Minerva Executive Board Meeting –
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
In attendance: Amber Tatnall, Kevin Davis, Martha Ott, Steve Norman, Liz Soares, Nancy Crowell, Tim McFadden, Cindy White, Shelly Davis (by telephone), Judy Frost (Maine InfoNet representative), Josh Tiffany, Jen Alvino, Karen Jones, James Rathbun (Circulation Standards Committee); and representing Maine InfoNet – James Jackson Sanborn; and Alisia Revitt and Lynn Uhlman (virtually).
Call to order at 10:05 AM
Welcome and introductions:
Review and acceptance of the minutes of the November 12, 2014 meeting: The minutes were approved as written.
Old Business
ILL loan period for DVDs: Amber made a motion to continue the three week AV loan period. Kevin seconded. Discussion: Nancy commented that Scarborough would adhere to the Minerva rule if instituted, but would keep their current shorter rule locally – which would, if anything, benefit other Minerva patrons. It was noted that straw votes at the Minerva Users Council and the circulation roundtable showed strong support for the policy’s continuation. Those who oppose the lengthened loan period appear to be those who are still utilizing a shorter local period. Martha reported that informal discussion among some of the academic libraries showed support for the longer period. Nancy noted that the only statistics gathered were those provided by Josh Tiffany. Maine InfoNet staff had indicated that relevant numbers are difficult to identify. Liz commented that her school system has not seen any issues. Kevin noted that patron satisfaction is anecdotal and his patrons have been complimentary at the circulation desk. They are not complaining about longer wait times and they appreciate that the reason they are waiting is that someone else is enjoying the video. Steve reported that he has had positive comments from other libraries. Although there have been vocal listserv opponents, straw votes have shown strong support. In a consortium, there are many circulation and cataloging issues that need to align for the whole consortium to work – many decisions are controversial with some libraries. Amber said that we need to always be sure that we have gone through processes in a good and open way – now and in the future. James agreed noting that there needs to be an established procedure with accommodation for feedback – the new RFA form is one step. Nancy made a friendly amendment to the motion to read:
Intra-Minerva Loan Rule Policy
All materials, regardless of format, circulate for 21 days and may be renewed one time for an additional 14 days.
The exception to this rule is if the owning library adds a note (an item message or a note on the packaging) directing an extension of the original loan period (that is, a longer loan period).
If additional time is needed after the first renewal, the borrowing library must contact the lending library for permission to override the system.
The ability to renew is contingent upon the fact that no holds exist for the item.
The motion carried with one dissenting vote. Steve will distribute this information to the listserv. We will, as a board, continue to revisit our process for making these decisions.
RDA Toolkit update: 23 libraries are participating and their cost is the same as last year’s.
Review of Minerva policies: Pam is still working on this.
Committee responsibilities & RFA template: Nancy distributed documents pertaining to communication expectations for the board and the Users Council with bullet points gleaned from the Minerva bylaws. Martha questioned whether the posting of minutes pertained to approved or draft minutes. Discussion ensued and it was agreed that draft minutes, while subject to error, are preferable because they are timelier. We will post both, making sure they are clearly marked as either draft or approved. Nancy will add language to her documents and send them out. The RFA template is already in use.
Syndetics and other options: Steve, Amber, Tim and James have been exploring options. All agreed that while some are attractive, none are one-to-one replacements for our current Syndetics subscription. With insufficient time to communicate options to the membership, the group felt it best to seek an extension of the current contract, bringing it in line with our fiscal year. Syndetics offered to do this for a reasonable price. Meanwhile, the group will continue to research options, perhaps bringing in more members with the goal to bring one or two options to members. Syndetics gives us an array of features, but there are competitors – some offering a more visual display. Judy urged that the group keep the needs of academic libraries in mind. This group should have something to bring to our attention in April or early May. The motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to authorize James to enter into a five month contract extension with Syndetics.
New Business
Budget and dues for FY 2015: It is time to begin work on next year’s budget. Steve has already received inquiries from other libraries concerned about Minerva’s cost next year. At this point, with three new libraries in the system, we don’t expect any increase in dues – either staying the same or offering a slight decrease depending on whether we decide it’s more important to build a reserve fund or reduce fees. James reported that III costs will be the same for the first two years of the new contract. Also, since we have Airpac, Library Thing’s cost will go away. There will also be savings with lower accounting costs by having our money at Maine InfoNet versus the State. Van delivery costs are unknown, though lower gas prices should help. Director’s insurance would be a new cost. Our reserve fund was increased five years ago in anticipation of a system migration – now accomplished. These are tough times for libraries and a zero percent fee increase will be appreciated. We will approve next year’s budget at our March meeting. Amber will communicate our expectation to Minerva members.
Next election cycle for Minerva executive board: The terms of Liz (school), Kevin (public) and Shelly (academic) are expiring. We will need candidates for these three positions. Cindy will chair a committee, with Shelly’s help, to solicit nominations through Minerva-L by January 30. Ballots will be out by March 30 with an election in April. Alisia will update the webpage to reflect current membership.
Flow chart for resolving conflicts within Minerva: A final appeal for resolving conflicts is given within the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).This item is on the agenda due to a recent conflict over overdues. The steps to seeking resolution are to address the issue: 1) Staff – library to library 2) Director to director 3) Appropriate committee / Director of the executive board / Full board. This process will be sent out to board members for further discussion.
Minerva strategic planning: Maine InfoNet is close to approving its plan. It went through a facilitated process – should we? In the past we had a report from Linda Bills and also some meetings that Arnold Hirshon facilitated. Martha will try and distribute those again. A facilitator would help us determine where we want to go, and how best to get there. There would be costs associated with this – Judy will investigate possibilities.
Minerva and the PPL bridge program: There is some concern expressed that Minerva materials are being requested by libraries in southern Maine through this program – with no reciprocity. Kevin noted that a similar situation is that some of his AV items, previously coded 100 to prohibit lending outside of Minerva, had that coding stripped. He said that Portland Public Library has scaled back its DVD purchasing and their patrons are hitting Minerva hard. South Portland had the 100 codes reinstated and now smaller libraries are feeling the trickle-down effects. James was not aware of any recent large-scale coding changes. He said that the Bridge program is an efficient way to handle ARCC services for those libraries not in MaineCat, but on the van delivery service. He said that while there is no official agreement concerning lending among MaineCat libraries, he strongly reiterates his belief in open borrowing. The new MILS libraries will be brought in with the explicit expectation of open lending. Perhaps a discussion with PPL would be beneficial. Kevin expressed his concern that entities are defunding collections and relying on Minerva to provide materials. This problem may increase if state revenue sharing declines. There are many complaints around issues of open borrowing – something that could be considered within strategic planning. This will be kept on the agenda.
Reports
Circulation Standards Committee: James Rathbun said the committee is hoping that the OPAC can be tweaked to make it more user friendly. For example, patrons can’t check items out using the shopping bags feature – as they might well expect to. James Jackson Sanborn noted that MILS will not have bags. Also, there are several popup button options in Sierra that are not relevant and seemingly should be done away with. These will be investigated. They asked if the hold-shelf period could be tightened – it could not. Also, there does not appear to be a request cap in InnReach. Lynn is checking on this.
New Business
Professional and business liability insurance: Already touched upon. James will forward the Maine InfoNet policy.
Minerva participation in Maine Shared Collections Cooperative: The community colleges are working with Matthew Revitt. Groups can participate inexpensively. It would make sense for Minerva libraries to do so as it would help clean up the catalog. Groups of five or fewer are best. Matt will send information to Steve who will get the word out to members.
Consortial purchase of DVDs/AV: Suggestions as to how we might all develop our collections so that open borrowing is not a problem would be useful. The Download Library has potential, but its catalog doesn’t include what most people want. Other similar streaming options have the same failing. Maybe what we need is collections best practice guidelines. Would it be useful to publish the high demand holds list? Alisia said this was done in the past to no good effect. Josh Tiffany volunteered to come up with some useful lists to share.
Reports
Maine InfoNet: James reported Maine InfoNet’s 501c3’s quest to obtain sale tax exempt status is ongoing. There is new legislation language posted to include non-profit collaborations of libraries. This should go to committee soon. The transfer of Minerva funds from the state to a special revenue account within Maine InfoNet has been accomplished. Minerva did not have to pay the Stacap fee on this – largely due to Linda Lord’s efforts. The money is now in an interest bearing “club account.” A process for signing off on expenditures is now in place. Windham and Freeport are now live within Minerva. The Download Library increased by 1100-1200 items purchased with sales tax check-off funds. Bills will go out this month to those participating – fees remain the same. Circulation is double last year’s, though there was no “holiday bump” this year. MILS (Maine InfoNet Library for Small libraries) will shortly roll out its first library Vose Public, soon to be followed by Paris Public.
Maine InfoNet Representative: Judy said that their focus has been on the strategic plan. She also noted the challenge of coordinating billing among Maine InfoNet Libraries – there doesn’t seem to be an agreed-upon policy.
Minerva Technical: They have been consumed with bringing in Windham and Freeport. It went well though some cleanup remains. Minerva’s scopes table needed to be expanded and this required III to empty all of the scopes. They worked as quickly as possible, but it did slow the system somewhat. Alisia reported that annual statistics will be ready at the end of the week. Lynn said that she will be providing documentation on creating lists shortly.
Finance: We are in good shape. Amber noted that she will need access to bank reports in order to balance the account. James will send her paper statements monthly. She intends to rearrange her reports to make them more readable.
Membership: No report
Cataloging Standards Committee: The committee submitted two RFAs. A motion was made to approve the first with a minor edit: To remove “view DVDs” and replace with “view video streaming” in the Cataloging Attendance Policy.” It was seconded and carried unanimously. The second RFA concerned discontinuation of the MARC 791 field as a means of identifying special collections. A motion was made and seconded for Minerva to discontinue the use of MARC 791 and use Sierra’s feature list or other documentation to note specific library information. Karen Jones expressed her opinion that there had been insufficient notification of this change. She was unaware of it until after the RFA had already been submitted. She indicated that this was a valuable and efficient way of identifying special collections and that more than the one library could benefit from the information – using as an example the CHIP collection of science titles. It was also noted, however, that the entries could be confusing to patrons of other libraries who did not participate in the collection. Nancy suggested we defer this item until we have more information. Seeing examples, knowing how many of these are currently in play, and hearing directly from the cataloging standards committee would be informative. The motion was made and seconded to table.
Other
Thomas Memorial Library is currently under construction. Scarborough Public Library has offered its services to TML patrons under a simple MOU for about a year.
Josh Tiffany wondered what had happened to the statistics committee. Kevin noted that it had been an ad hoc committee focused on unifying reporting for the public library annual reports. Once that was accomplished, it went away.
Adjournment: 12:48 PM
Next meeting: March 11, 2015
