There is a reason this debate is uncomfortable for city councils and state legislators: libraries are emotionally protected symbols, not just budget line items and cost centers. They represent pursuit of education, knowledge fairness, and civic virtue. Questioning their scale or footprint can sound, at first blush, like an attack on those values themselves.
That said, policies should not be frozen in place by sentiment.
When cities face massive structural deficits, such as San Diego’s current budget crisis, continuing to fund large physical infrastructures without questioning alternatives is not conservative, progressive, or compassionate. It is simply avoidant, like sticking one’s head in the sand.
If the goal is maximum access to knowledge per dollar spent, then we have an obligation to ask whether legacy delivery models are still optimal.
Objection: “Libraries Provide More Than Just Information”
This argument is true and incomplete because libraries today provide some of the following. Reminder that these do not automatically justify expanding or even maintaining their physical footprint.
- Safe indoor spaces with plenty of light
- Community programming and entertainment
- Knowledge, support, and guidance
- Technology access for those without it
The correct question is not “Do libraries do good things?”
It is “Which of those good things require a building, and which do not?”
- Delivered digitally
- Delivered at lower cost
- Delivered directly to homes
- Delivered without transportation, stigma, or safety barriers
“Preserving functions does not require preserving forms.”
Gregory Scott Wall
A Hard Truth About Equity
Physical-first systems inevitably favor people those characteristics that correlate strongly with prior educational success.
- Can travel easily
- Feel socially comfortable in institutional spaces
- Have schedules that allow fixed operating hours
- Already trust academic environments
That means the populations we most claim to be helping such as low-income individuals, the underemployed, struggling students, caregivers, people with disabilities, and those living in unsafe neighborhoods are systematically under‑served by location‑centric solutions.
Digital-first access flips this entirely:
- No commute
- No social exposure
- No gatekeeping
- No hours of operation
Equity is not only about what is offered but also about how safely and comfortably people can use it.
What a Rational Transition Looks Like
This is not a call to “shut down libraries tomorrow”, if ever. It is a call to stop treating buildings as sacred and start treating access as sacred.
A rational transition would include:
- Freeze New Library Construction: If population growth or modernization demands investment, redirect those funds toward connectivity and devices, not walls and roofs.
- Gradually Reduce Redundant Physical Locations: Especially in metro areas where libraries exist within short distances of one another, consolidate rather than expand.
- Sell or Repurpose High-Value Urban Properties: In financially strained cities, this is not radical… it is responsible stewardship.
- Use Proceeds to Fund Universal Digital Access: This is the chance to provide the following.
- Free broadband
- A personal computing device
- Digital literacy support
- Once provided, that access serves entire households, not just individual visitors.
The Metric That Actually Matters
The success metric should no longer be: “How many people visited a library last year?”
It should be: “How many people gained meaningful, safe, and continuous access to knowledge?”
- Under that metric, home internet plus a personal device consistently outperforms physical libraries in reach, usage, and life impact.
Final Thought
Libraries were one of humanity’s greatest inventions for their time. But honoring their original mission means adapting it, not preserving it in amber for posterity.
The true legacy of libraries is not brick, mortar, or shelves, it is universal access to knowledge.
Today, the most ethical, scalable, and equitable way to deliver that mission is direct digital access, where people actually live their lives.
The only real question left is whether we have the courage to fund outcomes instead of monuments.
Library Visitor Demographics in the U.S.
Based on Pew Research Center, ALA, and other studies:
- Low-income adults with no computer or internet at home:
About 50% of Americans in households earning $30,000 or less visited a library in the past year. Many rely on libraries for computer access and job searches. [pewresearch.org] - Low-income children with no computer or internet at home:
While exact percentages for children without internet aren’t broken out, libraries report strong engagement from families in underserved communities. Over 60,000 libraries worldwide provide services specifically for underserved communities, and U.S. libraries target literacy programs for low-income families. [worldmetrics.org] - Students with a computer and internet at home:
Over 60% of college students in the U.S. use their campus library frequently, even when they have home internet. [worldmetrics.org] - Adults with a computer and internet at home:
Many still visit libraries for books, study space, and programs. Pew reports 48% of Americans age 16+ visited a library in the past year, including those with home internet. [pewresearch.org] - Those who do not have a job:
Library visits surged after the recession for job searches. Libraries remain a key resource for unemployed individuals seeking free internet and career help. [pewresearch.org] - Those with an AA, BS, MS, or other degree:
Americans with college degrees are especially likely to visit libraries—59% have done so in the past year. [pewresearch.org]
Estimated Breakdown (per 100 visitors)
| Category | % of Visitors | Source |
| Low-income adults with no computer or internet at home | ~15% | Pew Research: 50% of low-income households visit libraries annually [pewresearch.org] |
| Low-income children with no computer or internet at home | ~10% | ALA & WorldMetrics: Libraries target underserved families and literacy programs [worldmetrics.org] |
| Students with a computer and internet at home | ~30% | WorldMetrics: 60% of college students use campus libraries frequently [worldmetrics.org] |
| Adults with a computer and internet at home | ~25% | Pew Research: 48% of Americans (including those with internet) visit libraries [pewresearch.org] |
| Those who do not have a job | ~10% | Pew Research: Job seekers drove library visits post-recession [pewresearch.org] |
| Those with an AA, BS, MS, or other degree | ~10% | Pew Research: 59% of college graduates visit libraries annually [pewresearch.org] |
How These Numbers Were Derived
- Pew and ALA data give annual visit trends by income, education, and purpose.
- WorldMetrics adds insights on student usage and underserved communities.
- Percentages above are scaled estimates for 100 visitors based on those trends.
Why Libraries Are Expensive
- Digital Content Costs
The biggest driver of rising library expenses is the shift to digital materials. Unlike print books, which libraries can buy outright for $8–$30 and keep indefinitely, eBooks and audiobooks often cost three to ten times more and come with restrictive licensing models. Libraries typically pay $40 for an eBook and $73 for an audiobook, and these licenses expire after a set time or number of checkouts, forcing libraries to repurchase popular titles repeatedly. For example, maintaining access to one bestselling title for four years can cost $120 digitally versus $16 in print. [spokanelibrary.org], [sjpl.org] - High Demand for Digital Access
Digital lending surged during the pandemic and continues to grow. Libraries now spend a third or more of their materials budget on platforms like OverDrive (Libby), which require ongoing investment to meet patron demand. This means libraries are locked into a cycle of renewing licenses and buying multiple copies to reduce wait times. [theweek.com], [govtech.com] - Operational and Community Services
Beyond books, libraries provide free internet, technology access, job assistance, literacy programs, and safe community spaces. These services require staff, infrastructure, and technology upgrades, all of which add to operating costs. Inflation and deferred maintenance also strain budgets. [action.everylibrary.org]
Cost Comparison
Library model: High fixed costs + ongoing staffing + indirect costs (transportation, safety)
Digital model: Higher initial investment in devices and connectivity, but scalable, shareable within the residence, and equitable
Accessibility Factor
Libraries are great and only if people use them or if you can get there.
For many that can benefit from their knowledge and content, do not get there.
- No car = long walks to get there
- Limited dollars = costly public transit, Taxi, or Uber
- Unsafe streets = personal risk because of their neighborhood or the location of the library
- Rural areas = no library nearby at all
- Not cool or trendy = not seen by friends or family as beneficial
Digital access removes these barriers entirely.
Option 1: Building and Maintaining Libraries
Direct Costs:
- Building upkeep repairs
- Staff salaries and benefits
- Physical materials (books, archives)
- Security of the location and its surroundings
- Cleaning and Insurance
- Community programs and events
- Connectivity and utilities
Hidden Costs:
- Transportation: People without cars may need public transit or long walks
- Safety: Traveling after dark or through unsafe areas adds risk
- Time: Commuting to and from the library reduces productivity
- Coverage gaps: Some communities have no library nearby, requiring new construction
Option 2: Free Internet and Laptops for Those that Request Them
Direct Costs:
- Hardware (laptops or tablets)
- Device replacement every 5 years
- Broadband infrastructure
- Installation and configuration
- Monthly service costs
- Technical support and cybersecurity
- Digital literacy programs
Benefits:
- Eliminates travel by being safely at home
- 24/7 access from home
- Bridges the digital divide
- Supports remote work
- Allow families/friends to work together without going anywhere
- Provide clarity to parents overseeing the children’s education
Hybrid Approach
A blended solution could work:
- Keep libraries as community hubs and do not build more
- Sell off libraries
- To generate revenue for cities that are near bankruptcy
- Provide revenue to pay for Option 2 above
- Provide digital access for those who can’t easily reach a library
Key Insights
Libraries serve both ends of the spectrum:
- Low-income individuals without internet rely on libraries for access.
- Highly educated adults and students use libraries for research and quiet spaces.
Where Tax Dollars Are Best Spent
Experts recommend prioritizing funds in these areas:
- Core Services:
Keep libraries open and staffed. Salaries and facility maintenance are essential for accessibility and safety. Without this, programs and collections cannot function. [ilovelibraries.org] - Digital Access & Technology:
Invest in e-resources and broadband to bridge the digital divide, especially for rural and underserved communities. Federal programs like LSTA and E-Rate historically support this, but local funding often needs to fill gaps. [aeanet.org] - Community Programs:
Allocate funds for literacy initiatives, workforce development, and educational programs that deliver measurable social and economic benefits. Studies show libraries return $4–$6 in community value for every $1 invested. [savoryourreads.com] - Strategic Budgeting:
Libraries can stretch dollars by prioritizing high-demand materials, leveraging partnerships, and renting spaces for revenue. Flexible budgeting and stakeholder involvement help adapt to changing needs. [blog.pressreader.com], [lis.academy]
Bottom Line: Libraries are expensive because digital content costs are disproportionately high and require constant renewal, while libraries also serve as multi-purpose community hubs. Tax dollars should focus on sustaining core operations, expanding digital access, and funding programs that maximize community impact.
Would you like me to create a visual breakdown of a typical library budget (materials vs staffing vs programs) to show where the money goes? Or should I draft a short policy recommendation on optimizing library funding priorities?