Systemwide Operations and Planning Group (SOPAG)

Action Minutes

 

Friday, March 18, 2005

1:00-4:00 p.m.

Teleconference Call

Recorder: Kate McGirr

Present (SOPAG): Bernie Hurley (chair), (UCB), Patrick Dawson (LAUC), Julia Kochi (UCSF), Kate McGirr (UCSC), Marilyn Moody (UCSB), Terry Ryan (UCLA), Susan Starr (UCSD), Lorelei Tanji (UCI), John Tanno (UCD)

Present (guests): None

Absent: Stefanie Wittenbach, Trisha Cruse, Bruce Miller

I. Bibliographic Services Task Force, Next Steps

SOPAG discussed the "Charge for SOPAG’s Bibliographic Services Task Force" draft provided by Hurley. SOPAG agreed that the task force should complete their report by 4 months after they’re charged. The report will go out for comments, and then a roadmap for services will be developed by the Task Force. SOPAG discussed recommendations for task force membership with the goal of creating a small flexible task force.

ACTION: Hurley will do some further consulting to seek recommendations for task force membership seeking an individual with a public service, web development, or resource sharing background. The charge will be sent to the group who attended the Bibliographic Services discussion at the last SOPAG meeting for review and comment. Hurley will finalize the charge to the task force and distribute the charge to suggested members.

II.SOPAG Electronic Resource Management System Task Force- Update-Hurley reported that the RFP is finished except for a couple of fine tuning questions and pre-qualifying statements. The ERMS task force is discussing how much, if any, review on functional requirements will be needed . Part I of the RFP includes the usual RFP questions, and Part II delves into consortial support issues and asks for vendor comment on joint development type questions.

ACTION: Hurley will distribute the draft to key librarians (suggested by SOPAG because of their expertise) to provide comment and to HOPS for the Acquisitions Common Interest Group to provide comment. Hurley hopes that the RFP will complete internal review and be submitted to purchasing in several weeks.

III. All Campus Groups Update

    1. UL's Scholarly Publishing Meeting, May 5th
      1. Hurley reported representatives from SOPAG, CDC, and SCO will attend the April meeting in SF to continue formulating the May summit topics. CDC scenario documents were well received by the UL steering group.
      2. CDC Report Tanji reported the strategies and scenarios document was shared at the recent CDC meeting. The document describes various issues that could be points of discussion for the summit. A small group of CDC is to receive input from the full committee, the SCOs, and SOPAG and rework the document.
      3. SCO Report- Starr reported the SCO’s are working on a paper for the May summit that describes the rationale for UC libraries investment in transformative business models as well as a process and criteria for making investment decisions. A preliminary draft has been crafted; when finalized, the document will be shared with SOPAG. She also reported SCO is trying to develop a tool kit for faculty to use in managing their copyright.

ACTION: SOPAG will discuss, in its next meeting (April) prior to the summit, the goals of the strategies and scenarios documents.

b. HOPS- Moody reported the Image Services Advisory Committee members are in discussion. The issue of HOPS requesting information from CDC regarding Special Collections borrowing through ILL was mentioned.

ACTION: Tanji will follow up with CDC to find out the status of the Special Collections ILL borrowing issues.

c. HOTS- Miller, No news

d. LPL- Kochi, No News

e. LTAG- Ryan reported LTAG is still working on testing web conferencing. They will use a software trial next month for their meeting.

f. RSC- Starr reported that she had asked RSC to provide additional information on their request to block checked out reserve items from ILL as discussed at the last SOPAG meeting by June. The RSC report on sharing media collections is due in May. . SOPAG discussed the possible effects of OCLC's new subscription pricing model for Interlibrary Loan and the likelihood that this same model will soon be required for cataloging. Hurley indicated that the new OCLC pricing model is likely to be on the April UL meeting agenda.

ACTION: Hurley will contact Mary Heath to determine if data is available centrally that can provide information on how the new OCLC model might affect UC ILL costs given the ongoing implementation of VDX. . Tanno will compile the data SOPAG collects into a short presentation for the UL discussion. Tanno will send a draft of this document to SOPAG for review

 

IV. Shared Collections- Update

Investigation of a High Volume Digitization Infrastructure- Hurley indicated he has contacted Barclay Ogden, who continues to look at subject areas for high volume digitization opportunities. Ogden is considering using Californiana collections for the proposed trial. He is also exploring what instructions should be sent to a digitization vendor, such as which dpi seem appropriate for preservation copies for textual; materials.

V. Print Collection Planning: Possible Collaboration with the State Library- Tanno indicated there was nothing new to report since contributing the minutes of last meeting. A Spring meeting still needs to be scheduled to see if some collaborations on state documents and action steps might result.

ACTION : Tanno will schedule one more Spring meeting with the State Library and post meeting will construct an update for the UL’s requesting they identify the next steps for SOPAG to take.

VI. Government Information: A SOPAG Review of Current Themes and Directions for the UC Libraries- As SOPAG continues to discuss and review the current themes and directions for the UC Libraries in government information, Moody recommends SOPAG review the Non-UC Large-Scale Government Information Digitization Projects next. These include projects currently under consideration by the GPO; ARL; Google; and the Internet Archive Digitization Project.

ACTION: SOPAG will review the large scale government information digitization projects and consult on their campuses in preparation for discussion at the next SOPAG meeting.

Tanji updated SOPAG on its request to CDC to evaluate if GILS should be charged with analyzing the system-wide impact of the GPO changes and suggesting possible collaborative responses. Phyllis Mirsky, CDC representative to GILS, has contacted GILS alerting them that CDC will likely request them to look for the collaborative opportunities outlined in Hurley’s email after the upcoming FDLP meeting clarifies GPO's plans

ACTION: Kochi will pass on the email Mirsky sent to GILS to SOPAG.

VII. SOPAG Membership and Terms- Hurley reminded SOPAG of the process for continuing a campus SOPAG representative or recommending new campus SOPAG membership when a member’s expiration date comes up for review. Members who are going to continue, consult with their UL for concurrence, and then let the chair of SOPAG know they are continuing. If a UL wants to change their campus representation on SOPAG, the UL steering committee will need to be consulted.

ACTION: Hurley will place the membership change rules on the SOPAG terms sheet which shows the current membership and their current term dates.

VIII. RLF Persistence Task Force- Kochi updated SOPAG that the persistence group is working hard and that procedures have been difficult to formulate and are complex.

ACTION: Hurley encouraged the group to come back to SOPAG with additional recommendations that may simplify the assumptions and make it easier to formulate procedures.

 

Next meeting: April 22 meeting will be an in-person meeting 712 Kaiser in Oakland, 9:30-2:30