NOTE: Minutes reflect the actual order of discussion topics each day, which differs slightly from the printed Agenda.

Campus reports were distributed previously via e-mail.

2. Approval of minutes of the Winter 1997 meeting were approved as corrected, and Sam volunteered to take notes for this meeting.

3. Discussion of new chair/chair elect and location of the next meeting.

*After this meeting, Nancy will pass the torch to the new chair, Beth, who will serve the 1998/1999 term. *The next meeting will be at UCLA, tentatively scheduled for December 7-8, 1998.

*Joan and Phoebe will become co-chairs after the June 1999 meeting, and will serve the 1999/2000 term.

*Elliot asked that electronic documents of interest to the consortia be forwarded to him by August 1, 1998 for inclusion on the website. He will send out an e-mail request separately.

*Nancy Kushigian has paper copies of everything on the website, including campus reports and areas of special collection interest on each campus. She asked that any old paper files be sent to her to organize and fill in gaps in the earlier years of consortia history.

*Ellen distributed four lists revised in June 1998: 1) Titles held by 5 or more campuses, 2) Titles held by 4 or fewer campuses, 3) Foundlings: unadopted (or unadoptable), and 4) Titles under cooperative agreement. Each campus agreed to check their local holdings record to verify that a note appears such as "DO NOT CANCEL PER EK AND U.C./U.S. HISTORY CONSORTIUM."

*Changes or updates to campus commitments should be sent to Ellen by November 15, 1998.

*Nancy Koller related the telephone conversation she had with John Adler of HarpWeek who was trying to negotiate special pricing among some campuses for a subscription. The consortium agreed that we should not encourage this kind of activity since it is unfair to individual campuses who may have paid more initially, and which may affect relations with other vendors. We agreed that the next two segments of HarpWeek should be negotiated consortially and that we should request a reallignment of prices to ease the burden on individual campuses who had subscribed initially. In addition, we should advise our local ULs and AULs about the situation in case John Adler contacts them directly.

*Nancy Koller agreed to get back to John Adler to convey this consortium agreement to negotiate consortially and see how he might accomodate the campuses in a more equitable manner.

*We cited the need for analytics for microcard and microfiche sets to provide

access to the very expensive sets held by many individual campuses. Analytic records are available, but are very expensive and range in price from $51,000 for the Evans pre-1801 to $1700 for the Shoemaker/Readex stand-alone CD-ROM.

*We also need analytics for the three parts of the American Periodicals Index

*We need one complete set of both the Eighteenth Century (which UCB cancelled) and Nineteenth Century in the UC system.

*We should consider creating a prioritized list of electronic titles for the CDL in case money becomes available for purchasing big ticket items.

*Cindy and Ellen will check fiche/microcard holdings for the Eighteenth Century and Early English Books sets and see if marc records/analytics are available.

*One idea would be for the CDC to create a new listserv for heads of UC/Stanford consortial groups.

*CDC could sponsor a retreat for consortial members.

*Nancy Koller will examine the two lists of recommendations to the CDL to make sure our revised "Guidelines for collaborative purchases" (6/6/95 draft) reflect all the elements we are including in our prioritized, annotated proposals; she will then send these to Beverlee French.

8. Report of Collection Development Committee activities.

Cindy will attend a CDC meeting on June 10 and report back.

We want to know where our consortia fit into the new structure of CDC/CDL. We need to know how to make recommendations to the CDL, as well as how to evaluate proposed additions to the CDL.

Our discussion could be described as fluid, robust and nimble. Some of the substantial informational points we gleaned include:

*the fact that the CDL will be developing along parallel tracks instead of library by library (or discipline by discipline).

*the need to develop and evaluate the proposed content of the CDL in light of the intended users.

*the need to prioritize potential additions to the CDL in terms of price and potential use, and to compare the electronic or digital content with the print counterpart (if it exists).

*the target date for suggestions is late July 1998. We should submit our recommendations to Beverlee who will forward them to Richard Lucier.

We introduced many informational points to Beverlee's attention: *the need for a listserv for consortial chairs.

*the need for electronic access to our microform and microcard sets.

*the need to evaluate the rich primary source collections of the University (archives, botanical collections, etc) as possible digitization candidates for the CDL.

*the problematic concept of "critical mass" as it relates to the social sciences and humanities.

NOTE: Monday's agenda continued with items from Tuesday

*Joan distributed three lists revised June 1998: 1) the UC/Stanford "master" list, 2) Titles under cooperative agreement, by campus, and 3) the preliminary draft of the Women's Studies Microform Collections. We reviewed the first two lists and noted some titles that had changed their status.

*Each campus agreed to check their local holdings record to verify that a note appears such as "DO NOT CANCEL PER SD AND U.C./WOMEN'S STUDIES CONSORTIUM."

*Changes or updates to campus commitments should be sent to Joan by July 20, 1998.

*The third list generated some discussion around the appropriateness of some of the large microform sets for Women's Studies in particular.

*Joan will revise the list to reflect an "A" list of titles pertinent specifically to Women's Studies, and a "B" list of more general titles such as Eighteenth Century.

*Tomas agreed (on Tuesday) to add microform sets held by Stanford University.

*Jacquelyn gave an update to the project and noted that she had identified a couple of new presses. We discussed the criteria for inclusion on the list of presses. Since some "presses" (or desktop presses) only publish one or two titles (and may not intend to publish more), should they be included? Should the standard be set at three or more publications? We agreed to notify members via listserv if new "presses" were identified, even if they published only one title. In this way we could be sure to acquire a copy for the archives.

*Participating members agreed to check their local records and talk with local catalog departments in an effort to use the 500 and 710 fields. The wording we should use is "California Feminist Presses Project."

*Jacquelyn mentioned that she has written an article about the California Feminist Presses Project for the Feminist Bookstore News.

*Announcements: The Diana Press Archives is now at the Mazer Lesbian Archives in Los Angeles. The archives of Volcano Press may go to The Bancroft Library. The Lyon-Martin Papers are at the Gay and Lesbian Historical Society of Northern California. The group agreed that it would be useful to collect this kind of archive information and disseminate via USWM listserv.

*This discussion was held with the assumption that we should think in terms of the CDL. The Gay and Lesbian Abstracts are now available as an online product www.nisc.com/bibliorev/qglb.htm. UCSC is concerned about contract with WRI on CD-ROM. Jacquelyn reported problems with the CWI CD-ROM and that the publisher is investigating.

*Joan will collect data on the products and resources we like, including CWI, Women's Studies on disc, Women-R, WRI, and Gay and Lesbian Abstracts.

* Joan will work with Nerea and Nancy Kushigian in putting together a package of Women's Studies resources for eventual presentation to the CDL.

4. Third International Women's Archives Conference in Amsterdam.

Jacquelyn is organizing two workshops: Electronic resources and websites: problems and successes; and Developing the philosophy of women's information. There is also an ambitious project underway, "Mapping the world," a world-wide listing of women's resources of all kinds. Jacquelyn will forward more information.

*We agree that there should be a new listserv for all consortia chairs, and for distribution of meeting agendas and annual reports.

*Nancy Koller will send a letter proposing such a listserv to Beverlee and ask her work with the CDC to obtain a list of consortia chairs and set up listserv.

*We also agree that there should be a UC Consortia webpage which would provide links to existing corsortial webpages, along with meeting dates, agendas and minutes for each.

*We also agree that there should be an annual CDL-sponsored meeting of UC consortia chairs.

*We reviewed some essential components of the U.S. History and Women's Studies packages of electronic resources we will send to Beverlee French. We will describe the entire package, include justification for inclusion of specific elements and discuss how they relate to each other. We may or may not choose to prioritize items within a package.

*Ellen, Cindy, and Phoebe will work on U.S. History components and will submit draft to listserv in time for discussion and revision and then will be forwarded by N. Koller (for Chair Beth who will be out of state until after deadline) before the end of July.

* Joan, N. Kushigian, and Nerea will work on Women's Studies components for submission to CDL and submit to listserv, in time for discussion and revision and then will be forwarded by N. Koller (for Chair Beth who will be out of state until after deadline) before the end of July.

*We noted, as well, that 40% of Richard Lucier's time is allotted to "other," and we propose to interpret this in a way that will allow us to request electronic records for microform and microcard sets (such as Early English Books) as a way to add enhanced value to our current collections.

*Ellen and Cindy will think about this and work on the wording.

*Sam asked about British History and history of Continental Europe. Many bibliographers in the U.S. History Consortium are also responsible for British History, and some for Continental European history as well. The group felt it would be acceptable for the U.S. History Consortium to expand its scope to include Canada and the United Kingdom and to make necessary changes to the name to reflect this; i.e. North American and United Kingdom History Consortium. We agreed that this group would also include Cultural Studies as an element within British/North American history, but would not include the broader area of British Commonwealth history. It is unclear to whom we should report this shift of emphasis (CDC?), but Nancy Koller will inquire.

*Sam will send out a formal query in the fall to compile a list of librarians in the UC system and Stanford who are responsible for Continental European history.

*We should discuss this issue in more detail at the next meeting.