
The Case for Eliminating Fines on Overdue Library Books - danso
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/10/public-library-late-fees-chicago-san-francisco-equity-access/599194/
======
csande17
It seems to me like the _symbolic_ value of children's book late fees vastly
outweighs any actual monetary incentives or benefits to the library. They're a
lesson to kids that, yes, it's bad to break rules, but you don't have to feel
anxious and guilty about it forever--if you make up for what you did by paying
the fine, you're forgiven.

For this to work, though, the library has to walk a very thin line. The fines
have to be large enough to feel significant to a child (setting them at $.01
would send the wrong message for sure), but also small enough that they'd
never actually cause problems for a family trying to pay them. I don't know if
it's possible to achieve this, especially in places with high income
inequality.

~~~
ars
They can do this by adding a cap. Say max $0.50 fine per book, and max $10 per
account.

Then you are motivated to return the book, but if you mess up the fine is not
so high as to be ruinous.

~~~
Broken_Hippo
How does this work for a 7 year old, with no income of their own and no means
of transportation?

Also, some folks are poor and simply could not afford the $10 without taking
away from vital things, like food and electricity.

~~~
cafard
Yes, but with no means of transportation, how does the seven-year-old get the
library book in the first place?

Not that I think we should impose punitive fines on those who would have to
scrimp to pay them.

~~~
Broken_Hippo
I was able to walk to the library as a child, actually - plus some places have
Bookmobiles. There were also libraries at schools.

A kid's experience might vary with all of these, though: I also lived a
5-minute drive from a place with no free public libraries with the exception
of a school.

------
derefr
Sometimes I put off reading a book I've checked out—but also don't want to
return it until I _have_ read it—and so I am _quite likely_ to end up accruing
a late fee on any books I check out.

Given this, _and_ given that I also know the price of just buying the book to
begin with, I usually feel a "prediction of regret" that I'll wish I'd have
just bought the book, instead of spending so much on just "renting" a used
copy. This stops me from using the library, most of the time.

That's probably for the best, I guess?

There's probably some optimum stopping-point where a book that I've taken out
from the library should be returned (although I'm not "done" with it
yet—sometimes that's even true!), and replaced with a purchased copy, to sit
there in my reading queue in the borrowed copy's stead.

Maybe you could make a service out of recognizing that optimum stopping-point.
Rent-to-own books, where you hold onto the old one for three weeks and then,
if you liked it, you can pay the difference to trade it in for a fresh new
copy to keep?

~~~
toast0
Many libraries will let you renew checked out books online, without cost, as
long as nobody has placed a hold on it in the meantime. For me, that would
work ok --- if I had put off reading it, but someone else wanted to, I'd get
it back right away; but if I could renew it, then I'd be ok putting it off a
little more.

~~~
ars
Even those that don't will usually allow you to return it at the desk, and
check it right back out, to reset the renewal cap.

------
yason
I like schemes where positive behaviour is directly linked to counter negative
behaviour.

Let's first introduce a soft cap and hard cap. If you have fines accrued it
doesn't prevent you from borrowing books but the fines are still kept in
record, and you owe to the library. You can pay the fines, or keep them on the
record but if the total fines reach, say $10, then also borrowing will
eventually be denied. Maybe the number of books you could borrow would be
limited earlier: if you have unpaid fines pending, you can only have one or
two books out for loan at any given time.

Now, here's the idea: what if upon returning a book a small amount would be
subtracted from the accrued fine?

If you racked up a few dollars of fines for a good reason or a bad reason, you
could pay those off merely by using the library properly, i.e. borrowing books
and returning them. Kids could easily afford this sort of "payment".

There could be a limit that by returning books you can only subtract a certain
amount off the fine during one week or one month, but basically the scheme
would be designed so that anyone who kept using the library regularly would be
bound to clear out their fines in some definite time. It's like club card
discounts but only applied to late return fines.

What if someone just borrows a lot of books and returns them only to erase
their fines? If that's what gets these people to come back to a library
repeatedly, if for nothing else than to return books they've borrowed to get
their fines erased then that's not a bad outcome either.

------
2shortplanks
The problem with charging a fine is that by providing a mechanism for penance
it reduces the pressure for those people who are prepared to pay fines to
actually return the books on time.

The more affluent therefore work under different rules than the less well off,
and can be "justified" in keeping books longer than they otherwise should.
This probably explains why in the article they found a reduction in late
returns when they abolished the fines.

~~~
krupan
It sure seems to me that wealthy people would be smart enough with their money
to never pay a fine for a late library book. Unless they really are the type
of wealthy people that always pay more for convenience, but then, why would
those types be slumming around the library? They'd surely just buy books on
Amazon.

~~~
jacobolus
Libraries can sometimes be much better for book discovery than the web.

You can pick up books and skim through as much as you want on the spot. You
can go to a shelf and see many of an author’s books next to each-other, or see
many books about the same topic.

------
WheelsAtLarge
But how do you keep people from abusing the service? When there are no
consequences people tend to abuse it.

I used to buy books with the idea that eventually I would read them. I have a
bookcase of books that I've yet to read but every time I borrow a book from
the library I read it within the allotted time. To me fines and deadlines are
a nice nudge to read the book.

~~~
eesmith
The article says there can be consequences.

> Under Chicago Public Library’s new policy, a checked out item will
> automatically be renewed 15 times as long as there are no holds on it.
> Afterwards, the item will be marked lost, and the library will charge the
> borrower its market value, though charges will be cleared as long as the
> borrower returns it.

~~~
panarky
This is all well and good if nobody else wants the book.

But if I check out a book, and you place a hold on it, and I fail to return
it, that's not OK.

Now you don't know whether to wait for the book to be returned, or to just go
buy it because I can't get around to returning it.

~~~
stuaxo
I'm guessing once it is marked as lost the library may re-buy it.

~~~
eigenvector
A lot of books in libraries can't be repurchased easily. Personally, I've had
two books I've placed on hold turn up lost recently and they're both out of
print. Considering both books are over $300 on used book sites, I rather doubt
that they were lost.

~~~
eesmith
I used ILL to read a copy of Neal Stephenson's "The Big U" before it was
reprinted, when used copies were going for $100s on eBay.

Bear in mind though that most library books _can_ be repurchased easily, and
sales like this are independent of late fines, so doesn't affect the issue at
hand.

------
tkahnoski
I was pleasantly surprised when the Dallas public library didn’t have late
fees I was used to as a kid.

They allow 99 auto-renewals which seems absurd. Unfortunately you don’t get an
alert when a hold is in place you get an alert letting you know the book is
due.

We did lose a book. And there is a restocking fee UNLESS you provide a new
mint condition book, ANY book, to replace it.

The librarian was thoroughly confused when I insisted on paying the fee so I
could check out.

Only “con” is I no longer have a real excuse for my kids to return their books
so I instead just have to be honest that I don’t want to read the same Curious
George story for the 100th time.

------
imsesaok
One thing i was very surprised coming from Korea is that you had to pay fines
if your book is overdue. I've never experienced or heard of such things in
Korea. What we do instead is not allowing you to borrow books for the amount
of days it has been overdue.

------
irrational
Our library system doesn't have fines for any children's materials. As far as
I know there haven't been any issues with this policy.

------
woadwarrior01
Libraries in Ireland eliminated late fees for overdue books early this
year[1]. I wouldn't say it has made any significant difference to me, since
the borrowing periods are already very generous. But if it does encourage more
reading in this day and age of audio visual content, why not?

Times are changing, just a couple of years ago, most new acquaintances and
colleagues would ask me for book recommendations, these days most people ask
me for podcast recommendations, and I don't listen to that many podcasts.

[1]: [https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0102/1019973-library-
fi...](https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0102/1019973-library-fines/)

------
sowbug
A nice side effect of this policy is that the library's storage capacity is
expanded to include the homes of people with late books that don't have holds
on them. I don't know whether storage capacity is scarce these days.

------
elektor
This is why I'm a big fan of Overdrive/Libby. I check out a lot of audiobooks
and they get automatically returned after 21 days, so I don't have to worry
about any late fees.

~~~
fro0116
Surely I can't be the only one irked by the fact that they're bringing the
concept of "copies" and "borrowing" to what are just bytes sitting on hard
drives that can be copied and transmitted at 0 marginal cost?

I agree that it's a better user experience than the non-digital alternative,
but I'd like to see digital books at libraries be available for free to anyone
who wants it at any time, without any arbitrary restrictions whatsoever.

~~~
1123581321
It’s even worse as publishers sell digital lending copies to libraries that
cap out at fewer lends than a physical book would be good for, forcing
repurchases! Most libraries are small and this policy prevents them from
building up large digital collections over time.

~~~
iggldiggl
> that cap out at fewer lends than a physical book would be good for

Oh yes - my favourite local library branch [1] is mostly volunteer-run and as
such was the last one to get computerised lending, so any books older than ten
years or so still have that paper slip in the back onto which the due date
used to be stamped. Looking at those, quite a number of books (and not just
the ultra-popular ones) would have already expired if they had been subject to
the same lending caps as digital books, but in practice are mostly still in an
okay (or even a bit better than just okay) condition that still looks good for
quite some more lends.

On top of that, it seems that some publishers now use licenses that simply
expire after a fixed term (two years or so!) regardless of the number of lends
(compare
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20982315](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20982315)).

[1] A former US Army library in Germany that was donated to the city when that
particular Army base was closed in the mid-90s and now effectively functions
as a dedicated English language section of the regular city library.

------
dontbenebby
How will I force them to break a 20 for the vending machine without fines?

------
Bostonian
This is a bad idea. A library is supposed to be stocked with books so that
patrons can indulge their curiosity browsing. People can't browse library
books that are sitting in the homes of other people for months.

~~~
electriclove
There is a sense of responsibility that goes away when you can keep books
indefinitely. The example here is that the books will be automatically renewed
up to 15 times and then the borrower is charged (until they return the book).
I get that these small fines can be a burden to lower income folks. I suspect
that there will be a ton of books that are never returned and borrowers will
be charged and they will feel that same burden. Yes, this is contrary to what
the 1983 study in the article states. I'd like to see a recent study - perhaps
a follow up in a year in Chicago.

