21 May 2002
Sue Searing, presiding, called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm after determining that a quorum existed.
1. Approval of the 16 April 2002 faculty meeting minutes
Kathleen Kluegel moved to accept the minutes as distributed on LIBNEWS-L. Bob Burger seconded the motion, and the motion carried.
2. Introduction of new Librarians
Barb Henigman introduced Nuan Chew, the Science Cataloger on the Original Cataloging Team. Maria Porta introduced Joe Zumalt, the Assistant ACES Librarian.
3. Committee Reports
Executive Committee (Sue Searing)
The Executive Committee met three times since the last faculty meeting (on April 22, May 7, and May 13), plus held 2 special meetings to review Paula Kaufman’s performance and prepare a letter to the Provost.
? The EC recommended to Provost Herman that Paula’s appointment be renewed for another year.
? The EC worked on a statement of principles for filling vacant faculty and academic professional positions. The goal is to craft a short set of guidelines that will help EC and the Library administration think about vacant positions strategically.
? The EC considered a proposal from the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee that just one person be scheduled to meet with candidates as a joint representative of the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee and the Faculty Review Committee. This matter had been proposed earlier, and the EC had expressed a strong preference then for having a separate representative for each committee. However, the burden of multiple searches this spring, coupled with sabbatical and medical leaves by PTA members, created a crisis in scheduling. EC again affirmed the desirability of having separate representatives, but agreed that in a pinch, a member of either committee can take full responsibility.
? EC selected some of the peer reviewers for promotion and tenure cases. With so many candidates, EC has not finished this yet, but should complete the process at the next meeting.
? The Executive Committee had two guests. Barb Henigman came to discuss the Cataloging Policy Committee and possible ways to increase its effectiveness. Much of the discussion centered on communication and documentation. Bart Clark also came to EC to discuss the budget plan for FY 2003.
? The Executive Committee anointed Paula Kaufman and Beth Woodard as a subcommittee to develop internal procedures for nominating candidates for honorary degrees.
4. Other Reports
Oak Street (Bart Clark)
Environmental Health and Safety had questions concerning the fire suppression system in the building and has queried the architect regarding their concerns. We don’t expect any problems while going through this process and do not expect delays. Construction will begin in August or September and should be completed by the following summer.
“Faux Oak” is the preliminary facility to be used for remote storage starting this summer. This will help get things moving along and give us practice doing things the way they will be done for Oak Street next summer.
The project manager from O&M is to begin work on the room in the Hort Field Lab. On May 28 Bart’s office will be looking at shelving for the facility.
Main Library Reconfiguration (Bart Clark)
The third phase of Phase I has begun. 246 is being cleared out to be the new home for Newspaper. 4th floor and penthouse construction is also taking place to provide air-conditioning for the 3rd and 4th additions of the 5th and 6th decks of the stacks where microforms and newspapers will be housed. The main disruption will be to faculty studies on the fourth floor in the next five weeks. Bart reiterated that we are NOT doing away with faculty studies.
The second phase has been completed. Acquisitions has been relocated to the basement. The space is habitable, but they are still doing some work in the hallways, putting windows in doors, painting, and putting in new flooring.
The Library has received notification that Graphic Services is going out of the Microforms printing service. As of July 1, those machines will belong to the library. The machines need new coin boxes to change them from 10 cents to 25 cents, otherwise the Library will lose money. Decisions need to be made about maintenance agreements and the fact that it will cost $2,000 each to change over the coin boxes. Also, Graphics will no longer deal with computer printing so Systems is working on writing software that will do that.
5. New Business
CDC Changes (Karen Schmidt)
Karen distributed a draft document showing the revised charge, the present charges for both CDC and the CDC Budget Subcommittee, a short discussion document, and the by-laws language.
Karen’s rationale for these changes is that the work of the collections budget is presently separated from the rest of collection policy discussions, that the Budget Subcommittee does not provide for even representation from the divisions, and that the roles of the 2 groups are different (the CDC is advisory and the Budget Subcommittee is a committee of the whole.)
Kathleen Kluegel feels that this proposal gets us away from collection management by selectors. CDC members designated by virtue of their office are valuable and their expertise is needed, but she feels that the selectors need to be the primary voting members for budget decisions.
Al Kagan felt that this proposal changes CDC Budget Subcommittee from a standing committee with authority to an advisory committee.
Karen Schmidt clarified that CDC is advisory already; CDC Budget subcommittee is not listed in the Bylaws. She is merely proposing to make it one committee as an advisory committee. She also noted that the Collection Advisory Committee is more than the budget and those individuals she is seeking to give voting authority to would need to be included in the non-budgetary discussions anyway.
Bob Burger didn’t understand the objection to the non-selectors being voting members. With the heightened awareness of preservation and conservation, those individuals are needed to keep us aware of those issues.
Mary Stuart felt that the selectors from divisions should still have the primary voice in budget decisions. If this is an advisory committee, then she feels that it is a diminution of the CDC Budget Subcommittee’s authority.
Al Kagan questioned the future relationship to the Senate Library Committee. Karen’s intention is to include them—see second to last paragraph. Karen noted that the Budget Subcommittee is now a committee of the whole: everyone on the group has a vote. Karen is suggesting that it will become an advisory group to the AUL for Collections.
Janis Johnston felt that the composition of the new committee reflected more accurately the values of what we’re attempting to do with the collection in terms of weeding, preserving, and electronically accessing.
Pat Allen noted that if this proposal were to take effect, Karen would need to consider staggered three year terms.
Mary Mallory noted that Mary Stuart’s arguments are persuasive, but in CPS discussions, CPS feels strongly that the second group should be voting members, but that the Budget Subcommittee needs to be a separate group. Carol Penka noted that she doesn’t remember the CPS discussion that way.
Tom Teper noted that budget implications on preservation and conservation are very important. Our binding budget has not kept pace with the percentage of our budget spent in serials over the years. The library needs to be responsive to these changes and the structure should reflect that change.
Mary Mallory shared the opinion that the current non-voting members also have budgets and should vote.
Mary Stuart feels that preservation concerns will be addressed by current voting members, and that it is important to keep people in the front-line in the decision-making process.
Bill Maher noted that the only difference in the old and new draft in membership is in Technical Services, where the Acquisitions librarian would serve by virtue of position and plus another person from Tech Services is to be elected.
Karen noted that the current method has a lot of inequality in budget decisions. She is hoping to have a new and fresh approach to the collection.
Becky Smith likes the idea of strengthening this committee and eliminating a committee.
Sue Searing noted that Karen brought this idea to EC and EC wants committees to be more effective and efficient and encouraged Karen to proceed with taking it to the faculty.
Janis Johnston noted that the collection is important to each and every one of us. We need to move forward in thinking about the future and we need fresh views.
Kathleen Kluegel suggested taking CDC out of the bylaws to that we can continue this discussion.
Bill Maher objected to taking something this important and central to the library out of the bylaws.
Karen suggested doing away with the budget subcommittee since it is not in the Bylaws anyway, and have CDC take over this function.
Gene Rinkel feels that we are confusing the issues of standing committees with advisory committees.
Mary Stuart was still concerned that the budget subcommittee would lose its authority.
Karen moved that the current CDC Budget Subcommittee be disbanded and the duties be absorbed by the main CDC as is already stated in the CDC charge. Kathleen Kluegel seconded the motion.
Al Kagan proposed a substitute motion that we discuss this at the next meeting and not vote at this time. Karen Schmidt was concerned that this would mean that the committee structure couldn’t change for the next 14 months. Mary Stuart seconded Al’s motion.
Kathleen Kluegel, as the seconder of the original motion, didn’t agree with the substitute motion, nor did Karen Schmidt, the person who proposed the original motion. Bart called the original question as posed by Karen.
Paul Healey, the Library Faculty parliamentarian, advised the chair that since the substitute motion was not agreed to by the mover or the seconder of the original motion, the original motion must be voted on first. Gene Rinkel voiced a different interpretation of the Rules of Order. Bill Maher pointed out that the Parliamentarian advises the chair and the chair can decide otherwise. The chair agreed to go with the Parliamentarian’s suggestions. Becky Smith called the question.
The motion passed. Sue Searing noted that it is the will of the faculty to dismiss the Budget Subcommittee. CDC when constituted in the fall will discuss further considerations for changes in CDC. The Budget Subcommittee will stay in effect until August 20, 2002.
There will be more discussion at future meetings about the role and composition of the CDC.
Sharon Clark announced that the Faculty/Staff Retreat is June 5 and the questionnaire sent out is due May 22.
Lynne Rudasill announced that the Gateway page will be up on the weekend after next and there will be a meeting on May 29 from 1:30-3:00 pm in 126 LIS to rollout the new Gateway.
Barb Henigman announced that the GAP cataloging database is up and accessible to the public as well as to the staff.
Sue Searing announced that the next Faculty meeting will be June 4 in Grainger Commons.
The meeting adjourned at 4:30 pm.