Attended by: Chuck Eckman (chair), Gail Ford (recorder), Rebecca Green, Jim Gordon, Susana Hinojosa, Norma Kobzina, Mary Ann Mahoney, Barclay Ogden, Gary Peete, Margaret Phillips, John Roberts, Linda Vida, Kathryn Wayne
Guests: Frank Carothers
1. Announcements
2. One-time funding proposals: summary
3. Collections webpage (first draft)
4. Development campaign follow-up discussion
5. Gifts-in-kind (guest: Frank Carothers
6. Collections Security / Loss Rate Study (deferred)
7. NRLF JSTOR Proscription Proposal (deferred)
- After all one-time orders have been finalized, Chuck will send out a list of new content available because of this call.
- Council representatives will discuss with their Councils what collections-related places, people or things, if funded, would allow them to do fabulous things they cannot do within current budgetary restraints. Reps are asked to have these discussions during January and February to enable CC and Chuck to meet a target for discussion with Development of late February.
- Chuck will work with Tracy Mills from Development to clarify what elements selectors should include in proposals they submit to Development that will be most conducive to donors supporting collections.
1. Announcements
- February 1: Early Bird on Collections Budget
- Barclay announced that the California Preservation Program in which we participate has received an NEH grant to extend its educational programs for libraries and archives. These programs, including 40 new workshops, will be offered in fourteen Western and Pacific states and territories.
- Jim Gordon has posted a 4% permanent appropriation to m-funds.
- The Custodial Collections Task Force report will reach Admin in January
2. One-time funding proposals: summary
The requests for one-time funding for collections have mostly been approved and are in process of being ordered – a few are still awaiting more information from selectors. In the final tally, the AUL will contribute more than the $300k originally set aside. Suggestions to improve the process for next year:
- fold in the idea that Tier 2 proposals in the works should be submitted at this point in the budget process
- consider how to include fact-finding about follow-on issues arising from purchases (are vendor-supplied MARC records available and what is the cost? Who will shelve and is there space? is hardware/software available and/or can it be supported?)
Chuck thanked Jim Gordon, Don Lee, and Margaret Phillips for taking the decisions and turning them into real orders in time to meet deadlines and realize discounts.
3. Collections webpage (first draft)
Chuck distributed a first, and very preliminary take, on a new public website for Collections. Goals for such a site include
- a home for new information
- a place to bridge pages (already up but in need of update, expansion and/or reorganization) intended to inform on budget issues and those related to scholarly communication.
- a place to describe our strengths and planning efforts
- easy entry to information about who to contact for collections-related questions
- a place to cement a partnering role for the collections-program role in fundraising
Council provided some initial questions / comments
- who will maintain the content (especially for items drafted under “new”)?
- How will Affiliated libraries be folded in?
- Would less passive and more active headings work better?
- Gifts-in-kind could link from here
- Consider url’s and make them logical
4. Development campaign follow-up discussion
Last meeting, David Duer estimated that development could raise $5-$10 million, and is asking what collections-related items/ projects/ or programs selectors would like donors to consider. Council representatives will discuss with their Councils what collections-related places, people or things, if funded, would allow them to do fabulous things they cannot do within current budgetary restraints. Reps are asked to have these discussions during January and February) to enable CC and Chuck to meet a target for discussion with Development of late February. David encouraged participants to ignore the “vehicle” and concentrate on the overall objects. (e.g., don’t specify “endowment” vs. “gift” …. Do concentrate on “…to enable us to….”)
CC members are also welcome to send comments on two documents distributed at the meeting:
- Transforming Learning: Campaign for the University Library, 2007-2012 (Duer)
- Digital Millenium Endowment
5. Gifts-in-kind (guest: Frank Carothers)
Frank Carothers presented a document he prepared entitled “Effects of the Pensions Protection Act of 2006 on Appraisal, Deductibility, and Management of Large Gifts-in-kind.” The rules for who can appraise a collection and tax ramifications of gifts-in-kind have changed. The tax changes are important for gifts valued at over $5000, given either as a single gift or the accumulated value of a series of gifts offered within a single tax year. Frank reported that we receive between 10 and 15 such gifts per year.
Frank’s document offered some options to consider in response to these changes in law. Discussion will continue at the next CC, January 16.
- Gifts-in-kind (continued)
- Collections Security / Loss Rate Study (deferred)
- NRLF JSTOR Proscription Proposal (deferred)
- Early Bird on Budget
- Demand-driven selection
- Collections Access Projects
- Preserving access to Web-based content
Go to Collections Council minutes
Copyright © 2008 The Regents of the University of California.
All rights reserved.
Server manager contact