The short answer is to count downloadable audio books with audio, and downloadble videos with videos.  Collection expense for this is in electronic materials.  In the current collection count definintions, one only counts items if they are part of a permanent collection and are cataloged.   Not every library in the ODLC can afford to have the records for the downloadable items their catalogs, but since the right to access the item is permanent, go ahead and count the ODLC items.  In this case, the principle of "You can be wrong, but be consistently wrong" applies.

The very long answer:

One of the problems of counting such a collection this way is that if all the members that bought into the collection count the whole collection, the total of e-audio books available statewide will be vastly inflated.

To reason out the correct answer, back up to the essence of collection counts. We report stats for the purposes of planning, advocacy and fundraising.  Is it that we want to know how many library materials there are in Oregon? Maybe, but would there be a political use for this? No, probably not. It would be more valuable to know the amount of resources the library had made available to a patron if they stepped into Library X on June 30, as most library funding is at a more local level.

Think of it this way- if a library purchased permanent rights to something, they ought to count it as part of the "what is available because of the library" count.  If the library bought rights to the whole collection, count it.  Yes, it may mean that several libraries will count the whole collection.  Again, what is more useful, the total items available across the whole consortia, or the items you can tell your patron they have available?

The next problem is where to report the count.  The author is happy to report that after much debate, the national consensus has reached this answer.  There are print and non-print items.  In the non-print, there are things you read, things you watch, and and things you listen to.  An e-book is something one reads like a print book.  But what to do about downloadable audio books and video files?  Rather than create new boxes to count them in, we agreed to expand the definition of audio and video counts to include their e-counterparts.

Someone called to ask if items like this should be counted separately.  This was indeed part of the larger national debate that suggested a grid to report counts of the physical and the e-forms.  Some people thought that asking for circulation and collection expense too as a part of that grid would be good. Ack! Ack! (Bill the Cat hairball noises).  It'd make perfect sense, but somehow, the idea of more detailed reporting hasn't  been greeted with enthusiasm by Oregon libraries.    

Expense for these items is still in electronic materials.  Its an imperfect world.