|
|
Library Advisory Board Minutes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| November 17, 2003: Fall
All Libraries Meeting 61 people attended Paul welcomed the group and opened the meeting with discussion of the results of LAB's query about starting a second list for chat. There were 37 replies. 10 were in favor of starting the new list. 2 would rather not have to work with a new list but were willing to. 25 were against forming a new list. Reasons stated in support of a new list included unwanted political messages and clutter in the inboxes. Reasons against having a new list included anticipated confusion about what "work related" means, and general support for a unified list as it gives a personal element to the workplace. So, we will not pursue getting a second list. To alleviate the problem for those who object to getting "chat" email, John Culshaw will send out a summary of use guidelines for the Net and the Norlin list. We will also have a workshop on how to create email filters. Everyone is asked to be considerate of others and use the "chat" label when appropriate. Each Division head had been asked to address the cost cutting that had been done but Susan Anthes is out of town and Janet Swan-Hill is just recovering from an illness. Scott Seaman summarized for all the Divisions. The budget cut was $1.1 million. Last year we had $17.7 million and now we have $16.6 million. Public Services took a $200,000 direct reduction: $78k from personnel and $120k from hourly wages. Technical Services took a $200,000 direct reduction: $114k from personnel and $40k from hourly wages. Admin Services took a $150,000 direct reduction: $40k from supplies and equipment, $15k from capital equipment (from $60k to $45k) and renegotiated the Security contract for $90k. Hilary used to report to the Campus Police and now reports to the Library. Other staffing and overhead related to Security were reduced. Cuts made across Division lines amounted to $625k. The large chunks of this were $180k for the Louisville facility which is no longer needed and $450k from materials. A question from the group asked if staff positions can be "unfrozen". Scott answered that this was an internal freeze and we are unfreezing several positions now. A question from the group asked about the Spring Term student budget. Scott answered that we were promised $160k from the Provost for "doors open". $80k we have received and $80k should come for Spring. A question from the group asked: "if we are hiring, where is the money coming from?" Scott answered that that is why we are going slowly in hiring and bringing the total student budget under control. By bringing the student budget under control and keeping it in control we won't need the salary savings as much. "Dean's minutes" In response to a question submitted earlier, the Dean replied that we do have a budget though some details are uncertain. Specifically, he said that we do save money by closing the doors during periods of limited service, and that we are in an era of counting pennies so as to not exceed the budget. Among the uncertainty is the supplemental funding for student employees: this $80,000 amount will probably [but not definitely] again be funded for spring semester. Also, in filling vacant positions, we must focus on our central mission and our strategic plan to fulfill that mission. System-wide, the University has taken a cut of $42 million from last year's total; this campus has sustained a cut of $27 million. The Dean expects that CU President Betsy Hoffmann will pursue enterprise status for the entire University system. This would remove us from the TABOR [Taxpayers' Bill of Rights] limits, while allowing the University to set tuition and to fund projects [such as buildings] through bonding. Enterprise status for CU-Boulder would require the consent of the Governor, as the legislature has already approved it. State financial support for higher education has decreased as a percentage of the total: for the Health Sciences Center, only 3% of their funds come from the state. For CU-Boulder, this figure has declined from 22% in 1988 to ~8% this year. Another aspect of the budget is "Quality for Colorado", a differentiated tuition plan for CU-Boulder, allowing an incremental increase in both in-state and out-of-state tuition for this year. Our portion of these funds was applied to the $80-160,000 supplement for student employees in the Libraries. If this plan continues, the University hopes to decrease enrollment from current levels of 5500 freshmen to a more-sustainable level of less that 5000. However, for now, CU-Boulder continues to be an enrollment-driven campus. Though the Dean hopes that Quality for Colorado will be an ongoing program, it is not definite. One of the program's major demands was that the Libraries must stay open. The Dean expects the Provost to call this spring for "Quality for Colorado" projects. Among these will be completing the catalog, including the holdings in Special Collections; currently this project is being funded by 3 open faculty lines to support payments to BCR [Bibliographic Center for Research]. Other projects may include digitization projects by Holly Long & John Culshaw and the Colorado digitization programs [such as those in Earth Sciences & in Music], to partner with faculty on projects for teaching and research. Finally, if possible, Quality for Colorado may be used to revisit the $1.2 million in cuts to our budget [though the Dean expects these cuts to be permanent]. The Dean described our current environment as one of reallocation and reinvestment. The $1.2 million budget cut was distributed among a 3-legged stool representing personnel, operating funds, and the materials budget. The Dean had proposed that all the cuts be made from materials alone, but the campus rejected that proposal. Within this budgetary environment, he proposed that we focus on our strengths:
By the end of the fiscal year, the Dean expects an additional $500,000 decrease in our materials budget, as a permanent base cut. The Dean noted that our work is labor-intensive and often misunderstood [both on- and off-campus]. With that in mind, he had initially proposed that the budget be cut entirely from materials: he assumed that we won't get money back for personnel, but we might get money restored for materials in the future. As an example, the Dean mentioned the request for a $6000 facsimile of a da Vinci work; Charlene Kellsey found that we already owned the item, un-cataloged in Special Collections. With such a vivid example, the Provost now understands that we need to complete the catalog. We may get new money in the future for such limited projects, but not for open-ended staff/faculty lines. He cited that among our strengths was how people value us; for example, how the Humanities faculties value our resource base. The Dean has discussed with our consultant for strategic planning, "What does it mean to have a strategic plan in a constrained environment?" They concluded that we can't do everything we had hoped, that we need to pick out the most important tasks and defer the rest. Since we now have fewer people, the Dean feels that we need to approach the point where all of us can assume more leadership roles for the organization. As an example, he noted the initiative to move old Engineering holdings to PASCAL. The strategic plan report card shows that, even with fewer people, we have addressed almost all parts of the plan. The Faculty-Staff development committee will be acting as "guinea-pigs" for a new personnel instrument; this should answer what level of leadership we do have. The Dean asked how we find out more about our users. We will do another survey of faculty and students. We also need to understand how those in different academic disciplines communicate. With fewer people to do the work, it seems that there's now more reliance on technology. Our advantage is that we know how to use the technology to access our resources. In terms of budget cuts, the Dean plans to use the strategic plan to guide us. At the end of the fiscal year, we will reexamine where to reinvest & reallocate. The "Quality for Colorado" program will be used only for projects that the campus will support [e.g., the supplemental $80-160,000 for student employee wages to keep the libraries' doors open]. We will try to choose strategic projects with partners such as the Writing & Rhetoric Program. How can we leverage that partnership? By creating a Writing Center, possibly in the Libraries? They seem to recognize the abilities of our faculty and want to invest in our expertise. The Dean explained that data about students' expectations show that many of them want 2 majors, that they want more Socratic dialogue in class, and that they demand access to technology everywhere. Though this may be a time of uncertainty, Chancellor Byyny does believe in investing in our organization. Thus, we must propose the right activities for those investments [such as keeping the doors open, by use of the supplemental student employees' funds]. The Dean personally apologized for the uncertainty in September about the student employees' budget, and he appreciated the efforts of the students' supervisors. He emphasized that we must make proposals associated with things that are valued by our users & that match our expertise---projects that we can deliver. The Provost, Phil DiStefano, approved all of our requests for selected faculty lines. [For classified staff, we didn't need approval but must fit within the budget.] At this point, 25% of the fiscal year has elapsed and we have spent ~ 40% of the supplies budget. A question and answer period ensued. A question from the group asked what searches are now underway. Answer: 1. Assistant to the Dean for Development and Outreach. 2. Faculty Director for Cataloging. It has been posted and advertised, but no closing date has been set. 3. Assistant Head of Science. 4. Government Documents. 5. Assistant Head of Acquisitions. Also needed is the Head of Original Cataloging which is a position waiting for the Faculty Director for Cataloging to be filled. 2 1/2 positions are being held open to fund the BCR project. The Dean mentioned that when the budget crisis has passed, we will need to address the retrofit of and enhancement of Norlin. He spoke of some of the desired results. For now the projects being proposed are being kept to $249k. Some of the desires are a 24hour study area, and a writing center. We have removed large amounts of our paper-based science collections to PASCAL, but not all of them. This process is continuing. NorBase is almost empty. We need to be effective with fewer people and using the One Service Desk idea would allow us to concentrate on our service. The Dean was asked what "limited service" during the Holidays means. He defined it as very few desks other than circulation open, and outside units making their own decisions. A comment was made that people do not understand limited service. Deborah Fink offered to publicize what hours and services will be available over the holidays. For the Holidays there will be no Governor's or Dean's days off for staff. An earlier question to the LAB asked what is happening with the Human Rights Collection and why is it not easily found on Archives' Web site. The Dean noted that its future is not here and it will not be cataloged. The meeting adjourned at 11:03 Respectively submitted, LAB members: |
This page last modified 24 November 2 003. Send comments to: liblab@colorado.edu.