ACRL Oregon Board Meeting
February 25, 2011
Oregon State University

Present: Jane Scott, Diane Sotak, Anna Johnson, Steve Silver, Jennifer Nutefall, Margaret Mellinger, Michele DeSilva, Kate McGann, Emily Ford, Kate Rubick.

Meeting was called to order at 12:56 pm. Thanks to Jennifer for providing box lunches! 

Approval of the Minutes from December 2010: motion to approve Minutes from the December 2010 Board meeting, without changes.  Margaret/ Steve – motion passed unanimously. Minutes will be given to Robin to post to the website.

Budget Update:

Jane gave board members a reformatted budget on one page, with a clearer demarcation between 2007-2009 and 2009-2011. Our goal for 2009-2011 has been to keep a $10k reserve and only spend what we take in. In September 2011, Anna and Jane will be creating the 2011-2013 budget.

Some budget highlights: our OLA preconference only has 5 people registered so far (that’s fewer participants than speakers) and OLA says that if the preconference can’t show a profit, it has to be canceled. Menucha registrations were down this year. We will receive no reimbursement from vendors for e-learning, but a $295 credit will be coming from e-learning overpayment. Proposed end of year income = $13,500.

Traditionally, ACRL does a reception at OLA conference ($200) and sends legislative rep to Washington, DC (budgeted at $1,000 but could be much less since Emily’s workplace will help and she has a place to stay in DC).

Memberclicks fee line is hard to estimate, comes as % of our use of memberclicks, haven’t seen a fee for this yet in our budget reports from OLA. With $ added back in, we’ve adjusted our spending to reflect our adjusted income, so we are doing pretty well.

Jane also provided an itemized monthly budget sheet. Can we afford the ACRL National virtual conference? Will discuss later in this meeting.

Report from Chapters Council:

Jennifer said 14 people attending Chapters Council at ALA Midwinter. 3 or 4 of those 14 were Chapters Council board members, so a very small group was actually representing chapters. Two things were on the agenda: Steven Bell discussed his ACRL president candidacy, and Lisa Hinchcliffe and Joyce Hogburn stopped by to talk about ACRL upcoming events like ACRL National conference, value report, and draft plan for ACRL goals.

Jennifer found the meeting frustrating since much of the discussion was about increasing participation but so few people were there. Jane said that Chapters Council is supposed to help chapters communicate, chapter presidents write 2/ yearly reports about chapter, read newsletter before the meeting (conf themes, speakers, etc) – that is important, but does it need a meeting? Jennifer: they didn’t talk about that at all at the meeting except that they need a new editor. Kate: did they ask for agenda item? Jane: yes, a call went out to chapter presidents. Kate: should be common themes, could create partnerships. Shame that it wasn’t well attended. Jennifer: at Annual it was more. Emily: Midwinter problem. Future of Midwinter isn’t looking good – some RUSA sections have done away with it. BRASS too (see report). Virtual meetings instead. Margaret: ALA whitepaper on Midwinter says it’ll be repositioned to make money still. When travel budgets slashed, Midwinter first thing to go. Jennifer: some relevant issues, like how ACRL funds chapters based on # of members and how that $ hasn’t changed in X number of years and should go up. But 14 people isn’t enough to really discuss any issues. All: Thanks for going anyway, Jennifer.

Update from OLA:

Jane: taskforce to talk about how divisions partner with other groups hasn’t met yet. Operating as we have all along, where our division is the contact for Memberclicks for these groups (e.g. RIG) and info says we’re sponsoring. If want to become entity alone, can become round table by petitioning OLA so they use infrastructure directly. Still pressing for the discussion because important in lean $ times to bring new ideas forward without strapping them with infrastructure challenges.

Makes sense for us to continue to provide sponsor support and put reps of those groups on board as ex officio to have communication. Kate R is ex officio for LIRT but is also the IL Summit rep on our board. Do we need an ILAGO rep too? Jane says Kate can decide. Robin is the RIG rep but is also a board position. Robin isn’t here so we will clarify with her later.


Is Board okay with RIG member as non-voting ex officio while we sponsor RIG as it grows? Yes. Steve and Kate R attended this morning’s RIG meeting, no plans for anything that needs sponsorship at this time.

Update on IL Summit:
Kate R announced that the date for this year’s Information Literacy Summit is Friday Apr 29 at PCC Sylvania (that’s the day of Royal Wedding!)

Background: Kate is head of LIRT for OLA, LIRT is sponsoring ILAGO (Info Lit Advisory Group of Oregon) but now ILAGO has a board, just formed last year, and is pursuing status as a nonprofit.
Last year ACRL OR and LIRT co-sponsored IL Summit. This year only LIRT is sponsoring the conference. Kate is their memberclicks contact and is helping an ILAGO person with registration.

Conference format = five workgroups during the day with presenter-facilitator for each to share with whole group in afternoon. Topics = assessment of IL outcomes in sequential comp classes; IL continuum, K-12 to CC to U; providing IL in online and DL; IL in the disciplines; initiating credit classes for IL. [Kate has draft of program] CFP coming soon.

ILAGO board met this morning. Won’t need any additional funds from LIRT, still have $1400 from the $2k that LIRT gave them last year. Last year the IL Summit enterprise fund was under ACRL, now it’s separate (handout) like a round table of its own.RIG is also separate. Brings up other conversations re: sponsoring yearly should have $ coming back to LIRT since LIRT can’t raise funds. Need a funding model to transfer between groups. Will be a LIRT business meeting at OLA but Kate might not be at OLA. Can an alternate run it? Good idea.

Update on OLA Legislative Day:

Emily went to leg day, has recap email from Janet. 45 people made visits, over half senate offices and almost half rep offices got visits. 31 members sent legislators messages via Capwiz, but we used email template instead so can’t count people who may have sent emails. Capwiz is service from OLA, we should be able to use it for advocacy at state & national level but Emily doesn’t know the tech yet (it’s on her to-do list). Generally good day.

30 legislators stopped by the lobby bookshop to send a book to their favorite library (usually children’s books because public/ school focused). 30 is a big turnout, usually 5 is impressive. Nan, OLA lobbyist, pleased with the turnout.

Committee discussed county law libraries in a panel. Very informative to hear about a study trying to create equitable funding across state. Kate M: that was an LSTA funded report, came up during Jim Schepke’s report on the state library. New report. Should be in Oregon document depository soon, and on legislative wiki too. Kate M can send. County libraries touch ACRL more because college libraries get legal research public patrons.

Other issue: public records privacy, asking for library exemption to keep patron data from being public. Bill up for renewal, asked to keep exemption still in place. Jim thinks we’re safe. Good news. Jane: it is very fun to go to legislative day. Make appts with your senator and rep, see what bills are important to libraries before you go, talk with them about your stance and OLA’s stance. Can go alone or in groups. Chip Shields asked for Emily’s cell # to call her if he has questions on the day a bill is discussed. He also said she was his only constituent he’d talked to all day. Wu and Merkely say they don’t hear from constituents either. They welcome you – who hates libraries? Emily hopes librarians can get over reticence to talk to legislators. Jane: yes! Let voice be heard.

Update on OLA Conference:

Preconference: Jane says this is the best program that will probably never happen. Publicized in all listservs, sent flyer to membership, sent to all librarians in Oregon as a PDF, printed and distributed at Online NW, gave stacks to Emporia… only 5 people signed up. Other preconfs: Storytime = 43 registered. Book repair = 8. Book value = 12. Stepping stones (multicultural) = all day, 5, morning 0. RDA = 30. So, people’s interests are storytime and describing info … and nothing else. Less travel & training money as in previous years. Kate M: Especially when southern Oregon only has private libraries now. Missing part of the state. Steve: paying for OLA myself, can’t even consider preconfs.

Jane expects Garett to cancel our preconference next week and we’ll refund the 5 people’s money. We’d need 10 to break even, 15 to have more people than presenters, 20 to be acceptable. Not even close. Worth sending a direct email again to get more “last chance” attendees? Maybe people don’t get what it is? Tough time of year workload-wise. Could send last email with a deadline: 2 days or something. Could this be at a different conference? Pack Forest? Not in this format. And we’re not in charge of program at Pack Forest, WA is. Today is early bird deadline to register, so if it hasn’t happened today, might not happen. Wait for 2013 joint OLA/ WLA? Issues won’t go away.

Social: Kate M looked into hosting at state library but admin services have lots of rules about conduct in state building (no alcohol) and afterhours access. So, Bentley’s bar/ restaurant in conference center (site of 2008 event) – manager wants $500 up front usually, but they like libraries so they’d not charge us that much. Room fits 20 or fewer people, overflow is bar area. Priced for $20, cut hors d’oeuvres into halves to stretch = $215 for food, $38.70 for service gratuity = $253.70. Last time fee was $600 with alcohol. Cash bar this time. They have 500 wines at Bentley’s, so that’s exciting, and it’s a nice place and right there. Haven’t signed a contract yet. Thanks to Kate for doing this leg work.

Should this still be Wednesday if our preconference is not happening? Can we do it Thursday? That’s the banquet and also the business meetings. 5:30-6:30 = business meetings (but we don’t have one scheduled). Emporia reception 5:30-6:30, president’s reception 6-7, banquet 7-9pm. Jane: most appropriate seems to not do it at all. Acceptable to cancel? Jane can ask conference committee if that’s okay. Tradition to do this before the public libraries’ banquet, but academic group won’t be there anyway, except maybe some of the 30 people at RDA. Could do it in a hotel room on a smaller scale since it will be a smaller crowd? Or have an “un-reception” for people to eat dinner together, on own dime, somewhere in Salem? ACRL could order pitchers of beer. Or Bentley’s but don’t pre-order hors d’ouevres? Decision: Jane will ask if okay to cancel, if not she’ll email us and we’ll go with Bentley’s idea for Weds. Informal call on Thursday for dinner together at a restaurant, open to all who are interested. Put a call out on the blog.

Session introductions: Board members will introduce each ACRL OR-sponsored session. Introducer needs to get bios from session presenter and ask what they’d like said, then man room and pass out evaluations at the end and turn them in.

Thurs 11:00 - Diane
Thurs 2:00 - Robin 
Thurs 4:00 - Margaret
Friday 8:30 - Steve
Friday 2:00 - Margaret

Update on e-learning opportunities:

Embedded librarian webcast: at UO on April 26. This is the 5th webcast in our 4-for-5 deal.

Virtual conference, Thu March 31 and Fri April 1. Group (10+) costs $995 and gets us: one site for the two days to watch virtual conference of 12 presentations, then after those 2 days we’d get link to send to all members for all 130 slidecasts from regular face to face conference and all 12 virtual sessions, for one year. Makes sense to partner with OSU Libraries, who are planning to spend $325 for three attendees plus $25 each for 2 more sites.

Main site should be in Portland. Choices for Portland sites are PSU, PCC Sylvania, White Stag building (UO Portland), or OHSU. Portland host site will not pay (included in our $995) and every other site will pay $25 each. What tech is needed? Just web access and speakers. Note that all times are east coast times so the 12 synchronous sessions are from 6:00am-3:30pm both days. Should a board member be a facilitator at each virtual site? Good idea. Shooting for 4 sites: Corvallis, Portland, OSU Cascades, and somewhere in Southern Oregon.

Survey on desired e-learning opportunities: board members chose not to do a survey at this time.

Update on blog:

Widgets aren’t displaying correctly right now on our main page, but Diane’s working on it. There have been 132 posts since the blog was created in Nov 2009. Total page views are at 6,000, with an average of 13 views a day. The user with the most posts is Emily Ford with 19 posts. Now that SOU has a blog liaison, all major universities are represented, but some CCs are still lacking liaisons.

Vision 2020 discussion on the blog:

Robin will be breaking Vision 2020 down into its parts and blogging about each piece, since the survey about Vision 2020 didn’t get a lot of interest. We can make comments to nudge the discussion along. Diane can re-post the topic if it gets a lot of comments, to keep it at the top. Diane reported that Robin’s first post about Vision 2020 has 3 comments so far. It’s been hard to get conversation flowing on the blog. We’re trying to solicit member input in other ways.

Jane has asked Anne-Marie what our expectations should be regarding member input – are other divisions hearing more from their members? Jane explained the vision statements as the kinds of things that will most probably be happening between now and 2020. Some of these statements (e.g. shared catalogs) sound like things that are already happening in academic libraries, but not yet in the public libraries. Jane: academic community leads the rest of the state and the public libraries look to us for innovative ideas. Jennifer: but public libraries lead the way in services like self-checkout. Steve: small academic libraries feel on the trailing end with limited resources. Jane: this is the kind of conversation that should be happening on the blog about Vision 2020.

Diane reported that Anne-Marie Deitering will be the guest editor for the summer issue of OLA Quarterly, with Vision 2020 as the theme. Board members were happy to hear this, because many of us are still not clear about what OLA wants from us re: Vision 2020 feedback.

Member satisfaction survey:

Diane reported that Robin wants us to think about how often we want to survey our members. Last survey was 2 years ago. Do we still have the survey from last time? Garrett might have it. Suggestion: a member at large should take the lead on surveying members. The plan: at the membership meeting at the next Menucha (2012) we will discuss the need for member satisfaction surveys (e.g. what does ACRL Oregon do for me?) and then survey members soon after the conference.

Next survey should include information about how ACRL OR Board has responded to the previous survey by making changes to our organization. We listened to what you told us you wanted. Also: drawing for winning something for survey participation? Jennifer: literature says there’s no correlation between lottery incentives and survey participation.

Report from nominating committee:

Elections for ACRL OR board positions will be held May 1 to May 20. Open: two members at large and VP/ President Elect. Michele: so far two candidates for member at large, a third person has expressed general interest, but that’s it. More communications will be coming out this month, with a lighter tone and some humor. Can we resort to personal arm twisting, like last year? Yes, if we know people who would be good, turn those names into nominating committee (Michele and Margaret). Steve says: nominate guys, please.

Other business:

OLA has hired a design firm to create a new logo with a new tagline. Coming soon, but maybe not before OLA conference. Next joint OLA/ WLA conference will be in 2013.

The next meeting will be held on May 20, 2011 at Reed College in Portland.

Meeting Adjourned at 3:17pm.
Respectively Submitted  - Anna Johnson