Showing posts with label action. Show all posts
Showing posts with label action. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

One step forward, two steps back?


Last night’s UFL Board of Trustees meeting was lightly attended by about 30 people, including Lissak’s attorney. Confusion (for the third time in a row) about the start time of the meeting resulted in the loss of public comment for several who arrived at 7:30. Public comment ended by 7pm. I'd like to thank those who provided comment, including Kate McDowell, Laura Haber, Al Kagan, and Danielle Chynowith. This meeting provided some answers and resulted in more questions. I’ll call this a 'two steps forward one step back' outcome since I’m feeling charitable this morning.

Steps forward:
 The IMC livestreamed the meeting. UPTV recorded the proceedings. View them here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/37270267 and here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/37271369

An interim director was appointed effective immediately: Kathy Wicks – Lissak’s Associate Director for the past 4-5 years. Lissak remains on the payroll - as her contract was renewed on July 1, and her role at UFL is unclear. She was quite vocal at the meeting.

A national search will commence for the position of Executive Director, timeline to be announced. A working group consisting of Mark Netter and Beth Scheid will craft the search process.

The UFL Board announced a special meeting for Tuesday, August 27 at 6:30 in the UFL auditorium. correction from the UFL website: > Satterthwaite conference room on the ground floor. Under discussion may be the criteria for the search candidates, and the proposed search process among other items.

Of the 259 boxes returned by BWB only 40 remain to be evaluated. Adref staff have carefully (and I'd say heroically) reassessed the contents and 2074 books have been returned to the collection. The target completion date is one month from now. Return rate is approximately 50%, though the remaining boxes have subjects such as finance and health – which have higher weed rates due to temporality. Scherer estimates that at $12.50 valuation per book/ this means over $25,000 in resources have been restored to UFL shelves.

As part of the state library reporting process - Kathy Wicks recognizes the need to learn more about the UFL audience and how to reach them. The public has been directed to send ideas for how to do this to her. These ideas may be incorporated into an actual SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis – "at some point in the future".

The UFL grievance policy revision is in the hands of the city, which is overseeing the process. (according to Chris Scherer). 

Steps backward:
Confusion about the Board meeting start time (again!) – Listed as 7:30 on the library calendar (but corrected by the morning of the meeting), in the reminder email sent out by UFL and as 6:30 in the meeting agenda, and the flyer posted on the announcement board at UFL.

Scherer characterized role of comment on the strategic plan with what appears to be another retrenchment – "The strategic plan will be evaluated and the new director will have input." There was no indication if – or when – the public would be allowed to comment.

Mel Farrell is back from vacation with a new word she likes to use: ‘silly’
She did praise the staff, while reminding the audience “we don’t often have the luxury of hiring immediately” and we shouldn’t worry about this because our ‘eminent staff will carry on.’ Ostensibly we’ve all been worried about a decline in programs and services and we just don’t need to be! Aren’t we silly!

News Gazette coverage – which – again doesn’t quite get things right in ways that inaccurately color the news.

No one said that “many of the removed books have been returned to the stacks.” We were actually told – again – that the numbers are not available, though Mary Towner feels this may be possible once all of the boxes have been unpacked and assessed.

Towner didn’t say: “she believes the actual number of removed books may have been smaller than that [9,343 is the number stated in the article].” What she told us is that not all of the yellow highlighted books on the spreadsheet were removed because the weeding stopped prior to completion.

Continued vigilance is needed, and indeed appreciated by Chris Scherer - President of the Board of Trustees, though he repeatedly warned us not to push too hard - especially on timelines. 

Friday, July 26, 2013

An Open Letter to the Urbana Free Library Board of Trustees

To the Urbana Free Library Board of Trustees:


In early June members of the public learned of immense changes taking place at the Urbana Free Library. Since then hundreds of people have attended and spoken at Board meetings, signed petitions, contacted you personally, written public letters and comments, and otherwise shown concern for UFL.  We appreciate the Board’s promise of greater transparency and its pledge to listen to community concerns.


To that end, we would like to bring the following questions to the Board. These are not our only questions, but they are some of the most pressing ones and some we have been asking for nearly two months. As you work towards the best possible outcome for this beloved public institution and for the community as a whole, we hope and trust that you will respond to these questions quickly, thoroughly, and openly.


(1) How will the Board of Trustees address public concerns voiced at the June and July Board meetings?


(2) At its July 9 meeting, the Board announced it would pursue an early separation agreement with the current executive director. What is the timeline for hiring personnel — specifically an interim executive director, an executive director, and a director of adult services — at UFL?


(3) What criteria will be used for evaluating prospective candidates for the positions of interim executive director and executive director?


(4) As library staff have reported both publicly and in confidence that they were bullied and pressured by the Library’s executive director, what progress has been made towards updating the untenable, twenty-year old grievance process for staff?


Led by an outside consultant with little knowledge of our community, the Library created a strategic plan. Some of these planned changes — such as an effort to provide more community spaces — were made public through documents on the Library’s website after the controversy began.  Other significant changes  — such as a drastic reduction in the physical magazine collection — have only been addressed by library administrators.


(5) Are there plans for repurposing space? If so, what are they? Is there a long term strategy to increase the size of the building?


(6) What are short term plans for the following portions of the physical / print collection?
  • Periodicals: Will these be reduced in number during the next 12-24 months? If so, why? What is the basis for this decision?
  • A/V materials including CDs and DVDs: Some sections of this collection have already been significantly weeded; will this continue? Why?
  • Is the Library committed to maintaining strong, diverse nonfiction and fiction print collections?
  • What is the budget for ‘replenishing’ the collections with new items?
  • Will there be balanced growth of physical and digital items?


At the July 9 Board meeting, the community was told that the strategic planning process would not be reopened, but that the public would be allowed to provide comment for an ‘addendum’ to the plan. Not only is the role of this addendum unclear, it will be difficult for the public to give meaningful comments since details about implementation such as timing and logistics (such as implications for personnel and re-allocation of library resources) are not currently available to the public.


(7) What is the Board’s understanding of the scope and purpose of the strategic plan as it has been adopted?


  • What role will public comment play?  For instance, will the Board use public comment  to modify the existing (adopted) strategic plan?
  • What are the specific action steps for the objectives and priorities in the current plan?
  • Is the plan viewed as an entirely new vision for services and collections at UFL or is it viewed as a strategy for allocating resources to enhance existing services and collections?


Please act to restore the community’s trust in Urbana Free Library. We are watching and listening.


Sincerely,


Danielle Chynoweth
Brian Dolinar
John Paul (JP) Goguen
Ben Grosser
Laura Haber
Charles Harris
Frances Harris
Taylor Hocutt
Barbara Horne
Betsy Hearne
Andrew Heathwaite
Daniel S. Johnson
Al Kagan
Dan Keding
Kathryn La Barre
Kate McDowell
Erin Miller
Tracy Nectoux
Jadon Peck
Ashley R. Price
Jennifer Roth
Carey Smith
Lawrence D. Smith
Joan Stolz
Maggie Taylor
Don Thorsen
Carol L. Tilley


——————————————————————————
If you are an Urbana (or Champaign) resident and wish to have your name added to this letter prior to its release to the News-Gazette site and its mailing to the Urbana Free Library Board of Trustees, please send your name and street address to reclaimingourlibrary@gmail.com by Monday, July 29, at noon.

Monday, July 8, 2013

A Few Reasons You Should Care about #BOOKGATE Even If You're Not from Urbana

I had a moment (or two) this evening. I wanted to encapsulate in a few tweets why what's going on / wrong at Urbana Free Library matters to everyone. This brief list isn't intended to be comprehensive, but I hope it will provoke conversation.

  1. Public libraries are public institutions intended for the public good. We must ensure they remain responsive to the public.
  2. Public libraries have always had to respond to competing needs, but libraries must understand those needs first!
  3. Public libraries must remain a bulwark against digital / device divide; streaming & downloadable content don't work for all (and aren't desirable for others).
  4. False dichotomies (e.g. change vs tradition, analog vs digital, space vs materials) should not drive strategic planning.
  5. Librarians & library staff serve the public. It's not about pay or glamor or recognition. Their expertise & service ethic matter. They should not be bullied or belittled. They should have a meaningful voice in planning and implementation of services.
  6. Strategic planning which is rushed, is not driven by genuine needs, and fails to include stakeholder and community voices is neither strategic nor planned. 
  7. Public libraries should steward public resources for public good. That does not mean, however, they should be run like a business.

I do not want to send my LIS students out into a world of cookie-cutter, corporatized public libraries. This is my Howard Beale / Network moment: I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore.

If you're mad as hell too, do something