Library board caps Hoopla checkouts after surge in digital use

The Churchill County Library Board of Trustees voted to limit Hoopla digital checkouts to 15 items per user per month and to cap audiobooks at $2.84 and ebooks at $1.99 per checkout, starting May 1, to curb rapidly rising digital spending.

Library Director Kathy (name on record only as Kathy) told trustees, “Hoopla is an amazing service that we offer,” but added it “is unsustainable for a very long period of time because of costs.” She told the board the library spent about $3,100 on Hoopla in March and reported about 1,343 “instant” Hoopla circulations that month. Kathy said the library has roughly $11,000 in one‑time digital collection funds (including a $5,000 state collection development award and a separate one‑time gift) but that current growth rates would exhaust those funds quickly without limits.

Board members discussed usage patterns and alternatives. A trustee noted that many patrons also use Libby, the consortium’s shared digital lending platform, and suggested the library publicize Libby as an option for patrons if Hoopla limits are enacted. Kathy said the library is the only member of the local consortium currently providing Hoopla at the level it has been funding, and that other nearby libraries rely more heavily on Libby.

Trustees and staff cited these data points during debate: about 1,300 unique Churchill County residents used Hoopla in a recent month, 956 circulations had occurred 24 days into the current month, and March’s high usage was described as an anomaly but illustrative of upward pressure on costs. Trustees asked for a sustainable monthly target; Kathy said she does not yet have a single “magic number” but recommended the temporary caps as a measured step while staff tracks usage.

Trustee Sue Segura moved the motion to impose the caps; Sari Kehler seconded. The board voted in favor; no recorded nays or abstentions were reported in the transcript. Kathy will report back at the May meeting with 30 days of updated Hoopla usage and cost data and propose next steps, which may include adjusting the cap or recommending a budget allocation for fiscal planning.

The board emphasized the limits are intended to preserve long‑term service rather than end access: staff noted options such as Libby and interlibrary loan still exist and the library can offer temporary additional access for patrons working on specific projects. The board asked the director to include comparative data from similar rural libraries and from other Nevada counties as part of the follow‑up report.