RSS

E-mail

Twitter

Facebook

County points to usage data for choosing Garner’s library

By Paul Tambasco
News Editor

Before recommending Garner’s library for possible closure, Wake County staff studied usage data they say shows that the move would have less of an impact on patrons county-wide than dozens of other cost-cutting options. However, staff recommended closing Garner’s library over Knightdale’s, a branch with poorer overall scores.

Lindy Brown speaks at a community meeting about SE Regional's possible closing Thursday, Feb. 4. RACHEL HEALY, GCNT

Since the proposed closing was first reported by The Garner Citizen on Jan. 21, thousands of patrons and local officials have demanded an explanation of how the county settled on a proposal they say unfairly harms the area.

County staff and officials have defended the recommendation, saying it was a difficult but logical decision.

To prepare for a county budget deficit estimated to be $18 million, the county manager required the library and other county departments to suggest about $1.2 million in permanent cuts to their budgets.

Faced with having to trim 7 percent from their budget, library officials concluded that closing one of the county’s six larger branches was necessary.

Four ways to cut costs

Within the library system, county staff focused on four ways to cut costs: in operations, in book purchases, by reducing hours and by closing facilities, said Frank Cope, director of the county’s Community Services Department, which includes the library system.

In operations, the department trimmed about $85,000 by cutting a management position at a new library in Wakefield, the construction of which has been postponed due to the economic downturn.

With respect to hours, staff suggested closing regional branches on Sundays, saving about $256,000 and shedding five-and-a-half staff positions system-wide in the process.

Library officials opted not to cut book buying. Last year, the commissioners made a one-time cut to the book budget, Cope said. The county could not afford a permanent cut to its book collection, according to Cope.

“We know our current book budget is not adequate to keep the number of books we need in the library system,” he said.

Still needing between $750,000 and $800,000 in cuts, staff focused on shutting branches. Of the hundreds combinations of closures they examined, 87 met the target trim of between $750,000 and $800,000.

They then evaluated each of the combinations in six criteria measuring use and potential use, which they charted in a spreadsheet (see “Closing SE Regional: A closer look at the county’s options”).

The criteria included visitors per hour, residences within a 10-minute drive, residences with at least one library card within a 10-minute drive, circulation per hour and computer sessions per hour. The sixth criterion was the number of people currently within a 10-minute drive who would be farther than 10 minutes away from any branch if that library closed.

SE Regional didn’t fare well in the analysis. In at least four out of six measures, all 87 combinations scored higher than Garner’s library — except one.

‘It could have gone either way’

SE Regional had company at the bottom: East Regional in Knightdale also scored low in comparison.

With two branches left, staff tweaked their method of selection: Despite Knightdale’s library scoring lower than Garner on five of six criteria, staff recommended SE Regional for closure.

At that point, the branches were equally fit to be cut.

“It could have gone either way. Either way, we were going to hurt a community,” he said.

The number of people who would have to travel farther for library service was the main distinction between the two, according to Cope. Shutting East Regional would leave 31,402 people more than 10 minutes from a branch compared to 18,388 if SE Regional closed.

East Regional is also newer and better designed for library service than Garner’s library, Cope said.

“Those were the two deciding factors. … That’s what really broke the tie,” he said.

Cope understands that patrons may be upset that staff used a different method of selection to make the final call.

“I can’t argue with them,” Cope said. “It could easily be argued that East Regional should have been closed because it was beaten by SE Regional on five of the six criteria. That’s a completely fair argument.”

Scoring did not include the proximity to other cultural resources, like a large bookstore..

Student achievement should have been considered, said Mayor Ronnie Williams, who met with Cope last week to discuss the decision. Test scores and graduation rates at Garner-area schools have traditionally lagged behind those of other schools in the county, he said. Libraries provide invaluable support to schools with more struggling students.

Williams was generally satisfied with the county’s explanation but believes factoring in more subjective measures — such as the intensity of public opposition — would have taken Garner off the table.

“Some things you can’t assign a number to,” Williams said.

Cope acknowledged the analysis has limitations. The county tried to keep politics out of the decision, he said. Because the cuts are difficult and controversial, the county used data that was available, verifiable and comparable, Cope said.

Later in the budget process, subjective factors get examined more closely, he said.

“I’m sure those are things that the commissioners will consider in making their decision,” Cope said.

Related articles:

• Closing SE Regional: A closer look at the county’s options
• Garner library’s possible closing to be discussed at community meeting
• Wake County may close Southeast Regional Library in Garner

 Print This

Leave a Reply

Comments are subject to moderation. Remarks that are rude, unrelated, or otherwise inappropriate will be removed.