SWAN Recommendations on Expanded Membership

Transcription

1 SYSTEM WIDE AUTOMATED NETWORK WHITE PAPER SWAN Recommendations on Expanded Membership Recommendations for January 2017 Adoption Process for LINC & MAGIC Libraries Joining SWAN September 27, 2016

2 Libraries in LINC & MAGIC Considering SWAN Batavia Public Library District Bensenville Community Public Library District Bensenville Elementary School District #2 Bloomingdale Public Library Carol Stream Public Library Geneva Public Library District Glen Ellyn Public Library Itasca Community Library Kaneville Public Library District Messenger Public Library of North Aurora National University of Health Sciences Oak Brook Public Library Poplar Creek Public Library District Saint Charles Public Library District Saint Patrick Catholic School Sugar Grove Public Library District Theosophical Society in America Town and Country Public Library District Villa Park Public Library West Chicago Public Library District Wheaton Academy Wood Dale Public Library District Timeline for Approval Date Location Task September 1, 2016 RAILS 125 Tower Dr., Burr Ridge, IL SWAN provides 22 libraries in LINC & MAGIC information packet, including membership pricing. SWAN announces November 1 meeting & forthcoming white paper November 1, 2016 December 1, 2016 December 31, 2016 January 2, 2017 January 31, 2017 Tinley Park Public Library, 7851 Timber Drive, Tinley Park, IL RAILS 125 Tower Dr., Burr Ridge, IL SWAN Committee of the Whole meeting to discuss the white paper & process SWAN Quarterly meeting: Further white paper discussion & overview of 22 libraries 22 libraries Deadline for 22 libraries to complete SWAN Membership Agreement and submit to SWAN Online ballot SWAN online ballot opened for library director approval Online ballot Deadline for ballot approval Page 1 of 12

3 Page 2 of 12

4 How This All Got Started Rich Wolff, Library Director Tinley Park, Chair of SWAN Futures Task Force, Former Board President of SWAN It s simply amazing how two phone calls can set so much in motion. In the late spring of 2015, I received a phone call from Aaron Skog, Executive Director of the SWAN consortium. At that time, I was the SWAN Board President and Aaron outlined to me a vision of his that both awed and inspired me. That vision entailed talking to the Board Presidents of both the LINC and MAGIC consortia to see if they would be interested in meeting to introduce ourselves and to talk about the feasibility of the three organizations becoming one. On July 7, 2015, representatives of the three groups met for lunch and left the meeting both engaged and excited. From this informal meeting, the SWAN Board developed a committee to match identical groups that had been formed within both LINC and MAGIC. The SWAN Futures Task Force consisting of Jamie Bukovac (Indian Prairie Public Library District), Stacy Wittman (Eisenhower Public Library District), David Seleb (Oak Park Public Library), Aaron Skog and myself, met in February and we discussed some possible outcomes. The SWAN Futures Task Force came away with three main areas: SWAN was not going to offer to embark on an organization merger; however SWAN was open to new libraries joining and welcomed growth; and SWAN wanted to make clear that sustainability, business continuity, and independence were of the essence whereby some libraries joining could possibly pay higher annual membership fees than they were currently paying. Throughout the fall and winter of 2015 and into the spring and summer of 2016, representatives of the three groups and staff of RAILS have been meeting to discuss and shape this exciting endeavor. Having worked in SWAN Libraries for the past 31 years, I have been a firsthand witness to the development of the organization. We have slowly but surely taken control of our own destiny and we are now on the cusp of enhancing access and service to our patrons, while ensuring the financial and functional stability of SWAN. With shrinking budgets and the loss of revenue, it is easy to circle the wagons and focus on our own needs, but in order to keep SWAN and its member libraries functioning, vibrant, and strategically growing, we have to see our membership fees as the life blood of the organization and without it, we all stand to lose and so do our patrons. I truly value all that SWAN has provided the 78 members who have made it so strong and by adding new members to our organization, we will insure that SWAN will continue to serve all of us for many years to come. Page 3 of 12

5 Why This is Good for SWAN David Seleb, Executive Director, Oak Park Public Library & Current President of SWAN Board of Directors SWAN is a model for resource sharing in Illinois. It always has been. I think it has also been a model for exceptional service, responsible stewardship, and visionary leadership. We have our wonderful members each other to thank for that. As your current board president, I would like to see that legacy continue, for SWAN to remain as strong an organization as it can be. Those we serve deserve no less. I know that our member libraries face significant challenges. Financial challenges, such as decreasing tax revenue and shrinking budgets, are foremost among them. Our staff and leadership in SWAN also understand and acknowledge these challenges. We demonstrate that by working to keep costs and membership fees as low as possible, while maintaining a healthy and robust infrastructure and the resource levels needed to do our important work. We strive to balance the fiscal realities of our members with the financial needs of our consortium. Our work requires careful planning and strategic decisions. As we forecast to next year and beyond, the SWAN Board of Directors and our Executive Director, Aaron Skog, are thinking carefully about many issues, including our reserve fund, our new facility and space, the usability of our products, and the personnel we will need to accomplish our objectives. Our membership fees will be affected as we strategize, plan, and implement. There is no doubt about that. So, we should be ready to take any carefully considered opportunity before us to minimize that effect as we maximize our effectiveness and organizational strength. We have a wonderful and unique opportunity to do that now by welcoming the libraries of the LINC and MAGIC consortia and by expending some of our resources today for a stronger organization tomorrow. These approximately 20 libraries are vibrant, well-supported organizations that would bring a wealth of financial and human resources to our consortium. Their strength added to our own would mean a healthier future for all of us. This white paper will provide you with all the details of this opportunity. Please read and think about it carefully. Please talk about it and ask questions about it. And, then, please help us to make the right decision for SWAN. Yours, Page 4 of 12

6 Together is Better Aaron Skog, Executive Director of SWAN When Franklin Park Public Library approached SWAN about joining our consortium in July 2014, I began to think about how much things could change. Franklin Park patrons were part of the LINC group of libraries, but bordered by SWAN libraries Schiller Park, Northlake, Melrose Park, and River Grove. Patrons were already moving between the libraries, but the convenience of being in a single system was not possible. Prior to the RAILS merger, the SWAN and LINC consortia were more or less affiliated with Suburban Library System and DuPage Library System. If your library was in one library system, you could not be in the consortium of another system. The five-library-system merger to create RAILS generated new possibilities. Franklin Park realized this and concluded that there was a benefit to its patrons in switching from LINC to SWAN. As it turned out, only a year passed before much larger changes were under discussion. I am excited by the idea of SWAN growing to include the patrons in these nearby areas. The old geographic boundaries that defined the five library systems no longer exist. Why not consider that the library visits (reciprocal borrowing) and resource sharing (interlibrary loan) that benefit the existing 1.4 million patrons in SWAN s service area could grow to serve as many as 1.8 million patrons? Who are the Libraries in LINC and MAGIC? SWAN would be much stronger by FY2019 with up to 22 more libraries joining our ranks. Below are some benefits the existing SWAN membership should consider as part of their decision to approve membership in January LINC, MAGIC, and SWAN by the Numbers The combined resources represent a 49% increase in the titles available to a combined 100 libraries. Group Libraries Card Holders Titles Items Annual Circ LINC 8 176, ,000 1,187,200 4,350,000 MAGIC , ,337 1,239,442 1,755,300 SWAN ,172 1,429,786 7,924,458 13,456,399 Total 100 1,224,074 2,797,123 10,351,100 19,561,699 Percentage Increase 22% 25% 49% 23% 31% Page 5 of 12

7 The profile of the combined group of libraries would rival the largest public library systems in the United States. Another statistic to consider is lending and borrowing. On the whole, the sharing within SWAN is a winwin for large and small libraries. The largest libraries borrow far more than they lend, and the smaller libraries can provide to their communities far more than if they were disconnected from the surrounding library community. Libraries currently in SWAN with average higher circulation have a community that borrows on average 68% more than they lend. Adding smaller and medium-sized libraries can in fact act as the engine for lending within the consortium. This white paper has assembled some data for titles, circulation, and annual operating budget for comparison in Appendix A which follows. Page 6 of 12

8 Collections The two special libraries Theosophical Society in America and National University of Health Sciences have collections worth highlighting. The Theosophical Society in America is part of the International Theosophical Society which has 150 branches nationwide. The Theosophical Society of America main library is the Henry S. Olcott Memorial Library located in Wheaton, IL. Two branch libraries in Ojai, CA and New York, NY also have collection in MAGIC. The Henry S. Olcott Memorial Library collection is arranged in 159 subjects area, ranging from Acupuncture to Zoroastrianism. The Library is a unique collection, bringing together the religious, philosophical, and spiritual traditions of the East and West, emphasizing the Ancient Wisdom tradition Theosophy. The National University of Health Sciences, located in Lombard, provides the following targeted collection for its students and larger resource sharing community: The Learning Resource Center offers over 15,000 book titles; 143 current print journal subscriptions; 109,823 electronic journals, ebooks and streaming videos; and 32 bibliographic databases in a collection supporting NUHS programs in chiropractic, naturopathy, homeopathy, acupuncture, oriental medicine, massage therapy, and biological sciences. Library Expertise The addition of libraries to SWAN brings the expertise of the library staff that will benefit SWAN membership directly. Outreach Module Implementation SWAN has the Symphony Outreach module available to all its member libraries. The purpose of Outreach is to extend services to patrons as bookmobile stops, managed care facilities, daycare centers, schools, or the homes of patrons who cannot come to the library in person. However, we need some libraries to turn to as models for using the software successfully. Carol Stream Public Library, Geneva Public Library, Saint Charles Public Library, and Town and Country Public Library District have implemented the Symphony Outreach module, providing service to patrons who are unable to visit the library. Carol Stream currently has 60 outreach patrons; Town and Country has 24. As soon-to-be members of SWAN, these libraries could provide valuable insight into how to approach these service communities and the best practices for using the Outreach software in combination with the MobileCirc system already in place. Bensenville Public Library and Bensenville Elementary School District #2 Strong links between public libraries and the schools they serve is not unique, but the community of Bensenville has created a model that will be of continuing interest to the SWAN consortium. Bensenville Public Library and Bensenville Elementary School District #2 demonstrate this collaboration directly through their integrated approach to patron records in MAGIC. Rather than Page 7 of 12

9 duplicate student patron records of those served by the public library, all student patron records are owned by the public library. Students use their public library cards to check out material in three schools in the district. Through use of user categories, circulation rules, and customized notices, needs of school library use can be balanced with students rights to a wider collection of resources outside the classroom. Expansion of Cataloging Member Libraries Within the 22 libraries considering SWAN, many are considering becoming officially designated as SWAN OCLC Cataloging Libraries. The five current member libraries (Downers Grove Public Library, Morton Arboretum Sterling Library, Oak Lawn Public Library, Oak Park Public Library, and Tinley Park Public Library) could have 9 libraries joining their ranks as the group of libraries designated with adding full OCLC MARC data to the SWAN consortium. The benefits are plain and simple: the more expertise in this area of record data entry, the faster SWAN will have full bibliographic records, resulting in richer search results for patrons. Reciprocal Borrower Patrons As an example of how SWAN libraries would benefit directly from ease of transactions, let us examine Oak Brook Public Library s reciprocal borrower activity with SWAN libraries. Oak Brook Public Library: 5 Year Analysis of New Patron Records & Origin 65% 2% 4% 3% 0% 1% 5% 2% 0% 18% CCS CPLS LINC NIC PCAT PIN RSA Standalone SWAN A total of 8,087 new patron records were created in the past 5 years at Oak Brook Public Library. Of those, 3,367, or 42% were for reciprocal borrowers coming from other Illinois libraries. As each patron is registered, Oak Brook Public Library staff noted the home city of 50% of these reciprocal borrower patrons. Of the 50% where city was recorded in the patron record, the breakdown shows 65% of these patrons are affiliated with a library in the SWAN membership. SWAN libraries and Oak Brook Public Library would benefit from the shared patron database of the combined consortium. Oak Brook Public Library staff would be able to instantly look up the visiting patrons within the SWAN database and grant access based on the patron s good standing. SWAN library Page 8 of 12

10 staff would be unburdened from various phone calls required to ensure a patron s good standing. Library patrons visits would be substantially made easier. Pick-Up Anywhere Expansion SWAN library patrons can pick up and return materials almost anywhere within the consortium and with the addition of LINC and MAGIC libraries, there an expansion of this service. Saint Charles Public Library has drop-off boxes throughout the Fox Valley area. In addition there will be access to pickup items or return items at Messenger Public Library of North Aurora, Town and Country Public Library District (Elburn), and Sugar Grove. The same can be said for Oak Brook, Villa Park, and Downers Grove patrons. Collaboration Many of the libraries in LINC and SWAN are collaborating on programs. The One Author, One Community program that is being co-sponsored by Glen Ellyn and a number of SWAN libraries this fall. Think of what is possible if they shared resources and materials, in addition to programs. Organization Stability Adding larger libraries back into the SWAN ranks to make up for the loss of libraries like Elmhurst and Orland Park offers more stability. The operating budgets for all 22 potential libraries are listed in Appendix A. Of the 20 highest operating budgets listed, 7 of these libraries would be from the 22 under consideration for SWAN membership. This strengthened membership would mean more stable fees and service with us all collaborating and contributing together. Impact on SWAN The addition of 22 libraries in one-fell swoop requires careful planning. There will be costs to the project and a need for expanded support for a larger consortium. While SWAN has cash reserves to cope with planned changes, we want to ensure that sudden membership fee increases are not around the corner. Page 9 of 12

11 The SWAN Board was presented a plan that will allow SWAN to maintain momentum on many of the projects underway. First and foremost, we want to ensure that our catalog quality and search experience remains a top priority. Secondly, several of the services we have as part of the SirsiDynix contract are in early stages of deployment or remain in a pilot phase, so we do not want any efforts with these to halt while we work on adding 22 libraries. SWAN Support Staff The biggest challenge for SWAN is to bring these new libraries into the consortium but not lose momentum of our current projects and workload, which we understand is a major priority to our membership. Enterprise usability improvements, EBSCO EDS article search integration, eresource Central connectors and collection management, BLUEcloud Analytics: all of these remain in demand and cannot wait for 18 months of project work. As the Executive Director, I initiated discussions with the SWAN Board on how to manage this impact. The approach and subsequent proposal is quite simple: determine the support staff levels required for a SWAN organization supporting 100 libraries in fiscal year 2019 (FY2019), and begin the process of recruiting and hiring as soon as the joining libraries sign their SWAN Membership Agreements. Thus, the needed support would arrive early and allow SWAN to move forward with the project and not lose momentum on ongoing projects. Personnel expenses would increase in the second half of FY2017 with additional staff being hired, and the full staff plan in place by the start of FY2018. These new positions would be support and leadership roles that will fit our needs as a much larger consortium. SWAN Membership Fees The SWAN Board pledged to lock in fees lowered by 13% for three fiscal years: 2016, 2017, and When the three years are up, SWAN will have to consider restoring fees to those levels from fiscal year This was always the likely outcome. RAILS increased LLSAP funding support for those three years which made that possible, and that high level of support from RAILS would probably not continue once FY2019 began. The new libraries would be part of SWAN starting in FY2019 (July 2018). SWAN budget projections are focused on operating expenses to support a larger consortium. All SWAN membership fees quoted to the 22 libraries interested in joining SWAN have been based on operating expenses that includes additional SWAN staff. The SWAN Board has reviewed a draft of FY2019 membership fees which are around the FY2015 levels (the year before the 13% discount). Reasons for providing only estimates on FY2019 membership costs: SWAN operations are shared cost and we won t know more accurately what the fees will be until we know how many of the 22 libraries have completed the SWAN Membership application RAILS LLSAP funding for FY2019 is being revised. SWAN budget projections for FY2019 are conservative in this area Page 10 of 12

12 Please refer to Appendix B for a chart of the projected FY2019 membership fees. RAILS LLSAP Grant The RAILS LLSAP grant program has an excellent track record for libraries joining LLSAP consortia. The eight libraries in the Quad Cities area joined PrairieCat in 2015 and were provided individual grants through RAILS to pay for the one-time costs for joining. SWAN estimates through SirsiDynix that the one-time migration costs and licensing would be around $260,000. The RAILS LLSAP grant picks up 100% of this cost. Additional costs within the grant program for SonicWALL appliances and hardware peripherals are available to allow the libraries to get to the standards within the SWAN LLSAP. Conversations with SirsiDynix have already begun around the areas of additional consulting services purchased in blocks of hours for the purpose of setting up and configuring various areas of Symphony and statistical reports. These consulting hours would be included within the RAILS LLSAP grant application. Summary of Work Completed As stated, official meetings between SWAN and representatives from LINC and MAGIC began in At each step the group asked the question Do we wish to continue? and the answer was always yes. Four meetings with LINC, MAGIC, RAILS, and SWAN to discuss membership in SWAN have been held beginning in October 2015 and continuing through July SWAN provided membership fees estimates for LINC and MAGIC libraries using the SWAN fee formula in a range of low and high fees. The low fee is a conservative estimate for supporting FY2019 operations with some RAILS LLSAP financial support; the high fee is as if no RAILS support existed, aka a doomsday fee scenario. SWAN held six sessions with library staff at LINC and MAGIC to get an overview of SWAN. SWAN provided an intergovernmental agreement for LINC, MAGIC, RAILS, and SWAN organizations to approve by September 1, 2016: this provides a framework whereby SWAN will commit to cost quotations and the approval process outlined in its bylaws; LINC and MAGIC organizations begin plans to dissolve; and RAILS commits to a set budget amount for its LLSAP Grant program. Page 11 of 12

13 Timeline Moving Forward LINC and MAGIC libraries will complete the SWAN Membership Agreement by December 31, SWAN libraries will vote to accept the petitioning group of libraries as a whole by January 31, Project planning will begin in February 2017, but 18 months are expected to finish the data mapping, data analysis, loading, configuration, and training. Go-live will occur in two groups: depending on readiness, it might be LINC libraries first, and MAGIC libraries weeks later. The goal is to have everyone circulating by June SWAN staff gained a great deal of experience adding Franklin Park and Lansing libraries during the winter and spring of SirsiDynix has committed to the project team that was used for the SWAN migration of 77 libraries, and Franklin Park Public Library and Lansing Public Library. We have established methods for setting up our various systems. New project management software is being evaluated for task management and communication. Conclusion We hope this white paper was informative. The timeline above notes that SWAN libraries approve by affirmative vote in January SWAN Bylaws provide for a vote by electronic means. This ballot will be announced via SWANcom, posted on the SWAN support website, and our bi-weekly newsletter. The addition of the new Member Library requires approval by the affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) of all the active Member Libraries of SWAN. Such vote may be conducted by electronic means. The SWAN Executive Director shall tally the vote and report it to the Board. The Board shall ratify the vote on the new Member Library upon receiving the tally of the Member Libraries vote, as long as at least two-thirds (2/3) of the Member Libraries have voted in the affirmative. The active membership of such new Member Library shall become effective on the date when the Board votes to approve the new Member Library. Questions regarding the white paper content and the approval process should be directed to the individuals below. Aaron Skog aaron@swanlibraries.net (630) Rich Wolff RWolff@tplibrary.org (708) David Seleb d.seleb@oppl.org (708) SWAN Executive Director Chair of the SWAN Futures Committee SWAN Board President Page 12 of 12

14 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Details on Title Count Sorted Low - High Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Title Count Wheaton Academy 2,532 Brookfield Zoo 8,502 Saint Patrick Catholic School 11,875 William Leonard 13,672 Calumet Park 15,961 Kaneville Public Library District 23,589 Markham 25,191 Thornton 26,152 McCook 26,373 Beecher 26,612 Morton Arboretum 29,136 River Grove 30,815 National University of Health Sciences 31,643 Steger-South Chicago Heights 32,070 Theosophical Society in America 32,478 University Park 32,967 N McConathy 35,540 Berkeley 38,127 Palos Pk 39,324 Hodgkins 40,376 Riverdale 41,673 Summit 46,240 Justice 46,585 Bensenville Elementary School District #2 47,341 Stickney-Forestview 49,950 Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Title Count Richton Park 51,535 Worth 52,198 Sugar Grove Public Library District 53,366 No.Riverside 54,995 Prairie State Col 58,080 Crestwood 59,695 Clarendon Hls 60,292 Broadview 62,602 Glenwood-Lyn 63,142 Lyons 64,878 Town and Country Public Library District 66,537 Hillside 66,792 Melrose Pk 66,850 Bensenville Community Public Library District 69,632 Wood Dale Public Library District 74,836 River Forest 74,932 Harvey 76,216 Acorn 76,642 Midlothian 77,178 Chicago Ridge 77,455 Forest Pk 78,197 Bedford Pk 78,457 Crete 78,637 Bridgeview 78,931 Maywood 78,973 West Chicago 80,974 Evergreen Pk

15 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Title Count 82,694 Bellwood 83,166 Schiller Park 85,713 Grande Prairie 88,397 Brookfield 88,710 Thomas Ford 90,969 Northlake 94,179 Flossmoor 95,318 Lansing 98,149 Oak Brook Public Library 98,480 La Grange Park 99,394 Riverside 99,576 Prairie Trails 100,267 Cicero 101,051 Blue Island 101,789 Palos Hts 102,997 Messenger Public Library of North Aurora 103,375 Homewood 103,859 Westchester 104,253 Matteson 106,665 Park Forest 111,475 Elmwood Pk 111,950 South Holland 113,700 Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Title Count Itasca 120,027 Berwyn 122,994 Westmont 125,363 Frankfort 127,282 Hinsdale 134,746 Calumet City 147,738 Carol Stream Public Library 151,442 Villa Park 152,019 Eisenhower 153,773 Bloomingdale 155,299 Franklin Park 163,450 Indian Prairie 182,173 Glen Ellyn 192,427 Tinley Park 194,347 Geneva 197,366 Woodridge 208,198 Poplar Creek Public Library District 240,375 Batavia 240,856 Oak Lawn 284,660 Downers Grove 291,258 Oak Park 309,499 Saint Charles 361,384 Dolton 114,125 Alsip-Merr. Pk 114,977 La Grange 116,112 Chicago Hts. 117,404

16 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Details on Circulation Average: sorted low-high Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Three Year Circulation Average Wheaton Academy 60 Brookfield Zoo 1,389 Kaneville Public Library District 2,820 Morton Arboretum 3,652 William Leonard 4,400 Theosophical Society in America 5,057 National University of Health Sciences 6,714 Bedford Pk 7,461 Prairie State Col 9,845 McCook 11,607 Saint Patrick Catholic School 15,671 Thornton 15,732 Summit 24,142 Calumet Park 24,577 N McConathy 27,992 University Park 31,889 Beecher 46,865 Justice 49,109 Markham 49,379 Stickney-Forestview 50,226 Riverdale 53,267 Harvey 54,041 Hodgkins 54,854 Palos Pk 57,057 Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Three Year Circulation Average Berkeley 57,952 Oak Brook Public Library 59,851 Steger-South Chicago Heights 61,371 Crestwood 61,868 River Grove 62,354 Maywood 62,753 Dolton 66,992 Worth 69,080 No.Riverside 75,130 Bridgeview 76,273 Hillside 76,798 Lyons 78,626 Broadview 79,574 Schiller Park 86,554 Richton Park 86,726 Melrose Pk 92,365 Bensenville Community Public Library District 93,256 Midlothian 93,600 Bellwood 98,377 Bensenville Elementary School District #2 103,037 Chicago Hts. 105,097 Glenwood-Lyn 107,376 Town and Country Public Library District 113,704 Grande Prairie 122,742 Clarendon Hls 123,970 Calumet City 124,156

17 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Three Year Circulation Average Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Three Year Circulation Average Sugar Grove Public Library District 126,803 South Holland 128,506 Flossmoor 129,994 Chicago Ridge 134,048 Itasca 134,594 Wood Dale Public Library District 143,139 Riverside 144,079 Palos Hts 147,604 Westchester 154,266 Evergreen Pk 157,517 Matteson 158,596 Crete 161,694 Alsip-Merr. Pk 162,326 Lansing 169,831 Blue Island 170,109 Northlake 170,935 Forest Pk 171,650 La Grange Park 173,476 Messenger Public Library of North Aurora 187,011 Prairie Trails 188,729 River Forest 189,566 Acorn 192,155 Franklin Park 195,187 Thomas Ford 200,850 La Grange 245,822 West Chicago 248,361 Eisenhower 256,607 Villa Park 284,378 Poplar Creek Public Library District 295,277 Hinsdale 298,344 Brookfield 302,975 Cicero 309,082 Bloomingdale 311,589 Westmont 335,976 Homewood 340,544 Carol Stream Public Library 347,116 Frankfort 366,039 Berwyn 370,303 Oak Lawn 467,251 Woodridge 557,677 Glen Ellyn 570,277 Geneva 574,783 Batavia 624,076 Tinley Park 692,376 Indian Prairie 776,946 Downers Grove 882,379 Saint Charles 1,317,578 Oak Park 1,335,538 Park Forest 219,916 Elmwood Pk 228,371

18 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Note: Source IPLAR Data 2014 "Total Operating Expenditures Including Capital Expenditures" Library Operating Budgets: Sorted Low-High Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Annual Operating Budget Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Bensenville Elementary School District #2 Annual Operating Budget Not avail Justice Public Library District $327,229 William Leonard Public Library District $424,023 Brookfield Zoo Not avail Crestwood Public Library District $434,873 National University of Health Sciences Not avail Palos Park Public Library $438,667 Prairie State College Not avail River Grove Public Library District $439,827 Saint Patrick Catholic School Theosophical Society in America Not avail Not avail Lyons Public Library $476,884 University Park Public Library District $483,141 Wheaton Academy Not avail Hodgkins Public Library District $534,906 Kaneville Public Library District $71,914 McCook Public Library District $546,692 Thornton Public Library $113,432 Summit Public Library District $140,782 Beecher Community Library District $204,498 Markham Public Library $548,000 Sugar Grove Public Library District $610,808 Clarendon Hills Public Library $642,092 Calumet Park Public Library $205,184 Riverdale Public Library District $651,955 Nancy L. McConathy Public Library District $315,416 Worth Public Library District $710,871 Berkeley Public Library $319,621 Steger-South Chicago Heights Public Library District $324,823 Dolton Public Library District $731,373 North Riverside Public Library District $816,872

19 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Note: Source IPLAR Data 2014 "Total Operating Expenditures Including Capital Expenditures" Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Annual Operating Budget Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Annual Operating Budget Broadview Public Library District $859,030 Hillside Public Library $866,017 Thomas Ford Memorial Library $1,256,496 Grande Prairie Public Library District $1,257,421 Schiller Park Public Library $889,985 Chicago Heights Public Library $1,257,507 Oak Brook Public Library $926,692 Chicago Ridge Public Library $1,313,222 Melrose Park Public Library $931,063 Flossmoor Public Library $1,340,385 Riverside Public Library $1,033,323 Glenwood-Lynwood Public Library District $1,036,246 Evergreen Park Public Library $1,043,009 Town and Country Public Library District $1,053,369 Itasca Community Library $1,363,541 Richton Park Public Library District $1,373,774 Bensenville Community Public Library District $1,386,713 Maywood Public Library District $1,403,922 Acorn Public Library District $1,066,515 Midlothian Public Library $1,084,987 Crete Public Library District $1,439,998 Prairie Trails Public Library District $1,458,052 Westchester Public Library $1,106,845 Forest Park Public Library $1,474,077 River Forest Public Library $1,115,959 Blue Island Public Library $1,488,467 Harvey Public Library District $1,144,941 Bellwood Public Library $1,163,008 Bedford Park Public Library District $1,247,041 Park Forest Public Library $1,491,827 LaGrange Park Public Library District $1,495,023 Messenger Public Library of North Aurora $1,534,287

20 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Note: Source IPLAR Data 2014 "Total Operating Expenditures Including Capital Expenditures" Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Annual Operating Budget Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Annual Operating Budget Elmwood Park Public Library $1,561,882 Franklin Park Public Library District $1,567,711 Westmont Public Library $1,579,608 Brookfield Public Library $1,643,145 Hinsdale Public Library $2,313,567 Palos Heights Public Library $2,473,364 Homewood Public Library District $2,480,287 Alsip-Merrionette Park Public Library District $2,512,155 South Holland Public Library $1,653,852 Stickney-Forest View Public Library District $1,660,395 La Grange Public Library $2,630,019 Morton Grove Public Library $2,831,615 Northlake Public Library District $1,705,944 Lansing Public Library $1,725,224 Bloomingdale Public Library $2,951,781 Indian Prairie Public Library District $2,963,875 Calumet City Public Library $1,761,925 Matteson Area Public Library District $1,775,369 Wood Dale Public Library District $1,837,050 Woodridge Public Library $3,046,253 Glen Ellyn Public Library $3,167,008 Berwyn Public Library $3,193,946 Bridgeview Public Library $1,845,549 Batavia Public Library District $3,204,463 Cicero Public Library $1,861,869 West Chicago Public Library District $2,000,781 Carol Stream Public Library $3,297,038 Eisenhower Public Library District $4,013,507 Villa Park Public Library $2,089,924 Frankfort Public Library District $2,105,871 Geneva Public Library District $4,386,870 Poplar Creek Public Library District $4,672,549

21 Appendix A: Data on 100 Libraries for Comparison Note: Source IPLAR Data 2014 "Total Operating Expenditures Including Capital Expenditures" Libraries (MAGIC green & LINC yellow) Annual Operating Budget Downers Grove Public Library $4,874,457 Tinley Park Public Library $4,952,639 Oak Lawn Public Library $5,198,036 Saint Charles Public Library District $6,171,583 Oak Park Public Library $7,162,766

22 Appendix B: SWAN Membership Fee Estimates for FY2019 LIBRARY FY15 FY16-FY18 Estimated Fee FY19 Acorn $23,630 $20,999 $24,700 Alsip-Merr. Pk $27,585 $24,514 $28,800 Batavia $80,000 $56,500 Bedford Pk $19,048 $16,927 $20,100 Beecher $11,637 $10,341 $12,400 Bellwood $20,888 $18,563 $21,900 Bensenville Community Public Library District $16,016 $21,000 Bensenville Elementary School District #2 $13,750 $17,500 Berkeley $13,427 $11,932 $14,200 Berwyn $37,380 $33,218 $38,800 Bloomingdale $60,000 $39,300 Blue Island $25,074 $22,282 $26,200 Bridgeview $20,509 $18,226 $21,500 Broadview $18,561 $16,494 $19,500 Brookfield $26,575 $23,616 $27,700 Brookfield Zoo $8,992 $7,990 $9,700 Calumet City $35,599 $31,636 $37,100 Calumet Park $10,173 $9,040 $10,900 Carol Stream Public Library $52,942 $41,100 Chicago Hts. $24,257 $21,557 $25,400 Chicago Ridge $21,084 $18,736 $22,100 Cicero $33,098 $29,412 $34,400 Clarendon Hls $19,256 $17,112 $20,200 Crestwood $16,495 $14,658 $17,400 Crete $23,667 $21,032 $24,700 Dolton $25,066 $22,276 $26,300 Downers Grove $59,891 $53,223 $61,800 Eisenhower $37,944 $33,720 $39,400 Elmwood Pk $27,708 $24,623 $28,900 Evergreen Pk $22,061 $19,605 $23,100 Flossmoor $24,589 $21,851 $25,700 Forest Pk $25,258 $22,445 $26,400 Frankfort $35,318 $31,386 $36,700 Franklin Park Not Applicable $35,435 $37,700 Geneva $100,000 $53,700 Glen Ellyn $80,000 $50,700 Glenwood-Lynwood $21,087 $18,739 $22,100

23 Appendix B: SWAN Membership Fee Estimates for FY2019 Grande Prairie $21,408 $19,024 $22,400 Harvey $22,649 $20,128 $23,800 Hillside $16,996 $15,104 $17,900 Hinsdale $33,678 $29,928 $35,000 Hodgkins $14,527 $12,910 $15,400 Homewood $32,583 $28,955 $33,900 Indian Prairie $51,336 $45,620 $53,000 Itasca $40,000 $29,700 Justice $14,043 $12,480 $14,900 Kaneville Public Library District $1,080 $11,200 La Grange $31,790 $28,250 $33,100 La Grange Park $25,393 $22,566 $26,500 Lansing Not Applicable $27,629 $29,300 Lyons $17,804 $15,822 $18,700 Markham $15,360 $13,649 $16,200 Matteson $27,675 $24,594 $28,900 Maywood $21,186 $18,827 $22,200 McCook $11,840 $10,521 $12,600 Melrose Pk $25,884 $23,002 $27,100 Messenger Public Library of North Aurora $30,444 $28,700 Midlothian $19,749 $17,550 $20,700 Morton Arboretum $9,742 $8,657 $10,400 N McConathy $12,091 $10,744 $12,900 National University of Health Sciences $1,080 $12,500 No.Riverside $18,227 $16,197 $19,200 Northlake $25,800 $22,927 $26,900 Oak Brook Public Library $15,732 $21,600 Oak Lawn $47,650 $42,346 $49,400 Oak Park $72,114 $64,085 $74,200 Palos Hts $22,822 $20,281 $23,900 Palos Pk $13,998 $12,439 $14,800 Park Forest $28,440 $25,274 $29,700 Poplar Creek Public Library District $56,817 $52,600 Prairie State Col $21,061 $18,619 $19,100 Prairie Trails $26,265 $23,341 $27,400 Richton Park $16,712 $14,851 $17,600 River Forest $23,416 $20,808 $24,500 River Grove $12,828 $11,400 $13,600 Riverdale $15,093 $13,412 $16,000 Riverside $25,280 $22,466 $26,400 Saint Charles $100,000 $85,100 Saint Patrick Catholic School $1,080 $10,300

24 Appendix B: SWAN Membership Fee Estimates for FY2019 Schiller Park $12,076 $10,732 $20,500 South Holland $27,720 $24,634 $29,000 Steger-South Chicago Heights $12,926 $11,487 $13,700 Stickney-Forestview $17,714 $15,741 $18,700 Sugar Grove Public Library District $13,667 $19,100 Summit $13,973 $12,417 $14,800 Theosophical Society in America $1,782 $12,600 Thomas Ford $24,685 $21,937 $25,800 Thornton $10,952 $9,733 $11,700 Tinley Park $43,536 $38,689 $52,900 Town and Country Public Library District $18,335 $20,100 University Park $12,880 $11,445 $13,700 Villa Park $51,500 $38,400 West Chicago $60,000 $30,700 Westchester $25,456 $22,622 $26,600 Westmont $30,713 $27,294 $31,900 Wheaton Academy $1,080 $8,600 William Leonard $9,541 $8,479 $10,200 Wood Dale Public Library District $21,659 $24,000 Woodridge $47,375 $42,101 $49,000 Worth $15,936 $14,161 $16,800