LAUC-B Executive Committee 1994/95 (5)
December 14, 1994
Present: I.Arguelles; M.Burnette; E.Byrne; C.Eckman (recorder);
D.Fortner; K.Frohmberg; B.Glendenning; D.Kearney; B.Kornstein
(Chair); L.Leighton; L.Osegueda; G.Peete; V.Roumani-Denn.
A. LAUC will be presenting one of the LAUC mugs to the new
University Librarian and the new Vice-Chancellor.
B. LAUC Research and Professional Development Committee
(G.Peete). The second call for research proposals was made
by Beverly Renford in late November. The deadline is
January 6 but it is possible that an extension will be
granted due to the short notice.
II. Minutes. The November Executive Committee minutes were
approved as submitted.
A. Statewide Executive Board Meeting (B.Kornstein).
1. LAUC History publication. LAUC Santa Cruz is
reviewing its chapter. A new version of the History
publication will be published.
2. Peer Review in a Period of Retrenchment. This
document was sent to Library Council with a cover
letter outlining three key issues. Library Council
responded that they would prefer that this document be
dealt with on a local basis.
3. Two ad-hoc committees have been established.
ii. How to respond to political issues such as
Proposition 187 (among others)
4. Myron Okada gave a report on the upcoming academic
5. Kronenberg Case related to lost 1991/92 merits for
non-Senate academics. A legal decision is expected in
early January 1995. LAUC members will be receiving
official notices related to participation in the class
B. Faculty Senate Library Committee (L.Osegueda).
1. L.Osegueda inquired on behalf of the Executive
Committee as to the possibility of broader distribution
of Faculty Senate Library Committee meeting minutes.
The Faculty Senate Library Committee felt that these
minutes were for internal purposes only.
2. Course reader proposal. Jeff Pudewell presented a
proposal under which the Library would subcontract the
operation of the Library Course Reader Service to a
qualified vendor with experience in scanning and
production techniques and who is willing to sell
readers through the Library Bookstore. Questions
immediately arose regarding what avenues were
available for LAUC or Library input on a proposal with
such wide-ranging implications. Considerable
discussion focussed on the idea that there are some
areas (e.g. issues related to entrepreneurial ventures,
time-sensitive issues) on which such input is neither
desirable nor appropriate. One possible avenue for
providing LAUC input would be to ask for copies of the
agendas from the Faculty Senate Library Committee well
in advance of the meetings.
C. Meeting with Sue Rosenblatt (B.Kornstein).
a. Two documents have been forwarded to Peter
Lyman: the LAUC-B Goals document and the article
on guidelines for branch consolidations.
b. LHRD is now distributing form letters
developed to assist in the solicitation process
for librarian review.
IV. Follow-up from LAUC-B Fall Assembly.
A. Bylaws Revision. Next step: Secretary-Treasurer will
run the revisions past the Chair of the Statewide Committee
on Professional Governance to ensure that they are
consistent with LAUC Statewide Bylaws.
B. Public Announcement of Librarian Advancements and
Promotions. Next step: Based on discussions at the LAUC-B
Fall Assembly, B.Kornstein will write a letter to
Janice Burroughs indicating LAUC's concern that such
announcements not include details related to steps within
C. Librarian IV to Librarian V Review. CAPA will work with
Janice Burroughs on language that will change this review
from a mandatory to a discretionary review.
V. Preliminary Discussion of Survey of Peer Review in a Period
of Retrenchment. (Statewide and local documents distributed
prior to meeting)
A. Local survey: "Peer Review in a Period of Retrenchment,
Followup Survey, March 1994." Significant concern was
expressed that this document had been distributed widely and
created the mistaken impression among some that it had been
reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee. The
Committee discussed the document at some length. Several
members raised questions about the document's assertion
that a "reasonable" distribution of professional
workload would be 50 percent in the primary assignment and
50 percent in work that falls into categories covered by
criteria 2-4. Questions were also raised about whether a
correlation between questions six and eight might produce
better evidence of trends in library workload.
ACTION: The Executive Board will be more proactive in
inviting LAUC-B statewide representatives to Executive Board
meetings in order to provide an opportunity for regular
reports to Executive Committee, as well as an avenue for the
Executive Board to provide advice and guidance to LAUC-
Berkeley's representatives. In addition, B.Kornstein will
ask Bill Whitson for more information on whether the raw
data for questions six and eight was still available for use
in follow-up correlations.
B. Statewide survey. The Executive Board--based on the
response of Library Council--has asked the LAUC Divisions
approach their University Librarians at the local level on
the following three issues:
1. Identify support needed to meet continuing education
2. Identify administrative and clerical assistance
necessary for librarians.
3. Identify mechanisms for providing adequate and
reliable technological support for librarians.
VI. Minutes from other LAUC Divisions (C.Eckman)
The Committee agreed to continuing last year's practice of
distributing the task of monitoring minutes from other LAUC
Divisions. The following Committee members volunteered:
B.Glendenning (Riverside, Los Angeles); M.Burnette (Irvine,
Santa Barbara); L.Leighton (Santa Cruz); D.Fortner
(Davis); V.Roumani-Denn (San Diego); E.Byrne (San
VII. LAUC-B E-mail Reflector (L.Osegueda).
L.Osegueda proposed that the four visiting librarians
participating in the Training Institute for Science
Librarians be added to the LAUC-B e-mail reflector since it
is a valuable source of professional information on campus.
Until now, the e-mail reflector has been limited to LAUC
members. The Committee approved the proposal. The LAUC-B
paper mailing list will remain as the sole "official" LAUC-B
ACTION: L.Osegueda will forward the e-mail addresses of
these four librarians to Maryly Snow who maintains the
VIII. Library Web Development Team Report. Some members who had
seen a presentation of this Report expressed concern
regarding three aspects of the Report:
A. The appropriateness of assigning routine text mark-up
training and work to librarians;
B. The volume of librarian workload increase implicit in the
C. The lack of any collection specialist representation on
the Development Team that wrote the Report.
ACTION: A copy of the report will be distributed to all
members and B.Kornstein will draft a memo to the AUL's
requesting more information.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, January 18, 10am-12am, Moffitt