Minutes of September 20, 2012 Meeting

Kevin Mulcahy (chair), Grace Agnew, Bonnie Fong, Tom Izbicki, Michael Joseph, Barry Lipinski, , Rhonda Marker, Gracemary Smulewitz, Julie Still (videoconference), Ann Watkins, Tao Yang

1. Agenda Approved

2. Minutes from July 19, 2012 approved

3. AUL Report-T. Izbicki

The two big priorities are budget and merger. We are still waiting for budget information. State money is expected to be flat. Non- state money might be a little better because of the stock market, but the Rutgers Foundation has reduced the percentage we receive on funds, which might cancel out any increases. Last year the big problem was inflation. We have reduced duplication, moved things to single format (often digital). We have already been able to identify potential savings of close to $205,000, through renegotiations, cancellations of some monographic standing orders, and other strategies.

We are meeting with UMDNJ on the merger, vendor overlap, renewals, etc. The transition will occur in the middle of many contacts. We are using data to plan for the merger and are looking at processes, like payments to see what needs to be changed or rearranged. We have to look at carrying over not only our resources but UMDNJ's unique resources, with a core principle of not losing any current resources.

4. AUL Report-G. Agnew

Grace echoed Tom's comments about how library purchase differ from almost all other parts of the university. The Libraries buy by content not best price or vendor. We and OIT are the only departments. that buy system wide but are not handled by the university purchasing office. Price Waterhouse consultants working on the UMDNJ merger were surprised that the Libraries have our own contracts and purchasing orders. There will be significant headaches in merging purchasing practices generally for merger of UMDNJ and RU but not in library. Put together a large report (we have 55 servers, who knew, trying to standardize on LINUX), how many are 3rd party hosted (Ligbuides, refchatter). Tibor and MIG met with Price Waterhouse yesterday.

5. Updates from DTS-G. Smulewitz

We were asked recently by Marianne Gaunt to put together a list of all of our contracts and their expiration dates. There is a difference between renewal and license contracts. We can have contracts for 4 years but renew them annually. These reviews are very helpful for us to see. Price Waterhouse is not familiar with library issues. With every contract renewal and invoice, if we think the increase is too much, we are going back to vendor or publisher and start the conversation by saying "We aren't going to pay it." We've developed evaluative tools, by impact factor, etc. After listening to selectors we are trying to develop some sort of metric for measuring impact on departments, etc. Will the balance of the university shift toward biomedical and away from the Humanities? Two interesting messages were noted on listservs - SUNY Binghampton cancelled ACS (American Chemical Society) journals because the library determined that it had other resources that met the same need. Elsevier has said it will not recognize fair use of MDConsult (used by medical libraries). Contract law trumps copyright, so it is important to eliminate overly restrictive language before signing contracts.

6. Planning for 2012-2013-Goals, Priorities, Activities

The new Strategic Plan gives no explicit mention of traditional collection development goals- buying books and journals, or seeking to match our peer and aspirant institutions in terms of expenditures or collection size. Such measures might no longer be relevant in any case, and we will do better to look for tools, measures, strategies assessing how our collections support our students, faculty, programs.

A discussion identified a number of possible LRC goals for the year.

A draft of the goals will be circulated for discussion prior to the next meeting.

7. CTS Report-Mary Beth Weber

Weeding and consolidation lists are being done based on the policies determined by LRC last year, but Access Services is concerned with the one continuous run policy because of shifting and space issues. Suggestion is to have the earliest 5 or 10 years sent to the Annex regardless of location of other years, thus saving significant space in the libraries.

8. Possible agenda items for next month

develop goals document; make a decision on continuous runs of periodicals; conference report from Gracemary; input on proposed license coordinator line in CTS. Agenda Items for November or after include streaming media; reports from Michael Joseph on collection issues and practices in SC/UA.

Next meeting is scheduled for October 18, 2012.

Meeting adjourned at 11:30.

Respectfully submitted,
Julie Still

URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/lrc/minutes/lrc_12_09_20.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy
© Copyright 1997-, Rutgers University Libraries