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.
• 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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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 nonrecurring, risk that University and State funding
may decline in the future, may be propitious time
for new funding initiatives.
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.
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”