Library Committee Handbook

Executive Committee

AUL Annual Reports

Committee Charge and Membership

Innovation Fund

2017-2018 Meeting Information

Previous Documents 

Position Table
Position Request Form

Standing Policies

Executive Committee Minutes

January 4, 2005

Conference Room – Slavic Library


Present:  Paula Kaufman (Chair), Bill Mischo (Vice-Chair), Lynne Rudasill (Secretary), Jane Block, Cindy Ingold, Janis Johnston, Kathleen Kluegel, William Maher, Lynn Wiley


Guest:  Rod Allen


1.  Budget Documents Review – Members of the Executive Committee discussed the budget documents provided by Rod Allen of the Business Office.  A variety of topics were discussed by those present including the increase in minimum wage, materials inflation, stem the erosion of resources for both electronic and print materials, network upgrades, debt repayments for Oak Street and the Chemistry Library, staff upgrades and graduate assistant hours, Oak Street development, OCLC costs and revenues, and a statement concerning the elimination of confusing multi-service points.  Members of the Executive Committee should receive a revised draft budget document the week of January 11 and are asked to look at it for items that might be confusing, what represents things improperly, etc.  The funds for facilities have either been obligated or earmarked for expenditure.


2.  Minutes – Minutes of the December 15th meeting were approved with the assumption that Kluegel would be proposing a clarification of wording for the decision regarding the make-up and appointment of the Administrative Council.


3.  Question Time -   Kathleen Kluegel requested that the Executive Committee formally approve a motion concerning the wording for the proposed change in our Bylaws regarding the make-up and appointment of the Administrative Council.  Proposed wording will be distributed via e-mail with a formal vote to be taken at the next Executive Committee meeting. 


Lynn Wiley questioned the procedure for transmitting the promotion and tenure documents and the vote of  the Faculty Review Committee to the Promotion and Tenure Committee.  The vote of the Faculty Review Committee should be conveyed to both the Promotion and Tenure Committee and the University Librarian.


Cindy Ingold contacted Paula Kaufman concerning an alternative model for service in the Women and Gender Resources Library.  In the future, Cindy will maintain her office on the fourth floor but the collection will be merged into others.  Cindy will spend time at both the Women and Gender in Global Perspectives offices and at the Women’s Studies Program offices. Hyon Joo Kim will be offered a transfer to the Media and Reserves Department in the Undergraduate Library.  The current facility for Women and Gender Studies will be used primarily as a conference room, but not being put on the classroom list.  Cindy will be providing some reference service hours in the Education and Social Science Library, although the possibility of switching off with some other unit does exist.  She hopes to make both the program and her services more visible in the community with these changes.


The status of the search for the Head of Rare Books and Special Collections was updated, as was the status of the Head of the Music Library.


4.  Peer Review Appointment – A peer review committee was suggested for appointment to the promotion and tenure case of Travis McDade of the Law Library.


5.  ICR Funds Request – A proposal for the use of ICR seed money in the amount of $9,260 for a project entitled “A Unified, Standards-Compliant System for Describing Archives and Manuscript Collections” made by Chris Prom was approved.


6.  PTA/FRC Review Process for 3Y – Lynn Wiley indicated that the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee and the Faculty Review Committee had agreed to share responsibility for peer review feedback as had been requested by the Faculty Review Committee a year ago.  Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee members will read the reports of candidates at 0Y, 1Y, 2Y, and 3Y peer review committee reports and dossiers with the goal of providing feedback to peer review committee members to assure that the process is proceeding as it should.  Paula Kaufman indicated that last year the Executive Committee included the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee in the process of reading and signing off on any 3Y reviews.  The process requires each peer review committee for 3Ys to give its report to the University Librarian to review prior to giving it to the candidate.  The chair of the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee must sign off on the document with assumption that that committee has reviewed the document.  If questions arise concerning the document, they should be forwarded to the University Librarian.  A separate sheet should be provided for the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee to sign that includes general comments concerning the future of the candidacy.  The University Librarian signs off, or doesn’t, and returns the report to the peer review committee to discuss with the candidate.


A meeting for 3Ys and their review committees will be set up.


7.  Newspaper Library Proposals – Three proposals concerning the future of the Newspaper Library were considered.  No action was taken.  The need for more usage data was expressed by several members of the committee.  Discussion will resume at the next Executive Committee meeting.


The decision was made to cancel the next regularly scheduled meeting of the EC unless a matter comes up that requires immediate action.