L.A. Bucks Trend of Reining In Library Scofflaws

In other cities, authorities might be out looking for library scofflaws who had racked up $1,000 or $2,000 in fines for overdue books.

But officials at the Los Angeles Public Library have done little to recover lost books and materials or collect fines from their long list of offenders, although they said recently that this practice may change.

“One of the hallmarks of our library is it is free and open,” said Susan Kent, the city’s head librarian. “Yes, there are really bad offenders, but we’re not here to prosecute. We’re here to provide a service.”

That laissez faire attitude is a far cry from the approaches at a growing number of library systems around the country, where officials are cracking down on problem borrowers.

From Queens, N.Y., to left-leaning Berkeley, librarians are getting tough with overdue-book holders by referring their accounts to collection agencies, threatening them with public embarrassment and even resorting to little-known laws that make stealing library books--public property paid for with tax dollars--as much a crime as pilfering stop signs.

Libraries typically lose 1% to 1.5% of their collections annually through the checking out of materials that are never returned, experts say.

Although the percentage is low, in Los Angeles it can represent a sizable number. Of 79,320 items considered missing during the first half of 1999 alone, more than 80% were long-overdue materials, according to a library report.

Even small libraries, which are coming under closer financial scrutiny, are growing less tolerant of such shrinkage.

“If someone doesn’t want to bring a book back, then I get an arrest warrant,” said Dusty Gres, director of a small Georgia library system and one of the leading voices in library circles for going after scofflaws. “It’s public property, and I have a responsibility to the public for the books.”

So far a dozen patrons have been hauled into court, but none has gone to jail, said Gres, who runs the 65,000-book system in Vidalia, Ga.

In Clearwater, Fla., last year a woman spent eight hours in jail after failing to respond to notices about seven books and videotapes borrowed from the local library.

In Center Line, Mich., early this month police issued warrants for three women with seriously overdue library materials who owed $90 to $222 in fines. Police did not go out and arrest the trio but told them to settle up or face potential arrest if they were ever involved in a routine traffic stop.

In Texas, library officials united three years ago in an unsuccessful attempt to pass a state law making it illegal to hold overdue library books. The Texas Library Assn. said the measure was needed because a survey of the state’s 500 libraries showed that they lose $14.5 million worth of books and other items each year.

Under California law, it is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and up to a $1,000 fine, for anyone to hold onto library materials for more than 30 days after being notified that they are due.

But here and elsewhere, where librarians still consider themselves the ambassadors rather than the avengers of literacy, many are loath to invoke such a harsh measure.

Instead, librarians are trying other tactics. In Columbia, Tenn., library officials are negotiating with the local newspaper to list the names of patrons with overdue books.

“The announcement [of the proposal] got more than 450 books back,” said Elizabeth Potts, director of the Maury County Public Library. More often, libraries turn to professional collection agencies, which contact scofflaws either through telephone calls or letters.

Firms Help Libraries Recover Materials

This movement has proved to be a boon for a Jeffersonville, Ind., firm called Unique Management Services Inc. It serves 300 libraries nationwide, including the country’s largest, Queens Borough Public Library.

Charles Gary, co-owner of the agency, said it recovers about $10 million in material each year, a task that on occasion requires hardball tactics. For the truly incorrigible, the firm will report the fine on the person’s credit record.

Across California, 40 libraries have hired the company, including systems in Anaheim, San Diego, Riverside and Pasadena.

“It’s a trend,” said Luis Herrera, director of Pasadena’s 733,000-book library system. “We’re looking at different approaches to an age-old problem of getting books back to the library.”

In Orange County, libraries in Newport Beach, Yorba Linda, Anaheim, Placentia, Fullerton and Orange all use bill collectors, as does the county library system.

The enormous, 2.2-million-patron Los Angeles County Library system, with a circulation of 14.5 million items annually, uses an agency called Advanced Collection Systems.

Typically, a large number of borrowers cough up the books when they are contacted, said library spokeswoman Nancy Mahr. She said that from 1988, when the firm was first hired, to 1992 the library paid Advanced $178,000 and in return received $359,000 in fines as well as $759,000 in materials recovered. Still, the system lost 55,362 items between April 1999 and April 2000, she said.

Last month, county officials gave the agency a 183-page list of scofflaws ripe for collection. The leading offender, one family, owes the county $585.50 for missing materials, the records show.

But at the Los Angeles City Library--the country’s fourth-largest system, with 1.25 million patrons and an annual circulation of nearly 13 million--officials take a more passive approach, interviews and records show.

They continue to use an honor system that does little more than slap a hold on the scofflaw’s library card for a fine of $5 or more, and try to contact the offenders. They send out about 730 overdue notices and make about 550 automated telephone calls a day. The system is designed to send the notices and make the calls automatically once an item is overdue.

Financial records show that these efforts netted the library $1.8 million in fines in 1999. Although the library’s sophisticated, in-house computer system has the ability to list and track problem borrowers, library officials say they don’t use the program.

As a result, they don’t track their problem borrowers, have any idea how much they owe the library or what the titles and values of those people’s books are.

Overall, library officials say they do not know how much is owed in outstanding fines or the value of lost materials.

“Most of the fines are under $5,” said Kent, who oversees 1,400 employees and a $59.9-million annual operating budget that includes $9.6 million for new materials. Kent said the library does not track the cost of missing books because many aren’t replaced since they are outdated, outmoded or out of print. Items are removed from library stacks daily because of wear and tear and other reasons, she said.

To obtain some numbers from the Central Library and its 67 branches, The Times filed a California Public Records Act request in October, seeking a list of library patrons with the largest overdue fines.

Although the law keeps library circulation materials confidential, it says the secrecy “shall not apply to records of fines imposed on the borrowers,” a provision that 1st Amendment experts say was written to guarantee the fiscal accountability of public libraries.

After the library refused the request, The Times filed a public records lawsuit Feb. 28.

This month the library agreed to produce a list of borrower names for patrons who had outstanding fines of more than $1,000 as of June 8.

The result: 37 names, with the top borrower owing $2,040.

Of those, 25 had adult cards, 11 had teen cards and one had a teacher borrower card. The library provided the names but no other identifying information on the borrowers or the books that were overdue.

Among the borrowers was Kathy Weems Hasenberg, a teacher at a private elementary school in upscale Pacific Palisades. The list showed that she owes $1,135.75 in fines, a debt she blamed on checking out books for her class at the Seven Arrows Elementary School.

“Oh, my God!” Hasenberg said, when contacted by The Times. “I thought the books had been returned.”

The school’s principal, Margaret Paglia, said almost all of the library books on various artists were mistakenly shelved in the school library.

“It was a human error,” she said. On Friday, Paglia said that the school had returned all but five of the books--those five had apparently been lost--and that the school was now facing an $860 fine.

Attempts to trace others on the list led to some unusual addresses. For instance, the last known address for one person who piled up $1,341.20 in fines was a mail drop in Van Nuys. One man, who owed $1,422, had an address that is now a Torrance dry cleaner. Another woman, who owes $1,500, has an address that is a Los Angeles hotel.

Despite these sums, officials at the Los Angeles city attorney’s office cannot recall charging anyone for keeping library property. “Absent an investigation by the library, we wouldn’t know about it,” said Don Kass, a deputy city attorney.

Decision to Contact Collection Agency

With patrons being able to check out up to 50 items for up to three weeks, Kent said those on the list probably kept out multiple items so long that they were considered lost. When that happens, a patron’s account is charged $25 or the cost of each item, if it is greater, she said.

“The majority of people return them on time or they pay off their fines,” said Kent. The people on the list “are highly unusual. There are people out there who try to beat the system.”

However, Kent on Thursday said the library will soon be talking with a collection agency for the first time about a potential contract to recover long overdue materials.

Her comment came less than one hour after a Times reporter called the mayor’s office and the president of the Board of Library Commissioners. Kent said her decision to contact a collections firm was spurred only by the availability of new technology that makes transferring computer records to an outside agency easier.

“We’ll examine that issue to see if there is a more effective way of ensuring we get books back,” library board President David Lehrer said. “We’re always looking at what other libraries are doing.”