Task Force Report Slams Chattanooga Library, Urges Reforms

Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 03/02/2009

• Library deeply underfunded, poorly managed
• Lacks buildings, needs more materials
• Strategic plan, government support necessary

A blistering report portrays the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Bicentennial Library, TN, as deeply underfunded and poorly managed, with insufficient buildings and materials, lacking a strategic plan, and neglected by its governmental patrons. The report, The Challenge of Change (PDF), was written by consultants June Garcia and Susan Kent for the Mayor's Task Force on the Revitalization and Future of the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Bicentennial Library, set up by Chattanooga Mayor Ron Littlefield.

“This report provides an unflinching analysis of our library system,” commented Littlefield. “It is bold in its frank assessment but also very exciting in its challenge for change.” Among the more startling analyses, at least to a library audience, may be that the library system spends only 2.3% of its materials budget on popular fiction, has no manager for its downtown central library, and has barely responded to a significant audience for juvenile materials. 

The library, which is governed and funded by both the city and county, but essentially orphaned by both, should be governed (but not necessarily funded) by one entity and perhaps gain a dedicated funding source, the consultants suggest. They also question whether a lack of leadership and direction has hurt the library’s opportunity to make the case for sustainable growth. 

Change needed
The report proposes multiple initiatives aimed at addressing the deficiencies; the consultants note that, while the challenges “may appear daunting,” not a single issue has not been tackled and resolved by other libraries.

“There needs to be a change of attitude,” the mayor told the Chattanooga Times Free Press. “And if there’s not a change of attitude, then there needs to be a change of leadership.” 

“I’m always defensive, but the essential facts are accurate,” library director David Clapp told the newspaper. “We’ve talked about a lot of these things for years."

Behind peer libraries
Task Force members visited libraries and studied library financial and management information, as well as hiring the consultants, at a cost of $50,000. The report shows that in comparison to nearly all peer libraries—those serving Tennessee metro areas and those in the Southeast—the Chattanooga library falls short.

It has only four branches and a central library serving a population of 283,968; .49 square feet of space per capita; FY07 spending of $19.40 per capita; materials spending of $2.04 per capita; circulation of 2.5 per capita,; holdings of 1.79 per capita; visits of 2.14 per capita; and reference transactions of .53 per capita.

The system lacks a general collection development policy, which has led to apparently skewed priorities. Juvenile materials account for 34% of circulation but represent 7.4% of the total materials budget. Adult fiction accounts for 12% to 17% of circulation but 2.3% of the budget. Adult nonfiction represents 32.3% of the materials budget; electronic databases are 17.8%, adult periodicals 11.5%, and adult reference materials 10.8%.

Policies on collections
“The library also has unusual internal policies for its collections,” the report states. “The Library Director has stated the library is a ‘research library.’ Therefore, staff only purchase a single copy of new, popular titles and then provide multiple rental copies for which the user must pay a weekly fee. The library also does not purchase mass market paperbacks and most popular media, relying on gifts in these areas.” (LJ counted 1108 rental items.)

The consultants recommend that the board promptly reconsider policies regarding collections, including increasing the number of copies of popular titles made available for borrowing free of charge and purchasing mass market paperbacks.

Facilities fall behind
While library staffers assessed most facilities as “good” or “fair,” the consultants were more critical, calling facilities "crowded, unattractive, and poorly laid out.” They criticized the “problematic” lighting, makeshift furniture, and awkward seating for computers. Building layouts were described as awkward and cramped, with staff service desks “often excessively large and poorly positioned.” Clear signage and pathfinding are needed.

As for the Downtown Library, it is outdated, lacking amenities such as meeting spaces and quiet reading areas, and is considered “unsafe” by many interviewees because of people hanging out.

Underfunding
The library’s budget, adjusted for inflation, has declined by about 25% over a decade. The library has received no capital funding since 1999 and less than $6 million for new buildings since its founding in 1905. Thus there have been no efforts to renovate buildings or add new facilities to respond to population trends.

Moreover, the library has no funding for a much-needed new integrated library system. The library has done very little to try to raise funds from the private sector; there is no fundraising plan, and a Grants position remains unfilled. The report criticizes the library's lack of partnerships and “connectedness” to other organizations.

Compounding that, the library has done little to promote itself. By contrast, the “Nothing Will Change/Everything Will Change” short-term campaign initiated as part of the public process for the consultant study “created quite a buzz,” the report states.

Organizational structure
The report criticizes a highly centralized organization “with tremendous concentration of control centered in the Director. On paper, the Director has 16 people reporting to him, a very large and unwieldy span of control.” 

Those direct reports include all of the Downtown Library’s departmental supervisors, and that library lacks a dedicated director. The report recommends creation of the position of Downtown Library Manager.