Attended by: Elizabeth Byrne, Chuck Eckman (chair), Gail Ford (recorder), Jim Gordon, Rebecca Green, Mary Ann Mahoney, Gary Peete, Margaret Phillips, Theresa Salazar, Linda Vida, Jill Woolums, Susan Xue. Absent: Scott Miller, Barclay Ogden, Kathryn Wayne, Beth Weil
Guest: Mike Rancer.
Agenda
1. Announcements / Updates
2. Debriefing Shared Print Presentation
3. Setting Replacment Costs
4. Collections Budget (Mike Rancer)
5. Facts in Graphs
Action Items
• CC members will suggest that Emily Stambaugh be invited to their councils.
• Chuck and Gail will work with Marilyn Ng in Acquisition to draft some best practices used in determining what replacement prices should be, and Chuck will explore how to promote the use of these practices across the organization as a preferred collection development policy.
• Gail asked CC to look at Facts in Graphs at http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Collections/facts.html and see if there are any sources of data and/or arguments, ideas pertinent to the site that they would like to recommend. She also asked that CC give particular attention to naming journal titles that have demonstrated large inflationary increases over the last several years.
Meeting Contents
1. Announcements / Updates
• A faculty conversation on scholarly communications sponsored by LIBR and the Library will take place in the Faculty Club on Monday April 14, 2008.
• Margaret reported that the new NIH Public Access Policy becomes effective April 7 2008 and calls for mandatory deposit in PubMed Central of peer-reviewed electronic manuscripts stemming from NIH funding. This will affect a number of researchers at UC. UCOP Executive Director of the Office of Technology Transfer William Tucker has created a letter that authors may append to any submissions indicating UC’s support and position for this policy. Margaret will be working with Marcia Smith of the campus Research Administration and Compliance Office to discuss how best to inform and support UC Berkeley faculty. More later….
• Linda Vida commented that the recent GAO report on EPA libraries seems hopeful. http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1812
• Chuck reported that the UL’s and SOPAG have recently had a joint meeting at which the process and timeline for reviewing SCAP-funded resources were discussed. Chuck will continue to track this review, since the outcomes may result in payment for some resources being redirected back to campuses.
• Chuck and Tom are talking about how UC Berkeley might participate in this program:
“The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation has awarded the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) $4.27 million to create a national program to identify and catalog hidden special collections and archives.” to http://www.resourceshelf.com/2008/03/18/mellon-grants-clir-427-million-for-program-to-catalog-hidden-collections/
• EAL opened to the public on Monday March 17. The opening was announced in the media including the Chronicle, the Contra Costa Times and on NPR. Susan reported that EAL was crowded with visitors on Monday.
2. Debriefing Shared Print Presentation by Emily Stambaugh on March 4
CC offered some thoughts on shared print:
• Chuck mentioned a study, to be published soon, by UCB Professor Candace Yano on the optimal number of print copies of a journal needed to ensure a complete print run. Chuck hopes that Professor Yano might become interested in considering how her study of journals might inform a “how many copies of books” are required for true preservation.
• It may be time to rethink the cost-benefit analysis of retaining prospective print copies of electronic journals. The pilots have proven very expensive and may be harder to support in the near term economic climate.
• Selectors are more than willing to have our copies of print digitized, but there is concern about relinquishing our ownership of same (e.g. JSTOR runs).
• A single shared print copy of a monograph might be a nice preservation strategy for e-books that we want to keep in the system in perpetuity.
• It’s important not to disrupt an economy that already works.
Mary Ann mentioned that the northern UC science libraries and Stanford science librarians will be meeting in May and that they will be inviting Emily to attend.
Chuck encouraged subject councils to invite Emily to speak to their groups on shared print.
3. Setting Replacement Costs
CC articulated that the goals for setting replacement costs and procedures for lost items include
• covering the real cost for purchasing or creating a replacement, and
• covering work associated for finding and processing a replacement.
At the same time, we want the pricing structure and overall interactions with patrons to encourage return of our originals.
CC agreed that we should recoup the actual purchase price of a book in any cases where the current price to acquire is greater than the $150 default price now in place.
Chuck and Gail will work with Marilyn Ng in Acquisition to draft some best practices used in determining what replacement prices should be, and Chuck will explore how to promote the use of these practices across the organization as a preferred collection development policy.
4. Collections Budget (Mike Rancer)
Mike reported that the budget call this year from campus asked The Library to describe what the effects would be of a 7% cut in the collections budget, with a possible further 4% tax on carryforwards. Mike underlined that this was the first time the collections budget was not protected against possible cuts. He mentioned that these cuts, should they actually occur, would happen on top of the indirect cuts we have suffered each year that there has been no new money to cover inflation.
The Library responded by iterating that last year’s budget had described how we might be able to manage with no new money, assuming that we could redirect carryforward money from elsewhere in the Library towards Collections. If the 4% cut on carryforward amounts goes through, we will be facing a 40% reduction in monographic purchases for 2009, with a serials cancellation of massive proportions for 2010.
The Library’s response has been presented to CAPRA, the Academic Committee on Libraries and to EVCP Breslauer. They have all been highly sympathetic.
The campus may not know our actual budget until the fall, but they do understand that The Library will need clear direction about what to expect by June 2008.
5. Facts in Graphs
Gail and Chuck are updating the collections website page, Facts in Graphs, at http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Collections/facts.html. Gail asked CC to look at the page and see if there are any sources of data and/or arguments, ideas pertinent to the site that they would like to recommend. She also asked that CC give particular attention to naming journal titles that have demonstrated large inflationary increases over the last several years. CC should get suggestions for titles to Gail by March 25.
Go to Collections Council minutes
Copyright © 2008 The Regents of the University of California.
All rights reserved.
Server manager contact