administration. Here 70 workers will be laid off at a time when previous cutbacks already have the library working on a skeleton crew and library usage is up 30%. These 70 are not redundant, they are vital. Remaining workers will be over committed and will work over time. Last year, the library paid out $1.3M in over time, what can we expect next year? When essential workers are rehired in better times, costs associated with rehiring and retraining persons with less experience can be added to the tab.

Second, consider the cost of branch closures. No branch is likely to be sold, so we are left with costs associated with closing and re-purposing, which have not been disclosed, and the cost of losing assets inside the buildings (books, computers, etc.). The Lower Mills branch was renovated in 2005 and we will likely renovate again for its re-purposing. At the Faneuil Branch, abandonment will leave another empty shell in Oak Square making it less attractive to residents and businesses, thus limiting new investment and property tax revenue.

Third, consider the hidden costs. The system being proposed is designed for commuting rather than walking. It places an increased burden on the MBTA, which is already heavily subsidized and loses money every time a patron steps on a bus. The RIDE program costs the state $40 per trip with costs rising every year. As the state funnels more money into the MBTA, other programs will suffer. Other patrons will simply stop going to the library, which will lead to a long-term decrease in literacy and education. Failure to teach our children to read will result in costs associated with failing to meet the No Child Left Behind requirements that loom in 2014, not to mention lawsuits related to violations of one’s right to education that may begin to pile up. Public school systems around the country regularly pay $100,000 per student for additional tutoring and $100M or more for private school tuition when public schools fail to teach children to read. The libraries in our neighborhoods help to stave off this failure, but not when their resources cannot be accessed.

While columns on the supposed benefits of this plan are able to give an exhaustive list, the costs and consequences enumerated above are just a sample. The entire plan is designed to reduce services and interactions with employees and has been presented with a lot of wishful thinking and promises that are likely to come up empty. Without firm commitments and more specific details the plan is simply asking us all to pay more for less.

---