April 8, 2016

April 8, 2016 hedgesst

Annual Planning Meeting

Minutes — April 8, 2016


The one hundred fifty-fifth meeting of the Ohio Public Library Information Network (OPLIN) Board of Trustees was called to order at 9:05 a.m. on Friday, April 8, 2016 by Board Chair Becky Schultz at the OPLIN office in Columbus, Ohio.

Present were Board members: Jill Billman-Royer, Susan Brown, Karen Davis, Joe Greenward, Jamie Mason, Chris May, Travis McAfee, Michael Penrod, and Becky Schultz.

Also present were: Stephen Hedges, Laura Solomon, and Karl Jendretzky (OPLIN); Bill Morris, Stephanie Herriott, and Jamie Pardee (State Library); and Doug Evans (Ohio Library Council).


Karen Davis motioned to approve the agenda as presented; Jill Billman-Royer seconded.

Stephen Hedges noted that the Executive Session at the end of the meeting for the purpose of discussing the procedure for searching for a new OPLIN Director could be moved to the open meeting if the Board so desired. After brief discussion the consensus of the Board was to move this agenda item to the open meeting; Karen and Jill agreed to change their motion to approve the agenda as amended.

The Chair called for a vote on the motion; all aye.


The Chair called for public participation.

Doug Evans provided an update on Public Library Fund (PLF) revenue, which is meeting projections. The Ohio Library Council (OLC) is busy hosting Chapter Conferences around the state and also preparing for OLC Legislative Day on April 13. This year the Legislative Day will feature a press conference announcing the results of a return-on-investment study of Ohio public libraries. The new OLC Communications Director is using social media to keep people informed about these OLC events.

In response to a question, Doug reported that the new OLC website has been favorably received by the libraries.

4. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES of February 12 meeting

Susan Brown motioned to approve the minutes of the February 12 meeting as presented; Chris May seconded. There was no discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion; all aye.


Jamie Pardee presented the Financial Reports as of March 31. Expenditures look normal after three quarters of the fiscal year. Ohio Office of Information Technology (OIT) charges for the entire year are less than budgeted and have already been paid. About 37% of the budget remains for the last quarter of the year.

Michael Penrod motioned to accept the Financial Reports; Travis McAfee seconded.

Stephen Hedges asked if the fees payment to the Ethics Commission indicated that all the Board members had already submitted their annual financial statements; Jamie replied that those fees are invoiced regardless of the submission of financial statements and any late penalties would be invoiced later. Stephen also reported that the $6,000 "Consultant" budget item refers to the grant match for the DPLA Ohio project, and that it might be carried over into next fiscal year.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion; all aye.


6.1. Network

Stephen Hedges introduced a document provided by Karl Jendretzky by clarifying that it had been prompted by the need to make decisions about the OPLIN network topology for E-rate purposes. The document explored several ways to configure the network since the current Internet access arrangement through OIT did not seem to be possible in the future. After Karl had prepared the document, however, Stephen had a meeting with OIT and it now appears that OIT may offer a multi-year contract for the current Internet access arrangement after all. Since it is not certain that a contract will be offered, that possibility has not been included in the document, but should be included in Board discussion.

Karl explained the five options in the "Network Possibilities" document: 1) Internet access outside OIT, with our bandwidth going directly to an Internet provider instead of passing through an OIT router first; 2) full state of Ohio OneNet migration, with all circuits routed through OARnet and the current OPLIN core hardware gone; 3) keeping the OPLIN network core, but phasing out OIT, so OPLIN would take over or contract for all network management services currently purchased from OIT; 4) purchasing Internet service at each library site directly from the vendor servicing that site, thus breaking up the OPLIN core; and 5) dissolving the OPLIN network entirely, letting libraries make their own arrangements for Internet connections. An online document provided to the Board before the meeting listed the "pros" and "cons" of each possibility, and Karl also summarized these verbally.

Stephen provided some financial background on the possibilities. Splitting the current Internet access arrangement so that network supervision stayed with OIT but bandwidth moved to another vendor would eliminate most of the E-rate discount OPLIN currently receives for Internet access. There were a few questions about this, so Stephen explained the details of the current OPLIN E-rate discounts.

Susan Brown recalled that the Board had decided to try OneNet at two libraries several months ago; Karl reported that OARnet never acted on that request.

Michael Penrod pointed out that the Internet traffic from public libraries is very different from other state government traffic, and he saw value in keeping the public library Internet traffic separate and independent.

Karl noted that problems with the network management seem to be aggravated when there are too many people and layers of bureaucracy involved; some of the network possibilities he had described could be worse than the current situation.

Travis McAfee expressed a concern that some of the network possibilities would remove the current security protections on the OPLIN network. Travis felt it was important to keep the network configured in such a way that the network core and the network security precautions could be retained. Cost considerations would come after that.

Susan noted that major changes to the network may not be a good idea right now, with Stephen planning to retire in a little more than a year, and Karl confirmed that most of the possible changes would take years to complete. Stephen suggested, however, that it should not matter who the OPLIN Director is; that person is charged with doing whatever the Board decides should be done.

Several Board members noted that the current network topology may not be ideal, but it also is not broken. Stephen summarized that his understanding is that the Board wants to keep the network core, keep the network secure, make sure OPLIN can respond quickly to network problems, and keep the network independent. Michael Penrod noted that the collaborative nature of OPLIN is also important. Other Board members expressed concerns with any plan that would break up the OPLIN network core.

Since discussion of network topology was abating, Stephen now asked Karl to describe the current situation with libraries wishing to implement Voice-over-IP (VoIP) telephone service over the OPLIN network using the state contract with Cincinnati Bell Technology Solutions (CBTS).

Karl reported that OIT has ordered 10 Gbps and 100 Gbps hardware to add to the OPLIN core to be able to support CBTS VoIP on the OPLIN network. Columbus Metropolitan Library has been waiting for this VoIP service for some time, so their traffic has been diverted to a separate port until the new core hardware can be installed. Stephen noted that this new hardware cost OIT several hundred thousand dollars, and the hardware will upgrade the OPLIN core to be able to handle much more traffic in the future. Susan Brown remarked that it was good to see this kind of effort from OIT.

Karen Davis asked if network neutrality was an issue in any of the network possibilities the Board had been discussing, particularly those that depended heavily on commercial Internet service providers. Karl replied that net neutrality is generally only an issue with consumer-grade connections, not the enterprise-grade connections libraries use. So long as OPLIN keeps its network core, it should be easy enough to switch service if net neutrality becomes an issue.

Stephen reiterated that it is the Board's desire to keep the network responsive and independent, and that it is very important to keep the OPLIN core. If the core is maintained, it becomes easier to address security and any other issues that arise.

6.2. Databases

Stephen Hedges reported on the February meeting of the Content Advisory Committee (CAC). The primary point of discussion was the method for selecting the databases, since some of the Ohio Web Library databases are of little interest to public libraries. From the CAC's discussions, it became clear that there is a need for better communication about the collaborative nature of the selections.

The CAC wondered if the RFP for the databases could be altered to place emphasis on databases of interest to public libraries, perhaps even asking for quotes for public libraries only. To find out what public libraries want, the CAC proposed a survey of libraries asking a few questions about their database purchases: What online resources are you currently purchasing?; What is your budget for such purchases?; What types of requests for information are you unable to satisfy?; What online resources (up to 10) do you consider indispensable?; and What online resources do you have now, including those in the Ohio Web Library, that you feel are not useful?

Stephen asked the Board if anyone had any objections to issuing this survey. There was none.

Michael Penrod noted that some consortia, such as SEO, also buy databases for their members. Stephen will therefore contact the consortia directly for information about their purchases.

Stephen had shared database usage statistics with the CAC, and now shared them with the Board. Over the last ten months, usage has stabilized, with article views in particular being almost identical with the same month in the previous year. In fact, averaged over the last ten months, searches are up 2% and article views up 1½%. Stephen also shared a report he found yesterday from Ithaka S+R indicating that college faculty nationwide are also starting to use library online resources a little more often when starting their research.

6.3. Website kits

Laura Solomon reported that there are currently 72 website kits in use, a number which has remained fairly steady over the past year, after the Board's decision to stop promoting them. That has allowed Laura do some some work on the websites that she had not had time to do before. All of the upgrades to Drupal version 7 have been completed, and Laura has also been implementing several new features, which she described for the Board. One of the most important has been drop-down menus that work with screen readers for the visually impaired. At the request of some website kit customers, she is now working on style guidelines for library staff maintaining site content, and has also been providing some refresher training for long-time website kit customers.

Stephen Hedges noted that Laura and Karl Jendretzky have also been implementing the HTTPS protocol for secure website communications in all the kits. A couple of customers had requested this encryption and Stephen decided it was important to use this protocol on all the website kits.

Stephen asked the Board if the website kits should be promoted to libraries again. He reminded the Board that the original intent of offering the website kits was to improve the quality of Ohio public library websites. The Board felt that there was still a need for the website kits; Travis McAfee suggested that the decision of whether or not to promote the service depended on staff time resources, and thus would be a management decision.

Doug Evans asked if promotion of the kits could be targeted to libraries that have either no website or a poor website lacking essential information. He noted that OLC encounters several such libraries in the course of their work. Several Board members remarked on the growing movement toward requiring that information about public institutions be available online. Managing a full website kit, however, may be beyond the staff resources of some libraries; Jill Billman-Royer suggested that a simpler webpage may be what they need.

Laura will do another survey of public library websites and report on her findings at the next Board meeting.

6.4. ExploreOhio

Stephen Hedges explained that the ExploreOhio website is the last of the link directories that comprised the original OPLIN website, this directory containing links about things in Ohio. Despite technology upgrades, it is still a link directory, and someone has to maintain the links manually. Usage statistics show that it is seldom used, mostly from library websites that include a link to it. Stephen questioned the wisdom of putting effort into maintaining the site, and suggested it be taken down. The Board agreed and had no objections to discontinuing the ExploreOhio website.

The Board recessed at 10:38 a.m. and resumed discussions at 10:54 a.m.


Stephen Hedges presented the current Strategic Plan with a few suggested changes. He noted that the Ohio Administrative Code, in the section governing the State Library, states that OPLIN will provide the State Library with a strategic plan following guidelines provided by the Department of Administrative Services (DAS). Stephen has seen no such guidelines and could find none online, but he did find a copy of the DAS strategic plan, and noted that the primary difference between it and the OPLIN strategic plan is the use of the term "Priorities" where the OPLIN plan uses the term "Goals." Accordingly, the biggest change in the presented plan is that change in terminology, with some measurable goals added to the end of each Strategies section. Stephen described these added goals.

Susan Brown noted that the goal to "support at least one digitization project in each budget biennium" depended on the existence of digitization projects to support. After brief discussion, it was decided to support digitization projects "regularly" instead.

Stephen noted that OPLIN staff had discussed the database marketing strategies that called for OPLIN to provide database training and database promotional materials. There is a feeling that this should be the responsibility of the database vendors. Michael Penrod noted that the promotional materials OPLIN currently provides are more useful than the materials available from vendors, and they promote the entire Ohio Web Library collection rather than specific databases.

In regards to training, Stephen stated that OPLIN seldom does training on database usage. Susan responded that OPLIN does provide opportunities for librarians to learn about the databases, even if it is only by linking to training done by others. Joe Greenward suggested removing some language and Becky Schultz suggested combining the training and promotion Strategies.

Michael asked if OPLIN had ever had to apportion Internet access, one of the Strategies for the Internet Access Priority; Stephen replied that this had never been necessary. Since a limitation on bandwidth based on financial ability is mentioned elsewhere in the plan, the Board felt this could be removed.

Stephen noted that OPLIN has not been presenting programs about Internet connections at conferences, as specified in another Strategy. Karen Davis suggested adding "as needed" to the language of that Strategy.

Susan remarked that current wording of the E-rate Strategy seemed to commit OPLIN to always file E-rate applications, though in some cases it may be best for the libraries if OPLIN did not E-rate some services. She suggested that the language of this Strategy be revised to make it clear that E-rate would be used when it was to the advantage of the OPLIN network.

Stephen will bring a revised version of the Strategic Plan incorporating these suggestions to the June Board meeting.


8.1. Approve policy manual

Stephen Hedges stated that during the February Board meeting, the Board had suggested that he prepare a complete policy "manual" for Board review at the April meeting or as soon as possible thereafter, paying special attention to removing procedures from policies. To that end, Stephen provided a packet of all current OPLIN policies divided into four groups: policies that he recommends for rescindment; policies that he recommends be combined into new policies; policies that he feels need revision (further subdivided by the extent of the revisions); and policies that he feels need no changes.

Stephen explained that the Bylaws require a special procedure to change, and probably need no change anyway, so he suggested that document be excluded from the current discussion. He also pointed out that the "Legal Perspective" on Internet materials harmful to juveniles was a document prepared by OLC's legal counsel in 1997, not an OPLIN policy, and suggested it be linked from the OPLIN website for information purposes, not as an OPLIN policy. All of the remaining "policies" were open for discussion.

The Board began by considering four policies recommended for rescindment.

Stephen noted that the "Policy on Acceptable Public Library Staff & Trustee Use of OPLIN" actually seems to be an old strategic plan, with a final section about email accounts that is no longer relevant. The "OPLIN E-List Guidelines" is listserv user information that should be posted on the listserv website instead of being contained in a policy. Both the "OPLIN Guidelines for Libraries Offering Patron Access to the Internet" and the "OPLIN Sample Policy: Patron Access to the Internet" are outdated; any requirements in them have been superseded by the Ohio Revised Code, and the recommendations, intended for libraries offering public Internet access for the first time, are no longer needed.

Michael Penrod motioned to rescind the "Policy on Acceptable Public Library Staff & Trustee Use of OPLIN," the "OPLIN E-List Guidelines," the "OPLIN Guidelines for Libraries Offering Patron Access to the Internet" and the "OPLIN Sample Policy: Patron Access to the Internet"; Jill Billman-Royer seconded.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

Next the Board considered two policies recommended for limited revisions.

Stephen thought that the "Policy in Regard to Library E-list Hosting Service" should have the last paragraph removed, since it referred to outdated technology and services that libraries could acquire elsewhere for negligible cost, but otherwise he felt that the policy should be unchanged, since several library groups still use the OPLIN listserv hardware and software.

Susan Brown questioned the wisdom of the language that specified that OPLIN "will train" list moderators. Michael Penrod asked if the current list moderators ever contact OPLIN, and Stephen replied they do not.

Joe Greenward pointed out that having such a policy could require OPLIN to provide listserv services for any library groups that requested them in the future, and such services are now available elsewhere for negligible cost.

Jamie Mason motioned to rescind the "Policy in Regard to Library E-list Hosting Service"; Susan Brown seconded.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

Stephen presented the "Policy on Public Library Use of OPLIN" with the numbered item about public email accounts struck out, since it is no longer relevant.

Michael wondered if the Ohio Revised Code language duplicated this policy, but Stephen explained that the Code is not as specific as this policy.

The Board discussed some of the wording of the policy and suggested changing "worldwide Internet" to "Internet" and "obscene and illegal materials" to "obscene and/or illegal materials," as well as deleting the item about public email accounts.

Michael Penrod motioned to accept all of the suggested changes to the "Policy on Public Library Use of OPLIN"; Travis McAfee seconded.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

The Board recessed for lunch at 11:48 a.m. and resumed discussions at 12:37 p.m.

Next the Board considered several policies recommended for consolidation into new policies.

Stephen felt that some parts of the "Statements Regarding OPLIN Participation & the Requirements of CIPA" are fairly important policy statements about local control of Internet access policies, but the rest of the policy is really procedure, and too specific. He proposed moving the local control policy statement into a new "Network Administration" policy along with another general statement about requesting information from libraries each year for E-rate purposes only.

Stephen also felt that the "OPLIN Community Good Neighbor Policy" is actually a list of procedures, not a policy. He proposed using some language from the end of the document to make a policy statement saying OPLIN proactively take steps to neutralize malicious activity on the network, and move that statement into the proposed "Network Administration" policy.

Stephen then argued that the "OPLIN Security Procedures" is also a list of procedures, not a policy, and he proposed that it be condensed into a policy statement within the proposed "Network Administration" policy.

Finally, Stephen presented the proposed new "Network Administration" policy built from components of these three old policies. He recommended that the old policies by rescinded and that the new "Network Administration" policy be adopted.

Michael Penrod motioned to rescind the "Statements Regarding OPLIN Participation & the Requirements of CIPA," the "OPLIN Community Good Neighbor Policy" and the "OPLIN Security Procedures," and that the new "Network Administration" policy be adopted; Jill Billman-Royer seconded.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

Stephen turned next to two policies about the OPLIN website. The "OPLIN Web Site Privacy Policy" was written when the OPLIN website hosted links to information databases and was regularly visited by the general public. Most of the "OPLIN Disclaimer" was also useful when the OPLIN website was the public gateway to the information databases, but is no longer really relevant, with the exception of the last paragraph. Stephen proposed incorporating some of this material into the Privacy Policy and renaming it as "Website Policy," which he presented for Board approval.

Stephen clarified that this policy would be linked from the bottom of the OPLIN website home page, as well as from the Policies webpage, in conformance with current best practices for websites.

Susan Brown motioned to rescind the "OPLIN Web Site Privacy Policy" and the "OPLIN Disclaimer," and that the new "Website Policy" be adopted; Chris May seconded.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

Next the Board considered the "Policy on OPLIN Sponsorship of Events Planned by Others," which Stephen had recommended for major revision. Stephen noted that this is a useful policy, but too detailed and with specific information that is outdated. He provided a proposed shorter version.

Michael Penrod motioned to approved the proposed revision of the policy on "OPLIN Sponsorship of Events Planned by Others"; Susan Brown seconded.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

Next the Board reviewed two policies governing OPLIN office operations that were recently approved by the Board. Stephen explained that the policy on "Office Use of Internet, Email and Other IT Resources" was adopted in June 2015 to comply with a DAS directive, and the "Teleworking Policy" was extensively revised in February 2015. No changes were suggested for either policy.

Next the Board considered the current "Records Policy," which Stephen considered inadequate. It is simply a statement placed on the OPLIN website by Stephen when he became involved in working with the State Library on a records retention schedule, and now he feels this statement is inadequate. He proposed that it be replaced with a Board-approved policy stating how OPLIN will comply with state open records laws, and he provided a draft of such a statement.

Karen Davis motioned to approved the proposed "Records Policy"; Michael Penrod seconded.

Jill Billman-Royer suggested that the policy also name the OPLIN Director as the OPLIN records management officer. Karen and Michael revised their motion to include this statement.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

Next the Board considered four policies not recommended for any changes.

Stephen argued that no changes were needed to the "Policy on the Provision of Network Services by OPLIN to Public Libraries," the "Policy on Internet Connections to Library Systems That Have Merged," the "Policy on Extending OPLIN Connections Beyond the Library" and the policy on "Public Libraries that Withdraw from OPLIN Network Services." He felt that all four were up to date and relevant. The Board agreed with this assessment.

Next the Board considered the "Procedures for local library compliance with OPLIN policy to control access to obscene or illegal materials as defined in the Ohio Revised Code." Stephen felt that this is a list of outdated procedures without any real policy statement. OPLIN does need a policy about this, however, since the Ohio Revised Code says the OPLIN Board "shall adopt a policy that requires each participant to establish and enforce procedures designed to keep juveniles who use the participant's services from having access to materials or performances that may be obscene or harmful to juveniles and to keep persons who are not juveniles and who use the participant's services from having access to materials or performances that may be obscene." Stephen proposed that the procedural details be summarized and added to a policy statement using the Revised Code wording. He provided a proposed revision

Michael Penrod motioned to approved the proposed revision of the policy on "Controlling access to obscene or harmful materials"; Chris May seconded.

There was no further discussion, so the Chair called for a vote on the motion.

Recorded vote: Jill Billman-Royer, aye; Susan Brown, aye; Karen Davis, aye; Joe Greenward, aye; Jamie Mason, aye; Chris May, aye; Travis McAfee, aye; Michael Penrod, aye; and Becky Schultz, aye.

Finally, the Board reviewed the policy on "Information Technology Security Management," which was written to conform to State of Ohio security policies, and is very thorough. It directs internal OPLIN IT security and does not specifically address the security of the network connections to public libraries, which would be covered by the new "Network Administration" policy. The Board did not recommend any changes.


There was no new business to come before the Board.


Stephen Hedges remarked that most of the OPLIN activities since the last Board meeting had been or will be discussed in other agenda items, but he did provide an update on the DPLA (Digital Public Library of America) Ohio project, which is nearing the end of the one-year grant period. The DPLA Service Hub that results from the project probably will be called the "Buckeye State Network." The current timeline calls for submitting the Ohio application to DPLA on June 30. Several members of the Steering Committee will be attending DPLAfest in late April to talk with representatives from other Service Hubs. Stephen also described the current discussion regarding public library representation on the governing committees.

Regarding the OPLIN office activities calendar, Stephen highlighted website kit refresher training done by Laura Solomon and Karl Jendretzky's visits to a number of libraries to investigate network issues. Stephen also reported that he had done a presentation on DPLA at the OLC Northeast Chapter Conference, and had attended a conference on the Future of Libraries in the Digital Age hosted at Ohio State University. Finally, he reported that the E-rate Form 471 workshop had been successfully hosted at the OPLIN office, since space was not available at the State Library.

10.1. Library Services Manager report

Laura Solomon reported on her attendance at the Computers in Libraries conference in Washington DC. She is currently reviewing Drupal security for all of the website kits, and is also making some revisions based on usability recommendations from the Nielsen Norman Group.

10.2. Technology Projects Manager report

Karl Jendretzky noted that he has recently been getting more involved in trouble-shooting networks in smaller libraries and changing their router configurations to be able to remotely control some aspects of their networks. He also reported that the SMS messaging service has been growing by about 3% every month. Karl has been spending time moving servers to new virtual servers and simplifying the processes for recovering from failures. He reported that five CLEVNET libraries have been added to the OpenDNS service, and he expects more now that we have the new licensing. Finally, Karl reported that a failing 10 Gbps card has been removed from the OPLIN core router. In response to a comment from Stephen Hedges, Karl described the office VoIP system and reported that it has been performing well.


11.1. Report from Nominations Committee

Becky Schultz asked Jamie Mason to present the report from the ad hoc Nominations Committee.

Jamie reported that the Nominations Committee had met by phone and considered eight strong candidates for the one OPLIN Board seat opening at the end of June. In considering the Board demographics, the committee looked ahead to next year when the Board would be losing both of the current representatives from small libraries. It is the recommendation of the committee that the OPLIN Board request that the State Library Board appoint Jeff Garringer from the Pickaway County District Public Library to the OPLIN Board, and that the request also include re-appointment of Cindy Lombardo, Joe Greenward and Michael Penrod to the Board.

Jill Billman-Royer asked if Jeff Garringer had been a candidate for the Board before, and Stephen Hedges replied that he had.

Jamie pointed out that in two years the Board will lose both public library trustees. Stephen pointed out that next year, the Board would lose not only the small library representatives, but also the only representatives from southeast Ohio.

The Chair called for a vote on adoption of the Nominations Committee recommendation; all aye.

Stephen will present the Board's request at the May 19 meeting of the State Library Board.

11.2. Director's evaluation process

Becky Schultz called attention to the Director's evaluation spreadsheet that had been distributed to the Board. Stephen Hedges remarked that he had reviewed the spreadsheet and felt that it is still a good evaluation tool, covering the job duties of the OPLIN Director.

Becky asked Susan Brown to collect the completed spreadsheets from the Board and collate them for the next Board meeting.

11.3. Ethics training reminder

Becky Schultz reminded the Board that everyone is required to complete the online training available from the Ohio Ethics Commission. Stephen Hedges asked that Board members send him a copy of their training completion certificates so he can record that training has been completed.

11.4. Director search process

Becky Schultz initiated a discussion of the process for searching for a new OPLIN Director to replace Stephen Hedges when he retires next year. Stephen distributed information about the search process that was used when he was hired in April 2006. He noted that the search committee was formed in May 2005, but the search process did not really start until September, following some meetings about the future direction of OPLIN. Stephen reported that Stephanie Herriott had already begun to lay the foundation for hiring a new Director.

Stephen suggested that October may be a good date for advertising the position and asked for Stephanie's opinion. Stephanie pointed out that there was no limitation on how long the position could stay posted, and reminded the Board that the Governor's office would also need time to formally approve the appointment of a new Director, so she felt the sooner the process is started the better. Stephen also asked Stephanie about the candidate interviews, which were done by the entire Board last time, and Stephanie replied that the better practice is to have the search committee handle all aspects of the search, including the interviews, with regular feedback from the entire Board. Stephanie also noted there did not appear to be any EEO component in the last search process.

Stephen remarked that the search committee included five Board members last time, and Stephanie felt this number was "more than enough." Jill Billman-Royer noted that the OPLIN Board represents the demographics of the Ohio public library community pretty well, and would have oversight over the process, so a large committee should not be needed.

Jill wondered if the search committee had to be limited to Board members, and ensuing discussion brought consensus that there was value to having non-Board members on the committee. Jill suggested that a first step would be to determine who was interested in serving on the committee and if anyone from outside the Board would be asked to serve.

Joe Greenward and Michael Penrod volunteered to serve on the search committee. In response to a question from Jill, Stephanie replied that the search committee did not need to be filled today, that there was time for people to think about it and appoint the committee at the next Board meeting. Stephen asked that Board members share their thoughts with him about committee membership.

Susan Brown and Stephanie had some questions about the timing and content of the Director's evaluation. Stephanie noted that all state employees now must be evaluated on their "Customer Focus" competency. Stephen will revise the spreadsheet and send it to Board members.

Michael Penrod asked Stephen if his job description had been revised since he was hired; Stephen replied that it had not. Michael asked that Stephen review it and bring suggested changes to the next meeting.


On motion of Karen Davis and second of Susan Brown the Board adjourned at 1:50 p.m.