Attending: Michaelyn Burnette, Lucia Diamond, Rebecca Green, Mary Ann
Mahoney, Barclay Ogden, Michael Rancer, Alan Ritch (Chair), Andrea
Sevetson, Beth Sibley, Allan Urbanic (recorder), Camille Wanat.
Next meeting: October 3, Recorder: Lucia Diamond.
Agenda
1. Approval of Minutes
2. Announcements'
3. Survey on Collection Budget Increases
4. Collections Budget Update
5. Recruitment Update: Assistant to the Director, Collections
6. Two Access Issues
7. Ebooks: do we want to broaden the Netlibrary test in mid-experiment?
8. Other business
1. Minutes for previous meeting approved by e-mail and distributed.
2. Announcements
- David Sullivan, the new Classics Librarian, was introduced to the council
members.
- Minutes procedures were reviewed for the benefit of the members.
- Wanat reported that Brian Quigley will assume selection responsibility
for Computer Science, Nuclear Engineering, and Industrial
Engineering/Operations Research in the Engineering Library.
- Ritch will attend the Technical Services Council and provide feedback on
the addition of CRL records to GLADIS. The majority opinion was that CRL
records should not be included in GLADIS and were appropriately displayed
in the CDL Melvyl catalog.
- David Duer will meet with Ritch and Iannuzzi on September 21. In response
to Duer's request for initiatives, it was suggested that setting up an
endowment for interdisciplinary digital resources would be helpful to
maintaining library collections.
- D/M selectors will meet on September 26 with Ritch and Iannuzzi. The
purpose of the meeting is to review selection assignments with the
intention of clarifying responsibilities and eliminating selection gaps.
3. Survey on Collection Budget Increases. Progress
The Council reviewed the preliminary draft of the survey, which Ritch
collated from all of the responses received. A discussion followed
concerning the format of the report, considering the audience perspective,
and the most important features to emphasize. It was decided that the body
of the report would be short, no more than several pages, followed by a
section quoting the faculty comments which were received. The compilation
of selector responses would be made available as an appendix with little
further editing. Michael Rancer gave raw numbers concerning the print
collection increases during the initial period. They show an increase from
155,000 volumes received in 1998 to 175,000 volumes received in 2000. The
library is moving from a sustainable annual growth of 150,000 per annum
(base in 1995) to 180,000 per annum if funding can be continued. Staffing
for processing in all areas is based on the 1995 figure thus it is
important to emphasize that a higher volume rate of acquisitions will
require additional staffing in several library units.
Because of the high profile of digital resources, in cost and user impact,
it was suggested that a separate section be devoted to this topic in the
report. Additional concepts to include are "recurring costs", sustaining
serial growth, and on-going digital expenses.
Next steps: Ritch will continue to accept selector contributions,
especially those with faculty comments (reminder: deadline for faculty
comments was set at October 1) Ritch will continue to work on the report;
and following draft review by Collections Council and members of the
library administration, he will distribute it, first to the Academic Senate
Library Committee and the Vice-Chancellor, and then to the Chancellor.
4. Collections Budget Update
There are still no precise numbers. Selectors should spend funds at a rate
equivalent to their past monographic base. This base is not the
appropriation recorded in Innopac (which reflects various adjustments) but
instead will be provided on a separate spreadsheet which will be sent to
selectors in the near future. Base inflationary adjustment will be 9.4% for
serials and around 3.5% for monographs.
The subcommittee which was formed at the last CC meeting and which is
charged to make decisions on the distribution of the additional collections
monies will deal with the issue of serial overages, the types of proposals
that will be solicited, etc.
With Bob Liu's departure and Fayette Elliott's transfer into the Order
Division, the latter unit will now have primary responsibility for
collection budget accounting, for the numbers in Innopac and for
reconciliation with the general ledger. As soon as the numbers can be
finalized for base budgets, they will be entered into Innopac.
5. Recruitment Update: Assistant to the Director, Collections
The recruitment closed and five applications have been received. Ritch
suggested that members of the Electronic Resources Working Group (Green,
Ford, Sibley, Jan Carter, and Norma Kobzina) be asked to fill the role of
screening committee for this position and to review the applications. There
was a general discussion about why the number of applicants was so low. The
low salary level and less publicity than desired may have contributed.
Ritch will recommend the next steps after the search committee reviews the
applications.
6. Two Access Issues
- There was little selector response to Leighton's request for suggestions
of sets now housed in NRLF which may benefit from analysis. $75,000.00 has
been set aside in the budget for this purpose. Ritch will discuss this
issue with Leighton and clarify that the low response was due to timing and
seasonal workload rather than lack of interest. Selectors are reminded to
consider titles for this project.
- Selection criteria for NRLF: The focus here was on the Gardner Stacks.
Current and past practices were reviewed. Questions arose concerning the
amount of selector oversight that is needed and about the use of inventory
information in GLADIS as a way of identifying potential titles for storage
[N.B. Storage from the Gardiner Stacks has been currently suspended until
the construction of the NRLF addition.] Stack shifting was proposed as a
way to alleviate some of the shelf congestion (e.g. old serial sets which
are not growing could be shelved more tightly).
7. Ebooks: do we want to broaden the Netlibrary test in mid-experiment?
The library currently subscribes to 814 volumes on NetLibrary. This was
funded as an experiment and the money set aside for this purpose has been
allocated. Several selectors have asked if they could participate in the
NetLibrary program by suggesting additional titles, which they would pay
for out of their individual funds. Collections Council endorsed this
expansion of the experiment. Selectors who wish to participate and add
titles to NetLibrary will be asked to adhere to the principles of the
NetLibrary experiment. They will have to be willing to pay all costs
(Initial cost of the volume then access costs which come to 15% in year
one, 12% in year two, 9% in year three, 6% in year four and 3% in year five
and beyond). They are also responsible for monitoring the usage of the
titles they purchase and to monitor feedback on the effectiveness of having
these titles in electronic form. While the NetLibrary initial and
continuing access costs might seem high, they actually compare favorably to
cost of purchasing print versions when all costs (price, processing,
binding, housing, etc.) are factored in. Ebooks seem to have the greatest
cost advantages when used for duplication of high-use titles.
8. Other business
None.