HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS - Feb 28 - Kitchener Public Library - Proposed Operating Budget Reduction CutsREPORT
REPORT TO:
Chair Gazzola and Members of Finance and Corporate Services
DATE OF MEETING:
February 28, 2011
SUBMITTED BY:
Kitchener Public Library Board
PREPARED BY:
Sonia Lewis, CEO, Kitchener Public Library, 519.743.0271, ext. 244
WARD(S) INVOLVED:
All
DATE OF REPORT:
February 17, 2011
SUBJECT: PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET REDUCTION
RECOMMENDATION:
For information only.
BACKGROUND:
In 2010 City funding for Kitchener Public Library increased by less than a quarter of one
percent. This funding level resulted in an 11% cut to KPL’s budget for books, AV materials and
electronic resources, reducing it to its 2004 level. The staffing complement was reduced by
almost 4 full-time equivalents. In addition, KPL reduced the cost of living increase allowed
under the budget guidelines and cut the staff training budget by 31%. In the end KPL cut
expenses by 3% in 2010.
In accordance with the City’s budget guidelines, Kitchener Public Library’s proposed 2011
operating budget included a 2.5% increase to the base budget and a growth allocation of
$37,000 for RFID costs. No new staffing was included in the budget.
The purpose of this report is to respond to Council’s request for potential budget reduction
strategies up to 5%. The report also outlines the impact of operating budget reductions on
services provided by the Library. A one percent reduction in City funding equates to
approximately $89,000.
REPORT:
At its February 16, 2011 meeting the Kitchener Public Library Board reviewed Council’s request
for potential operating budget reductions. A number of options up to a 5% cut were examined
by the Library Board. Consideration was given to both revenue generating opportunities and
possible reductions to operating expenses. No opportunities were identified to increase
revenues, largely due to the anticipated impact of the central library project.
3
ï ó ï
Only one viable cost reduction option was identified by the KPL Board. This option would cut
$24,600 or 0.28% from the budget.
All other options reviewed by the Library Board are not viable as they would have significant
impacts on public service at a time when library services, collections and programs are in
demand.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Option 1 – Cut 0.28%
Savings identified for this option are offset by the need for an additional $43,000 to cover the
OMERS pension rate increase. When the budget was submitted to the City in August 2010, the
full impact of the OMERS rate increase was unknown.
Potential Expense Reductions
Public Programs $ (5,700)
Resource Materials (books, AV materials, electronic resources) $(25,900)
Processing/Bindery $ (3,000)
Staff Training $ (6,000)
Postage, Delivery and Stationery $(12,000)
Equipment Maintenance and Facilities Expenses $(15,000)
Pension Benefits – add costs for OMERS rate increase $ 43,000
Total Reduction $(24,600)
Option 1 Impact:
Eliminating the 2% inflationary increase in 2011 for resources results in a 0% increase to this
budget line. Since the resource materials budget was cut by 11% in 2010, this means it
remains at its 2004 level. Even with a frozen budget, we have reduced buying power. Costs for
print and AV materials are expected to increase by 1-3% in 2011. Price increases for electronic
resources have been averaging 5%/year.
The provision of recreational and information resources is a core library service. Freezing or
cutting the resources budget has a direct impact on the service we provide to the community as
it means fewer new items would be added to KPL collections. For high demand items this
results in longer turnaround to satisfy holds that customers place on items. It means collections
in languages other than English and French cannot keep pace with the growth in our
multicultural communities, impacting the service we are able to provide to new Canadians. It
limits our abilities to expand our electronic resources at a time when the demand for
downloadable titles doubled last year and continues to increase.
Staff training was reduced by 31% in 2010. The 2011 budget restores some of that cut.
Reduced funding for training limits our ability to develop skills and respond to changes,
particularly in the area of technology and its application in libraries.
Option 2 – Cut 1%
Given the impact on public service, compounded by the effect of cuts made in 2010, the Library
Board feels a 1% cut is not viable.
2
ï ó î
Potential Expense Reductions
Option 1 cuts (includes 2% cut to Resources) $(24,600)
Salaries – reduce staffing $(64,700)
Total Reduction $(89,300)
Option 2 Impact:
Implementing this option would require cutting five positions (3 full-time equivalents), reducing
staffing levels at circulation and information desks and impacting public service system-wide.
This is in addition to the almost 4 full-time equivalents cut in the 2010 budget which also
impacted public service staffing.
Customers would experience longer line-ups, on occasion information desks would be closed
and telephone reference service would be reduced and possibly eliminated. Transferring
support services staff to public services to assist with the gaps in public service would result in
longer turnaround times to get new materials ordered and ready for the public.
Public service would be further impacted as this option includes the 2% cut to the resources
budget outlined under Option 1.
Option 3 – Cut 3%
A 3% cut is not viable given its significant impact on public service.
Potential Expense Reductions
Options 1 and 2 cuts (includes cuts to resources and salaries) $ (89,300)
Additional Resource Materials $ (89,300)
Additional Salaries $ (89,300)
Total Reduction $(267,900)
Option 3 Impact:
Only the resources and salaries budget lines could fund this level of cut and there would be
significant impacts on public service, possibly on service hours.
Total cut to resources would be 10% or $115,200 (including $25,900 from option 1). $115,200
buys approximately 4,100 books which equates to 12% of the total new books acquired in 2010.
The impact of cutting the resources budget is outlined under Option 1.
Total cut to salaries would be $154,000 (including $64,700 from option 2). This equates to 5
full-time equivalents and would impact 7-9 positions.
Staffing cuts would result in reduced services and programs. Off desk activities would be
reduced so we could staff information and circulation desks. There would be reduced support
for students in our shared high school/library facilities. Storytimes which develop reading and
early literacy skills would be cut back. Reduced staffing levels would impact our ability to
participate in community events like Kidspark and Word on the Street, putting a greater burden
on our partners, like the City. Customers would experience longer line-ups for service. It would
take longer for returned items to be reshelved.
1
ï ó í
Option 4 – Cut 5%
A 5% cut would require significant reductions to public service levels and hours of service. This
level of cut is not viable.
Potential Expense Reductions
Options 1, 2 and 3 cuts (includes cuts to resources and salaries) $(267,900)
Additional Resource Materials $ (89,300)
Additional Salaries $ (89,300)
Total Reduction $(446,500)
Option 4 Impact:
Only the resources and salaries budget lines could fund this level of cut and there would be
significant impacts on public service as outlined in options 1-3 above. In addition, service hours
would be impacted. Options the Library Board would need to consider would include a two
week system-wide closure, closing Sundays year round and/or closing one evening per week
system-wide.
Total cut to salaries would be $243,300 or over 8 full-time equivalents, impacting 11-13
positions.
Total cut to resources would be 18% or $204,500. Compared to last year, this would result in
purchasing 22% fewer books.
CONCLUSION:
Kitchener Public Library services are in demand city-wide. Circulation has increased 22% in the
past five years. Families, seniors, the unemployed and other residents turn to the library in
tough economic times for access to free information and recreational resources, services and
programs. The cuts absorbed in 2010 cannot be sustained. A reduction of $24,600 could be
achieved, albeit with some impact on the public given the reduced buying power for books, AV
materials and electronic resources. Further cuts beyond that level would have significant
impacts on Kitchener residents and are not recommended by the Kitchener Public Library
Board.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY:
Sonia Lewis, CEO, Kitchener Public Library
0
ï ó ì