Aaron the Librarian

Hi, Blogging from your ALA Council II Session - on trying to make Our Association better.

For those readers who are not aware, I have been an ALA Councilor at Large Candidate for the last two years (I got 2901 votes and lost by ~100 votes last year [2006] and got 2458(?) votes and lost by ~250 votes this year [2007]). I attended Council II, as is my usual practice; while there, I found I had something substantive to add to a long discussion about the format of the Membership Meetings.

Councilor-at-Large Heidi Dolamore stood for me (with coaching on parliamentary procedure by Councilor-at-Large Michael Golrick) and asked the moderator to suspend the normal rules of debate to allow me to address Council on this issue being discussed.

The moderator asked for the indulgence of Council to allow me to speak and a bunch of councilors shouted “Why?!” A fair few hands went up to support my opportunity to address council; however, a larger portion of voting councilors chose to
Shush me.

I do not know why a majority of ALA Councilors would not want to hear from a Member on the subject of the format of the Membership Meeting — however, that majority succeeded in shutting out the individual voice of an Interested Member from direct involvement.

Which leads me to my Wiki effort to Improve ALA from the ground up, http://improveala.pbwiki.com

In addition to my efforts to improve ALA from the grassroots, I have been nominated to run for Councilor-at-Large (again) on the Spring 2008 Ballot. In addition to running for Council and trying to improve ALA from the grassroots, I am looking for like-minded people to run as a slate dedicated to moving ALA forward. If you are interested in joining me in trying to implement possible suggestions many of which are on the Improve ALA Wiki, please add yourself to the Improve ALA Slate.
Thank you for your efforts and may I please have your vote for ALA Councilor at Large?

OITP/OGR Telecommunications SubCommittee
Sunday 24, 2007 @ 4-6pm
WCC 209A

1. Welcome and Comments
Bob Bocher, Lynne Bradley, Rick Weingarten

Rick:  Gave overview of OITP efforts
(link to oitp & telecom pages & atl posts)

2. Gates Connectivity Project Update (will blog it when I get a copy)
Rick Weingarten

The research part is done and the report is mostly written - OITP will release in a few weeks.

3. State Telecommunications Policy preconference
Report and next steps

Educate some state-level actors or interested parties to watch for and advocate for library inclusions in telecom discussions

4. Discussion of Telecommunications
John Windhausen

– Rural Utilities Service in the Department of Agriculture is a loan program to develop broadband in rural areas.  The funds are not being disbursed, as many applicants don’t show financial ability to pay back loan.  Plus broadband providers are squaking that too much money is being disbursed which fund their competitors.  Language is being proposed by ALA to modify this program to enable libraries to participate in this program.

– Universal Service Fund in FCC is a grant program funded by traditional telecom companies. ~65% goes to hich-cost rural telecom companies, ~35% to E-rate.  Many wireless companies are recipients of this funding.  Wireless satrtups oppose proposed caps, established, traditional telecom companies want the caps.  FCC Chairman is likely to approve the caps, to protect the Universal Service Fund.

Poo, I have to go if I’m going to be able to get to everything else today - I should have driven in this morning (sorry)

5. Legislative / Regulatory Update (OGR)
Current legislation
Key Issues
Recent FCC filings

6. Update on Public Library Net Survey and State Data Tool
Mark Bard

7. Pending Agenda for 2007-08

Had to leave 2/3rds oif the way through

I was late to this, because I dropped “Girl Scout the younger” at GS day camp on the way to DC.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
9:00 - 4:00pm
Washington Convention Center, Room 147 A/B
Agenda

9:00-9:30 Welcome and introduction
Lynne Bradley, Director, ALA/OGR
Rick Weingarten, Director, ALA/OITP
Michael Dowling, Director, ALA Chapter Relations

9:30-12:00 Issues exploration
Christopher McLean, e-Copernicus
John Windhausen, Telepoly

—I arrived here—

Mark Lloyd, Center for American Progress

Mark was speaking about the necessity of urban library support for the rural libraries provisions in this year’s Farm Bill. Please say to your Senators and Representatives: “Please support the rural library provisions in this year’s Farm Bill.”
12:00-1:00 lunch and keynote
Gloria Tristani, Spiegel & McDiarmid (former FCC Commissioner)

Gloria spoke about the importance of sufficient bandwidth for public libraries, wherever they are. She spoke about ALA WO efforts to simplify the E-rate for libraries, modify “poverty calculations” to bring libraries into parity with school districts and respond to “Notices of Inquiry” from the FCC.

(I got to review three Telcom-related responses in my positions on the OITP Advisory Committee or the OITP/COL Telcom Subcommittee)

Though FCC comment periods may say they are “closed,” if you have a comment you should send it in anyway (up until a decision is made). Grassroots advocacy and grassroots comments count with the FCC when they come in significant numbers.

While we are all here in DC, we should take the opportunity to drop in on the FCC Commissioners — we are competing with many other players and a massive drop by of interested parties. Take the time to have a few relevant statistics about library connectivity to hand and encourage the FCC. Wisconsin specific data here for example.

1:00-2:30 Broadband deployment models that work

Bob Bocher Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
Described development of BadgerNet and follow-on departments. Partners: between state gov’t, K-20, libraries, tribes, telcos. Funding: costs are “postalized” same cost anywhere — benefits rurals *big time* T-1=~$100/month, higher=~$250/month. Centralized purchase of access and divvied internally. Services: Video distance Ed, 24/7/365 Tech Support. Statewide VoIP soon, internet via WiSCnet, shared ILS in ~90% of WI libraries for resource sharing etc. Challenges: WAN circuts insufficient, State USF has had 6 years of no growth, Web 2.0 interactions loading network, working to improve funding, general sys admin stuff (security, spam, remote mgmt, etc) Success because: strong state network office, strong legislative and executive support, governor support, collaboraive environment (inclusive), state-wide funding of connections.

Steven Hedges OPLIN

Discussed Ohio’s path to a working state-wide network INFOhio, OSCnet, OhioLink, MORE. OPLIN also provides “postalized” pricing, same anywhere. All 3 agencies are now working together as Libraries Connect Ohio.
Policy issues about funding of bandwidth for gaming may crop up if legislators ask about what kinds of trafic are being funded.

William Giddings MOREnet

MOREnet started in 1986, REAL started in 1994, now 131 libraries with 107 branches. Connection depends on tax revenues for service area — you get the connection speeds you need (smaller libraries pay ~$300/year, largest pays ~$12,000 per year) no questions asked. T-1 to 45 MBps. Partners: Governor, State library, Dept of Ed, Dept of Higher Ed, U Missouri One network to rule them all (wait, no, There can be only one) in Missouri. Funding: Dept of Higehr Ed, Sec of State via State Library, participant fees, E-rate reimbursements. Services: Network Svcs, Video, Securoty, Resources, Training, more Challenges: growing demand for bandwidth, term limits, site visits by MOREnet (to keep issues tied to local issues), Techies resistant to loosening local control Successful because: Shared Leadership, program manager, single state-wide network, level playing field, public procurement.

Andrew McNeill Connect Kentucky

Am having a hard time note-taking (handout being read out loud), will have to scan & post the handout (sorry)

2:30-4:00 You can do it! Concrete approaches to tackling the most important telecommunications issues at the state level

Find out what is important to the person to whom you’re speaking.
Find solid examples to support what you’re saying.
Find a compelling story to share.
“Fiber to the Library” will also benefit the local community, nearby businesses, students doing homework. This initiative (or it should be an initiative) may be a great way to get fiber to the home rolled out. I think the Rural Libraries provisions in this year’s Farm Bill may have more on funding this?
Aim to get something scalable without huge new capital outlay

See ALA WO / Public Libraries and the Internet 2006: Study Results and Findings handout for more suggestions.
Quotes:

• “We are what we share” (from Jessamyn on Twitter earlier today) seems very appropriate.
• Way to think about libraries and information technology: “Libraries: Universal Service Providers” (quote from Nancy Kranich)

For what it’s worth, I think there are several Task Forces considering stuff at the ALA level.

The one I am most familiar with (I’m on its Reactor Panel) is the ALA Graduated Dues Task Force.  This task force will be reporting about the likely costs the association would incur if the decision were made to do a comprehensive study on a salary-based dues structure.  The numbers I saw in the report are, to me, pretty optimistic, lowball figures. (in the range of about half a million dollars)

Anyone know of other task forces? I only find Division-level task force pages when I search the ALA site.

HUH!

Actually, more than nothing - to refute the song I’m hearing in my head as I read the post title.

The Annual 2007 Wiki has a page about the membership meeting, what it is, what it does, *and implies what a group of interested members could do while attending.*

Specifically, I note “ALA members present at the meeting can change the proposed agendas at any time. Any discussion topics suggested by the committee, or others, are given second place to resolutions proposed by the ALA members”

I’ll admit to having a very short event horizon (my wife says ~2 days) and I’ll admit I realize this is very short notice, but parties interested in Improving ALA (a worthy goal, which needs discussion) could use Membership I and/or II to advance discussion about what might need improvements and how to go about said improvements.

ACRL Blog had some good insights from their recent member focus groups in some recent posts;  I’d like to see similar efforts in an association-wide effort.

The alacoun list had a recent thread on the mechanics of introducing council resolutions; it doesn’t seem that hard, 16 points to consider and a quick run by the Resolutions Committee (oh and a Councilor-sponsor and -second to get it to the floor)

It’s always fun to watch the fur fly, maybe that’s why this quote by Michael Gorman on the Britannica Blog made me grin:

[Gorman summarizes the history of intellectual property development and then says:] “There is today a concerted and multifront assault on copyright spurred by monied interests and the desire of consumers to use digital technology to get something for nothing. This assault has created a mindset that sees the notion of intellectual property as a barrier to progress rather than what it is—an affirmation of the singularity of the human intellect and personality.”

I see the “…assault on copyright … and the desire of consumers to use digital technology…” as a backlash against the ever-lengthening term (as lobbied for by commercial content producers) of copyright from the originally codified in US term of 14 + 14 years. Up to 28 years of virtual monopoly on the use of an expression of an idea was deemed plenty of time for exploitation of an expression/creation by its creator. At some point an individual’s “intellectual property” (which is used as a crass conflation of several distinct concepts: copyright, trademarks, and patents - among others) has been disseminated to the point where the individual’s right to the idea has diffused to the public domain.

The increasing length of copyright terms — from 14 years plus a 14 year extension in 1790, to 28 years plus a 14 year extension in 1831, to to life of the author plus 50 years or works for hire for 75 years with specific, codified fair-use provisions in 1976, to the Sonny Bono act in 1998 which extended copyright to life of the author plus 70 years — is a burden which the Public Domain cannot bear. I fail to see how life plus 70 years encourages a creator to produce new works; this term of “protection” seems to encourage resting in one’s laurels after producing a magnum opus or bestseller instead of encouraging continued creation of new works which could be better than the last.

As currently practiced under the law, intellectual property *is* a barrier to progress. Seemingly because Steamboat Willie was a smash hit in the roaring twenties. Copyright was originally enacted to encourage learning, prevent booksellers from monopolizing books and the sale of books, allow authors some control over their works, create a public domain for literature, and give the purchaser of a book control over what s/he could do with the purchased item. There was no overarching “affirmation of the singularity of the human intellect and personality” involved - no matter how good the rhetoric sounds.

Lastly, speaking to the accusation: “desire of consumers to use digital technology to get something for nothing,” I, and most digital technology consumers, are not out to get “something for nothing” while using our digital technology. We are out to make sure the items we purchased with our money are usable in whatever appliance we choose to use for our enjoyment. If I buy a standard $0.99 song from iTunes (not likely, as I generally only listen to whatever is on the radio) and want to listen to that song on a Linux-based computer, I would have to (illegally, in current practice) break the DRM in order to make use of an item I purchased and should be able to use on whatever device I prefer.

The consumer should be the ultimate decider of how to use their legally acquired products.

Woohoo, wireless available at “ALA2007″ in convention center, as twitted a mere moment ago.
(as is only right, of course)

I knew I liked Slacker Manager for more than just the name and the pearls (of wisdom). Learning about this: The five day weekend » Slacker Manager is yet another reason.

The Work Less Express sounds like an idea whose time has come. I wonder if I have a way to clandestinely do something like this at work?

and this has to be the best snippet: (assuming I got the code right, of course; otherwise, hit the link & see the third snippet)

************

Q. Who are you people? A bunch of slackers and hippies?
A. No, we’re the anti-slackers. Roy explains:

Must be an ALA conference week, I’m suddenly noticing lots more ALA related stuff.  One thing I found was the Web Planning - Webplanning wiki, which details the adventurous process being taken to disseminate info about and gather member input.

“By June, a number of high-priority fixes will be made to improve navigation and information architecture, including graphical recasting of home page content to provide more prominence to weekly spotlight items.  Google search results also will be modified to assure users that they are searching ALA content and have not left the ALA site. Work will begin on creating flyouts and dropdowns on high-level navigation items. Members should be able to preview the preliminary redesign at the ALA Annual Conference in Washington, D.C., and provide feedback on various redesign options.”

Not to be a Luddite, I’m hoping for shorter, more human readable URLs.

The list of folks tapped for this project is long, diverse, and I recognize many well qualified (in many different ways) people; I’m hopeful the “premier association” of library / information professionals will soon have a website that doesn’t run counter to the ease of use, intuitive design ideals for which we all strive.

There have been several posts of late and more and more , that got me to communicating (via Twitter, Meebo Rooms, IM, and email) with several folks about how to un-break some broken things at our favorite association.
Here’s a quickie overview of our side conversation so far:

• What should be ALA’s Core focus? (someone posted the 7 key areas page, not what I meant)
• Why [does / do] [ALA / the Divisions] seem so inefficient? (bureaucracy build-up of a century)
• Do we need term limits on Councilors? (maybe, maybe not - probably won’t/can’t happen)
• How to get the newer people involved in a discussion about what ALA’s Core mission should be?
• How do we get change agents (and a majority) elected to Council?
• How does the bureaucracy need to be streamlined?
• What other changes need made?

How’s this for a soundbyte?
“ALA needs to focus on libraries and librarians, and we’re pledging to push the conversation where it needs to be”

There’s loads to be hashed out & while dispersed conversation is good, a wiki should make it easier to turn out a finished product. So let me introduce to you, the one and only Billy Shears… Improve ALA Wiki. [UPDATE] (try the three lowercase initials of our favorite association as the pwd)
See below the fold for some of my view of our conversation notes or head on over to the Wiki to see what we’ve done so far.
(more…)