|
Circulation inflated with phantom library card in Edgerton
An improper method of checking out books by the Edgerton Public Library led to misallocation of county funds and a new formula for distributing those funds beginning this year.
“The procedure used by Edgerton had the unintended consequence of inflating the circulation figures,” said Mark Ranum, director of the Plum Creek Library System (PCLS), which provides interlibrary services and distributes local funding to 25 libraries in nine counties in southwestern Minnesota. “As a result the Edgerton library has received a larger share of the Pipestone County funds allocated to city libraries than should have been the case.”
Ranum told the County Board on Dec. 22 there were between 1,200 and 1,500 items out of a 70,000-item circulation that were counted in Edgerton’s circulation figures, when those books or items were not actually checked out by patrons. Over the course of a year, that could have led to about $600 in undue funding being allocated to the Edgerton library.
Elberta DeJager, director of the Edgerton library, does not deny that she set up a dummy account to check out books and other items, but she insists that she was unaware it would have an effect on the library’s funding and said she did it only to keep the stock at the Edgerton library. By checking the items out with the phony library card, the items appeared to be out and therefore not available when other libraries requested them.
“Why should I send all my new items to another library,” she said. “I have to keep new items here for when my patrons come in.”
Ranum said he discovered the improper procedure while viewing a report that tracks the heaviest users of the system during a routine calculation of circulation numbers for PCLS’s automated circulation system in September. The dummy account, he said, caught his attention because it had been used to check out 1,200 to 1,500 items over an eight-month period.
While DeJager said the procedure had only been in place a few months, Stephanie Hall, director of the Meinders Community Library, said in an Oct. 2 letter to the Pipestone County Commissioners that she suspected the Edgerton library had falsely inflated its circulation for years.
“Over the past 10 years that we are sure these practices took place, Edgerton has received $20,000+ of county funding that should have gone to Meinders Library,” Hall wrote.
Ranum said he has heard such comments in the past, but has never seen evidence that such accusations are true.
Circulation data from PCLS shows a large increase in circulation at the Edgerton library since 2006, but Ranum and DeJager attribute that increase to the new library building that opened in May of 2007 that was four times larger than the previous building, in addition to legitimate practices at the library that have led to increased circulation. Those practices include creating and supporting services for children and families and spending a high percentage of their budget to purchase popular materials for adults and children.
Until the new Edgerton library opened, the Pipestone library had consistently higher circulation of books than the Edgerton library. Pipestone’s edge changed between 2006 and 2008 when circulation at the Edgerton library increased by 24,345 items — a 51 percent increase.
While Pipestone’s population of 4,333 is significantly larger than that of Edgerton’s 976, Edgerton’s 2009 circulation was 71,227 while Pipestone’s was 57,533.
Ranum said he believes the library’s circulation was overstated by only two to three percent due to the recent use of the dummy account. Even without the inflated numbers, he said, Edgerton’s circulation is impressive.
“Library use in Edgerton is extremely high,” he said. “Almost everyone in the city has a library card.”
The use of the dummy card not only prevented the sharing of resources, which is the goal of the PCLS, but increased the library’s circulation numbers. Because funding is based largely on circulation, it also increased the amount of money the library was getting from the county.
Under the previous funding formula, which had been used since 1994, county tax dollars, paid by county taxpayers, were distributed to the two libraries based mostly on circulation and hours of operation. These county dollars do not include the tax dollars libraries receive from the cities of Pipestone and Edgerton.
In 2009, county taxpayers paid $52,000 in library funding. Of that, $12,000 was used for bookmobile services provided by PCLS to four locations in the county; and the rest was divided between the two libraries, with 40 percent of the distribution based on open hours and 60 percent based on circulation.
“When this formula was first developed,” Ranum said, “the percentage split between Edgerton and Pipestone was about 70 percent of the county dollars went to Pipestone, 30 percent went to Edgerton. Now you’re at just slightly off of a 50-50 percentage basis, mainly due to the circulation increases at the Edgerton library.”
In 2009 Edgerton received $20,752.78 in county funding to Pipestone’s $19,103.22.
The new funding formula will be based upon the population in rural service areas, which will be determined by the PCLS. The service areas will be based on geographic proximity and the number of residents in those areas who registered for their library cards in each of the two libraries, Ranum said.
“The goal of the new funding formula is to insure the distribution of county tax levy dollars support the libraries as they provide services to rural residents,” Ranum said.
According to estimates for 2010, the new formula entitles Meinders to about 69 percent, or $26,800, of the $39,000 remaining after bookmobile funding and the Edgerton library to 31 percent, or $12,200.
Hall would not comment on the matter, but indicated to the PCLS Board of Directors in an Oct. 2 letter that she thought the state librarian should investigate the Edgerton library and that “some sort of monetary recompense for misallocated county funding” should be considered.
DeJager said the Edgerton library ended the practice as soon as Ranum told her that it was affecting their circulation numbers and funding. It was not her intention, she said, to mislead anyone.
“I don’t have time to worry about that (circulation),” she said. “We’re not here to rip off any other library. We’re not that kind of people - we have better morals than that.”
Ranum said the Edgerton library has put an end to the practice and he believes that it was not done to receive undue funding, but to give local patrons the first chance to check out materials purchased by the Edgerton library.
“I have no specific reason to believe that there was any intent to falsify circulation figures,” Ranum said.
|
