Dscn0421_small
Reputation: 1195

What financial effect do my overdue books have on the seattle public library system?

I utilize the SPL a LOT-- I'm an avid reader, and I use the SPL's awesome holds system to get the books I'd like to read delivered to my branch, check out at least 3-4 books a week, and also check out quite a few e-books per month. I also, however, end up having slightly late materials on a fairly regular basis, and I find myself wondering how this affects the library's function. If I pay my fines (which I always do relatively quickly, despite the frustrating cash or check only policy), do my late fees actually make up for the late books or even help the library by providing cash flow, or do my late books create enough extra work that the late fees barely cover it (or not at all)? In these times, I know the library is struggling with funding, and if my own absentmindedness/nonchalance about late books is hurting them, I'll clean up my act. On the other hand, if late fees in general help keep the library functioning, I'm happy to keep paying them. I know the commonsense answer is just to return my books on time and donate to the library (which I have done occasionally), but I'm interested to hear about the particular impact of my borrowing/returning behaviors on the library's financial functioning.

Answer this question or share it with a smart friend:

Avatar_default
Type your answer here…

3 Answers

  • Photo_on_2011-05-23_at_16
    Reputation: 718

    The Seattle Public Library sent me to collections for $5. This may not explicitly answer your question, but those librarians are serious!

    Share this answer with a friend:
  • Icon_small
    Reputation: 1627

    SPL just raised the rates and lowered the amount of fees you can rack up before you have to pay, so I'm guessing that fines are a revenue source. It does make me feel a little less like a putz when I can't finish a book in several weeks (even after two renewals).

    Share this answer with a friend:
  • Sacri_ordines_by_charism_small
    Reputation: 3723

    Well, sphinxemma, 'common sense' is different for each person. "Common" in the eye of the beholder ;)

    No, it's not a primary revenue source... the fees are more of a defensive move instead -

    It's a way to keep books in circulation to more citizens and not have to BUY as many books (or other media) to begin with, which equals a much MUCH bigger savings/revenue than petty little overdue fees.
    (Maybe think of it like buses: If everyone wanted to ride the bus from start-of-route to the end-of-route, no one inbetween would get to have a seat ever. Late fees are kinda like encouraging you to get off/on at your own damn stop and not use the bus as a sightseeing vehicle, so that the nice pregnant lady might have a chance of sitting down, too).

    Not to say overdue materials don't add labor to the overall process, because late materials do delay other users, some of whom are waiting to use them as required homework materials, or (arguably more importantly) teachers are waiting to use them as teaching materials. But a trend of late and overlate materials makes the librarians have to buy more materials (supply) to address the system's continued overburdened requests (demand).

    My source? The librarians were nice about explaining these fees a couple years ago when the new fees/policies were first being considered.

    aside: I still think the fees for children's books is lame / bogus though... kids aren't financially (or morally) responsible for goofball adult policy and account-balancing issues. ;(
    Besides, they can't even vote on library or city issues - they certainly shouldn't be any more subject to library collections agencies than they are to income taxes...

    Share this answer with a friend: