OHIO
PUBLIC LIBRARY INFORMATION NETWORK (OPLIN)
ONE HUNDRED THIRD REGULAR MEETING of the BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Minutes
– August 10, 2007
1. WELCOME & CALL TO ORDER
The one hundred third meeting of the Ohio Public
Library Information Network (OPLIN) Board of Trustees was called to
order at 10:05 a.m. on Friday, August 10, 2007 by Board Vice-Chair
Gayle Patton at the State Library of Ohio in Columbus, Ohio.
Present were Board members: Bonnie Mathies, Bob
Richmond, Mary Pat Essman, Gayle Patton, Laura Solomon, Jeff Wale, Karl
Colon, and Michael Wantz. Terry Casey arrived at 10:33 a.m.
Also present were: Stephen Hedges (OPLIN), Joel
Husenits (OPLIN), Karl Jendretzky (OPLIN), Laura Watkins (OPLIN), Bobbi
Galvin (OPLIN), Jo Budler (State Library), Diane Fink (State Library),
Carol Verny (OHIONET), Doug Evans (OLC), and Stephen Marine
(NetWellness).
Gayle Patton welcomed the new board members and
Laura Watkins, OPLIN's new Library Services Manager.
Stephen Hedges informed the new Board members
about their state ethics forms, travel expense reports, and W9 forms.
2. NOMINATION
& ELECTION OF BOARD
OFFICERS
Gayle
Patton reminded everyone that at the last Board meeting, outgoing Chair
Donna Perdzock and the two other departing Board officers formed a
Nominating Committee for new Board officers. Their suggested nominees
are: Gayle Patton (Chair); Mary Pat Essman (Vice-Chair); Bonnie Mathies
(Secretary); and Bob Richmond (Treasurer).
Michael Wantz
motioned to accept the slate of Board officer nominees.
Karl Colon seconded. All aye.
3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Chair called for public participation, and there was none.
4. APPROVAL OF THE
AGENDA
Bonnie Mathies motioned to
approve the agenda, Bob Richmond seconded.
All aye.
5. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES of June 8
meeting
Mary Pat Essman motioned to approve the minutes from the June 8th
meeting, Bob Richmond seconded. All aye.
Bonnie Mathies noted that although the minutes were long, she
appreciated the detail.
6. ACCEPTANCE OF THE FINANCE REPORT
Diane
Fink gave a detailed finance report. For the benefit of the new Board
members, she explained how the state fiscal year and budget process
works. She also explained OPLIN's status as a line item
within the
State Library's budget, as well as how the State Library is
funded.
OPLIN has mixed funding, receiving both state General Revenue Funds
(GRF) and Fund 4S4 monies from non-state revenue sources, primarily
E-Rate reimbursements.
Diane presented two sets of reports for this meeting: one for the
Fiscal Year (FY)
ending on June 30, 2007, and the other as of July 31, 2007.
For
the first set of reports (ending June 30, 2007), Report A covered the
OPLIN budget and expenditures for FY 2006-2007. OPLIN receives large
telecommunications invoices monthly from the Office of Information
Technology (OIT) and
AT&T. Report B covered revenue and cash balance, which carries
forward from one FY to the next. Report C covered the Gates Staying
Connected Grant. This grant from the Gates Foundation
required
matching funds and OPLIN contributed money towards that. The grant took
four fiscal years to complete, and all monies OPLIN committed have been
expended. The grant provided hardware upgrades for public libraries,
workshops and training, a network security assessment, and
videoconferencing equipment. Report D projected revenue and cash
balance figures on June 30th, and therefore matched Report B. Report E
summarized the budget request for the State Library and
OPLIN. Diane
summarized the state budget process.
Diane reported that between
the last FY and the current one, the state has converted to a new
financial system called OAKS (Ohio Administrative Knowledge System).
Diane summarized the future rollouts for
the OAKS system over the next several years.
In the second set of reports, Report A covered
budget and expenditures for FY 2006-07 as of July 31st. Diane
talked
about the differences between this Report A and the one from the first
set. OPLIN distributed $105,423.35 for filtering grants during the last
FY, but one of the libraries given a grant failed to make their
purchases by June 30th; OPLIN will have to bill them to retrieve their
grant and the money will go back into the state GRF. Report B covered
budget and expenditures for FY 2008-09. In the OAKS financial system,
all state agencies now have to resolve any errors before the official
payroll figures are released. Building rent is one of the largest
expenditures for OPLIN, and is paid quarterly. Diane explained
OPLIN's
Libraries Connect Ohio agreement and expenditures, and also explained
how the OPLIN/OHIONET paid-for databases plan has evolved.
Terry Casey arrived at 10:33 a.m.
Report
C covered revenue and cash balance. OPLIN is starting to receive some
E-Rate refund checks, which will be deposited into Fund 4S4. Report D
covered the projected vs. actual revenue and cash balance.
Diane
explained that all state agencies have operating budgets and capital
budgets; the capital budget process occurs in alternating years to the
operating budget process. This year, the Office of Budget and
Management (OBM) will review agency capital
budgets. Agencies usually receive instructions in the fall. The
operating budget for FY 2010-11 will start developing next July, but
agencies will start receiving preliminary instructions in
January.
2010 is expected to be tighter than 2008 and 2009, but 2011 might be
better, due to planned changes in the tax structure.
The
State Library has a new budget analyst at OBM; he met
with the State Library and OPLIN a week ago. The State Library also has
a new legislative services commission analyst. Diane invited all the
new OPLIN Board members to call or e-mail her with any questions.
Bonnie Mathies motioned to approve the Finance Report, Terry Casey
seconded. All aye.
7. OLD BUSINESS
7.1. Board
Meeting at OLC Convention
Stephen
Hedges noted that the next OPLIN Board meeting is scheduled for October
12th, which is the Friday of the Ohio Library Council convention. He
suggested holding
the meeting at the Convention Center and starting the meeting at 9:30
instead of 10:00 a.m.
Mary Pat Essman motioned to
have the next
OPLIN Board meeting at the Convention Center on Friday morning,
starting at approximately 9:30 a.m., provided we can secure a meeting
room. Jeff Wale seconded. All aye.
7.2. Staff
Pay Increases (see
agenda item
11)
Stephen Hedges deferred this discussion until the Executive
Session to
be held at the end of the
meeting.
8. NEW BUSINESS
8.1. Router
Upgrades
Stephen
Hedges reported that the routers on the OPLIN network are reaching
their "end of life" in June 2008, which means that
the vendor (Cisco)
will no longer provide hardware support. Software upgrades have already
stopped and there are also issues with the larger routers at the metro
libraries related to the new ethernet services. In the next year, OPLIN
staff are planning to replace many of the routers, using E-Rate money
to pay for it.
Stephen recommended to the Board that OPLIN use
$500,000 of E-Rate refund money on router upgrades, but plan to use the
majority of that as a match to a capital budget request. It looks like
it might cost around $800,000 to replace all of the routers. OPLIN
might be able to recoup some of the costs by trading in old equipment.
If OPLIN does not receive the capital request, OPLIN staff can still
replace half of the routers this year and half next year, using E-Rate
money.
Karl Jendretzky explained how the current routers were bought
over a period of time five or so years ago, and elaborated on the
issues with the current configuration.
Jeff Wale
motioned to
spend up to $500,000 in E-Rate refunds (plus any funds received from
trading in old equipment) on router upgrades. Karl Colon
seconded.
Stephen Hedges explained that OPLIN staff would replace the
most
crucial routers and equipment first.
Roll
call: Bonnie Mathies, aye; Bob Richmond, aye; Mary Pat Essman, aye;
Gayle Patton, aye; Laura Solomon, aye; Jeff Wale, aye; Karl Colon, aye;
and Michael Wantz, aye. Terry Casey was absent.
8.2. NetWellness Support
Stephen
Hedges explained that in the early days of OPLIN, the legislature
earmarked money in our budget to support the NetWellness project. Over
the years, that money was replaced by federal grant funds. Those funds
have expired, and NetWellness is running out of funds. OPLIN is now in
possession of a cash balance of E-Rate refunds, and one potential use
would be to give an emergency bailout to NetWellness, in order to keep
them going until they can find an alternate source of funding.
Stephen
Marine, the Program Director of NetWellness, explained the background
of the current funding crisis. NetWellness started as a grant program
from the Department of Commerce in 1994-95, with the purpose of
extending the reach of the Internet and providing health information to
under-funded areas. When that original grant ran out, NetWellness had
four more years of funding due to the work of a state legislator, but
in 2001 that funding was eliminated. Federal congressmen then
became
interested and supported grants for NetWellness. NetWellness
is
searching for a more stable revenue stream, but in the meantime those
grants have expired.
The development of an ongoing funding model
now has two facets. One is a new champion in the state assembly, who
came forward late in the process but was not able to get funding into
the recently passed state budget. He wants to work on that next time,
and the Governor's office has been responsive as well, so
chances look
good to get a line back in the next budget. The second prong is a
supporter model along the lines of the public radio/TV model. Delta
Dental Insurance (of OH, IN, MI) is providing significant sponsorship
now, and is talking about making NetWellness a nationwide product.
NetWellness is hoping to secure a strong commercial funding model that
does not jeopardize the integrity of the site. They think
that in two
years they will be solid again financially.
Stephen Hedges explained
that he talked to Stephen Marine about how much of the NetWellness
budget goes toward content creation, instead of operations, and
NetWellness has provided that budget information. Diane Fink suggested
that OPLIN could do a grant program, but noted that it would not be
able to provide 12 months of support, because a grant program cannot
work retroactively to the beginning of the current fiscal year.
Stephen
Hedges noted that there is no doubt about the usefulness of
NetWellness, and that their web stats are impressive. In fact, he would
not have recommended OPLIN renew its current contract with Consumer
Health Complete had he been aware of NetWellness' problem. His biggest
concern is using E-Rate money for this ad hoc support before the focus
groups, which are planned for this fall, have provided input to help
OPLIN determine priorities for spending that money.
Stephen feels
that the terms should focus on a limited amount of money that could get
NetWellness through next June. Stephen further noted that there are no
restrictions on how E-Rate refund money can be spent; it has been used
in the past to hire staff, for example. The router upgrades are the
only high-priority, major expenditure related to E-Rate money that
OPLIN staff foresees in the near future.
Jo Budler suggested that
the State Library Board could potentially offer support to NetWellness
as well, in the form of federal Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA)
grant money. That Board would likely
prefer to provide matching funds, instead of being the sole provider.
Diane Fink led a general discussion about how a contract could
work and
the timeframes of such a contract.
Stephen
Marine explained NetWellness' current prospects for future
funding.
They have held discussions with various companies and are putting
together a professional business plan. There have been talks about
co-branding some of their content, but these are more long-term funding
discussions.
Stephen Marine further explained that all NetWellness
content is non-profit. He spoke of the differences between
NetWellness, WebMD, and other similar health information websites.
NetWellness works with faculty from three large medical academic
communities, and medical experts answer about 1000 questions a month,
creating the content themselves. Every topic has an actual expert in
that area to respond to questions from ordinary users.
Michael Wantz
relayed his concern about the appearance that OPLIN would not be buying
something concrete with its E-Rate refund money, but instead giving it
away. It might be a good use, but is it appropriate?
Stephen Hedges
suggested that Ohio libraries would feel the loss if NetWellness went
away. Mary Pat Essman suggested that OPLIN would really be
buying
content. But she noted that any agreement would have to have
a "one
time" stipulation.
Stephen Marine explained that NetWellness staff
have had many discussions about whether they should become a
profit-making entity, but they always conclude that they should
not.
The feeling is that the real value of their product is that it is
coming from authoritative university-based medical sources.
NetWellness acknowledges sponsors on their website, and would
acknowledge OPLIN's support.
Michael Wantz suggested that if
NetWellness were to go for-profit, OPLIN should get a refund.
Stephen
Hedges suggested that in that situation, it might be better for OPLIN
libraries to instead get a "free pass" to the
content.
There was a general discussion about contract terms.
Terry Casey returned at
11:15 a.m.
Terry
Casey questioned whether NetWellness was the most deserving recipient
of public dollars, in the form of OPLIN E-Rate refund money.
Mary
Pat Essman suggested that it was heavily used by her library, and
others agreed that public libraries would feel the loss if NetWellness
content went away.
Jo Budler explained that she would likely
recommend to the State Library Board that it uses LSTA money
to match
any OPLIN contribution. She noted that State Library staff
have
reviewed NetWellness, and that its "Ask an Expert"
service is not
available anywhere else. NetWellness compares very favorably
to other
medical information websites, as well.
Terry Casey suggested that
places like the Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic have better branding
and name-recognition than NetWellness, and thinks it is problematic to
use Ohio money to provide a service freely available to the entire
world.
Stephen Hedges noted that OPLIN's expenditure would
only
assure the availability of NetWellness content through the end of the
current fiscal year.
Terry Casey motioned to
authorize up to
$75,000, contingent upon matching funds from the State Library or other
source, to support NetWellness for one quarter.
Terry Casey
explained that he would like more time for OPLIN to explore other
similar sources for health content before committing more money.
Mary
Pat Essman stated that $75,000 would not be enough to help NetWellness,
and it would sap time and energy from the Board having to reexamine the
issue every quarter.
There was more general discussion about the terms of the
contract.
Jeff Wale noted that this type of database usually costs about
$150,000
.
Jeff
Wale motioned to authorize up to $150,000, contingent upon matching
funds from the State Library and/or LSTA grant money, to support
NetWellness content for up to one year. If NetWellness
becomes a
profit-making entity, OPLIN and Ohio public libraries will receive
"free access" to its content for two years.
Roll call: Bonnie
Mathies, aye; Bob Richmond, aye; Mary Pat Essman, aye; Gayle Patton,
aye; Laura Solomon, aye; Jeff Wale, aye; Karl Colon, aye; Michael
Wantz, aye; and Terry Casey, no.
8.3. Change to Support
Center Hours
Stephen
Hedges explained that when he started as Director, the OPLIN Support
Center expanded its hours from 8 a.m.-8 p.m., Monday through Thursday.
Since then, the staff decreased from three to two positions, but
retained those hours. In reality, they have been receiving very few
calls after 5:00. Stephen would like the Board to endorse setting the
hours to 8:00-5:00 Monday through Friday and keeping only two staff
members. The third position would remain inactive; there is
no need
for it right now.
Diane Fink noted that the third position had been funded out
of E-Rate
refund money.
Bob
Richmond motioned to change the operating hours of the OPLIN Support
Center from 8:00 to 5:00, Monday through Friday, with two staff
members. The OPLIN Board will reexamine this arrangement from
time to
time. Laura Solomon seconded. All aye.
8.4. Policy on Extending
OPLIN Connection
Stephen
Hedges explained that this item is a potential E-Rate issue. It has
recently come to his attention that if a public library is sharing its
connection with another entity, OPLIN cannot apply for an E-Rate refund
for the entire connection; OPLIN would have to guess at how much
traffic is library-generated and designate the other portion as
ineligible. Right now, OPLIN does not know which public
libraries are
sharing connections, but some apparently do this to support their
community. Should OPLIN ask libraries whether they are doing
this on
our annual connectivity survey, or conduct an independent
survey?
Bonnie
Mathies noted that her community is considering this type of connection
sharing, and that more groups around the state are beginning to do
this. Many people assume that their local public library is the focal
point of information coming in, so why should they not be allowed to do
this? Bob Richmond noted several libraries and branches in his area
that are sharing connections.
Stephen Hedges recommended that the
Board table any action on this item until an independent survey
determines how many Ohio public libraries are sharing their current
Internet connection.
8.5. FY2008 Internet
Filtering Assistance Grants
Stephen
Hedges noted that OPLIN once again has $100,000 per year to assist
public libraries with filtering. In the past, OPLIN has distributed
this money in the form of grants to libraries. The OPLIN Board needs to
formally approve this to start the process this year.
As part of
the process, OPLIN asks libraries to submit two reports: a financial
report in July the same year they receive the money; and a general
narrative report one year later, which many recipients forget to do.
This second report form asks questions OPLIN may not really need.
Stephen wondered whether it could be simplified somewhat, and whether
we should ask libraries to return it as soon as possible (instead of
waiting a year).
Terry Casey motioned to
approve this year's
Internet Filtering Assistance Grant process, and to simplify the
reports as described, Jeff Wale seconded. All aye.
9. OPLIN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
9.1. OPLIN in
Permanent Law
Stephen
Hedges reviewed the proposed legislation to put OPLIN into permanent
law, as suggested by Jon Iten (an attorney working for OLC).
The
proposed language was based on the language of 1997's AM. HB
118.
Stephen noted an issue regarding language related to the State Library
being OPLIN's fiscal agent. According to Jon Iten,
if OPLIN is an
independent Board in permanent law, then that Board would typically own
OPLIN equipment; currently the State Library does. Independent entities
can contract fiscal services to another agency, but under this
arrangement, OPLIN employees might no longer be State Library
employees. Jon Iten feels that there is probably a way to write the
language so that the relationship between OPLIN and the State Library
is roughly the same as now.
It appears that this process might
separate OPLIN from the State Library, and it reopens the discussion
from two years ago. Stephen suggested the Board table this discussion
until he and Jon Iten and the Department of Administrative Services
(DAS) can get a better idea of
what all the hidden implications are. Diane Fink suggested that OBM
should be involved too.
Stephen noted that in 1997, the intent might
have been to set OPLIN up as an independent agency, but that is not the
intent now. Rather, the intent now is to provide a stable platform for
the network and the databases, and allow for vendor contracts beyond
two years. Diane Fink noted that technically even permanent state
entities can really only do two-year contracts, because they only have
funding from budget to budget, but they can include automatic renewals
in their contracts.
Gayle Patton suggested the Board table this discussion until
later.
9.2. Security Update
Stephen
Hedges noted that OPLIN, along with other state entities, has been
asked to submit a report by August 14 describing how we comply with the
state data privacy policy.
Although OPLIN already complies with many
of the individual activities, many of the questions on the report
require the agency to have an official policy in order to fully comply,
so Stephen will be coming to the OPLIN Board with many new policies for
approval during the next few meetings.
9.3. Office
Activities
Stephen Hedges reviewed recent activities by the OPLIN
staff.
9.4. Databases
and Network Reports
9.4.1. Database
usage
Laura
Watkins reviewed the current database usage statistics, which are
generally on the rise. She noted that some of the data OPLIN receives
from the vendors is subject to error, and OPLIN staff are working to
figure out how the vendors determine their metrics.
Karl
Jendretzky noted that a lot of new optional subscriptions are just
starting up, so strange things may happen with the numbers. Bobbi
Galvin noted that some vendors have recently changed their reporting
tools, and the numbers have changed as a result.
9.4.2. Support
Center (June and July)
Karl Jendretzky reviewed recent Support Center activity, and
reported
that nothing out of the ordinary has been happening.
9.4.3. Web
Hosting
Karl
Jendretzky reported that OPLIN's web hosting service is up
and running.
OHReadytoRead is using the service, and some medium-sized libraries are
also signed up. Karl and Stephen attended a small library conference a
few weeks ago, and many people there seemed interested.
Stephen
Hedges noted that there is an ambiguity about what web hosting is. He
suspects that libraries erroneously think OPLIN is offering website
design services. Providing website templates was an objective, in
addition to hosting. Stephen wondered if OPLIN should involve
OHIONET
or the regional library systems in that service, i.e. OPLIN does the
hosting, and other entities do the content building and hands-on
service.
10. CHAIR'S REPORT
10.1. Executive Director's
Evaluation
Gayle
Patton distributed the Executive Director's Evaluation, which
Donna
Perdzock compiled from individual Board responses. Gayle
noted that
Stephen Hedges has been here for over a year, and there were no major
disconnects between the Board member opinions and his own
self-assessment.
Terry Casey noted that Lynda Murray from OLC had
heard many positive things about Stephen at a recent ETM ("Every Third
Month") libraries meeting, as
well as from CLEVNET.
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Terry Casey
motioned to go into Executive Session at 12:10 p.m. to
discuss
personnel compensation, seconded by Bob Richmond. Jo Budler, Diane
Fink, and Stephen Hedges were invited to attend.
Roll call: Bonnie
Mathies, aye; Bob Richmond, aye; Mary Pat Essman, aye; Gayle Patton,
aye; Laura Solomon, aye; Jeff Wale, aye; Karl Colon, aye; Michael
Wantz, aye; and Terry Casey, aye.
Karl Colon motioned to
return from Executive Session at 12:28 p.m.,
Terry Casey seconded.
Roll
call: Bonnie Mathies, aye; Bob Richmond, aye; Mary Pat Essman, aye;
Gayle Patton, aye; Laura Solomon, aye; Jeff Wale, aye; Karl Colon, aye;
Michael Wantz, aye; and Terry Casey, aye.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Terry Casey
motioned to adjourn the meeting at 12:31 p.m.