LAUC-Santa Barbara Business Meeting
May 28, 1999

The meeting convened at 10:00 a.m.



This was LAUC-SB's first formal meeting with S. Pritchard, the 

new University Librarian.  LAUC-SB invited S. Pritchard to address the 

membership and hear her plans for the library.



Announcements (S. DeDecker)



Introduction of S. Pritchard to LAUC-SB.  



Sarah Pritchard



1. Campus representations:

The University librarian is a member in the following groups.



Academic Affairs Advisory Committee

Academic Affairs Planning Committee

Faculty Senate Library Committee

Information Technology Board (ITB)



Bob Sugar is the chair of the ITB.  This is an important group whose 

charge is looking at the campus-wide systems support, computing resources, 

and telecommunications policies.  According the S. Pritchard this committee 

is "eager to have library representation."  The committee plans to conduct 

a survey of technological needs and support from faculty and graduate 

students.



S.Pritchard sees our primary mission in the months ahead as twofold one.

One is to foster a campus-wide awareness of the centrality of the library

with regards to the academic mission of the university;  we can remind 

faculty of the apparent importance of the library in their teaching and 

research.  The second one is to find a viable and long-term solution to 

the library space problem, ideally through securing a library building.





2. Librarian and staff positions



According to S. Pritchard, our ability to add more personnel in the

librarian and the library assistant levels depends mainly on the 

overall library budget, that comes from the state.  With new ongoing 

funding for technology and materials, salary savings may not be 

needed to fund those areas as was the case in the past.   With this in 

mind, she is cautious and optimistic that we could open two librarian 

positions.  We also have a strong need to hire positions in the library 

assistant levels.  But, given our low ranking in the number of librarians

when compared to similar institutions, S. Pritchard would like to see the 

librarian positions filled first.  She also sees that one of our greatest

needs is in the public services area.



The balance of the one-time money of $1 million that we received from the 

state this fiscal year will be used for collections.  We will use other 

library budgets for upgrades and facilities work since (as noted above) we

don't have to use operating budget for collections.  We do not expect to 

receive the same amount of extra money from the legislature next fiscal year.  

This seems to be the case since the state legislature's major concerns for 

the following year are the increasing student enrollments and the needs of 

the community and state colleges.  





3. Associate University Librarian Position



Hiring an Associate University Librarian is one of the top priorities 

for S. Pritchard.  A draft of the call for this position was circulated.  

She would like our input about the draft by Tuesday.  The position 

will be announced at the ALA annual convention. It also will be 

posted in the Chronicle of Higher Education twice: once before ALA, and 

once in July. We plan to conduct interviews by October.  



There is some urgency and priority in sending this out early because 

Other university libraries already have made their announcements for 

similar  positions.  S. Pritchard plans on looking for the right person who

is open to changes and has a good understanding of working in a collaborative

and teamwork environment.




The search committee for the new AUL will be appointed by EVC Ilene Nagel. 

C. Johns, will chair this committee.   S. Pritchard would like a small 

committee made up of a faculty member, two librarians, and a library staff.  



Some of the members expressed their concerns about unclear supervisorial 

lines when responsibilities overlap with different areas. 



S. Pritchard sees that, while most of us have overlapping lines of 

responsibilities, clear lines of major responsibilities could still be 

determined and thus still have some sense of accountability.



S. Pritchard also sees the role of the AUL to cover areas of capital 

development through grants and private funding.  On this note she would 

like all of us to be capable of seeking grants appropriate to our areas, 

especially specific collections that would attract donors into giving 

financial support. 



Comments from LAUC-SB membership:



J. Martorana raised the issue of Reference Services not being a 

"department," hence there are unclear lines of reporting.  This is 

also true for the Government Publications that used to be a department.  

In response, S. Pritchard expects Reference Services will report to

the new AUL who will be in charge of all components of public services.  

This includes Government Publications that S. Pritchard sees as 

information resource which cuts across many areas.



L. Hayman would like to see more interaction between technical services 

and public services.  S. Pritchard agreed and mentioned that the 

distinction between cataloging and reference functions which was clear in 

the past is somewhat blurred.  As an example, she pointed out the 

webresources that we link to our webpages.





4. Library Reviews:



S. Pritchard has met with S. Awramik, the acting Vice Chancellor of 

Academic Personnel about the reviews for this year.  She has read the 

APM manual on reviews and the LAUC MOU.  One major aspect that she felt 

needed more clarity was the review process that she plans to discuss with

EVC Nagel.  



S. Pritchard believes that the LAUC-SB selection process for membership to

the review committees is democratic and does not see the need for changes. 

But She is also open to any changes that LAUC-SB membership might propose.



She would like to keep peer reviews remain mainly internal, but would 

welcome external letters also, since department liaison work is a major 

area of responsibility for some librarians, hence performance evaluations 

should reflect this important aspect of librarians.





5. General Library Organization and Shared Governance:



S. Pritchard plans to have formal and informal meetings with librarians 

and staff to get input and learn about their concerns.  One avenue that 

could encourage discussions that S. Pritchard would like to have is brown 

bag lunches.  Ultimately, she would like to establish a consultative group 

of librarians and library staff who will represent the interests and 

concerns of all library personnel.  S. Pritchard envisions this group as one 

of the major organizational structure through which library planning and 

decisions 

could be discussed and decisions made.





6.  Working with LAUC



S. Pritchard sees LAUC as a separate organization from the formal library 

structure where librarians could meet as peers and candidly talk about our

work and professional concerns.  She would like LAUC to be a space where 

we could leave our supervisorial and administrative roles behind and take 

part in open dialog with one another to discuss critical issues which 

concern us openly and with professional honesty.





7. Interaction between librarians and staff



While she sees good working relationships between librarians and staff in 

the library, she is also aware of some strained working relationships 

which have created polarization.  On this matter, she would like to work 

closely with supervisors and department heads to find workable solutions.



It is S. Pritchard's vision that our library evolve into an integrated 

unit committed to working together in providing the instructional, 

research, and information needs of our patrons.  Because it is often the 

case that patrons make wrong assumptions about who is just behind the desk, 

we need to establish clear and consistent information help at all public 

access points in the library.  But S. Pritchard knows that to accomplish 

this goal, requires changes in how we work with one another and in how we 

approach our responsibilities.  Changes are often met with resistance from 

personnel.  This is what we need to address.  How to engender an attitude 

among library personnel that is open to changes which would lead to a 

better, more cohesive, and mutually supporting library.  



Lastly, she asked all of us to treat personnel issues with extreme 

confidentiality.





The meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m.