University of Toronto Central Library System
Minutes of Library Council April 14, 2000
Fillion, E. (Chair), Clark, J., Cozzi, S., Downs, V., Grof, G., Guardia, T., Martyn, K., Masters, A., McNair, L., Moore, C., Rosenstock, M., Stone, S., Santeramo, A. (Recording Secretary)
Bradshaw, G., Bravo, G., Chase, V., Cheng, A., Clapp, S.,
Cummins, M., Granatstein, E., Hawrychuk, S., Healey, R., Holder, R.,
Houtman, E., Jaffray, C., Langford, L., Lee, M., Leishman, J., Murray,
C., Newman, S., Press, M., Raic, J., Roddy, M., Schlauch, E., Snow, J.,
Socknat, C., Thierry-Broad, A., Turko, K., U, A., Wagle, I.
Horne, B., Michael, H.
Minutes were approved with one correction as follows: add 2000 after March 15th in first sentence.
a) Addendum to the report of the Task Force on
Services at a Distance. The addendum was distributed at the meeting.
The Chair announced that it was actually an amendment to the report. It
was agreed to reopen discussion of the report for the purpose of
considering the amendment, moved by Jane Clark, seconded by Lachlan
McNair. Jane reported that as a result of her membership on several
committees where issues of library delivery have been a priority, she
felt that the language should be stronger for Recommendation 2. It was
made clear that this proposal had already been discussed with the Chair
of the Task Force on Services at a Distance, Helen Michael, who added
that it was not out of place, considering the fact that the task force
focused on automation. A motion to accept the amendment was made by
Jane, seconded by Gabriele Grof, and Council voted in favour. A motion
to accept the report as amended was made by Susan Cozzi, seconded by
Teresa Guardia, and Council unanimously voted in favour.
Chief Librarian's Report:
Carole announced that she has accepted
the report of the Task Force on Services at a Distance in principle.
She indicated that she would like the Steering Committee to move forward
in establishing the standing committee to help with the implementation
of the report’s other recommendations. She added that it is a very
Planning and Budget
The Chief Librarian announced that the University expected to have good
news at this time, but this is not the case. The University
Administration will continue its lobby-ing efforts in hope of some
better news, hopefully in early May, from the Provincial Government.
The Planning stage is therefore on hold until later. It was stated that
the government’s Performance Indicators are very poor indicators of how
Universities are rated and the University Administration is much
involved with addressing this.
Resource Sharing update:
Susan Cozzi pointed out that the Resource
Sharing Transition Team has met since late last summer. Six vendors
have been investigated. A recommendation has been made and a contract
has been signed with a vendor. Implementation plans, which will cover
all libraries at the University, are being made at this time. The hope
is to have the document delivery system in full operation by the end of
summer and all team members are full of enthusiasm. The new system is
Question/Comments arising: It was asked how this system would benefit
the library. Susan said it should work more efficiently and smoothly
than the present system. It will give better reporting for statistical
purposes and will enable patrons to request material on their own. The
flexibility will be much improved. The system is already in use at the
National Library of Australia and most universities in Australia. All
the reports received have been good. The Chief Librarian added that the
leaders of the OCUL libraries are very enthusiastic as well. Mike
Ridley, who is President (OCUL), wants to move ahead very quickly with
this, based on all the work the Resource Sharing Transition Team has
Bonnie Horne reported that the task force came to the determination that everyday procedures were
being covered. The task force also looked at very large budgetary
issues, stocktaking, etc. The report was therefore divided into two
parts, the recommendations which have serious budgetary implications and
the Best Practices. The report was made available to Council before the
meeting and all recommendations were reviewed.
Recommendation #1: That stocktaking is done routinely in all library
collections in the Central System. A member asked how many areas
actually conduct stocktaking. It was reported that it is not conducted
frequently in any of the libraries at the University any longer.
Gerstein Library has tried stocktaking in selected call number areas. It
was added that the task force is not proposing that stocktaking of
entire collections be conducted yearly; it actually may take several
years for each library to do stocktaking of its collections, as it is an
extremely big job. OISE/UT has not conducted any stocktaking since the
merger; they usually do only the more frequently used areas. Gerstein
also targeted the most heavily used areas. It was noted that project
funding might be required for stocktaking of targeted areas in Robarts.
Recommendation #2: That this Task Force strongly supports the Status
Report of the Advisory Committee on Library Space with regard to the
need for off-site collection storage facilities. A member stressed
concern for off-site storage facilities: how will we know what has been
sent there? It was mentioned that a form of inventory would be needed
to select items for off-site storage, and the location would be entered
into the catalogue, as well.
Recommendation #3: That a library technician position be created in the
Collection Development Department to assist in the timely ordering of
replacements. It was added that this would include more clerical
routines. Useful Internet sites for ordering out-of-print books have
Recommendation #4: That funding be made available to support a digital
replacements programme based upon an expanded mandate for the
Preservation Services Department.
That the feasibility of extending the digital replacements service to
the campus libraries, and to external organizations such as OCUL, be
It was noted that copyright issues have been investigated when making
Recommendation #5: That adequate funding for replacements always be
made available. Bonnie added that this could have serious implications
if the number of books needing to be replaced rises significantly. The
Chief Librarian was very impressed with Gerstein’s stocktaking results,
which were much better than expected.
Recommendation #6: That where the missing item is from a unique record,
the item record be eliminated and the 090 field changed by adding a $r
with the message “Last copy cancelled”. The record from UTCat would be
suppressed but left in Netcat.
That where the missing item is not from a unique record, the item record
be eliminated and the 090 field changed by adding a $r with a short
clear statement to the effect that the copy at this location is
missing. This record would not be suppressed.
It was recommended that the first word of the second line in the first
paragraph be changed to read: eliminated instead of cancelled. (This
was approved and is incorporated above.) It was noted that the
terminology of the DRA system, particularly “assumed lost”, gives a
false impression to the public, suggesting that many more items are
missing than is actually the case. This problem is being investigated,
and wording may change in the future.
Recommendation #7: That the Access and Information Services Department,
on behalf of all central system libraries, improve the methods by which
patrons are enabled and encouraged to report missing items. Methods
could include the development of electronic and print “missing book”
forms. While it might seem convenient for patrons to be able to submit
forms without stopping to talk to staff, it was stressed that this would
eliminate the opportunity for immediate problem-solving in cases where
patrons need to be directed, e.g. to the blue shelves on the 9th floor,
or to copies available elsewhere on campus.
Recommendations #8: That the DRA and resource sharing systems be
utilized in part as tools for electronically forwarding appropriate
interlibrary loan/document delivery requests to the Collection
Development Department. No comment.
The Chief Librarian reported that this report is excellent and that she
felt it could move forward at a fast pace.
Lachlan McNair announced one new member of Council:
Joanne Lynes. Nominations are still open for other members.
Meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Back to: Minutes of Library Council
This page was last updated
Your comments and questions are welcomed.
All contents copyright ©, University of Toronto Libraries, 2001.