Attendees: Ruth Anderson (Minnesota Historical Society), Orrin Ausen (Bethany Lutheran College), Heather Biedermann (Minnesota State University, Mankato), Bobby Bothmann (Minnesota State University, Mankato), Carrie Curie (Minnesota State Community and Technical College-Moorhead), Paul Dahl (Department of Health), Todd Digby (MnSCU), Susan Dueis (PALS), Stephen Elfstrand (PALS), Keith Ewing (St. Cloud State University), Sharon Evenson (Vermilion Community College), Mary Ann Greenwald (PALS), Adam Marsnik (Normandale Community College), Pam Sukalski (Minnesota West Community and Technical College), Rachel Wexelbaum (St. Cloud State University), Angela Wortham (St. Cloud State University).
PALS is still looking at Strategic Planning Goals - site visits, consolidated plans, etc. The updated patch for the Aleph server seems to have solved batch job aborts. PALS has set up more direct borrowing through VDX.
Authorities - After the new file load in August, PALS has removed the second indicator in the 1XX field for 2.6 million records that were incorrectly flipped. They will also begin loading the weekly updates and start doing retrospective flipping. The retrospective flipping will be done on weekends. This will take a few weekends. Also, PALS will set records with form subdivisions to update=no.
A new service pack will be installed this weekend. After that, they will clone the database from production to test server. Also MSU, Mankato is looking at patron-initiated booking. MSU, Mankato is working on the new vendor record loader - this will allow records from other vendors than OCLC to be loaded. Reindexing will be done over Thanksgiving.
Version 20/21 - timeline has not been decided yet, but PALS does not think March is doable. Adam brought up the MSCF contract issue - they do not work summers, so regardless of whether the workflows change there is still work involved in just directing/redirecting servers for the client and OCLC on staff PCs. September, 2010 might be a good alternative to do the switch.
PALS is still working on MnPALS Plus 2.0. They will do small fixes and work on getting a Course Reserves interface in place. Other major developments will be lower priority. ODIN has also gone with MnPALS plus. ERM testing training begins today for the Electronic Resource Management portion. Additionally, PALS is still working with Evergreen. They have copied some data to allow testing. Currently, East Central Regional Library has expressed interest in having PALS support Evergreen for them. They have submitted an RFI. Meanwhile, PALS is looking at other possibilities for consortium - OLE, etc.
PALS is marketing services to other regions, etc. The promotional materials have been made to show PALS as an agency that would get to a solution - not marketing specific products.
PALS has a consulting contract with Equinox. This allows PALS to work with Evergreen designers when needed.
PALS is looking at federated searching products like CUFTS federated search. Also, PALSconnect Linker might go into production in March instead of January to allow for more testing time.
Keith Ewing asked about development of eXtensible catalog and consortial pricing. Stephen wondered how it would work with providing access to other vendor information, but will look into it.
5. MnSCU Report - Todd Digby
Todd says his office is at the point of the year where funding is lobbied. His goal is to keep funding levels the same with the budget scenarios (or hope for a small increase).
He has found an issue with staffing for small campuses, but he is working with Minitex to plan campus visits to help lobby for campuses locally. He will be meeting with the NE group at Fond du Lac next week with Bill DeJohn. As for four year campuses, the staffing is still okay, but there are some problems with keeping positions when incumbents leave.
Keith asked about Media Mill streaming project. Todd has talked with Penny Dickhudt about trying to get more librarian input. There is beta testing at some institutions going on right now. Also, there is a meeting in December at SCSU and Keith wants to know if Todd was invited. He was not, so Keith will talk with the coordinator to get Todd invited. They hope to discuss proxy servers and STAR ID issues.
6. User Group Meeting Review
Michele sent out evaluations Tuesday. Most evaluations were positive.
People really liked the one day format.
People did miss some networking time that came with the old schedule.
Interest in moving ILL to earlier in the day. Traditionally, they asked for the last slot, but with breakouts, the meeting does not need to have time to run over.
Keith feels the evaluation needs to be reworked a bit in the future. The order of the last few questions is reversed from what it should be.
Box lunches - many people were not impressed, but there are problems with keeping prices down.
Wellstone venue was nice.
Many verbal reactions showed that people liked the one day format with no business meetings conflicting.
Evaluations seemed to show strong support for continuing them.
Stephen pointed out that the agenda was really crowded. There were some comments about missing some breakouts and networking time.
Possible governance structure changes may allow for some opening of time.
User Group Business Meetings
Planning workday with Cataloging
Created Acq/Serials wiki
Outstanding tasks were accomplished, so they did not need to be moved to the new strategic PALS plan
Nothing for PALS to do coming from main group (small TFs have sent some things on)
Trying to update Consortium circ policy
Question for PALS about new strategic plan - liked numbering system from work plans, so they asked for some clarification
Workday - feel that it’s for the UG to work on, not the PALS staff. They also feel that there needs to be interest to have one in the spring from people beyond the Steering Committee.
Discussed changing committee structure of Steering Committee - consolidated two-years into one position
December 14 deadline for responses on spring workday
Direct borrowing (libraries in Minitex courier service can lend/borrow directly from other institutions that self-volunteer for this) - survey still needs to be filled out for about six libraries. The Steering Committee will contact the remaining libraries individually if they do not respond shortly. Master lists will then be created for those participating. End result is that participating libraries will need to contact all other participating libraries in PALS because Minitex will not - if it gets sent to them.
Discussed MnPALS Plus
Looking at working with Systems for workday - not sure if it will be online or in-person
Need replacement for Steering Committee. Pete is leaving because he is moving to BSU. Also, Ruth is retiring this spring and will need somebody to take her spot, too.
Update from Reports Task Force
Outcomes of User Group Meetings Requiring PALS Work
Overall best results from evaluations.
Only task - Circ-brief records for MnPALS plus catalogs. PALS staff is seeing if they should even be put in.
Suggest Dates for 2010 User Group Meeting
Late October seems a good time. Sharon brought up that out state sites like the occasional use of St. Cloud - it’s less travel. Although midweek worked this year because of the Midwest Ex Libris Regional User Group meeting, it might work at the beginning/end of the week, as well, because traveling on a weekend would be good for out state libraries. It would be possible to rotate between St. Cloud, Twin Cities, and Mankato. Also, the Wellstone Center is less expensive than a hotel, but a Twin Cities campus would be cheaper, if one would volunteer.
Mary Ann brought up the fact that ND and SD libraries would like to work more with the MnPALS libraries to learn some of our tips and tricks. We should look at extending workdays and possibly UG to them. Also, Upper Midwest will not meet next year. If we do work with ND and SD, Moorhead might be a good location to work from.
Discussion: What themes from the report suggest areas for User Council to focus on:
Adam suggested input on this should be sought at the spring workdays.
UC feels that we should look at the Ex Libris URM more to see if it would fit the needs of the consortium. There is also some consensus that people did not follow links to see more information for the questions.\
Keith thinks the responses point out very different needs among Consortium libraries and wonders if one ILS can supply those needs? Discussion followed on the impact to the Consortium and the PALS office if multiple ILS’s are supported.
Stephen wants to know if we really do need course levels for Electronic Reserves. Adam pointed out that if they were able to get in the databases to start with, we’re not violating licensing agreements because they are already students - so it should not matter. Bobby pointed out that 90% of reserves at Mankato are electronic.
STAR ID is moving forward because Media Mill project will not work without it. There are still concerns with how this will work with PALS. Stephen will follow up on this project with their team. Todd said it was going to be Faculty/Staff first, but the rollout changed with the Students First initiative.
Stephen will also work with private colleges, if they want reserves functionality.
Stephen said it would be nice to get information about libraries that do not have a product but would want it.
What about the governance structure discussion? It was sent to the Executive Committee after the September 10 meeting.
9. Report to the Executive Committee
Ruth Anderson will be giving the report to the EC, in place of Michael Kirby.
Evaluations for User Group were positive and are looking at having them again in October, 2010. We are also looking at other sites like St. Cloud, Mankato, and Minneapolis. Farther sites we are looking at include Moorhead. We are also exploring the possibility of doing more things with ND and SD - they might like to attend our workdays and User Group meetings because their states do not really have anything like it.
Motion - Adam, seconded - Ruth Adjourned at 10:55 a.m.
1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Additions / Approval of the Agenda
3. Approve Minutes of 10 September Meeting
4. Director's Report
5. MnSCU Report
6. User Group Meeting Review
User Group business meetings
Outcomes of UG meetings requiring PALS work
Suggest dates for 2010 UG meeting
7. Needs Assessment Task Force Report
Discussion: what themes from the report suggest areas for User Council to focus on