Merlin Meeting 2014.05.22

MERLIN CONSORTIUM MEETING
May 22, 2014 Minutes (online)

I. Call to Order
Chair Courtney Dietsche called the meeting to order at 10:03 a.m.

II. Quorum Determination/Recognition of Proxies
Quorum (of 15 members) was determined with the following attendees: Linda Stobbe, Jim Trojanowski, Mike Sheehan, Mike Sauvola, Marsha Sorensen (NWLS); Shirley Miller (Ashland); Cherie Sanderson (Boulder Junction); Kristine Lendved (Cable); Judy Pearson (Grantsburg); Molly Lank-Jones (Hayward); Courtney Dietsche (Iron River); Caryl Pfaff (LCO College); Julie Zelten (Land o’ Lakes); Jennie Thewis (Mellen); Connie Ross (Madeline Island); Kaye Petts (Phelps); Pam Eschenbach (Presque Isle); Ida Nemec (Sayner); Amy Stormberg (Shell Lake); Jane Frankiewicz (Spooner); Sue Heskin (Superior); Darrell Pendergrass (Washburn); Patti Meyer (Webster); Donna Knuckey (Winter).

Cherie Sanderson carried a proxy for Teresa Schmidt (Mercer).

III. Approval of the February 20, 2014 Consortium Meeting Minutes
Donna Knuckey moved to approve the minutes. Seconded by Patti Meyer. Passed unanimously.

IV. Approval of Financial Reports
Jane Frankiewicz asked if there would be rebates from delivery for days closed. Linda Stobbe confirmed that any rebates will be distributed at the end of the year.

Motion to approve by Cherie Sanderson and seconded by Molly Lank-Jones. Passed unanimously.

V. Other Business
Report on Clearing Holdshelf
Marsha Sorensen reported that she was happy to see the number of items on the holdshelf has dropped significantly. As long as Consortium members manage their holdshelves, she will not be required to manage the holdshelf centrally. There may be an added benefit with improved responsiveness from Sierra as well.

Project WIN Update
Jim Trojanowski praised the consortium for their attendance at the May 20 all-library meeting conducted on Tuesday. Much of the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the drafted budget and to try and find consensus on areas where recommendations could not be made previously.

Jim then opened the floor to questions. Areas addressed included:

• Local holds vs 1st come, 1st served: Jim explained that there was not as much divisiveness on this issue so it was not emphasized at the meeting. There would most likely be some decision made for the Final Report though.

• Delivery: Delivery is a concern, but the focus was on how well routes can be coordinated and whether we can focus on geographic proximity rather than system boundaries. Delivery costs would be difficult if not impossible to determine, so this was not addressed. There definitely needs to be more discussion on delivery if the ILS merger is a “go.”

• E-content: Libraries in larger communities find e-content more valuable than smaller libraries seem to find it. Directors speculated that this may be due to those libraries giving it less attention and to lack of Internet connectivity in libraries in rural communities. There was quite a bit of discussion on the fact that use of e-content doesn’t count as a circulation and there is continued belief that this is lowering county reimbursements. Participants also discussed the problems with some of the e-content providers, such as the fact that Freegal only offers Sony music. There was discussion about other e-content such as Zinnio as well. Jim reminded the group that the consortium should also think about content in the future, not just currently available.

• Discovery Interface: There was quite a bit of enthusiasm for Encore along with acknowledgment that it might require additional patron training.
There were questions about how smaller issues will be dealt with and how many of them will be resolved before each consortium votes. In response to Jim’s question about whether these issues would cause someone to vote against it, the response was that an individual decision might not, but the decisions in total might. Jane remarked that her individual decision will be based on what is good for WIN as well as what is best for her individual library. It will include impacts of not only big issues but small decisions made affecting her library.

With the overall sense of the meeting, many felt it moved along better than they were expecting. Ida mentioned she liked hearing that library directors in the other systems voiced many of the same concerns and potential good things with the merger. Several mentioned that the process for this project has been well developed and articulated.

If library directors have additional questions or remarks, they can contact Jim at NWLS or they can feel free to use the NWLS list-serv to continue discussions.

VI. Adjournment
Amy Stormberg moved to adjourn the meeting at 11:03 a.m. Shirley Miller seconded. Passed unanimously.


Next meeting date: August 7, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. at NWLS.


Respectfully submitted,
Michael Sheehan