Print

Print


Dear SACO Task Group,
        Our Interim report included the recommendation that: "a letter
outlining the responsibilities for SACO institutional membership be sent to
both NACO and SACO participants and request an official commitment from
those who chose to be members in this new context."
        For Hugh: it is a common term over here when a new criteria is
applied to situation to allow those already enjoying the relevant privileges
under a previous set of expections to continue to do so without being
required to meet the new criteria and call it, "grandfathering" them in.

        The draft recently sent out says, "That a letter announcing the new
option of SACO Membership be sent to all current SACO Participants to
describe this opportunity and invite those interested to apply." I had
revised this to be a letter announcing the membership option because I
thought Mary Charles was afraid she would not be able to continue as a SACO
Participant if we sent a letter that demanded a decision. It would then be
up to the library to initiate a request for official membership status,
which could happen whenever they felt ready. It seemed to me when I drafted
this compromise that we would reduce the number of libraries to become SACO
Members immediately. It seemed, however, that those who did become SACO
Members right away would be more strongly committed and others would join in
time.
        In my opinion any institutional membership in PCC must be based on a
conscious decision to become a member in some way, but I am not really picky
about the wording. I would foresee a larger number of SACO Members at the
outset if we adopt Mary Charles' proposal.
        At this point we can still change the report to recommend Mary
Charles preferences, but I will only feel justified in doing so if the
majority of the task force wants this to happen.  So, it would be extremely
helpful if each of you would respond as soon as possible to the following
questions:
Do you want the recommendation to be changed to include a separate letter
for libraries already meeting the quota say they are de facto members, etc.
upon specific written acceptance as Mary Charles is proposing?  ____Yes
____No
Do you want the recommendation to go forward as currently written in the
draft final report? ____Yes   ___No
Other comments?

I will change the recommendation accordingly in the next draft if a majority
of the task group members say yes to the first question. Else, I will try to
include Mary Charles concerns as a kind of minority opinion. Either way, I
hope to know the will of the group quickly so I would appreciate it if you
would take the time to respond soon. Thanks to all of you for your continued
efforts,
Jimmie