Among the dozens of Annual Plan submissions protesting Tauranga City Council's decision to scrap the mobile library service there's one stand out alternative.
Bob has a mobile book service.
While most submissions from customers expressed regret, dismay and even scorn at the council decision to axe the $85,000 service and instead spend $40,000 delivering books to the elderly, a Mount Maunganui book seller has anther plan.
Old Grumpy's Gallery is offering an alternative mobile service based on their business model.
It's an extension of an initiative the gallery undertook some time ago, offering a book lending service to patrons who for various reasons and circumstances are not able to visit the local library or mobile library.
'It has not become widespread, but it works and it's well received by patrons,” says owner Bob Ricketts.
'We supply a selection of books in categories requested by the reader. We deliver to their door and exchange for books that they have read.”
The gallery charges a first time joining fee equal to $1 per book for the amount of membership start up books, typically 10 or 20 books.
Those books become the property of the reader. Each time they are ready for a change of books a new selection is delivered and the gallery replaces whoever many books (minimum of five) the reader wishes to exchange.
There's a delivery fee of $10, which Bob says was originally introduced at the insistence of a customer.
A reader enrols takes delivery of $20 books, cost $20. If they change them every three weeks then there is a $10 charge each time the change is made. Over a year with 18 changes that would be $180 plus the $20 for the books, a total of $200 for the year, or 52 cents a book if the reader gets through 380 books.
The gallery carries 30,000 - 70,000 second hand books at any time and doesnt sell books that are soiled, damaged or smell.
If the council wants to get involved, a key area it can assist is to provide the gallery first right of approval on the city libraries redundant and surplus books, DVDs and CDs that become available, says Bob.
Councillor Clayton Mitchell thinks Bob's idea is fantastic and his solution to the mobile library service is thinking outside the square.
14 comments
And the school children
Posted on 11-05-2014 17:03 | By Murray.Guy
The Mobile library Bus is of huge benefit to the schools it visits and the relationship is sparks between the very young and their City Council. The Elected Members are bending over backwards giving away millions in ratepayers land assets and revenue for a 'proposed university', in preference to a very basic and critical low decile school service. One of the few Council vehicles that has one objective - to add value to the lives of it's residents in the suburbs, coming to them - silly me, like many in our community, I thought this Council had finally realised that building it's community relationship was important, yet so far seem hell bent on eroding it further.
Sorry MG
Posted on 11-05-2014 22:29 | By Capt_Kaveman
the mobile library is a nice have not a must have and i was against it to start with due to cost v benefits
A Library is NOT simply a Bundle of Books
Posted on 11-05-2014 23:30 | By Bill Gibson-Patmore
A common "book exchange", albeit with or without some style of delivery system is absolutely NO REPLACEMENT for a professionally-run adjunct of a fully operational Library! If Council thinks this is such a great idea....they will close all Library's and rely on Op-Shops for Paper-back exchanges! I think Bob is a nice guy, but this idea has a ridiculous feasibility! And.... I am truly concerned that our city is managed by such as Councillor Clayton Mitchell who apparently thinks "Bob's idea is fantastic and his solution to the mobile library service is thinking outside the square.". It is hardly outside of any square and I cannot see it as anywhere near fantastic. What hope do we have of major commercial decisions getting any sort of reliable or thoughtful deliberation. "Councilioring" is not a game and it's not a popularity trip beyond election-day, so please, please get yourselves seriously tunedin.
They will be paying twice
Posted on 12-05-2014 12:36 | By KateC
The savings from cancelling the mobile library service will not returned to the ratepayers. Instead, anyone who picks up this service will be paying twice. This service works out to around $200 per year per user for books that are not current and do not have the wide range found in the libraries. The amount of rates paid for libraries is only 6% of the total rates bill. Is this new service really good value for money?
Paperback book exchange just wouldn't do what the library bus does
Posted on 12-05-2014 12:55 | By SML
My elderly mother, now in her 90's, has lived in her own home in the suburbs for close to 30 years, and now can't get regularly to the library in towm, but needs the LARGE-print books the library bus delivers close to her each week - she reads 5-6 a week - and paperbacks simply wouldn't do it for her, nor have the range of factual as well as fictional works she loves. She pays rates too - why should she miss out on reading because there's no flash library she can access when she's frail and elderly? The mobile library is one of the joys of her life... and she helps pay for it. Please don't take this away, as not all Matua residents can drive, use the bus, or have huge cash resources.
No comparison
Posted on 12-05-2014 13:00 | By morepork
There is no comparison between a book exchange and a mobile (or static) library. For a Councillor to consider this a brilliant idea and "thinking outside the square" just shows the bankrupt perception of said Councillor. If it saves the Council money it must be good? In general, yes, but you need to look at the WHOLE picture. Sometimes we need to pay for things that add value to our lives. I agree with Murray Guy on this.
Library important but so is cutting costs
Posted on 12-05-2014 13:37 | By Annalist
Just because a council service has an emotional attachment doesn't mean it should be exempt from the cost cutting council must do to become sustainable. We now have a good bus service in Tauranga and people can take a bus to their library. It isn't the role of council to provide library services to schools. Sorry, but Bob's idea won't work because council runs a ratepayer funded library where you can even borrow DVDs. Impossible to compete with council services because they seem to have a bottomless pit of money.
Pensioners
Posted on 12-05-2014 14:45 | By Horsefly
I think pensioners should be taxed a bit more to fund this. Perhaps 2% on top of their existing rates? I use E- books so will never use this library?
Morepork's use of word bankrupt
Posted on 12-05-2014 16:09 | By Annalist
Not sure that it's what morepork means, but I worry that bankrupt and the city will go hand in hand if councillors don't cut spending across the board. The attitude that sometimes we need to pay for things to add value to our lives has seen council using ratepayers money to fund all sorts of services, gallery, sports, arts, business promotion, and even things properly paid for by taxes. It seems that no-one wants any funding cuts to anything that affects their hobbies, interests, sports, the young, the old, the disadvantaged, the middle aged etc etc. May as well let Council fund everything but don't whine about ever increasing rates.
No nreed to cut the basics ..
Posted on 13-05-2014 15:24 | By Murray.Guy
Annalist, accepting there will always be varied opinions in regards the valid use of rate income (Library, stadiums, etc) and valid debates as to the amounts being spent, other than our Mayor and Staff, a few funding dependant trough feeders, all with whom this question has been discussed, agree that the first place to start is inside the walls of the City Council where $million's of annual, operational 'actual savings' are buried and waiting to be exposed and eradicated by the City Councillors. Why would anyone in their right mind restrict access to a book to save $80,000, restrict access to a pool to save $11,000 with the knowledge that $millions are being squandered under their noses?
@Annalist
Posted on 13-05-2014 16:28 | By morepork
I understand and, to some extent, share your concern. But we live in a COMMUNITY. That means many different interests and few of us would share ALL of them. I have never attended Baypark Raceway, for example, but I have no problem with some of my Rates going to support it, as I know it needs support, just as the Libraries, The Hot Pools and the Art Gallery do. If it is always only about money, then the quality of life in our community will be diminished. BUT, that doesn't mean there shouldn't be priorities, budgets, and proper, transparent, and accountable financial management of the resources we DO have. I used "bankrupt" in the sense of "no more ideas" because the particular suggestion is patently flawed and yet a Councillor considers it brilliant. I do take your point about taxes and Rates... addressed in another post.
Rates and taxes
Posted on 13-05-2014 16:44 | By morepork
Annalist (and possibly others) raised a good point that maybe Council should NOT be supporting anything other than Council services and these should be limited to essential services, especially when there is a huge debt deficit and funds are tight. That means that local taxes would have to be levied to finance all the other things that Council tries to support. The difference here is that Rates are paid by property owners; a tax would be paid by everybody living here. Immediately we see how unfair this is, because Ratepayers would be paying twice (Rates AND Taxes), and everybody would be supporting community interests, some of which they have no interest in. But THAT is exactly what happens right now; Ratepayers support the lot, whether they have interest in it or not (hence the posts here). Abolish Rates altogether. Replace them with a single community tax on ALL residents.
Morepork (twice)
Posted on 16-05-2014 11:11 | By YOGI BEAR
Agree that ratepayers are selected out to pay for everything that all use and benefit from. However one way or another all citizens pay be it as a home owner or when paying rent. It is naïve of tenants to think that they are not paying regardless. The real issue here is that many a group expects a annual handout from the rates coffers for their little hobby horse. That means all pay for a few to have just what they want for free. A good example is the Art Gallery. A better example is what happens when there is not free handouts, Katikati Museum.
The mobile library
Posted on 19-05-2014 15:59 | By morepork
... is just ONE example of the unfairness inherent in our Rates system.I agree that people in rental property are paying also, but I never disputed that. There are really 2 choices: Either, accept that there will be activities and groups your payments will subsidise, which you have no personal interest in, OR revert to a "user pays" model where many smaller groups (like the mobile library users) will be closed down completely. My point is that if the "load" was spread wider, across everyone in the community, then it would be much less of a load and we could keep the "minority" things. It should be carried by PEOPLE, NOT by HOUSEHOLDS. And, of course, I fully support Murray Guy's suggestion about pruning at the top... a fish rots from the head. We need simple, transparent accountability and processes for both the contributors and the beneficiaries.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.