1 / 12

Task Force to Investigate Fees to Benefit the Library

Task Force to Investigate Fees to Benefit the Library. Background

luz
Download Presentation

Task Force to Investigate Fees to Benefit the Library

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Task Force to Investigate Fees to Benefit the Library Background At the April 20, 2004 faculty meeting, a motion to investigate the feasibility and strategies for fees to benefit the Library’s budget passed by voice vote. The motion emerged from the discussion generated by Al Kagan’s draft resolution calling for a Library fee for students.

  2. Members Al Kagan (Chair) Pat Allen Sue Searing Becky Smith Rod Allen; ex officio • Reporting Date The report should be prepared in time for consideration at the November 2005 faculty meeting.

  3. Charge The Task Force is charged with investigating the range of potential options for implementing a library fee. Such options include, but are not limited to, a fee that is assessed with tuition (e.g., Penn State’s IT fee that includes a library fee); a fee that is added to differential tuitions; or an addition to the Student Activities fee. For each option please provide information about advantages and disadvantages. Experiences with similar fees at peer institutions should be used to inform your work.

  4. Options • 1. Designated Library Endowment Fee • 2. Designated Library Fee • 2a. General Fee • 2b. Student Activity Fee • 3. Library Fee Embedded in an Information Technology Fee • 4. Library Fee Embedded in a General Fee • 5. Library Fee Embedded in Tuition • 6. No fee

  5. Option 1: Designated Library Endowment Fee • The model is a small fee established at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. • Advantages: Endowment grows over time, facilitates planning for the future, timely response to current UIUC development efforts, could be relatively inexpensive. • Disadvantages: Lack of immediate impact, income dependent on investment strategy, income could vary widely due to market swings, complicated to explain to students.

  6. Option 2: Designated Library Fee •2a: General University Fee •2b: Student Activity Fee • Advantages: Immediate income, establishes ongoing stable funding mechanism, probably tied to support of high-profile student service issues, increases visibility and good will toward Library. • Disadvantages: Restricts use of designated income to undergraduate concerns, increased Library accountability and record-keeping, probably not tied to inflation, complicated implementation process including large-scale lobbying

  7. Option 3: Library Fee Embedded in an Information Technology Fee • In this model, the Library might or might not get a specified percentage of the total fee. • Advantages: Easier to make the case because of widespread support for enhanced technology. • Disadvantages: Need for continuous justification and lobbying, income received might vary widely depending on campus decisions.

  8. Option 4: Library Fee Embedded in a General Fee • In this model, the Library might or might not get a specified percentage of the total fee. The current General Fee covers many activities including many campus service units excluding the University Library. There is also a Service Fee that covers many campus service units excluding the University Library. • Advantages: No new restrictions on how money is spent, less complicated approval process. • Disadvantages: Need for continuous justification and lobbying, income received might vary widely depending on campus decisions.

  9. Option 5: Library Fee Embedded in Tuition • In this model, the Library might or might not get a specified percentage of the total tuition. • Advantages: No new restrictions on how money is spent, less complicated approval process, could increase with tuition, provides stable funding source. • Disadvantages: Political pressure against raising tuition, more negative public perception, and might just replace funds already received from tuition.

  10. Option 6: No Fee • Advantages: Already have good University administrative support, no risk in alienating University Administration or students, no risk in losing our recent special funding, no new restrictions on how money is spent. • Disadvantages: Passive acceptance of current situation, passive acceptance of current morale situation, risk that future funding might be non-recurring, risk that University and State funding may decline in the future, may be propitious time for new funding initiatives.

  11. Conclusion The Task Force to Investigate Fees to Benefit the Library unanimously recommends further exploration of implementing a library fee with the new University Administration. Having examined the advantages and disadvantages, we think that Option 5, a library fee embedded in, and as a fixed percentage of tuition, shows the most promise. Once implemented, it would provide a stable income source, would automatically increase along with tuition, and would not further restrict how we allocate our funds. As opposed to any type of fee, it would not be listed on student bills, and therefore likely would not be a continuous topic of discussion.

  12. What to do now? • File the report with no action • Refer the report to another body for more action • Adopt the report with the action being: “further exploration of implementing a library fee with the new University Administration”

More Related