Advertisement
Articles

Las Vegas/Clark County Library District Cuts Hours, Staff

E-Mail This Link


Enter recipient's e-mail:


Close
Email
Print |
RSS |
Share | |

Library, union signed contract in time of growth

Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 05/25/2010

  • Five years of raises mandated in contract
  • Union did not set up meeting on concessions
  • 42 employees laid off

The Las Vegas/Clark County Library District (LVCCLD), NV, faced with a $5.5 million shortfall over the next fiscal year, is cutting hours, materials, and staff. LVCCLD’s current general fund budget is $53.6 million, while next year’s budget will be $52.5 million. However, it would cost $57.5 million to operate at current levels.

To cope with the new revenues, the library will eliminate 93 staff positions, including 19 full-time and 23 part-time employees. Other positions lost include 39 that were previously frozen and 12 vacated by staff who took a retirement incentive.

LVCCLD was the Gale/Library Journal Library of the Year in 2003.

Contract issues
Executive Director Jeanne Goodrich said, “With 64 percent of the budget going to salaries and benefits, we needed either concessions from the bargaining unit representing full-time staff, or a reduction in force in order to balance the budget. The district would have preferred to reach our number while retaining all of our excellent staff. Unfortunately, the district was not able to reach an agreement with the union in a timely manner.”

Pat Marvel, director of marketing and community relations, said that in the contract that took effect in 2006—a time when the economy is booming—employees got four percent increases the first year, 3.5 percent the next year, and three percent in each of the next three years.

She said that 24 upper management staffers in the last fiscal year gave up cost-of-living increases.

Hours and materials
Urban libraries in the system will see their hours trimmed Monday through Thursday from 9 a.m.–9 p.m. to 10 a.m.–7 p.m.

LVCCLD’s materials budget, previously a robust 20 percent of the General Fund Revenue, will go to 15 percent, or $7.7 million.

The library, said Marvel, has looked for places to trim. For example, it used to produce a four-color newsletter that was mailed to patrons. It’s now two-color and no longer sent by mail.




Reader Comments (6)


You did not mention the new library that is being built. The Library took out over 50 million in bonds to build it and is now having to pay back 7 million a year. That is your shortfall. Don't blame the Union blame the past library director, the library board, and their CFO for borrowing money at the cost of library staff jobs!

Posted by Rita on June 4, 2010 06:19:53PM

This article implies that the situation is simple, but it is far from simple. Additionally, a balanced article would include at least a mention of attempting to contact Union representatives to confirm if, indeed, they "did not set up meeting on concessions." And simply cutting back on newsletter mailings isn't going to recoup the money squandered by building a branch that the district cannot afford to staff. Years and years of poor fiscal responsibility have finally caught up with this organization, so now, the paraprofessionals and the patrons pay the price.

Posted by Linda Boreman on June 4, 2010 07:50:21PM

Certainly is one sided, the Library District would take meetings with the Union because it didn't fit in their schedule....righteous to blame the former director, but must also blame the BOARD! The current administration not without faults, after all, it was chosen by the former....

Posted by Janet McKay on June 4, 2010 08:09:23PM

Rita's comment is right on. For years the previous administration spent and spent at the expense of staff: Staff were always told there was no money to hire help, but then were given higher and higher goals to reach reqarding circulation and programming. Then when the public turns down a bond issue to build a new library, the former director takes out a 50 million dollar bond at the height of the "Great Recession" oF which 7 million must be paid back this year. It is definitely that which is causing the economic crisis with LVCCLD, not the staff, who have been worked to the bone in order to meet the demands of the previous director. Let's call it like is is and not put the blame on the workers who have kept the District going and made it Library of the Year in 2003.

Posted by Kendra on June 4, 2010 08:31:51PM

Previous | Next

Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or antisocial behavior such as "spamming", "trolling", or any other inappropriate material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our terms of use. You are fully responsible for the content you post. All comments must comply with the Terms and Conditions of this site and by submitting comments you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Your name: *

Your email address: * (We won't publish this.)



* = Required information


 
Advertisement

LJ Reviews Database

LJ Reviews Center

Latest Stories



From the Blogs



Advertisement

Advertisement

Connect with Library Journal


Follow on Twitter








About Us | Advertising Information | Submissions | Site Map | Contact Us | RSS | Subscriptions
©2011 Media Source, Inc., All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc.