In the spring 2002 we saw that inflation in the renewal costs for our electronic journals dictated cancellations for the coming academic year: with a static budget, we simply could not cover the price increases publishers announced. Accordingly, after consultation with faculty, subject specialists recommended the $100,000 in cancellations needed to balance our budget. But worse news was yet to come: in fact, the worst in a decade.
In August 2002, the state and city's post-September 11 fiscal crisis hit the University full-force. Opting to save jobs, the College realized a 2% hold-back required by the University by cutting OTPS funds, and the axe fell on the Library's budget.
Initially, of our OTPS budget was frozen; however, on December 16 half of that sum ($166,666) was released and we moved quickly to devise a financial plan that allowed us to renew three of the four science packages (Chem Abstracts/SciFinder Scholar, Science Direct, and Wiley Interscience) whose fates had been hanging in the balance. IDEAL was cancelled. This plan included a heavy infusion of gift funds, the 2002/03 annual "match," Coordinated Collection Development Aid (a NYS grant), and Student Technology Fee funds. We also reduced the book budget by˝ and the Library and Academic IT operating budgets by 26%.
Although IDEAL is an important package for the sciences, reluctantly we chose it for cancellation over the other 3 packages because:
Our Chemistry faculty insist we must have Chem Abstracts/SciFinder Scholar for their programs' accreditation.
Science Direct, as the largest, most costly, most desired package, had to be retained.
Wiley Interscience's journals are of greater interest to our faculty than those in IDEAL because each title in the package is individually faculty-chosen, whereas IDEAL is a package put together by the vendor.
Very importantly, cancelling IDEAL does not hurt any of the other CUNYs–our withdrawal from the agreement does not cost them money or reduce the number of journals to which they have access.
By halving the book budget, stealing from Tech Fee funds, diverting the "match," and putting almost $50,000 in gift funds on the table, we bought time to implement the best possible contingency plans for the future. This will mean:
Reviewing all subscriptions and licenses with faculty, to determine what can be cut with the least pain. (Certainly, we will carefully track the usage for all electronic titles–those CUNY funds, those we fund, those purchased from Tech Fee monies etc.)
Working with other CUNY libraries to coordinate purchases and drops.
Trying to achieve better pricing from publishers and vendors.
Working with you to identify long-term alternate funding sources.
Attempting to persuade the University to pick up some or all of these costs (for example, there is a group working on CUNY central to pick up the cost of Chem Abstracts/SciFinder Scholar in the coming years).
Looking for more favorable consortial arrangements. (Here, we must not be too hopeful: we already participate in a variety of extra-CUNY corsortial deals, and CUNY is a charter member of the state Higher Education Initiative, a partnership of private and public academic institutions formed for the purpose of achieving better pricing through volume purchasing: Brooklyn will get in on anything the HEI comes up with.)
Nonetheless, there were some grave concerns and serious risks related to spending so much money on collections in the worst budget year we have seen in a decade:
It is uncertain that the Library and Academic IT can operate until July 1 on the reduced sum set aside for this purpose.
Unless our budget is significantly stronger next year, more cancellations are certain.
Materials prices will continue to rise (we cut $100,000 in journal subscriptions in September, simply because of price inflation).
E-journal packages will continue to combine–this means there will be both fewer and larger packages, making cancellation decisions even more painful. (For example, a $75,000 package can be bought by a company and merged with its existing $150,000 package, creating a single $225,000 package: this greatly narrows libraries' cancellation options.)
CUNY central has warned libraries that budgetary shortfalls will likely force it to reduce the number of packages it funds each year: this means Brooklyn and other campuses will be faced with diverting already scarce funds to pick up the cost of some very basic packages.
As price increases hit all of CUNY, other libraries will cancel packages, raising our cost if we want to continue.
The University may eliminate the "match" program, because of its own fiscal problems ($37,000).
Similarly, the State may cancel the Coordinated Collection Development Aid program ($17,800).
We will be forced to increase the book budget, cut by 50% in 2002/03.
We will be forced to restore the Library/AIT's operating budget, cut by 26% in 2002/03.
For all these reasons, we are husbanding our gift funds, looking at a two to three year period during which they can help us–they replenish themselves very slowly, at 4% or less in annual interest. And, we must keep in mind the very high cost of the science journal packages: we would have to cancel dozens of humanities social science packages to keep just one of the incredibly costly science packages.