Recorder: Helen Wigersma, University of West Florida

Present:

John Ingram, Chair (UF)
Vivian Royster (FAMU)
Rita Pellen (FAU)
Barbara Shearer (FSU-Med)
Roy Zeigler (FSU)
Anne Bardolph (FSU-Law)
Jeanette Ward (UCF)
Athena Hoeppner (UCF – ECC Chair)
Kitti Canepi (FGCU)
Tony Schwartz (FIU)
Judy Kelly (NCF)
Kathy Cohen (UNF)
Larry Heilos (USF)
Helen Wigersma (UWF)
Meg Scharf (UCF - PSPC Chair)

John Ingram, Chair, convened the conference call at approximately 10:10 a.m.

Meeting: John Ingram proposed that the CMC have a face-to-face meeting to discuss the several issues that are too complex to resolve through a conference call. He suggested October 4, immediately following the ECC meeting. Because of scheduling conflicts with several members, a different date will be proposed at a later time.

CMC Role in relation to ECC: The committee briefly discussed the role of the two committees and recognized that the relationship between them will be an evolving one. CMC agreed that each institutional representative on the CMC has a responsibility to reflect the print and electronic collection development/collection management thinking of his/her institution during discussions of the CMC.

Print Journal Subscriptions: Recognizing that budget restrictions may require cancellation of print subscriptions across the SUL, the CMC agreed that we should develop a policy statement related to retention of at least a single print subscription for each title in an electronic aggregator package (e.g., Elsevier, Kluwer, Wiley) to which one or more of our institutions might subscribe. The method for determining which institution might assume responsibility for which title will be discussed at a future date.

John polled the committee to determine whether library users at each of our campuses preferred electronic or print access. Most indicated that both faculty and students were "content" with electronic access for the most part and were delighted with access to the wide variety of titles available, not knowing or caring whether their library held the title as a print subscription. Some faculty, however, continue to advocate retention of the print subscription. In general, there is a mix of reactions among users, and many "want it all."

Issues related to "electronic only" access:

• quality of graphics – improving, but still need to assure that graphics are clear and readable in the electronic version
• accreditation issues – Kathy Cohen (UNF) noted that the American Chemical Society is taking a strong stance on having print journals available to meet ACS accreditation for chemistry programs. Roy Zeigler (FSU) asked whether the ACS requires continued access to the print Chemical Abstracts as part of the accreditation process. Several institutions (UNF, UWF, UF) indicated that they have cancelled the print version and had no problem with accreditation
• archival access – critical to assure long-term, continuing access regardless of changes in the electronic realm
• resource sharing – license agreements may restrict ILL of some electronic titles

Kluwer, Elsevier, Wiley Proposals: Although the proposals from these vendors have not been finalized, the CMC discussed various issues related to the draft proposals:

• Cost savings if we go with all electronic subscriptions – differs among vendors. Kluwer’s proposal offers one print subscription mailed to the same address. Discussion will be necessary to develop a rational distribution plan for those print subscriptions.
• Timeframe within which we may proceed with canceling print subscriptions from any of the vendors – since libraries will need to make cancellation decisions in the near future, it is important to know when the negotiations with Elsevier, Kluwer, and Wiley might be completed to assure that cancellations will not violate the terms of the agreement.
• Adjustment factors – CMC members expressed real concern with having to pay an adjustment factor multiple for a new subscription. The Kluwer proposal spreads the cost of their adjustment factor (2.89) across all participating SUL institutions. The current Wiley proposal assesses their adjustment factor (2.1) against the individual institution initiating the subscription. CMC can support the Kluwer model (system-wide), but not the Wiley model (individual library).

Electronic Model: John suggested that we consider how to extend the electronic model to other publishers and other types of materials. He posed the question on the degree of redundancy we need for print materials throughout the system. This may be a topic for future discussion.

SUL Directors: John reported that the State University Library Directors, at a their October meeting, committed themselves to continuing to work together on system-wide issues, regardless of what happens at the local university level. This statement reinforces our position as SULC, the State University Library Consortium.

Taylor & Francis Offer: Jeannette Ward mentioned an offer from Taylor & Francis that she later sent to all CMC members via e-mail.

Next Meeting Date: No future meeting date was set. John Ingram will be in touch regarding a possible date in October.