LAUC-B Executive Committee 1992/93 (3) October 21, 1992 MINUTES Present: E. Byrne, W. Diamond, M. Drabkin, G. Handman (Chair), R. Lhermitte, R. Moon, L. Osegueda, G. Peete, A. Sevetson (Recorder), D. Sommer, P. Stewart, K. Vanden Heuvel Guests: S. Hinojosa, M. Harmon Announcements: A. G. Handman announced that LAUC-B Executive Committee would have an extra meeting on Nov 4, 10-11am in the Bancroft Conference Room. B. The Berkeley Representatives for the LAUC Fall Assembly in San Francisco will be G. Handman, E. Byrne, K. Vanden Heuvel, and A. Sevetson. G. Handman announced the LAUC Fall Assembly will also have a celebration dinner for the 25th Anniversary of LAUC. All LAUC members are welcome to attend. The flyer with details of the dinner will be attached to the next issue of CU News. C. UCOP Library Closing - G. Handman wrote a letter to V.P. Calvin Moore expressing the concerns for impact of the UCOP Library closing on the Berkeley Campus (distributed with agenda). S. Hinojosa announced a letter had been sent from UC AFT 1474 to Calvin Moore. The AFT letter focussed on the following concerns: 1- lack of any discussion on the closure of the library and no information on the basis for this closure 2- information requested on how UCOP intends to meet its information needs in the future; 3- concern over the impact of the closure on the UCB library system; will campus libraries be expected to meet UCOP library needs? 4- concern over the reassignment primarily because a reassignment to the Berkeley campus rather than CEB could help UCB absorb what is additional future work for UCOP. D. G. Handman announced that he has asked Judson King, Provost of Professional Schools to speak at the LAUC-B Fall Assembly. E. Library Strategic Planning - W. Diamond has been appointed to the Library Cultures group as a LAUC-B Representative, D. Sommer is also on that committee. L. Osegueda is in the Working Group on Development and External Relations and R. Moon is on the Automation Committee. F. There were several comments on the paper LAUC revitalization at LA. Comments included: it has to be read as one divisions struggling, LAUC-LA had a lot of turnover because of VERIP and people who would have normally taken LAUC leadership had retired so there was no one to serve, we are seeing some of the same effects of VERIP here with more to do and less time in which to do it. W. Diamond noted that it is a document which could be used by the Library Cultures Strategic Planning group, as could the LAUC- B document "The Librarian Series in the '90's." It was also noted that LAUC-LA feels it has gotten back on track, partially as a result of the effort that went into this report. G. G. Handman announced that all of the Committees and Committee Chairs are in place for the 92/93 year. The full roster will be distributed to membership. Approval of Minutes: The minutes for Sept 16, 1992 were approved with corrections. Ongoing Business: A. M. Harmon discussed the progress LAUC-B Committee on Programs for Professional and Career Development in planning the Peer Review Workshop. The date is November 12, 8:30-11:30 in 315 Wheeler. A notice has gone out in CU News and via "lauc@ced" Confirmed speakers are D. Sommer, R. Heckart, B. Whitson, R. Aasen, J. Burrows, B. Kornstein, and B. Lhermitte. The Committee also hopes to have D. Gregor speak. The Program Committee wants the philosophy and history of peer review, the paper flow, and how to do a good self-evaluation to come out. Supervisors of Affiliated Librarians should be given an explicit invitation, and all review initiators should make a point of attending, especially in view of the new Peer Review timetable compliance guidelines. B. G. Handman announced that only one comment had been received about the Peer Review Timetable Compliance information which had been sent out the LAUC-B membership in early October. G. Handman said the next step would be to propose actual language for the Berkeley guidelines to the APM and to send that to The Vice Chancellor and the University Librarian for review. The sub-committee will meet, and there should be language reflecting the changes in time for the Peer Review workshop. C. G. Handman announced that the LAUC-B Budget has been approved by The Vice Chancellor. A motion was made and passed to purchase a laptop PC for the use of the LAUC-B Secretary and CAPA. New Business: A. G. Handman and E. Byrne reported on their meeting with M. Teitz, Academic Senate Chair. He is interested in their proposal for including Librarians on Academic Senate Committees (other than the Senate Library Committee) and requested that LAUC-B submit a short discussion paper on the mutual benefits of this action. E. Byrne is in the process of drafting such a document. E. Byrne also had a list of faculty members on Academic Senate Committees which will be distributed to Executive Committee. She noted that very few of the Academic Senate Committees activities were reflected in the committee names. B. E. Byrne reported on the Faculty Senate Library Committee meeting. Members are Jeremy Waldron (Law) Chair, Diane Clemens (Hist), William Clemens (Int Bio),Leonard Duhl (SAHS), Ralph Greif (ME), Laurent Mayali (Law), Hung-Hsi Wu (Math),Ron Lopez (student), Mike Young (student). Some proposals were brought forward by Library Administration: 1- downsizing in the 90's in collections and increasing sharing, getting the faculty to buy in, and 2- dealing with the very expensive Sci/Tech Journals. The Library is trying to promote a policy that faculty who write using university material cannot give away copyright. 3- Making loan policies for journals shorter. K. Vanden Heuvel will attend the next meeting for E. Byrne. C. Guidelines for Extension of the Timetable. K. Vanden Heuvel presented the guidelines developed by the group. Much discussion centered on who should actually grant extensions, whether it should be a centralized body, or an agreement between the review initiator and the reviewee, or whomever needs the extension and the person next to receive the packet. The feeling of LAUC-B was that it should be between the person needing the extension and the person directly "up" in the review process.