Reston Spring

Reston Spring
Reston Spring

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Library friend's efforts to stop the destruction of books

The following is the text of an e-mail sent by Tresa Schlect to Supervisor Linda Smyth following her efforts to stop the destruction of books by the FCPL TechOps group.  The e-mail notes Ms. Schlect's many efforts since last fall to prevent the destruction of books, especially children's books.  She ultimately began photographing the disposed books in the dumpster behind the TechOps facility at Chantilly Regional Library. Those photos are available here





From: Tresa schlecht <tresa.schlecht@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 20:45:48 -0400
Subject: Preparatory books discards, FCPL "beta test"
To: linda.smyth@fairfaxcounty.gov
Cc: John Ball <jrball@alumni.pitt.edu>

I am pleased that attention is being directed to the questions surrounding
the "beta test" and changes at FCPL.  I am especially pleased that you have
personally addressed the question of whether sending excessed library books
to the dump was an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars or was required for
administrative efficiency.  Apparently, there are several interpretations
of the facts surrounding disposal of excessed books during the past year. 
I hope the documents and pictures I have attached and referenced will assist 
you to evaluate the facts.

I am a member of the Board of the Friends of Tysons-Pimmit Regional Library
(TY Friends), and have been for several years.  My hobby is an
interest in literacy and children's books.  As a matter of policy, TY
Friends offers library discards back to the community at a nominal
price in its booksales (prices for children's library discards begin
at 25 cents), because our community includes individuals who want
children's books but cannot pay commercial used book prices.

In October 2012, we were advised that library discards would be sent to
a central location in Chantilly (Technical Operations, or TechOps) for
disposal as part of the conversion to a floating collection, and that the
Friends could not be offered library discards until after conversion to the
floating collection was complete.  TY Friends requested information about
obtaining excessed books.

I personally visited TechOps in Chantilly to request that we be allowed to
pick up discarded books, especially children's books, before the books were
placed in the dumpster by TechOps.  I was told that my request would be
considered, but that it was unlikely that TY Friends could obtain
discarded books, as it would be unfair to let TY Friends have books
simply because we were willing to pick the books up when other Friends
groups could not.

I have attached the relevant portion of an e-mail sent to TechOps in
follow-up to that meeting.  (See below.) My e-mail shows that a request for 
discards was made, to the correct FCPL representative, in writing, on behalf 
of TY Friends, in January 2013.  The e-mail establishes that TY Friends
offered to pick the books up, at TechOps, at a time selected by TechOps for 
its administrative efficiency and convenience.  Moreover, TY offered to share 
the books with any other Friends groups, OR to use the discarded books as 
directed by FCPL.  Thus, our request for books would not have required FCPL 
personnel time, other than an e-mail to me naming the time/dates for pick-ups,
nor would it have involved any cost to the county.  TY Friends was not
granted permission to pick up discarded books at Tech Ops.

After several months went by, in April 2013, I began taking pictures of the
discards in the TechOps dumpster.  April 11, 2013, and April 27, 2013
pictures, attached, show the volume of  children's and other books, many 
in salable or usable condition, in the dumpster.

In late April 2103, a TechOps representative, and FCPL Director of
Libraries, Mr. Sam Clay, provided presentations at the Fairfax County Friends 
Forum, a discussion group that includes representatives from Friends groups
county-wide.  The TechOps representative indicated that, after
May 1, 2013, when the conversion to the floating collection was completed, it
would be possible to resume allowing Friends groups to have some library
discards, under limited circumstances.  The TechOps representative noted
that each Friends group that wanted discards would need to make a written
request to TechOps.  Friends at a particular branch could only have
access to books excessed by that branch, among other limitations.  Mr.
Clay appeared on the program following the speaker from TechOps, and
reiterated the accuracy of her presentation.

The agenda of that meeting, the date of that meeting, and the
substance of the remarks made by both FCPL speakers, is objective
information verifiable through the published agenda and minutes of the
sponsoring group.  The public record establishes that a limited amount
of discards were made available to Friends groups after, but not
before, May 1, 2013; any information currently circulating suggesting
that a wider range of discards was offered to Friends groups is
incomplete or factually inaccurate.

TY Friends did not receive any discards from TechOps in the first two
weeks after the Friends Forum, although TY Friends sent an e-mail
request for discards immediately after the meeting.  On May 16, 2013,
I again took pictures to determine whether excessed books were still
being discarded.  The pictures, which are date stamped, show a large
volume of books, most in salable or usable condition, in the dumpster.
 Additional pictures taken in late May and in August 2013 again show
usable, salable books in the dumpster.

I hope this information is of use to you.  I believe this information, in
conjunction with other objective verified information, shows that Friends
groups were not offered, and in fact, were denied, access to excessed books, 
from October 2012 to May 1, 2013, and were permitted to obtain a limited 
percentage of books excessed after May 1, 2013.

If books were offered some other charitable use other than county
Friends groups, TY Friends would like to obtain this information.  If
the TY Friends were excluded from an offer to charitable groups, we would 
like to obtain information about that.

I note that the Friends have very recently learned that county-wide
publications designed to inform the public of the programs and
booksales at each library have been discontinued.  I noted that the
George Mason Friends made a presentation at the April 2103 Friends Forum 
about the benefits to the Friends of the publications and how 
standardization of information about booksales in the publications could 
benefit individuals Friends groups.  Although Mr. Clay was in attendance, 
he provided no information about potential or planned discontinuation of 
the publication under discussion.  There is no indication that input from 
the public or any interested constituency was sought prior to the 
discontinuation of the publications.  Now, each library is to set up 
information about the programs available at that library.  This makes each  
branch responsible for the time and cost of publicizing its programs, even 
though staffing at each branch is projected to be reduced.  It also makes it 
more difficult for a member of the public to find out about programs, 
especially programs that might be offered at other branches.

The disposal of books is one thread in the administrative process leading
up to the "beta test."  Personnel issues, impact on the public, information
about, and availability of, programs at local branches, and the vision for
FCPL, are the much larger picture involved in the "beta test."  Books
have already been discarded, and cannot, without extra expense, be brought back
in if the "test" proves that the proposed system does not work as well as
anticipated.  Personnel descriptions have been changed, and the former
personnel descriptions cannot be restored without expense if the
"test" proves that the system requires adjustment.  Personnel actions
have been taken, and personnel cannot magically reappear if a "test"
shows that the original personnel are still needed.  The facts that
the actions have been taken prior to the "beta test" demonstrates that
this "test" is not a "test" in the general sense of the work, but
rather, is intended as a continuation of a process which is anticipated to move 
along without adjustment or modification.  If FCPL does not intend to adjust 
what it is doing based on what the public needs or wants, then FCPLis not a
"public" library system.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Attachment:
 
 

Books
Sent:  January 3, 2013
From:  tresa.schlecht@gmail.com>



To:  elizabeth.rhodes@fairfaxcounty.gov

Thank you for speaking with me the other day.

As I indicated, I am interested in obtaining discards that would otherwise be disposed of as trash, especially discards which are children's pictures books or early readers or early chapter books.  
Because I work with a variety of groups, I would be happy to use the discards in any manner directed, and would be happy to provide written documentation or contract regarding the number of books, the designation of the 501(c)(3) donor status, the method and timing of picking up the books, the method and documentation of distribution of the books, or other record-keeping as necessary.  

If the discards can be made available only if they are donated to Friends' groups for resale, I will be happy to transport the books obtained to the designated Friends group.  If the books can be made available to me only if they are used in Fairfax County, but not re-sold, I will be happy to make sure that the Fairfax County discards go to only Fairfax county purposes which do not involve resale.  If the books can be made available only for non-profit groups, I  will be happy to enter into an agreement regarding documentation that the Fairfax County discards are distributed only to non-profit groups or to designate the specific groups.  

I hope this information will assist in determining that system discards can be put to a use other simply being actually discarded.

1 comment:

  1. Thanks for the explanation and background. It's great that Tresa Schlect tried to do the right thing and "go through channels". Only when that didn't work, did she go to the BoS and have her efforts documented in this blog. Her grace in handling the situation and her persistence in trying to correct a wasteful situation are truly constructive and truly appreciated.

    ReplyDelete

Your comments are welcome and encouraged as long as they are relevant, constructive, and decent.