George R. White Library and Learning Center
July 8, 2010
- 12:00 noon - 5:00pm: Business meeting, George White Library, Shakespearian Authorship Room
- 6:30pm + Dinner
- 9:00 am - 12:00: Business meeting, George White Library, Shakespearian Authorship Room
- 12:15 - 12:30: Board of Directors Meeting, George White Library, Shakespearian Authorship Room
|Patricia Cutright (CWU)
Natalie Beach (Chemeketa)
Michelle Bagley (Clark)
Brent Mai (Concordia)
Karen Clay (EOU)
Julie Miller (EWU)
Merrill Johnson (GFU)
Marika Pineda (LCC)
Mark Dahl proxy
for Jim Kopp (L&C)
Carol McCulley proxy for
Susan Barnes Whyte (Linfield)
Nancy Hoover (Marylhurst)
|Jeff Ring (MHCC)
Chris Shaffer (OHSU)
Karen Kunz (OIT)
Faye Chadwell proxy
for Karyle Butcher (OSU)
Marita Kunkel (Pacific)
Donna Reed (PCC)
Helen Spalding (PSU)
Vickie Hanawalt (Reed)
Bryce Nelson (SPU)
Teresa Montgomery proxy
for Paul Adalian (SOU)
John Popko (SU)
|Bill Bruner (TESC)
Deb Carver (UO)
Drew Harrington (UP)
Jane Carlin (UPS)
Betsy Wilson (UW)
Carolyn Gaskell (WWU)
Sue Kopp (WPC)
Jay Starratt (WSU)
Allen McKiel (WOU)
Christopher Cox (WWU)
Deborah Dancik (WU)
Dalia Corkrum (Whitman)
Proxy assigned to a Council member: John Popko serves as proxy for Scot Harrison (SMU); Natalie Beach serves as proxy for Daivd Bilyeu (COCC)
No proxy: none
Staff: John F. Helmer, Elizabeth Duell, Anya Arnold, Greg Doyle
Key linked documents
- Incorporation documents, please especially note the Resolutions
- UI Apllication (password protected)
- WEST background paper
- Program reports
Thursday July 8, 2010
1. Welcome, introductions, and review agenda (Corkrum)Introductions of new Council members:
Harrington raised a "point of order," took control of the floor, read a proclamation, and presented a framed scroll in honor of Dalia Corkrum's contributions as Chair of the Orbis Cascade Alliance. Well done Dalia!
2. Incorporation (Dancik)Background: Incorporation documents
Executive Committee recommends that Council adopt the structure of incorporation and approve moving Alliance business functions to a 501c3.
No Questions were raised.
VOTE on Recommendation 1
Executive Committee recommends that Council adopt the following Resolutions.
Discussion and Questions
Question: Is the agreement with UO being voted on?
A: No, that is a separate agreement and still in process. It is not expected to require a Council vote.
Question: Bylaws 1.16 "Quorum and Voting" only requires a majority vote for action. Have we considered including a higher standard for financial questions etc?
A: The proposed bylaws are consistent with past practice: the only Council decisions requiring a 2/3 vote are amending the by-laws and admitting new members.
Question: The MOU includes much about the responsibilities of the individual members without similar mention of the corporation's responsibilities.
A: Good point but the language is consistent with previous MOUs from the past 15 years and no legal counsel has suggested a change.
Question: In the Conflict of Interest policy Section V Paragraph B, it says "Each Officer, Director and employee…." Why doesn't it include Council members disclosing?
MOTION: Move that paragraph B include "Each Officer, Director and Council member and Employee..."
In this context, the "Council member" refers to the representative of the institution. The Member is the Institution that is being represented not the individual who is at the Council meeting.
Council concluded that we should not edit as a body of the whole and probably need to seek legal counsel before making such a change. Since this is a policy document, revision is relatively easy.
MOTION WITHDRAWN Wilson withdrew her motion with the understanding that topic will be considered by the Board and return to Council. Chadwell agreed.
VOTE on Recommendation 2
Dalia Corkrum's statement on the occasion of Council's decision to incorporate:
Fellow Council members, today I am asking that you remember you were here when history was made. Just as our librarian predecessors took that leap of faith, knowing that the Ohio College Library Consortium was destined for greater things than library cooperation within the State of Ohio, so we too stand at the threshold of an unique opportunity to transform academic libraries. We couldn't have made it this far without those first few brave libraries and the Meyer Memorial Trust who believed that Orbis and Cascade were of such value. Nor would we have grown and prospered without the broad shoulders of the University of Oregon to support our developing alliance. This organization was founded by and continues to evolve because of the commitment, dedication and faith of all its member libraries and staff.
3. University of Idaho membership application (Corkrum)Documents (password protected):
Executive Committee recommends that Council offer the University of Idaho membership in the Orbis Cascade Alliance, subject to acceptable inclusion of the UI catalog in Summit. As is standard practice, the Alliance will require that UI act on this offer within two years.
Council discussed UI's application materials and Executive Committee's site visit and recommendation. Vote followed on the second day of the meeting.
4. WEST: Toward a Western Regional Storage Trust (Helmer, Wilson, Carver, Starratt)WEST background paper
a) Explore the interests of members in direct or consortial participation in WEST
b) Investigate, direct costs, opportunity costs, and the strategic opportunities presented by serving as WEST Administrative Host, and
c) Develop a recommendation for Council concerning a role for the Orbis Cascade Alliance as administrative host for WEST. Given the WEST timeline and Mellon funding cycle, Council's vote on this recommendation will be conducted via web poll.
Discussion and Questions:
Council discussed WEST and Executive Committee's recommendation. Vote follows on the second day of the meeting.
Question: Does the Alliance staff have enough "bandwidth" to take this on?
A: It is large and complex issue, however, within the WEST plan there are admin fees and and one additional FTE for project staff. Helmer reported that he and Alliance staff have reviewed the proposal and judge themselves able to take on hosting duties if WEST is judged to be a priority by Council. Efficiencies would need to be identified (perhaps paid for by admin fees) and some other initiatives may be slowed, especially during the first year.
Question: How would WEST relate to CDMC and the Distributed Print Repository (DPR)?
A: It is too early to know with specificity except that the DPR would likely be be part of WEST and built in coordination with both WEST and national or international efforts. WEST wouldn't supplant other things that we are working on. Helmer is scheduled to brief the CDMC Steering Team meeting on Monday.
Question: How separate would WEST be? Will Council be talking about WEST for a 1/4 of the meeting or would we need to have a separate Council meeting to manage this?
A: It could have an impact similar to NWDA, except that WEST would be larger and more separate from the Alliance. Serving as host would be a three-year commitment. If we decide at the end of that three years that it is no longer beneficial to continue the relationship, then we could discontinue our role as host.
Question: Are they looking for continuing external sources of funding?
A: The business model predicts a decline in total budget (owing to a decline in grant funding) with stable membership fees
Question: What time frame are we working on?
A: WEST has set the deadline of September 1, 2010 for participation commitments.
Question: Is it true that in the absence of the Alliance, WEST is unlikely to be as well hosted by another group?
A: This has been the general sense of the WEST planning group. UC is another likely host and the project will still move forward capably even if the Alliance is not host.
Helmer noted that the Alliance would not take the lead on system development, a task more likely to be lead by UC/CDL or CRL.
Question: What date does grant funding begin and where does it fall in the fiscal year?
A: January 2011; within the current fiscal year .
Question: Would Council meet before voting?
A: We would not be meeting face-to-face but could host a conference call if needed. The Board will provide a recommendation and vote would take place via web poll.
Question: Is there a general sense that WEST is a strong fit with our mission?
A: (General Agreement)
Question: Should the Board proceed with the intent and hope that all members of the Alliance will participate either directly or through a consortial membership?
A: (General Agreement)
5. Strategic Agenda Overview (Helmer)Helmer briefly reviewed the Strategic Agenda. Teams pursuing the Strategic Agenda were asked to create brief status reports (linked below) which EC reviewed and discussed at length (see 2010 June 16 EC action items, agenda item #3).
Council feels that the Alliance needs to do more to publish, present, and generally publicize this important work. The Board will consider awards or other incentives. Helmer suggested that Alliance staff could partner or otherwise help member library staff working on articles, studies, etc. involving the Alliance. The Research Interest Group may also be a good vehicle for doing more to "get the word out" about the Alliance.
SA1. Cooperative Collection Development
SA2. Regional Library Services Cooperative
SA3. Future of Integrated Library Systems
SA5. Digital Initiatives
6. Executive Session for annual review of Executive Director (Corkrum)Since Council let staff back in and Helmer was greeted by applause, things must have gone well.
7. EC update (Corkrum)Council Liaison
EC has been drafting a job description for Council Liaisons, including
EC has discussed developing a policy concerning when and how the Alliance can issue a political opinion. EC determined that all such Alliance activity should continue to follow the Bylaws and that it would not be wise to develop a separate policy. In its deliberations EC felt it particularly important to recall the the members of the Alliance are institutions and Council members represent those member institutions, thus a Council member's vote is an expression of a member institution's stand on an issue. When considering such activity, EC encourages members to consider whether topics are closely related to the business of the Alliance and thus likely to be appropriate for Council action. More tangential or purely political stands are unlikely to receive sufficient support for action. EC will consider including such advice in a members handbook.
OCLC Group Services
EC is in the early stages of considering whether or not the OCLC Group Services program may be of value to the Alliance.
Question: How is the work with OCLC on Summit going? Is OCLC responsive?
A: Yes, WorldCat Navigator has been steadily improving although there remains much to do. Formal and informal communication occurs regularly at both operational and administrative levels. Anya Arnold will provide additional information as part of the Summit Program update.
Friday July 9, 2010
8. VotesVote on recommendations from Thursday agenda (#4 and 5)
8.1 VOTE on University of Idaho membership application
8.2 VOTE on EC recommendation regarding WEST
9. Program updates
NorthWest Digital Archives
Arnold summarized her report on the Summit Program and engaged in discussion with Council, including:
Doyle distributed reports specific to each member institution and reviewed program activity for the previous year.
10. Discussion (Carver, Starratt)
What are the impediments to full adoption of YBP?
Question: When and how should we decide on full participation?
A: There are many factors to consider and it would be useful to have a matrix or tool that prompts us to recall and discuss the issues that need to be taken into consideration.
The Board will continue this discussion and report back to Council.
Karen Clay announced the Northwest Academic Library Directors Symposium is scheduled for November 10, 2010, the day before Council's next meeting.
|Dalia Corkrum turned the meeting over to the new Council chair, Drew Harrington.
Motion to adjourn: Dancik
Vote was unanimous
Board of Directors Meeting
Following Council's meeting, the Board of Directors met for the first time: Meeting minutes.
Minutes: Duell and Helmer