Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries
April 25, 2012
9:00 – 3:10
780 Regents St. Room 126
Present: K.Davis - Chair (UW-Stevens Point), E.Barczyk (UW-Milwaukee), P.Beck (DICC Chair), J.Champoux (WILS), G.Engeldinger (UW-Parkside), R.Ettinger (USCC Chair), A.Evans (UW-La Crosse), P.Ganyard (UW-Green Bay), R.Ginzberg (UWSA Office of Procurement), L.Konrad (UW-Madison), V.Malzacher (UW-River Falls), E.Meachen (UWSA), P.Moriarty (UWSA), S.Morrill (WiLS), T.Muraski (LTCC Chair), D. Nordgren (UW-Superior), Lynn Paulson (UWSA Office of Budget and Planning), J.Pollitz (UW-Eau Claire), J.Ranger (UW-Oshkosh), J.Robb (CRSCC Chair), Z.Sampson (UW-Platteville), P. Wilkinson (UW-Oshkosh), E.Jozwiak (Faculty Rep.UW-Rock), M.Stephenson (UW-Whitewater), S.Silet (UW-Colleges),
Excused: E.Van Gemert (UW-Madison), B. Johnston (UW-Stout), M.Havlovic (Facutly Rep.UW-Cooperative Extension), Ed Schmitt (Faculty Rep.UW-Parkside), M.McCallister (UW-Whitewater), A.Cooper-Cary (FacultyRep.UW-Milwaukee), J.Schneider (UW-Madison), L.Arendt (Faculty Rep.UW-Green Bay), M.Boucher (UW-Colleges), J.Chamberlain (UW-Colleges)
The meeting was called to order early, at 9:15am
Announcements were mailed ahead of time to the CUWL list-serve. After introductions, Davis read a resolution thanking Ed Meachen for service on the occasion of his retirement. Following that Malzacher read a resolution thanking Evans for service on the occasion of her retirement. Engeldinger bid CUWL farewell as he expects that the UW-Parkside search will soon end successfully bringing to a close his interim service. Davis thanked her executive committee for a year of service. (Ganyard, Havlovic, Sampson, Menon, Wilkinson)
Approval of CUWL Minutes – February 13, 2012
Ganyard asked that OCLC billing header be removed (from Section 5. WILS report item h). The minutes were accepted as amended.
Demo of the D2L Pilot – Jen Champoux (WILS)
Champoux displayed screen shots Moriarty explains that this pilot is designed to be used as substitute for the CUWL Wiki which has run out of space and as a result serves poorly. Champoux reported that the work began with Maciejewski and the pilot was developed to serve CDC for storage of documents. A secure sign-in was added to provide a protected area to deal with pricing/budget information. The current pilot is set up as courses at UW-Madison because that is where WILS is housed. Under “courses” set up for various committees roles can be changed from read to upload. The pilot group is investigating indexing organization and possible standard folder titles. Access to see work and documents of committees you are not a member of is unavailable. Permission to edit documents cannot be granted to multiple people in D2L (as they could be in a wiki). Most members will be read only and not have edit roles. Each committee chair would be the editor. Robb reported that the CDC has been using this product since late March and has found it easy to get into without the need to keep up extra passwords. Their biggest initial hurdle was creating an organizational structure to consistently facilitate finding documents.
System Report – Moriarty
Paulson from Budget and Planning is filling in during a staff vacancy. Research Commons is a great request but the current budget climate is unique. Past discreet biennial budgets included libraries as a strong component. Now system is moving to a block grant concept. This new approach will ask the state to deliver a block of money to cover large areas wrapping into the single block funds to cover items as far afield as utilities, grounds, etc. These large block funds should come with some flexibility. The current budget request may not name libraries specifically, although the Research Commons will likely be mentioned. The Chancellors and Provosts will be the deciders on the delivery of campus block funds. This applies even to the base budgets. In the future there will be few or no requests for discreet funds. In order to get the Research Commons we will need a critical mass of Chancellors, Provosts and Chief Budget Officers. There will be no more DINs as in the past. This is how Common Systems has worked in the past and it has served well. Currently there is no plan for the 3 million discreet dollars for UW library resources to be rolled up into the blocks, so it will likely remain. Tuition flexibility going forward could allow funding the Research Commons. Should the Board of Regents give one percent system wide that would give $7 million in support of the commons.
Moriarty distributed the draft budget for FY 12 and for FY 13 as revised by the budget committee to add a small amount to the shared fund for electronic resources. Meachen thanks South Central Library System for keeping the delivery costs low in the face of rising gas prices. Beck noted that the funds for digitizing were slightly reduced. A discussion of payments to WILS for Madison ILL service followed. This system of payment was set up when Madison was expected to be a net lender. They are now a net borrower. Barczyk and Pollitz questioned leaving this in place since we just agreed to cease payments to net lenders. Moriarty suggested a working group look into this. Wilkinson moved that the CUWL Executive committee be charged to create such a group to look at universal borrowing, net lender payments to Madison for WILS, and add to the charge a required report of their findings and recommendations to CUWL for the FY14 budget. The motion was seconded by Evans and subsequently approved. Meachen agreed to find money to pay the expected FY12 funds to Whitewater as needed. Moriarty agreed to will work with WILS and Whitewater. The CUWL Budget committee moved that the budget be approved for FY 12 and FY13. The budgets were accepted unanimously.
Long Range Budget Plan – Ganyard
Ganyard passed out a five-year budget. She pointed out that based on current titles we will have a $376,538.00 shortfall in five years. The document shows how much campus contribution will need to be increased for each of the next five years. It also reveals the additional $400,000 to $800,000 dollars more if we would need had we not cancelled past titles.
Ganyard see the options to be:
1. CUWL continues to support for shared electronic collections. Ganyard recommends that the CDC be given authority over that budget line and okayed to spend up to 5% overbudget with the additional 5% to be made up by the campuses, without asking CUWL to approve the titles kept or deleted.
2. That we tell the CDC that the budget is fixed and just, stay within that given dollar figure.
If CUWL does not want the cuts made CUWL could consider cutting another budget line such as document delivery and/or other services.
3. That CUWL seek out additional funding.
Wilkinson acknowledged that UW System does pay for some titles (and it is likely that they will continue to do so) as these titles are needed by virtually every campus. Keeping up with technology is also important and we are behind in technology on many levels of collection support. He recommends we keep an eye on the resources that decline in use after resource discovery is in place. Pollitz says we need to keep looking at the formulas that deliver funds as campuses grow at different rates. Ganyard recommends looking at the Common Systems formulas. Silet urges review of the resources that were cancelled for CUWL but picked up by campuses. Tracking the dollar amounts spent on dropped titles could show spending of individual campuses exceeds the cost of an all CUWL purchase. Moriarty recommends that we show this five-year projection to our Provosts and that the CUWL executive committee meet with System Senior Vice President as soon as they are settled in to be sure we communicate this. Ganyard moved that CDC be authorized to make a 5% increase for the next two years Wilkinson seconded her motion. The motion passed.
Resource Discovery Update – Malzacher and Ginzberg required that everyone present sign an “Assurance of compliance with procedures and ethical guidelines for proposal evaluation” document. Ganyard moved that CUWL go into closed session for purposes of confidential discussion and Barczyk seconded. Approved unanimously.
Closed Session entered 11:10 am.
Silet moved Ganyard seconded that CUWL return to open session.
Close session ended. Regular open session of CUWL resumed 1:15pm
Unified CUWL statement for Percentage of Grant Overheads – Van Gemert/Evans/Barczyk
Barczyk offered the draft for use by campuses as they may need. No one single CUWL statement will be formally pushed at this time. The draft statement was distributed to CUWL on April 17, 2012.
CUWL Communication Plan - Wilkinson
Ranger distributed a copy of the plan to CUWL by email on April 23, 2012. Wilkinson explained that OCLS and then UW-Oshkosh have adopted communication plans similar to the plan distributed before the meeting and handed out in print. At UW-Oshkosh Ranger’s position was written to include 25% communication officer. Wilkinson stated that, at Polk, they determined that well-meaning people were pulling the library and the message in disparate directions. Creating a good plan is an intellectual activity and even when it states what might seem to be the obvious, still stating things out loud helps add clarity. The difference is that the CUWL plan will not be focused on directly communicating to users. CUWL wants to coordinate communications with CUWL funders. The goal is to get all CUWL members on the same message, that funders hear the same initiatives driven in the same direction, consistently reinforced. The idea is not to communicate all policies and all needs, but to consistently repeat the most important. An ideal strategy includes using the newsletters and media our funders read to promote our message. We already communicate our ideas to the public using our websites and blogs and we should examine them asking what do we say to the public? Is the message clear or confused? Our Chancellors need stories about how each campus is relevant, distinct, and contributes to the greater good, the state and its citizens. We can give the Chancellor our stories about the library in the form of fact sheets and stories ready on demand. If there is a donor who really cares about the library when the Provosts and/or Chancellors prepare to meet with them the library fact sheets are in place and can be pulled and used. The sheets can include data trends, our story and the stories of other state agencies or enterprises that help us, such as the South Central Library System. Such statewide stories provide important provide talking points.
The Communications Task Force moved that the plan be accepted and recommends that the CUWL Executive Committee appoint a Interim Communications Task Force that will implement CUWL’s Communication Plan starting as soon as the group is appointed and charged by the Executive Committee and ending June 30 2014.
Rationale: The Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries is committed to provide Wisconsin with world-class educational materials, research resources and services through cooperation. The Council intends to promote its accomplishments, programs, services, collections and mission to its funders and patrons. The task force will aid getting the plan implemented.
Charge: The charge will be written by the Executive Committee and should address, at least some of the se points. The task force will:
- Develop ideas on how to get strategic messages to funders. After approval by CUWL or its Executive Committee implement them in a professional manner.
- Support often CUWL committees and task forces that need to create public relations/promotional activities for CUWL.
- Advise CUWL members on common messages that should be given to individual campus funders with flexibility for individual campus requirements.
- Investigate patron communication needs from member libraries and determine the best and most appropriate methods CUWL can help meet them.
Committee: The Executive Committee will appoint the chair of the task force. The task force will include one representative from both Milwaukee and Madison, two representatives from comprehensives and one representative from the colleges. A member of CUWL will be asked to be a liaison to the task force.
Evans recommended we include stories of both pain and gain, citing the inflationary increase of databases illustrated by Ganyard’s budget analysis. Other examples included the Research Commons work. Barczyk said Chancellors and others in upper administration are asked to show data. If they are to help us they must show compelling evidence to Deans, alumni, donors and foundations. So we need to communicate our wants and needs in hard data because that is what they are asked for. When we put out clear communications with needed metrics it will be used. Deans hold a lot of power. It is recommended that the Communication Task force be combined with the task force investigating our – unified statement?
Coordinating Committee Reports
CRCC – Robb sent out a report electronically.
She reported that CRSCC continues work on eBook purchase and license policies and on the last copy policy. Consortial eBook purchasing for system is challenging. Mary Rader (UW Madison) reported that the committee is working for a vision for eBooks across the libraries in a very tricky, costly landscape with implications for sharing and not sharing but they are not ready to report clear findings. Wilkinson supports user driven acquisition but is unsure how we would fund it. The packages vendors offer across the libraries are very costly but if we are all left to the go on our own we cannot share resources. Robb asked despite all the constraints and challenges, that the committee continue working to review products and investigate a possible consortial arrangement.
J. Schneider’s sub-committee on last copy reviews a variety of formats and does not recommend digital or other surrogates as equivalent to print for the purpose of last copy. Retention of last copy in the state will be reserved for monographs meeting specific criteria outlined in the policy. Digital last copy for journals with perpetual access rights will be acceptable. The committee will work to develop procedures for withdrawal of items and communication among campuses regarding last copy holdings. All recommendations are not yet ready for action.
CDC also completed a survey of campus policies on video streaming and copyright. The results reveal that streaming rights offered by publishers are highly variable and can be costly. How campuses handle the copyright responsibility is also inconsistent. Rights that were once purchased outright now cover short periods of time increasing ongoing costs and the need for record retention. This issue may need to be explored further in the future.
Shared electronic collection is beginning to look at business databases to analyze them for overlap as a possibility for removal if duplication in coverage is significant.
Barczyk moved and Silet seconded giving CDC authorization to approve titles without CUWL approval if overall increases are within 5%. Motion approved.
Robb moved the following from the committee:
It is the recommendation of the CRSCC and CDC membership that the CRSCC be disbanded and that the work of the CRSCC be conducted by the CDC. It is also recommended that a CDC representative report to CUWL regarding the work of the CDC.
Ganyard moved the following from the CUWL Executive Committee:
The CUWL executive committee recommends that instead of disbanding the CRSCC at this time, we suspend the CRSCC for the next two years (2012-13 and 2013-14) as a trial. The chair of the CDC will, for this trial period, serve on the CUWL board. We also recommend that 2-3 additional people be added to the CDC to provide input from areas of resource sharing, electronic resources, and/or public services.
Discussion ensued comparing LAMS current state of joining with LTCC to CRSCC needs and request. CUWL Executive Committee motion passed.
LTCC – Terri Malzacher
ITMC joint meeting with the LAMS was great. There is one action item, currently there is some confusion over the needs and upcoming work for Resource Discovery. The committee needs a definite charge for Identity management going forward. The next step is work on campuses that do not use people soft. Jim Lowery was named as CUWL rep to UWSA
ERM subcommittee sees the technical side of hosting is of great interest, especially with open source. Many parts of the ITMC work will be impacted by resource discovery.
A new version of Forward was rolled out Apr. 25, 2012 and in May it will become the UW-Madison catalog.
USCC – Renee Ettinger
The committee has met and will resume noon teleconferences in the fall. USCC will survey of the past participants of the Research Fellows and will working with Barczyk who developed a survey. The survey will be sent out in the fall. Silet recommends work to get the research fellows on the same cycle.
DICC - Paul Beck
The committee met in early April and approved four projects, one of which is a large $33,000 multiyear project. CUWL contributes only a part of these costs. UW Waukesha has a project digitizing a campus literary publication and they have received permission to post without full permissions in place and they promise to remove any offering if the author objects. A Pipeline project for the ARCs and WHS will digitize five boxes a year starting with the most used materials first. The committee will offer a topical session at the summer conference, Digitization 101.
Summer Conference - Davis
The conference agenda was discussed and tweaked.
CUWL Web Site Update – Ganyard
Karen Dunn is implementing suggested changes and will have them ready by July.
WILS – Morrill
The ERM working group met, they discovered that most ERM did not support consortia. CORAL is recommended as the right direction for CUWL even though there is no support for consortia at this time, CORAL is open to developing consortia service. The group recommends that CUWL Directors assign staff to serve on the ERM task force. UW-Parkside is testing CORAL just as a test instance.
If you want to learn more, CORAL will be at the WILSworld conference (July 27-28th). WILS is using a student volunteer to test implementation.
Historical Society/UWSAC Report – Blessing
The WHS Library/UWSAC shared report was emailed. Conversations have completed the preliminary work for each ARC and they are identifying materials for the bar-coding project. ACRs house 15,000 cubic feet of the WHS collection. The goal is to get all of them into Voyager. University of Missouri is the only other system with loaning ARCs. The next step is establishing a timeline and cost estimates. All of the items are already cataloged. Ganyard moved and John seconded that the UWSAC move forward with a cost analysis and timeline for bar-coding the ARC materials. The motion passed.
Nomination Committee/Elections – Barczyk
The follow slate was put forward for CUWL officers for 2013. Paula Ganyard of UW-Green Bay (current Vice-Chair) will serve as the Chair.
Vice Chair – Ed Van Gemert
Secretary – Marc Boucher
Member at large Deb Nordgren
The slate was accepted in unanimous vote. Faculty representative member for the CUWL Executive Committee is yet to be determined.
Planning for next year’s meetings – Ganyard
The transition meeting will be at lunch during the CUWL conference June 4th. The use of videoconference was discussed. Ganyard will send forward times for face-to-face and times for video. If the Videoconference rooms in the Chancellor’s suites are not available on your conference they meetings can be joined from any computer. Dates and times for ITMC meetings will be investigated for possible joint conference. Jabber is a software tool that will enhance connections. Each campus has 10 licenses, if you can secure a webcam Moriarty recommends a fifteen minute run through prior to connecting.
Due to the late hour and the long meeting with no breaks we did not do the wrap-up. Wilkinson moved adjournment and Pollitz seconded.
The meeting ended at 3:10 pm.
Zora J. Sampson