Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries

CUWL Executive Committee Conference Call
Dec 1, 2008, 9 am

Present: Ewa Barczyk, Jean Gilbertson, Lisa Jewel, Vanaja Menon and John Pollitz.
Ewa called the meeting to order. Since Deb Nordgren was absent Vanaja agreed to take minutes. Ewa suggested we discuss three main topics:

1. Letter to Rebecca Martin

In the last CUWL meeting we had agreed that a letter should be sent to Rebecca Martin regarding the $100,000 cut that was made to the Library Automation Budget for 2008/09. Jean Gilbertson as the former CUWL Chair had shared the letter she had sent to Martin in January, 2008. Although our understanding was that this reduction was of permanent nature, it was not mentioned as such in Jean’s letter.

A discussion followed about what we should say in the letter. We could be positive about the great job we have collectively done to have a strong shared electronic collection (SEC). The budget deficit for this collection is grave and we are currently looking at canceling some databases. This will be a big blow to the Libraries since individual campuses have made important decisions to cancel resources based on the SEC. Each campus has contributed money towards the SEC. If we still had access to the contingency fund of $100,000 that was folded in the Library Automation Budget, we could have protected the electronic resources. Understandably, this amount was redirected to the Equity Score Card, another strategic initiative of the System. It was agreed that we need to make a case for restoring this amount in our automation budget. It will be February when we hear more about the DIN and also how much money individual campuses will be asked to pay back.

John agreed to draft a letter to Martin and send to EC. It was suggested that Ed Van Gemert should be copied on it. He has agreed to review the letter before it goes to Rebecca.

2. Integrated Library System

As we know, ELUNA is going away in 3-4 years and it is important for us to have some ideas about what to do next. What are our options? We should explore possibilities. CUWL had suggested that Marlys and Steve should work with EC to develop a charge for those two committees to look into this and make some recommendations. We will then send it to CUWL for further discussion and voting.

It is important to reiterate that EC is not looking for product recommendations; just possible options for the future. Ewa will ask Steve and Marlys to send us what they think should be the charge to work on this.

3. Digital Initiatives Coordinating Committee (DICC)

Joshua had submitted a lengthy report which had asked for more money from CUWL. Lisa confirmed there is no money available. Perhaps DICC could submit a business model. It is not clear what exactly the money will be used for. Ewa will be in touch with Joshua about this.

If the budget turns out as bad as expected, CUWL will have some difficult decisions to make about priorities.

4. Miscellaneous

Vacancies on the Coordinating Committees:

What is the process for appointing a replacement when a member of a coordinating committee leaves UW employment? The User Services Committee currently has a vacancy. Do we go back to the original spreadsheet of names submitted by the CUWL? If an archivist’s slot is vacant we need to appoint someone who is an archivist. It was agreed that an archivist from any 4 year institution could be appointed to the User Services Committee. The names of members and their terms are on the CUWL website. The new appointee will fill the slot until 2009 to complete the former member’s term. The terms were staggered at the time of appointment to ensure some continuity.  Jean has the original list; she and Ewa would take a look at the names.

Jean asked a question that was raised by Mark Rozmarynowski from the Colleges. He serves as a member of a Coordinating Committee. He is currently on CUWL, representing the Colleges. Mark is wondering if he should continue on the committee since he is on CUWL. EC recommended that he continues on the committee since his CUWL role expires in June 2009. This role is rotated among College directors.

Lisa’s role on all CUWL Committees:

We currently have  many committees and working groups. A Task Force will be looking at the organizational structure and make an assessment. Meanwhile, is it practical for Lisa to be part of each and every committee and working group? It is a huge time commitment for anyone in Lisa’s role. Ewa asked Lisa if she finds it important to continue this level of participation. Lisa felt it is important in order to understand what they are discussing. She said her workload is heavy on CRS and CDC, but she does not think other committees or groups add much more.

Digital Market Place:

Jean asked Lisa if there were further meetings about this. Lisa said there was a follow-up meeting to discuss concerns raised by CUWL and she is not aware of any further plans. Jean requested that Lisa keeps us informed of any future development.

Action plans:

1. John would draft a letter to Rebecca Martin based on our discussion. John will copy Ed Van Gemert when he shares the draft with EC.
2. Ewa will ask for a draft charge from Marlys and Steve to investigate options.
3. Ewa will ask Joshua Ranger to submit a business model for his request and also to correct the amount of reduction mentioned in his report.
4. Ewa and Jean will look at the original list of names submitted by the Directors and see if a possible replacement for Nick Weber can be made on the User Services Coordinating Committee.

Conference call ended at 10:10 am.

Respectfully submitted by Vanaja Menon