Steve Potash Testimony: The Details That Matter
The surface-level testimony is about ebook pricing and whether libraries should mandate CDL-compatible licensing. The details tell a different story. After reading every page and every footnote, three findings change how we should understand OverDrive's business model and the stakes of this legislation.
CRITICAL FINDING #1: The Bookstore Pipeline
Location: Footnote 3, Page 10
"In partnership with Kent District Library (MI), with support from Executive Director Lance Werner, we piloted a program last year testing the influence of the library to drive consumer traffic to author fan sites and newsletters. For 2026, we are preparing to test a service that connects KDL patrons that opt-in with a designated bookstore."
What This Says
OverDrive is building a data pipeline from library patron behavior directly to retail bookstore sales. This is not theoretical. This is operational. In 2025, they tested it with Kent District Library (Michigan). In 2026, they plan to deploy it more widely.
Here's how it works:
- A patron borrows a book from the library using OverDrive
- OverDrive captures that patron's reading behavior (title, format, timing, abandonment)
- OverDrive offers to connect that patron with a bookstore to purchase books
- OverDrive monetizes the patron relationship by driving retail conversion
What This Means
The library becomes a lead generation funnel. The patron data is the product. The bookstore connection is the monetization.
This is why Eric Miller was hired as Director of Data and Information Science. This is why Potash repeatedly emphasizes "billions of transactions monthly." This is why OverDrive is valuable enough for KKR to own.
This is no longer a digital lending vendor. This is a consumer acquisition platform that happens to provide library services.
What Should Happen
Every library using OverDrive should ask:
- Is this bookstore connection feature enabled on our system?
- Can we opt out?
- What data is being shared with the bookstore partner?
- Are patrons notified before their data is used this way?
- Is there a contract amendment required, or does our current contract permit this?
Kent District Library should be publicly asked why they agreed to this partnership without announcing it.
CRITICAL FINDING #2: The DCPL Wait Time Trend Buried
Location: Page 9 (chart), Page 12 (summary data)
What The Numbers Show
Potash presented 15 years of DCPL financial and operational data. Here's what actually happened:
| Metric | 2010 | 2021 (Peak) | 2024 | 2025 | Change 2010-2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annual Spend | $120,715 | $2,082,291 | $1,867,376 | $1,648,368 | +1,264% (but declining since 2021) |
| Checkouts | 69,494 | 3,282,405 | 3,156,234 | 2,973,553 | +4,180% |
| Cost per Checkout | $4.75 | $0.63 | $0.59 | $0.85 | -82% (but rising again) |
| Average Wait Time | 17 days | 54 days | 65 days | 45 days | +165% (wait times nearly tripled) |
What This Reveals
The success story Potash tells: "We've made digital lending 13 times cheaper per transaction!"
The patron story the data shows: "I wait 45 days for a book instead of 17."
Potash emphasizes the declining cost-per-circ. He places the wait time trend on a single page with one sentence of commentary. He doesn't acknowledge the 15-year trend. He focuses on the 2024-to-2025 improvement (from 65 days to 45 days) without contextualizing it against 2010 (17 days).
Most damning: DCPL\'s spending has declined for two consecutive years (2024: $1.87M, 2025: $1.65M) while checkout demand remains steady. They\'re spending less on the same demand. The cost-per-circ is rising again ($0.59 in 2024 to $0.85 in 2025).
The library is hitting a wall. They can\'t afford to buy enough copies to satisfy demand at current pricing. Patrons wait longer. Potash doesn\'t address this.
Why This Matters
This is the actual argument for legislation like B26-0490. Not abstract fairness to publishers. Not hypothetical patron access. Concrete data showing that 15 years and billions in OverDrive revenue later, a major urban library still can't meet patron demand at current pricing. DCPL is exactly the kind of library that should benefit from CDL-compatible licensing, and the data proves it.
FINDING #3: Rhetorical Strategy Over Evidence
The Deliberate "Book Banning" Reframing
Location: Page 22, Footnote 4
"For purposes of my testimony, I\'ve decided to call this a Book Banning bill. As such, it\'s my opinion that this bill doesn't deserve \"capital B\" status. This should not be confused with another \"BBB\"."
Potash isn\'t making an argument. He\'s creating a rhetorical association in a government record. He's documenting his decision to frame ebook pricing legislation as "book banning" (lowercase, apparently, to distinguish it from real book banning). This is messaging strategy, not testimony.
Later he compares the bill to xenophobic "America First" hypotheticals that would ban non-US authors. He's escalating the rhetorical frame in every section, even though the bill just sets licensing terms.
Naming Competitors as Industry Representatives
Location: Page 27
"It is illogical and a flawed strategy to throw a blanket definition over all parties working together... (OverDrive, Hoopla, Follett Content, Mackin, etc.)"
Potash lists his competitors by name in government testimony and argues the bill would hurt them all. This positions OverDrive as the industry spokesperson, speaking for competitors without being asked to. This is monopoly behavior.
The Litigation Threat
Location: Page 27
"Libraries will not be able to avoid being dragged into the litigation either as a third-party defendant... claimants will subpoena library patron borrowing records, ILS data, and more."
Potash tells a government committee that passing the bill will trigger litigation and subpoenas of patron data. Whether this is a warning or a threat depends on perspective. He\'s explicitly connecting the bill to a scenario where his company\'s data holdings become subject to discovery.
Personal Investment Disclosure
Location: Page 33
"My family, OverDrive and every ally of the library market has invested years of recent investment to block this unthinkable scenario."
He invoked his family. He said "my family, OverDrive." This is founder language, not PE-backed CEO language. In a document where every word counts, this is personal. It\'s vulnerability. It\'s also a reminder: "I still own this. I still care about this more than a salary."