4) Do you think that libraries should charge fines on overdue materials or have other fees? Why or why not? ����������� I do think libraries should charge fines on overdue materials. The fines help enforce the lending period set by the library which is in place so that all patrons have access to the materials. If there wasn�t some form of fine then it would encourage a patron to keep a book as long as they please, without considering if other people also want to use the material. I would think at some point if the material wasn�t returned the library would charge the replacement cost, but the same arguments could be used to say that a patron shouldn�t be charged to replace the item, that would be used to say they shouldn�t be fined for it. ����������� I would not suggest charging a large fine, maybe just 10 cents or less a day. It should be enough of a fine to remind someone that there is a consequence if you don�t return your material in a timely manner. It shouldn�t be a punishment or severely discourage someone from using the library. Recently I checked out a book from the D. H. Hill library at North Carolina State University. I forgot to renew it when it was due back so they sent me an email saying that my book was due the previous day and I should return it or renew it or I would be charged a fee. That is a good way to do things, because it alerted me that it was overdue because I wasn�t willingly keeping it past the return date, it had just slipped my mind to renew it, and it told what I should do or else they would charge a fine. In addition, I think the policy that PLCMC where they still allow you to check out books as long as your fines are under a certain limit ($10, I believe) is also good. It allows the user to still check out books even if they don�t have the cash on hand or are in a financial situation where it would be hard to spend money on it. It would serve as a reminder to a patron that next time they check out books they should return them on time. It might also be a good policy to say if a person has fines under a certain limit and they don�t rack up any more in a span of a year or so, that those past fines will be forgiven. ����������� Other fees are an issue that I�m much less willing to support. I do think the resources of the library should be free to all users, so I�d be very cautious in instituting any fees for any service which can�t be duplicated. The fee that PLCMC charges to get a bestselling book is a great idea. The patron can put them self on a list to get a regular copy of the book, or they can pay a few dollars to get it immediately. Both ways they have access to the book, and because it�s best selling books and not usually factual information or some other resource that a person would need immediately they are not greatly inconvenienced. Other fees for access to special resources I don�t think I could support unless it was possible for the person to find the information elsewhere in the library. Despite the financial hardships that most libraries face, one of the major tenants the profession prides itself on is free access to all people. I remember hearing an argument that a higher level resource would usually be used by patrons who can afford to pay a fee for it, but that�s a very flawed argument. It assumes that most library users, especially those that would want to access to more costly resources (online databases and the like) are financially able to afford it. While I�m not living on the street, I�m currently working a low paying job, and my funds are very tight, but I make good use of the library, and could possibly want to use one of those resources. I know I would think twice before paying for it, because I have other essential things I need to pay for. One thing everyone needs to remember is that the library is not a for-profit operation and it�s a service provided to all people, so all people should have access despite their financial status.