Present: Nancy Boerner, Becky Cape, Erika Dowell, Marion Frank-Wilson, Jian Liu, Jo McClamroch, Bob Noel, Mary Popp, Andrea Singer, Mary Strow, Suzanne Thorin, Gary Wiggins

Guests: Myles Brand, Martha Brogan, Harriet Hemmasi, Al Ruesink

1. Conversation with President Myles Brand.

Wiggins made introductions, and welcomed President Brand and faculty member Al Ruesink to the meeting. Brand said that he meets on an irregular basis with school policy groups to share information with colleagues, and keep informed about topics of concern. The topics he chose for today’s meeting were an update on State of Indiana and Indiana University finances, which he would like us to share with colleagues, and a general discussion of library issues and concerns.

State of Indiana:

Brand described Indiana’s financial situation as “volatile”. He recounted the efforts the Indiana legislature made in the special legislative session last year to reduce the billion and a half to 2 billion dollar deficit on the state’s 12 billion dollar budget. (These included actions relating to taxes on inventories, an ameliorative property tax measure for owners of older property, and an increase in sales tax by 1 cent.) 500 million dollars was raised, but the problems remain. Brand believes state budgeters’ financial predictions are optimistic regarding revenue increases (2.7% this year, 5.7% for next year).  The issue that faces the university is how the state can manage with a “Rust Belt” economy. Will they make cuts in K-12 education, raise the sales tax, increase gaming revenue, or raise the income tax?

Last year the University joined The Alliance for Indiana’s Future with the Indiana State Teachers Association and other groups . The New Alliance for this year has met once, and questions about how elections will affect control of the Indiana House and the Governor’s seat will be important. (The Indiana Senate is controlled by Republicans.) The group would be pleased if a penny additional sales tax were devoted to education (2/3 of $1 to K-12, and 1/3 to Higher Education). The Indiana business community is now the biggest advocate for higher education, and ISTA leadership is also a good partner.

Indiana University:

The University must find new sources of revenue. We have already been working on fund raising (#1 among public universities  in the U.S. last year), and on the increase in tuition for new students which puts us in the middle of Big 10 universities for tuition charges. Brand indicated that the impact on low income students from the tuition increase is not going to be out of line because our financial aid budget from the state is relatively good (7^th in the nation even though our operating budget contributions from the state put Indiana University and Purdue University in the 9^th and 10^th positions in the Big 10.)

Last year the University lost $110 million dollars of state funding, of which 36 million was a missed payment which we covered by spending reserves. The University hopes to regain that money since spending reserves may threaten bond ratings. The amount equaled 3.2% of our base budget. Cuts largely out of non-academic units covered all but 1.5%. The goal this year is to be without a deficit – at zero deficit.

The most significant source of new money for the University will be the $1,000 tuition increment for new students. Chancellor Brehm’s Strategic Planning Committee, which Fred Cate (Law) chairs, and on which Julie Bobay serves, will be working on priorities for the disposition of this money to benefit students.

Wiggins asked whether Indiana would follow the national cycle of economic downturn/upturn. Brand said generally Indiana starts the downturn earlier and finishes later because of the state’s economic reliance on assembly plants.

Brand described the University’s moral obligation to help the state make the economy better. In changing the state, our contributions to life sciences and information technology are important along with advanced manufacturing and logistics. The health care and medical research already in place in strong existing companies coupled with the IU Medical School make the health care opportunity the best. Molecular Biology and Chemical initiatives supported by the Lilly Endowment are important too. The federal NIH budget is 28 billion dollars a year, some of which comes to IU.

Brand described finding research space as the biggest barrier to increasing our capacity in the medical research area. Both Indianapolis and Bloomington lack laboratory space. Thorin asked whether the next campaign will address any of these issues. Brand indicated that it is difficult to ask for donations from physicians especially in specialty areas now that their own salaries have been cut back because of HMO outpays and other factors.

General Library Issues and Concerns:

Al Ruesink asked the group whether they had any concerns or areas of which they were proud to convey to the President.

Serials:

Brogan described the problem of 70% of collection budgets being allocated for ongoing commitments. Brand replied that that he was aware of the monies tied up for serials, and that efforts to share resources had brought moderate success. Brogan described collaboration with partners on the IUPUI campus, but mentioned that some problems were difficult to overcome. Brand said he wished he could wave a wand for the library system as a whole. Thorin mentioned the efforts to make repositories for faculty research.

Noel asked about the letter Brand wrote a few years ago to faculty about putting research where it can be accessed, in contrast to publishing in overpriced titles. Brand thought the enthusiasm for this was getting a little tired, and that it would have to happen on a national level. Brogan was more optimistic about the impact of scholarly publishing reforms. She mentioned evidence of more reasonable pricing. Elsevier prices showed more moderation this year on the inflation side, i.e. a 5 % increase. Brand said that trying to uncouple publishing from peer review is worthy, but difficult in the legal (copyright) situation, and that he doesn’t think headway will be made until that happens. Some fields are better than others.  Wiggins commented that the Sciences have bought into e-journals, and cited a success story of extending Chemical Abstracts to the campuses.

Retrospective Conversion:

Wiggins praised Hemmasi for accomplishing the retrospective conversion project, saying that a test of 100 old titles in the Chemistry Library card catalog revealed that all 100 are in IUCAT. However, Singer commented that many Government Documents weren’t yet in the catalog.

Hemmasi mentioned how hard-working library staff are, and that it is difficult to give up old services, yet there are shortages in staff. Wiggins mentioned more team development of course materials through OnCourse. McClamroch reaffirmed the commitment to provide electronic services to people who come in off the street. The IUB Libraries Electronic Resources Acquisitions unit always tries to negotiate that provision into licenses for new products. Popp described enhancements to IUCAT including the ability to renew materials online for people affiliated with the University. Soon the capability for patrons to place holds will also be available. IUCAT really does make the entire collection of the print resources of the University available as one collection on all the campuses.

One Collection:

Brand  said that the one collection idea really was a different way to look at things. Did it provide better leverage with publishers for savings? Thorin said that we view the campus as our clientele. It is especially helpful when people above us want cooperative ventures among campuses.

Sharing within the State/CIC:

Brand asked about sharing among public universities in the state. Brogan and Thorin mentioned the recent Lilly Endowment invitation for sharing, and CIC and statewide license negotiation. The CIC project for savings by cooperating on who will cancel print subscriptions to Academic Press journals as all CIC libraries continue e-journal subscriptions for particular titles was described by Brogan. Hemmasi described the Mellon project led by Stanford to archive electronic journals from the web: Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe (LOCKSS).

Students in the Libraries and 24/7:

Brand asked why we think students are physically in the Libraries more this fall, and asked our opinion on the idea of 24/7 service. Liu mentioned the assignments which require that students use print resources, and others described the libraries as a good places for working together in groups. Thorin said 24/7 needs serious consideration because of the impact on hourly funds for covering even skeletal service. Popp mentioned that our website development permits access to more and more resources all the time from the internet. Singer mentioned the web of referrals that underlie service to students and others. (The students don’t always find the right specialist for a complex question immediately, so the referral process is part of the learning process.) Cape described the difference in assumption of some parents and students that everything will be available on the web, and how she counters that with a description of “7 million manuscripts” at the Lilly Library. Ruesink said he was surprised by the ability to distinguish the good from the bad on the web by students in his wife’s Capstone course last year. Singer described the behind the scenes work on developing selected links within IUCAT through the work in the 856/956 fields. Cape described using ebooks in the Libraries’ NetLibrary collections, and commented that students may be envisioning this sort of access for everything. Liu mentioned that the Libraries are a great place for those who do not have their own computer equipment, particularly international students. Others commented on it as a great place for teams. Brogan mentioned that with the collaborative help of IT staff, staffing 24/7 may be more possible.

Conclusion:

Brand said that in his work on the national level with the AAU, he had always found librarians to be progressive in thinking about change and how to do things better. In Area Studies discussions, librarians were leading the way. He said, “My compliments to you.” Wiggins then mentioned the citation software which Brogan had arranged for the library to take the lead in distributing and teaching about. Thorin said that librarians were lucky to have Brand as a President, and stressed that few university presidents know what Brand does about libraries. Brand’s concluding remark was that librarians were not afraid of change, and “You’re going to be there. You really need to renovate this building… and it will happen.”

Following a short break, the back-up agenda of the meeting was addressed:

2. Dean’s Report

Thorin distributed the Libraries’ Program Statement for the consideration of the Strategic Planning Committee. Wiggins said that the committee now consists of 25 members including Fred Cate (Law), Chair, and Julie Bobay, Libraries. Thorin described the first priority of the proposal as staffing digital libraries (lower case) since we need positions wherever appropriate (not necessarily in the Digital Library Program --upper case).

The report requests six positions: $70,000 plus benefits for each position. Informatics is the highest priority after cuts to the budget are restored, and requirements for hiring faculty will require a huge pool of money.

3. Proposal for E-mail Approval of BLFC Minutes

The Council discussed and approved e-mail approval of minutes so that people wouldn’t have to wait a month to see them. If recorders complete draft minutes within a week, Council members will have a week to review, and they can be posted on the open access side of the ~libblfc web in two weeks.

4. Approval of Minutes of the 9/04/02 Meeting

The minutes of the BLFC meeting of 9/4/02 were approved as amended.

5. Need for a Listserv for IUB Librarians

Yolanda Cooper’s suggestion for a listserv for Bloomington librarians was discussed. Cape expressed hesitance about creating separate lists for separate groups of staff, since we don’t want to cause alienation or separation when we are all working with over-riding issues. Discussion revealed some possible uses for a separate list for librarians: communicating regarding committees such as Peer Review, Jenkins; discussing agendas for BLF meetings; communicating quickly when a group project is being addressed. (An example of the latter is the project to make a Bloomington research web site on terrorism after Sept. 11, 2001.) The group agreed that a list’s searchability and archivability would be beneficial. Liu asked whether the list would be moderated. A list open to discussion by all subscribers would be the group’s choice. Strow suggested trying it for a year.

6. Composition of P and T Review Committee

Gwen Pershing replaced Carolyn Walters on the Committee, which will meet on Oct. 23^rd. Thorin said that it would be advisable for the Bloomington sub-group of the Committee to investigate our local practice. For example, can tenure be awarded at the lowest rank? What are the requirements for the Bloomington campus?  Popp said that it will be especially important to inform ourselves as the Dean of Faculties Office becomes the Provost’s Office.

7. Bloomington Library Faculty Meeting on 10/9/02

Bloomington Library Faculty (BLF) Secretary Boerner provided a draft agenda for the BLF meeting scheduled for 10/9/02, and it was approved after an addition. Dean Thorin, who provided cookies for today’s meeting with President Brand, volunteered to provide cookies for the BLF meeting.

8. Other Business:

Wiggins will write a thank-you from the Council to President Brand.

Thorin will lead those interested in a tour of the new Teaching and Learning Technologies Laboratory (TLTL) construction project on the 3^rd Floor of the West Tower immediately after the meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.