Membership Meeting: Mar. 11, 2014

March 11, 2014 2-3:30pm
Orbach Science Library Room 240

Present: Michele Potter, Anthony Sanchez, Sharon Scott, Ying Shen, Patricia Smith-Hunt, Lizbeth
Langston, Marie Bronoel, Rhonda Neugebauer, Kuei Chiu, Stephen Mitchell, Michael Yonezawa, Trish Stumpf-Garcia, Judy Lee, Jessica Greene, Christina Cicchetti, Manuel Urrizola, Carla Arbagey (recorder)
Guests: Shonn Haren, Julie Ree

1. Approval of Minutes – minutes from 1/14/2014 were approved

2. Old Business
a) Proposal for pilot of Academic Senate Committee Librarian Guest [reps] practices
i. Michele read the new policies and procedures of a two year pilot for appointing the
senate reps
ii. Rhonda asked if there could be a statement about the reps reporting back to LAUC-R
a. Michele read the section of the bylaws stating that the reps are responsible for
reporting useful information to LAUC-R, and soliciting feedback from LAUC-R
iii. The outgoing and incoming LAUC-R chairs will decide on the reps
iv. Reps will have a two-year term
v. The LAUC-R Chair will send a message to the committee chairs and their assigned
committee analyst with the names of the new reps
vi. Michael suggested that the new policies and procedures for committee reps should be
adopted as a standing rule, which is in addition to the bylaws
a. Sharon explained some details of standing rules and that a full document would
need to be made; these rules only need local approval instead of system-wide
b. Judy asked for clarification on what a complete standing rules document would
look like,
i. Sharon explained that it would take the minute procedures out of the bylaws and put them into a standing rules document;
ii. Standing rules are more detailed procedures than those in the bylaws
c. Michele suggested putting the process for creating standard rules into the bylaws
vii. Further discussion was tabled so that the Bylaws Committee can discuss the issue, and
the committee rep rules will then make up “Rule #1” of the new standing rules, if approved
viii. Are there other Senate Committees of interest? Discussion was tabled until the next meeting
b) Completed LAUC-R Programs
i. Michele thanked all those involved in the programs which have taken place over the last
ii. Programs included Green Stranglers, R’Courses/DeCal, Hey Kids, Comics!, and
Professional Organizations are for Everyone (with LSA)
iii. Michele asked the membership if there is interest in archiving our events, and there was
a discussion on how LAUC-R might begin an archives a. Rhonda suggested archiving advertisements/flyers and gathering previous years’ documents
b. Sharon suggested that committee chairs should include material to be archived
with their annual reports
c. Shonn suggested setting up a Google Drive; Lizbeth suggested using a LibGuide,
other members suggested a web page of some kind
iv. Michele suggested combining pages from committees that hold programs into one
v. Julie Ree asked for a disclosure statement about the currentness of the information on a
web page, and that everyone should be able to access these resources
a. Michele stated that the LAUC-R page is open to all library employees
vi. Jessica mentioned that the LSA Professional Development Committee is doing something similar: a LibGuide that could be accessible by all, and easy to make a contribution to, rather than using Centaur or a blog
vii. Michael expressed the need to keep all LAUC-R materials/info together, and that
LibGuides may not be as flexible for our archiving needs
viii. The membership did not come to a consensus on the archiving method, so Michele
suggested that the Programs Committee should consider the issue and provide a
recommendation for archiving methods

c) LAUC Assembly
i. Will be held April 23 rd , 2014
ii. Assembly planning is moving along, Michele encouraged potential attendees to apply
for the 5-minute discussions or the travel scholarship for new LAUC members

3. New Business – Discussion of the Libraries’ Draft Strategic Plan Feedback and Next Steps
a) Michele thanked all who attended the feedback meeting on 3/4/2014
b) The letter expressing LAUC-R’s concerns about the draft plan, which resulted from the meeting, was sent to the University Librarian (UL), Steven Mandeville-Gamble (M-G), on Friday March 7 th , and also sent out to the LAUC-R membership
i. LAUC-R members can still give additional feedback
ii. Steve M-G sent a reply acknowledging LAUC-R’s feedback and thoughtful reading of the
draft strategic plan; he will discuss our feedback with the Strategic Planning Committee
and see how it can be incorporated into the plan
iii. Michele stated that she included the points of consensus and polled the membership to
make sure that there was consensus

c) Michele will express LAUC-R’s concern to Steve M-G about the group facilitators during the all-
staff planning discussions, that LAUC-R wants to know as soon as possible what the remaining
steps of the process are and if there is a re-org, and that LAUC-R will want to be a part of that
i. Michele clarified that she will also bring the question of the next steps, and if it means a
re-org, to the planning committee

d) Further points of discussion and issues about The Plan and LAUC-R’s letter to the UL were
brought up by the membership:
i. One member pointed out that there were some things missing from the LAUC-R
statement that were discussed in the previous feedback meeting, specifically criticism of
the plan, and concern about it being the beginning of a re-organization
ii. Two members mentioned that the need for additional planning meeting was not
included in the letter iii. There was discussion about reporting LAUC-R members’ concern over the implications of a re-org in the draft strategic plan
a. Patricia pointed out that the Strategic Planning Committee was instructed that
this would not be a re-org, and there was no talk about a re-org; Michele agreed
iv. One member suggested using the term “reporting structure” in discussing the  implementation, rather than re-organization
v. There was some discussion about re-orgs that have already happened in the library and
what LAUC-R’s response should be to these
vi. One member stated that with the new organizational charts posted to the library staff
intranet last week, the re-org has already started
vii. One member mentioned that the Draft Strategic Plan proposes to be a “transformative”
document, and thus a re-org will ensue from the plan as part of a transformation
viii. One member expressed concern about the denial or approval of resources citing the
Draft Strategic Plan, and that this is creating a re-org already

e) It was stated that it might be a good idea for LAUC-R to have a more active role in individual re- org situations, such as the WRCA Harmonization: it is LAUC-R’s responsibility to advise on these matters

f) One member motioned that a corollary document be drafted to document LAUC-R’s input on
org charts, or an addendum to further expand LAUC’s concerns about an ongoing re-org

g) The motion was seconded, but voting was put on hold to allow additional discussion:
i. Several members expressed a concern that those affected by a re-org should be
consulted and allowed to give input before it is implemented
ii. Members also expressed a disappointment that re-orgs are “announced” by posting a
new org chart on the library intranet, rather than by consulting persons affected by the
change or by an e-mail sent to staff that details the changes and the reasoning behind
iii. One member wanted to make sure that LAUC-R can address re-orgs that have already
taken place without input/advisement from LAUC-R
iv. Jessica detailed some points about the WRCA Harmonization as an example of a re-
organization, which occurred with staff input
a. However, the need to replace the temporary WRCA library assistant with a permanent position that is a paraprofessional was not fulfilled,
b. Librarians need the support of library assistants to do work that is clerical in nature. When a re-org results in the librarian doing such work, it stymies our ability to do professional work

h) After discussion, the first motion (2.f) was voted upon by the membership and was denied in
favor of making another related motion. Further discussion took place on the wording of the
new motion:
i. One member emphasized the concern is about ongoing re-organization
ii. There was discussion about if such a document should be connected or not to the Draft
Strategic Plan, but should be a segue to talking about an ongoing re-org, as it strongly
infers re-organization and includes an implementation plan
iii. One member stated that the LAUC-R document should focus on the org charts/re-org
and what we think will be necessary to carry out the Draft Strategic Plan
iv. One member mentioned that the AFT Union has filed a cease-and-desist letter with the
UL , so that the union can participate in any implementation of the Draft Strategic Plan
v. Several members agreed that LAUC-R should reiterate its role as a consulting body,
which is clearly stated in our bylaws. a. Further, the bylaws should be quoted in our communication

i) Further discussion took place to get an idea of what the LAUC-R membership would like to see
as a result of the feedback sent to the UL and Strategic Planning Committee:
i. More transparency by being informed about potential changes to our positions;
ii. Clear reporting lines and having librarians report only to others in the librarian series;
iii. Open and ongoing communication during the strategic planning process;
iv. Seeking input from individuals affected;
v. Clear communication of potential changes and responses or decisions on proposals and
requests for resources, especially in writing, before they go into effect.

j) Several members suggested making it clear that LAUC-R wants to be involved in change before it is decided

k) One member expressed concern that workload issues are not considered when re-org or org
chart decisions are made, and there was further discussion about such issues
i. It was suggested that these are not issues for LAUC-R to deal with, but rather to be
addressed through the librarian’s union (AFT)

l) Michele read the completed draft statement and thanked the membership for all of their input on this important issue
i. The initial statement read: LAUC-R continued our discussion of the strategic plan,
focusing specifically on its implied changes and re-organizations in the libraries, and our
desired process for dealing with such changes. Based on the plan leading to ongoing
library reorganization, org charts which were posted last week without input, and recent
reorganizations that occurred without ideal involvement and communication prior to,
during, and after implementation, LAUC-R requests that future changes in reporting
structure involve seeking input from individuals affected, as well as the library as a
whole, as changes are being discussed. LAUC-R requests clear reporting lines, clear
directives, and clear communication and transparency of changes resulting from the
implementation of strategic goals. LAUC-R as an advisory body will participate actively
in the development and implementation of the strategic plan.
ii. Carla (as the meeting recorder) and Michele will finalize the statement; anyone who
would like to see the document before it is submitted should ask Michele
iii. Michele pointed out that the statement will be directed to the UL and Leadership Team,
rather than the Strategic Planning Committee
iv. Patricia said it could be beneficial to send the statement to the Strategic Planning
Committee as well , which she and Michele are on, so that they can provide background
or details of LAUC-R’s discussion
v. Michele said that it would thus be sent to Steve M-G and the Strategic Planning
Committee (which includes all AULs) on Friday, 3/14/2014

4. All remaining agenda items were tabled:
a) Webinars and Webinar Page
b) Conference Reports, best format
c) End of year Professional Development Survey
d) Reports from Committees

Meeting adjourned at 4:18pm.