§ SAALCK Directors' Meeting
of Dec 11, 1992
(Louisville, KY)
Minutes
Those Attending: Micheal Binder, Ralze Dorr, Gail Kennedy, Marcia Meyers, Peggy Steele, Miriam Winner, (Morehead?)
The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 12:10 PM. The first order of business was approval of the minutes of the meeting of October 9, 1992. There was one correction to the minutes. This was the spelling of Judith Nile’s name. With the correction, the minutes were approved.
The Chair asked for discussion of some old business prior to proceeding with the agenda. In that discussion, it was noted that Judith Niles would prepare the list of journals for the Serials Task Force. It was also noted that directors should FAX to Marcia Meyer the latest IPEDS report for their libraries. Directors were urged to explain on their forms whether or not Law and Health Sciences libraries were included in the data. Marcia Meyer will prepare a consolidated report for the SAALCK libraries and distribute it to the directors.
The next order of business was a progress report on the work of the Serials Task Force. It was reported that the task force had met one time and identified 500 titles, costing $500 or more, that were duplicated. It was also reported that the Task Force had submitted the following list of questions to the directors: “Has a goal or quota been established for the number of titles to be deselected?” The directors’ response was “no, there is no quota.” A discussion ensued as to whether the task force should actually recommend titles as candidates for deselection or whether it should only carry out its official charge to determine the feasibility of cooperation. It was the sense of the meeting that the Task force should follow its original charge with the following change—that it first, as an initial project, concentrate only on expensive titles. The following motion was made, seconded and approved: That the Serials Task Force initially focus on titles costing $2,000, or more, with special attention to state and local use and that the Task Force report its recommendations to the directors by March 1, 1993.
The second question from the Serials Task Force was: “is it feasible to conduct the proposed project if minimal money is saved?” The response by the directors was “Yes, it is feasible to do so.” The third question from the Serials Task Force was “Who will determine the ultimate ownership of the titles?” The directors response was that the directors would negotiate this issue. In discussion, it was noted that speedy interlibrary loan would be critical to the success of the cooperative serials effort and that the process of cooperation, once entered into, would be continuous.
The next order of business, as announced by the Chair, was the report of the Task Force on Interlibrary Loan. Documents received from the Task Force were distributed (appended to the minutes as Attachment #1). The first question was whether the Task Force should include costs of subscriptions to the Copyright Clearance center for each SAALCK Library and check journal titles in the CCC catalog before “deselecting” them. The directors responded that the Serials Task Force should include the cost of the subscription and, in looking at expensive titles, should consult the CCC catalog. The second question from the Task Force was whether to include costs of fax copies for each SAALCK library to replace antiquated equipment, reduce staff photocopying time, and reduce turn-around time. The directors response was that this would be taken under advisement. The third question from the Task force was “Would there be value in trying to negotiate a SAALCK group membership in the Center for Research Libraries?” The directors response was that this should not be included in the grant proposal but that the Task Force should determine whether this would be of value to the project. The fourth question from the Task Force was whether funds should be included or an agreement should be made to contribute “in Kind” for alternative means for physical delivery of books (e.g. via UPS). The directors response was that the Task Force should make a recommendation in that regard accompanied by cost figures. The fifth question from the Task Force was to consider the addition of extra OCLC terminals for ILL or removing existing OCLC terminals from a chain so that updating could proceed promptly, upgrading printers to prevent jams. The directors’ response was that this should not be a factor in the grant proposal and that each library should look at this issue individually. In discussion, there was general agreement among the directors that ILL should receive a high priority. A motion was offered and approved for the directors “That the SAALCK Directors agree that they expect to give high priority to ILL services.” Michael Binder distributed copies of “READ!” (Resource Enhancement and Delivery Initiative [Attachment #4]—a program to upgrade ILL services by academic libraries in Virginia. He pointed out that this was accomplished with no new money and he hoped SAALCK could do as well.
The Chair announced the next order of business in discussion of the outline for the Grant Proposal under Title II-A U.S. Department of Education. (The outline is appended to these minutes as Attachment #2). A motion was made and approved to accept the grant proposal as reflected in the outline and to authorize the drafters to make modifications as necessary in preparing proposal.
In discussion, it was agreed that each director should:
[Text of minutes ends at this point]