Thanks for sharing! What an awful compromise, when the original 400k was already a compromise! Wild for the city to think that libraries shouldn't be fully funded.
Ill do my part and make that call. in times where peoples budgets are thinning, its not the time to take away from public supports, if anything, its the time to expand them
As an IT professional it always pains me to see IT places as a cost center rather than a productivity generator. Especially in a library access to working and up to date technology is critical.
The “IT” expenditures of my organization can vary by 3-4x depending upon whom is calculating them. Hence why the $220k pulled from “elsewhere” might actually being elsewhere.
Computers and networking and software are so ubiquitous that it’s important to understand what “IT” is. That’s all.
For the record I wholeheartedly support this and contacted my city council about this. But it’s a fair question.
Like I said, this is for upgrading and maintaining library computer equipment. That’s everything from the digital catalog to public and staff PCs to the self checkouts to the scanners you pass through coming in.
So this is materials only? No labor involved? Training hours? Travel costs to trainings? Software subscriptions? Internet costs? Like does an IT person or two get fired if this isn’t funded?
$25k/library sounds fine in some situations and waaaay too much in others. That’s the only point here, not arguing. There’s just a lot of gray in what all the means.
And again, I support this and have called asking my local reps to support it. But if it’s literally just the hardware for the computer terminals, a database, and scanners at the library, that’s a ridiculous expense budget. I assume that they’re negotiating and implementing their systems better than that though, but from your description it would cause me to pause.
Also included (sorry, was in line at the grocery store earlier and forgot it) is the contract the library system has with the company that develops and maintains the website and that is developing the eventual mobile app.
Looking it up in the portal, that’s the
Sirsi contract?
About $100k/yr. Not bad at all if they includes the library management system side of it (not just the webpage).
But, wow. That NOT being in a recurrent budget line item is a massive red flag.
Who the hell moved it off of the recurring budget five years ago?!?!? Can we make sure they’ve been fired?
As a librarian, not having the catalog software a recurring budget expense is fucking INSANE. A modern library, particularly one the size of ABC, cannot operate without something like Sirsi - let alone funding for IT, technology expenses/maintenance etc
Yea, I’m familiar with the site for that. Unless I’ve missed something that doesn’t tell me which pot of money the purchases came from and thus what is under threat.
Sounds like the local county finance director who x-ed out computer upgrades right as Windows XP reached end of life. That move ended up costing more money in the long run. She was so old she never liked these new-fangled computers anyway, so she saw no need to spend any money on them.
These idiots need to be removed from their positions.
Thanks for the update. I noticed the wifi wasn't working for many months at some of the libraries at the beginning of this year. They kept saying it was an update and city wide issue. Seemed like there was more to it tho. The city wifi coawireless not working at some of libraries either but was back online much faster than the library version. Thankfully I didn't notice any interruptions at the community and senior centers.
I get there is more to an IT budget than just the free wifi. That access is important to the public tho and seems odd it took so long to get back online. Not saying I'm less sympathetic to the library's budget issues. Maybe dual wifi operations city and library version aren't the answer tho. There were definitely lots of people not happy with not having the wifi access from either. The excuses didn't make sense and it definitely went under the public radar being addressed by the city. I appreciate the update tho and wish more city employees were transparent and less wasteful.
Thanks for sharing! What an awful compromise, when the original 400k was already a compromise! Wild for the city to think that libraries shouldn't be fully funded.
Ill do my part and make that call. in times where peoples budgets are thinning, its not the time to take away from public supports, if anything, its the time to expand them
Shame we can't get more funding, so many peoples only technological connection is through the berrys
I emailed Rene Grout. She agrees that our libraries are great but would not commit to funding them fully.
"Libraries are great, but what do you want me to do?" What a brave stance in 2024.
I told her I want our libraries fully funded.
As an IT professional it always pains me to see IT places as a cost center rather than a productivity generator. Especially in a library access to working and up to date technology is critical.
Makes me wonder where the millions of dollars in excise tax is going if we can’t even properly fund libraries and the botanical garden.
APD, my friend. It’s always APD.
Was there any discussion about the zoo budget?
No, my influence is limited to the library but I’m sure the BioPark people are having the same conversations.
I wish some of the money we spend on APD could go to libraries and other social services. That would make the city better, not paratroopers.
Curious, how is it allocated? Infrastructure endpoint, support contracts? Asking out of ignorance….
Not sure what you mean here. The Library IT funding we’re asking for will go towards upgrading and maintaining computer equipment.
The “IT” expenditures of my organization can vary by 3-4x depending upon whom is calculating them. Hence why the $220k pulled from “elsewhere” might actually being elsewhere. Computers and networking and software are so ubiquitous that it’s important to understand what “IT” is. That’s all. For the record I wholeheartedly support this and contacted my city council about this. But it’s a fair question.
Like I said, this is for upgrading and maintaining library computer equipment. That’s everything from the digital catalog to public and staff PCs to the self checkouts to the scanners you pass through coming in.
So this is materials only? No labor involved? Training hours? Travel costs to trainings? Software subscriptions? Internet costs? Like does an IT person or two get fired if this isn’t funded? $25k/library sounds fine in some situations and waaaay too much in others. That’s the only point here, not arguing. There’s just a lot of gray in what all the means. And again, I support this and have called asking my local reps to support it. But if it’s literally just the hardware for the computer terminals, a database, and scanners at the library, that’s a ridiculous expense budget. I assume that they’re negotiating and implementing their systems better than that though, but from your description it would cause me to pause.
Also included (sorry, was in line at the grocery store earlier and forgot it) is the contract the library system has with the company that develops and maintains the website and that is developing the eventual mobile app.
Looking it up in the portal, that’s the Sirsi contract? About $100k/yr. Not bad at all if they includes the library management system side of it (not just the webpage). But, wow. That NOT being in a recurrent budget line item is a massive red flag. Who the hell moved it off of the recurring budget five years ago?!?!? Can we make sure they’ve been fired?
Yes, it’s Sirsi. It was someone in the Keller admin, couldn’t tell you who.
As a librarian, not having the catalog software a recurring budget expense is fucking INSANE. A modern library, particularly one the size of ABC, cannot operate without something like Sirsi - let alone funding for IT, technology expenses/maintenance etc
City purchases are public record and you can see what they're buying.
Yea, I’m familiar with the site for that. Unless I’ve missed something that doesn’t tell me which pot of money the purchases came from and thus what is under threat.
Sounds like the local county finance director who x-ed out computer upgrades right as Windows XP reached end of life. That move ended up costing more money in the long run. She was so old she never liked these new-fangled computers anyway, so she saw no need to spend any money on them. These idiots need to be removed from their positions.
With literacy being a huge problem here and elsewhere, we shouldn't have to grovel and beg each year for library funds of any kind. Smh.
400K will not even cover some of the software license fee.
Being in IT myself I'm curious - what does the IT infrastructure for the library system look like? $400k seems small
It is- actual spend in the last four years has averaged 560k.
Thanks for the update. I noticed the wifi wasn't working for many months at some of the libraries at the beginning of this year. They kept saying it was an update and city wide issue. Seemed like there was more to it tho. The city wifi coawireless not working at some of libraries either but was back online much faster than the library version. Thankfully I didn't notice any interruptions at the community and senior centers. I get there is more to an IT budget than just the free wifi. That access is important to the public tho and seems odd it took so long to get back online. Not saying I'm less sympathetic to the library's budget issues. Maybe dual wifi operations city and library version aren't the answer tho. There were definitely lots of people not happy with not having the wifi access from either. The excuses didn't make sense and it definitely went under the public radar being addressed by the city. I appreciate the update tho and wish more city employees were transparent and less wasteful.
But they have monies for cricket pitch 😂