Note cards from All-Directors meeting

November 15, 2012

Wintergreen Resort, Wisconsin Dells


(There will be a follow up email from M. Van Pelt containing answers to several of these questions)

All Director Meetings:

Hold four all director meetings a year seems like a lot (distance)


Board / Appeals:

Is the SCLS Governing Board qualified to make the decisions that may come to it?
If there is an appeal, is there a process to handle the appeal?
Will this structure lead to more appeals to the System Board? 
Will there be a formal process for such appeals?
Does the Board really understand the weight and gravity of their decision making?

 Do they understand where the money is coming from?

 Libraries need to be more active. 

Bad meeting time 12:15 on Monday?


What is the plan for communicating among the levels as decisions are made? 

Who are the key contact people?
Clear lines of communication (hierarchy)


Facilitation/Role of Representatives:

Concern: the polling will end up as voting in the end.  Consensus modeling/education always needs to be addressed.
How do we ensure voices are heard?
What happens when dialog/polling fails to achieve consensus?


ILS Committee:

AC no longer “oversight” over ILS is a concern

Is the ILS a decision making committee or advisory type committee?


Non-LINKCat Libraries:

How do non-ILS libraries voice their concerns?
If AC will focus on issues affecting all members, and ILS will focus on issues for just ILS libraries, who will watch out for non-ILS libraries?
How are the needs of non-ILS libraries represented?
How to make structure more inclusive of broader services (non-ILS)?


SCLS Staff:

Clarification of the role of SCLS Staff sitting on committees.  Sometimes feels like SCLS staff just informs at meetings and there is no discussion but a push to accept what’s proposed.

Roles of SCLS Staff and the representation at SCLS Board meetings.

How does SCLS staff fit in?

Seats versus Clusters:
If consensus, then cluster quantities should only need one representative.  Seat numbers need to be considered.
One library, one vote?  Is weighting necessary?
One vote per cluster.  Dane Co. Suburban and rural population is greater than Madison city proper.  Dane County still has majority vote over entire SCLS community under current.  Unless voting on budget, each cluster gets one seat.


Form a standing budget committee
Better education of chairs so they know what meetings to go to.
Spread meetings out geographically.
ILS should have a seat on SCLS Board.
Combine CE opportunities with All Directors meetings
Make Directors meetings concise (options for online attendance?)
AC Should have a board seat.
ILS should have a seat at the table if they are separated from AC
Is there the possibility for some libraries to branch off?  Can we build in a mechanism to allow this?


Other Miscellaneous comments:

I want to acknowledge the loss of cross border collaboration in the new clusters by county.  I have concerns about going back to a one-county cluster and losing face to face meetings with my neighbors who just happen to be across the county line.
AC no longer “oversight” over ILS is a concern

 ILS seat on SCLS board?
All Directors meetings 4 times a year is good with opportunities for directors to network at some point in the day.
How does SCLS make decision?

 How do we get heard? 

Should AC have a board seat?
What problem are we trying to solve?  If we don’t know what the problem is how we know we succeeded.
Will the new process increase the perception of equity?