Meeting held at: UC Berkeley, 303 Doe Library.

In attendance: Beth Sibley, chair (UCB), Phoebe Janes (UCB), Jane Kimball (UCD), Nancy Kushigian (UCD), Joan Ariel (UCI), Ellen Broidy (UCI), Cindy Shelton (UCLA), Nancy Koller (UCR), Sylvelin Edgerton (UCSB), Nerea A. Llamas (UCSB), Dave Tambo (UCSB), Jacquelyn Marie (UCSC), Elliot Kanter (UCSD), Vicki Williamson (UCSD).

I. Welcome and Introductions: Beth welcomed the group and introduced first-time attendee Sylvelin Edgerton.

II. Announcements: None.

III. Approval of December 1998 Minutes: Approved and on consortia website.

(1). Consortia website/reflector/archives update: Elliot noted that the website had been revised the previous Friday (June 4th) and there had been no recent additions. Discussion followed about the advisability of taking items off the site, if no longer current, and possibly archiving (which Nancy does). Miniscap documents, for example, might be archived. Nancy noted that she routinely does this, most recently the previous Friday (June 4th).

(2). Campus reports: Discussion, based on the reports submitted earlier via email, focused on UCB's job stress survey. Beth and Phoebe talked about the process and purpose, including the need to get an overview or benchmark of what the staff situation currently is, how there had been a 90% return rate on the questionnaires, but results are not back yet. UCB also is looking at adding positions and determining which are most critically needed.

(3). Consortia members: Discussion focused on the role of Stanford, how CDC had removed Stanford, and USC never has been very active. Question of how Stanford's role impacts on journal lists and also microfilm set holdings. The new chairs will check into whether the journal list agreements that were signed still are valid re Stanford, and what Stanford sees as its level of commitment. Chairs will contact CDC chair, copying Judith Paquette, clarifying the relationship with Stanford.

(4). Joint Steering Committee on Shared Collections: Cindy reported on the JSCSC meeting of May 25th. Note: meeting notes shortly to be on the Shared Collections web site www.cdlib.org/libstaff/sharedcoll/). [LOGON INFORMATION DELETED HERE FOR POSTED MINUTES]. Elliot will link from our website. She noted that the UC system bought LION and PCI, with heavy co-investment from CDL (50% of the one-time purchase costs). Chadwyck-Healey is working with CDL on linking holdings in Melvyl PE. CDL also talked about other CH databases, and licensing of other titles such as CIAO, ITER, ABC/CLIO, and Ethnic Newswatch. Statistical Universe is delayed until next year, 1999-2000. Only LION/PCI received CDL investment; others were negotiated by CDL but paid by the individual campuses. Cindy distributed a 5/5/99 document: "Draft Cost Sharing Model," which set out parameters and procedures for licensing digital resources. Cindy also distributed a 5/14/99 document from Alan Ritch: "Digital Dissertations". This includes a table with cost comparisons for each campus if they acquired individually, as opposed to their share of a systemwide acquisition. The systemwide approach is much cheaper for each campus and it provides access to all UC full text dissertations, not just for each respective campus. Cindy also reported on Resources Liaisons, or monitors, for individual titles, whose names need to be approved by the ULs. Ellen is the Resource Liaison for Harpweek and Nancy Kushigian for LION. Cindy has a copy of the larger list of Resource Liaisons, which she passed around to the group. Re the survey groups that were formed this last year, JSC intends to go back to them every 6 months, to see what resources are out there. Next time will be June 30. There also was discussion among the group of a need for a systemwide selector list, or at least a link to the individual campus lists, so it is relatively easy to determine who selects materials in a given discipline at each campus. Re UC content to add to OAC (Online Archive of California) in CDL, Brian Schottlaender chairs the OAC Working Group, which has selected two thematic areas, arts in California and ethnic groups in California, as starting points for selecting archival materials to be digitized and added.

(5). CDC: Cindy reported that Judith, as CDC liaison to CRL, indicated a CRL project partnering with foreign entities was seeking suggestions year-round on purchase of appropriate foreign microfilm. Peter Briscoe has been trying to get a list from CRL of materials with guides, so we can get copies of the guides. CDC charged the Joint Steering Committee with organizing a workshop in the fall, to focus on consortial licensing agreements. No site or date has been set yet.

(1). Directory: Discussion began with the issue of navigating the directory, who comments should go to, and what it would take to make the directory more valuable and easy to use. Note that OAC pops up frequently but that manuscript sources generally are not what the majority of users, such as undergrads, need most. It would be useful to have some sort of filter or default so such items do not appear in an initial search.

(2). Role of Resource Liaisons: The list and responsibilities of the liaisons are not yet official, but there seems to be some confusion as to what the liaisons are supposed to do. Cindy noted that the March 1999 charge (not distributed to consortia members) spells some of this out, but it is in draft form. Discussion followed on the question of whether liaisons generally are to take suggestions from campuses and report to CDL, for negotiation with vendors, and also to share latest information from CDL and vendors, with campuses.

(1). U.S. journal list: Ellen provided four handouts (5 or more campuses, 4 or fewer, titles under cooperative agreement, and foundlings). Discussion focused on impact if Stanford were not included in the lists. Stanford, for example, has committed to 19 titles on the cooperative agreement list, and is heavily represent in the 4 or fewer list, and the 5 or more list (many titles might migrate to 4 or fewer if Stanford is omitted). The question also arose whether the data in the lists (now word processed) should be moved into a database, to allow easier manipulation of information. The consensus was that this would be useful, especially if the U.S. lists and Women's Studies lists were handled in a similar manner. There also was discussion of whether it would be useful to indicate if there is electronic access to full text for the titles, since this may affect campus selection decisions re keeping hard copy. Joan/Ellen to put into Excell database.  Action item: Campuses are to check current status of holdings, title by title, for both U.S. and Women's Studies lists, and forward findings to Ellen and Joan by August 1.

(2). Title list of microform sets (film and fiche) bought during the year: Phoebe raised the question of whether it would be useful to compile a list of major sets purchased in history and women's studies, primarily for informational purposes. It should include publisher, title, guide/no guide, and date purchased. Joan/Ellen will consider putting into Excel database. Action item: Send information to Phoebe by July 1. She then will forward collected information to Joan/Ellen.

(3). British history journal list: Phoebe asked for suggestions on best ways to develop a core list. There also was discussion on the scope of the project, what constituted British history, whether this meant journals relating to British empire also would be included. Action item: send suggestions to Phoebe.,

VII. Next Meeting: Tentatively set for Dec. 13 (Monday) at UCI.

VIII. New Chair for 2000/2001: Discussion centered on whether co-chairs would be willing to assume a two-year appointment (1999/2000 - 2000/2001). The consensus seemed was that this would be a good idea.