Executive Committee Meeting 1/13/93

LAUC-B Executive Committee                           1992/93 (7) 
January 13, 1993 
MINUTES 
 
Present:  E. Byrne, W. Diamond, G. Handman (Chair), R. Moon, L.  Osegueda, 
G. Peete, A. Sevetson (Recorder), P. Stewart, A. Youmans 
  
Absent:  M. Drabkin, R. Lhermitte, K. Vanden Heuvel  

Guests:  John Heilbron 
 
Vice Chancellor's Visit:
G. Handman gave a rundown of LAUC-B events of the last year for The Vice Chancellor. Issues and activities described included LAUC's work on various peer review time table guidelines; discussions with the Chair of the Faculty Senate regarding possible participation of librarians on Senate committees; statewide and local discussions of the stipend/management options issue; activities connected to the formation of statewide and local cultural diversity committees). What follows is a brief listing of topics discussed and comments from TVC. Collections: J. Heilbron talked about consolidation and rational distribution of effort and resources for collection building, and commented that we may have to coordinate statewide collection building activities more highly in the future. Related to these comments, regional cooperation efforts already in place were discussed. Also discussed were instances in which cooperation doesn't work due to overlapping programs, and places where cooperation and reliances have broken down (e.g. translation journals). Electronic Journals were mentioned as a place where the Library might save funds. L. Osegueda gave a short synopsis of the Electronic Journals Task Force. J. Heilbron also mentioned there was some hope to rework existing funding formulas. G. Handman discussed the Strategic Planning Process for the Library, and the changing nature of the profession. He also discussed the need perceived by LAUC for establishing effective academic partnerships and strengthening programmatic ties between the library and academic departments. The possibility of librarian participation on Faculty Senate committees was discussed. J. Heilbron commented that while the closing of programs goes through the Academic Planning Board, in issues where the enlarging of programs is an issue Librarians could be better placed on dean's councils and department committees. Startup funds: E. Byrne brought forth the fact that L&S now had startup funds to support the teaching and research activities of new faculty. She would like to see the professional schools brought into this program. J. Heilbron would like to see strong demands on Provosts in terms of startup funds. He commented that the money shouldn't be discretionary - demands should be made on departmental equipment funds for startup funds for The Library. Library Component in Research Grants: The inclusion of library-related costs in research grant proposals was discussed. The difficulty of identifying appropriate proposals--the decentralized nature of the grant request process-- was pointed out by J. Heilbron. While most major grants go through the Sponsored Projects Office, the SPO does not monitor the substantive nature of the grant and does no coordination of grant requests among departments. G. Peete suggested that J. Heilbron might suggest incorporating the library into grant requests whenever appropriate. The idea of J. Heilbron authoring a column about this for the Library Faculty Newsletter was brought up, and he was quite enthusiastic. J. Heilbron gave an overview of the Budget as it stood at that point. Basically, after all the "monkeying" there is a $100 million shortfall for new fiscal year for UC. The Berkeley share is 20% of this, or $20,000,000. He mentioned three options: raise fees again, furlough or paycut 5%, and VERIP III. Campus Administration wants to avoid layoffs. Berkeley has greater resources than the other campuses. W. Diamond raised the question of the contracts and what effect they would have. J. Heilbron responded that that would be looked into. G. Handman asked what this budget scene boded for cuts in programs. J. Heilbron mentioned that some of the options were to increase fees for professional schools or semi-privatize schools. There are already measures in place on this campus for the 92/93 budget shortfall (VERIP and 3% holdbacks), it is the 93/94 projected shortfall which is a problem. ANNOUNCEMENTS: G. Handman has asked the Program Committee to coordinate a presentation from Jack McCredie sometime in February. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of Dec 17 were approved as corrected. ONGOING BUSINESS: LAUC-B Server - G. Handman sent a rationale for establishing a LAUC gopher/WAIS server to B. Hurley. R. Moon reported the issue came up at Sparkplugs. B. Hurley will support the idea with LAG. Members of Sparkplug have been teamed with Systems people to put up server types and experiment to see possible uses. R. Moon mentioned there is a Gopher implementation team in Evans Hall. NEW BUSINESS: A. W. Diamond gave an overview on the work of the Library Culture Working Group. They have read articles on Total Quality Management (TQM), the UCLA campus administration response to Sustaining Excellence, and the Sustaining Excellence document. The work of the Working Group is continuing and will be soliciting input from various groups, including LAUC-B, as work progresses. The 6 areas of concentration (which often overlap) are: Administration as infrastructure, Planned work environment, Organizational Structure for Service, Current jobs and Motivation Programs, Information on Tap where needed, Culture for Adaptation. B. Colorado Issue - G. Handman passed out the resolutions from UCLA and UCSC about Measure 2 in Colorado. LAUC-B agrees that the profession is committed to intellectual and social freedom. It was decided to see what information could be made available to LAUC-B membership before the meeting so membership could make informed decisions about actions to take.