General Library

Sharing Your Ideas: Community Forum Blog

General Comments

We welcome any comments or suggestions you may have regarding issues other than library collections or services.

6 Responses to “General Comments”

  1. Andrew Waldron says:

    The crisis faced by the library is also an excellent
    chance for faculty to reclaim control of scholarly
    publishing. In planning for current cuts, we should
    do so envisaging a future where peer review, copy editing
    and dissemination or research are performed by faculty and researchers
    (or professional organizations thereof), rather than
    large and expensive publishing houses.

  2. Sandy Carlson says:

    After attending the meeting last Wednesday (June 10), I had a few questions and comments about what was discussed.

    Planning for a 20% cut was mentioned (down to 2.6 million from 3.23 million a few years ago) — how much is that in real dollars? $630,000? And has that percentage changed yet again since last week?

    In general, finding a way to generate revenue would be far preferable to me than to make cuts. Charging student fees for library use seemed to me to be an idea that would generate only a small overall percentage of revenue. Could someone calculate how much money would be generated if each undergrad and grad and professional student registered in Fall 2009 were “taxed” a $15 fee for library use? How does this number compare with the amount that must be raised? For 35,000 students, this could generate over $500K, which is not insubstantial. I would support this plan if it could generate a large portion of the money that needs to be raised.

    With respect to the four broad areas specified for budget reduction, I would advocate for cutting each of the four (library services, science libraries, technical services, and library technology) more or less equally. All will be impacted, but none fatally so. I have heard rumors that the closing of the science (branch) libraries has been discussed. How much in the way of savings will that actually generate? Even if all the books are relocated somewhere (where?) at no small cost (who will pay?), the buildings are limited in what other activities can take place there (certainly no labs). It would be helpful to evaluate these different options if a specific plan could be calculated: if PSEL and the CHSL were to close, and all the librarians relocated to Shields, exactly what savings would be realized?

    If staff must be cut, how many in actual numbers and in percentage of current staff, would have to be cut to make up the budget shortfall?

    In balancing the cuts between staff and collections, I would advocate for balancing the two more or less equally, and not forcing staff to absorb all the cuts, nor to force collections to absorb all. The library must continue to acquire collections, and must be able to retain enough staff to make this happen.

    Finally, I was dismayed to feel a strong sense of “us versus them; they’re out to get us” expressed by the humanists in the meeting. Scientists value libraries and librarians enormously, too, even though we do get many of our resources over the internet now. Not all scientists “have it in” for humanists, or their livelihoods or resources. Casting aspersions based on false assumptions will only divide and weaken us. We are all in this budget mess together and need to work together to find solutions.

  3. Steffany Caria says:

    Is there some resource, either online or in print, that contains the information that was presented by the acting University Librarians to the Academic Senate at the June 10th meeting? In the PDF file titled “Faculty Meeting Notes Library Budget Reduction Ideas June 10, 2009″, the following was stated: “Helen Henry and Gail Yokote, Acting Co-University Librarians presented the library’s budget picture, current fiscal year and projected fy09/10 budget reduction targets, and four categories of “bold” ideas …” Library staff have heard there are “big, bold” ideas in the planning stages for the Library but very little outside of rumor of what EXACTLY those ideas are as the acting University Librarians have refused to present these “big, bold” ideas to the Library staff. It is difficult to fully appreciate the scope of the ideas suggested by the faculty when the information that was presented to them was not included.

    At what point will the acting University Librarians address the ideas suggested by the faculty at the Academic Senate forum?

    At what point will the acting University Librarians publicly present the “big, bold” ideas they plan to implement?

  4. Gail Yokote says:

    Regarding Steffany Caria’s post, the following URL summarizes the budget reduction suggestions made by library employees: http://staff.lib.ucdavis.edu/budget/ (accessible by library staff only). These suggestions were categorized by the General Library’s Ad Hoc Budget Task Force, chaired by Matt Conner. In addition, suggestions from various faculty and students were added to the library employee suggestions. The library’s senior management team reviewed the task force’s report and other input in order to organize the suggestions into themes.

    At the May 29, 2009 all library staff meeting, a set of Powerpoint slides summarizing the current library budget context, library budget reduction targets, budget reduction suggestion themes, and next steps in the consultative and communications processes were presented. The URL for these Powerpoint slides is http://staff.lib.ucdavis.edu/lem-20090529.pdf (accessible by library staff only). Please note that the “bold” idea themes and examples presented at the June 10, 2009 faculty meeting were the same as those presented to the staff on May 29, 2009.

    The next step is a Summer 2009 data gathering phase for many of the bold ideas and the associated scenarios before definitive decisions or plans can be made by either the library’s administrators or the campus administration. It is expected that the results of the bold ideas and scenarios data gathering will be presented to library employees and library users (UC Davis faculty, students, and staff)during early Fall 2009 for their comments.

  5. Frank Maker says:

    I would really like to see the Computer Science books moved to the Engineering Library. It seems strange that they are in Shields since Computer Science is in the College of Engineering. I know personally it is quite a pain to have to go to Shields for just one subject, whereas all the rest of the books I need for engineering are in the Engineering library. It seems like there is enough space there for them as well.

  6. Roberta Millstein says:

    I am extremely unhappy to learn that some or all of the biological and agricultural sciences collections will be banished to the far side of campus. This will serve to marginalize these physical collections, both literally and metaphorically. The most popular majors on campus are in these areas; we want students to use the collections, not overlook them because they were too far away. Given the UCD’s international reputation in the Biological Sciences and Agriculture, we should be proudly displaying these collections in the centrally located Shields Library (as it does now), not banishing them to a corner of campus and inconveniencing many students, staff, and faculty in the process.

    Speaking personally as a philosopher of biology, my colleagues and students (both undergraduate and graduate) will be negatively impacted by this move. We are located in SSH. Carlson Health Sciences Library is not convenient to us.

    I realize these are bad budget times, but some other solution needs to be found.

Leave a Reply