Theme 4: Library Collections
Levels of Funding


"In 2002-2003, a massive journals cancellation project was necessary just to keep up with inflation. Then came an unexpected and drastic budget cut of $167,000, a reduction repeated in 2003-2004. The Library is still reeling. With $167,000 less for materials in both 2002/03 and 2003/04, it is difficult to be a cutting-edge library (if indeed we should strive to be such) without the money to purchase what is necessary for students and faculty." Susan Vaughn, Associate Librarian for Collection Development
"A concern to all members of this committee is the decrease in funding being made available for the Library budget. ... We recommend that the Library be shielded from any future budget cuts, and that the $167,000 held back from its budget in 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 be restored in 2004-2005. The Library is the foundation on which Brooklyn College can build towards academic excellence and its objective of creating a student-centered campus. We strongly encourage that the Library be supported financially to the fullest extent possible." Faculty Council's Committee on the Library, Annual Report 2003-2004

The budget for collections in 2003/04 was both poor and static. From the initial budget of $805,600, $130,000 was first held back, then cut, resulting in a starting budget of $ 675,600

$ 805,600 Starting Budget
-130,000 Cut
$ 675,600
+100,000 Student Technology Fee funds
+ 17,900 State Coordinated Collection Development Grant
+ 36,000 State/University matching Grant
+ 36,000 Matching money from the Tanger gift and the Library's very finite gift funds
$865,500 2003-2004 Spending Power

The last two years have been dark ones for Library collections at Brooklyn College. Down $166,666 for the second year running, it is only thanks to the resources the new building brought with it that we have been able to manage.

  • In the spring 2002 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. But worse news was yet to come: in fact, the worst in a decade.

    • In 2002-2003 what began as a $167,000 holdback became a reduction; in the end, we were able to renew three of the four large science packages (SciFinder Scholar, Science Direct, and Wiley Interscience); IDEAL ($65,000) was cancelled. The book budget was reduced by 50%; Student Technology Fee funds (meant to bring new electronic resources to our students) were diverted to save existing products from the block. By adding $50,000 in gift funds to the mix, we scraped by.

  • Fall 2003 was largely a reprise of fall 2002 to which new problems were added:

  • Once again, the Library began with a $167,000 holdback that became a reduction. This was the first blow.


  • Then there was the loss of the Audiovisual Center's budget ($16,200 temporary services; $8,000 OTPS), which came as a real surprise: (a) this was money we had in 2002-2003, the Library's first year of operation, and (b) the amount of Technology Fee money needed to operate the New Media Center was predicated on the AV Center's budget's being added to the Library's base.


  • Next, the Brooklyn College Foundation advised us that it would help to raise money toward the annual University "match" only if the Library paid all the associated costs. Offered access to about 1,200 names, we saw that we could only lose money under such a plan: the mailing would cost more than we could hope to bring in. Thus $72,000, money that had been part of our collections budget for fifteen years, appeared to be slipping away. However, thanks to the generosity of alumnus Al Tanger, we did make the match: for more on this, see The 2003/2004 "Match," below.


  • Next came the SciFinder Scholar crisis, described in greater detail under Theme 3, Electronic Information Resources, above. While the University teased the campuses with hints that it might help to support this product, in the end this electronic version of Chemical Abstracts was saved not by the University but by the campuses, as two more schools joined the Brooklyn/City/Queens mini-consortium and we were able to renew. By dividing the cost of this resource five ways rather than three, we were able to add some money to the beleaguered book budget. For more on this topic, see E-Journal Funding Models, above.


  • In March 2003 a few more pennies fell from heaven: CUNY central put an additional $600,000 into e-journal subscriptions, enabling us to reallocate some $16,400 to books. For more information, see Theme 3, Electronic Information Resources, above.


  • Once again, rather than enriching collections as it was intended to do, Student Technology Fund money chiefly helped to keep us afloat.