In attendance: Jim Duncan, Gene Hainer (Colorado), Ellen Fox, Justine Shaffner (BCR), Bev Obert (Illinois), Jim Scheppke, Darci Hanning (Oregon), Deborah Littrell, Tine Walczyk (Texas).

Minutes for March 28 meeting were approved.

Financial statement: 4/30/2008: balance of $157,195.04

State Reports:

Oregon

Continuing to have about two sites a month go live. Continuing work with contracted graphics designer for Plinkit site banners. Four are completed, four more are in process and the next eight libraries have been selected.

Texas

Number of active libraries, fairly stable, still taking time for each library to get started but interest remains high. Also working on getting a Plone 2.5 installation, working via their datacenter.

Illinois

Plinkit conference on May 1st with 45 attendees with various stages of being a Plinkiteer. Michael Piper from INCOSLA was there as well. One library was so eager that they got their instance started by their regional trainer during the conference.

By August Illinois hopes to have 75 libraries live. Next: going to modify MOU to include cost recovery, about $250/year for the first year.

Will be sending Troy Brown to Plone Bootcamp.

Colorado

20 libraries hosted; 21st about going live; not moving forward aggressively until open technology consultant position is filled. Making progress with the backend: ROI calculator is ready to roll-out, based on Colorado, localized costs. Planning on sending Steve Gregory to upcoming Plone Bootcamp, Collaborative will be reimbursing.

Project Coordinators Progress Report

Tine reports: joint meeting between technical group and project coordinators group. Joel will not be able to complete the Plinkit 2.0 as contracted. Project coordinators would like to propose an RFQ process which would include a recommendation for Plone 2.5 or Plone 3.0 as well as separate schedule/quotes for each.

Jim from CO: suggested having contractual arrangement cover more accountability. Include milestones that include code releases and payments. Darci agreed to have that included in the final contract.

Decision: Move ahead with the RFQ process.

Teleconference costs:

Teleconferences for project coordinator and technical group meetings have been paid for by Oregon to date and would like to have other arrangements made. The steering committee uses long distance conference. Jim D suggested using BCR's service: $0.09/minute/person. Decision: Steering Committee approves.

Confirm that original member states would have training costs reimbursed while new members who join at a lower fee would have to cover their training costs. Decision: Steering Committee approves reimbursements for Troy and Steve to go.

Texas would like request reimbursement of $600 to send Tine to ALA. Decision: Steering Committee approves.

Potential Members

Continue to hear from states that are interested but nothing solid has happened to date. Conversations with INCOLSA and PALINET have continued; both are interested in joining in the near future. The directors of INCOLSA, PALINET and BCR discussed Plinkit at a recent meeting. Piper presented an informal proposal to Jim for INCOLSA/PALINET:

Join by offering Plinkit as a hosted service to their regions in the country (to individual libraries) or even dividing the US into three large regions.

PALINET/SOLINET eastern, INCOLSA for middle/center, and BCR maybe someday for western states.

As a cost recovery service, the membership fee is still an obstacle. Both networks would need to cover hosting costs and staff resources so they are proposing that their year one membership fee to the Collaborative be $10,000 for both INCOSLA/PALINET. Michael is also interested in pursuing grant opportunities (e.g. Gates, National Leadership from IMLS) for Plinkit funding. INCOSLA/PALINET may be willing to take the lead for the next round of NLG grants (due in February 2009) and seeing if Plinkit couldn't be adapted for museums and historical societies -- which would a positive selling point for an IMLS-funded grant. All Collaborative members would be partners in an IMLS grant proposal.

There is an issue about what would happen if in the future if a state library from one of the regions served by one of the networks wants to begin offering Plinkit (without cost recovery) -- how would that work? Jim Scheppke suggested that states should be able to opt out of the regional model and join the Collaborative directly so that any state could still offer Plinkit. Michael seemed to feel that this approach would be reasonable.

BCR is still interested but has other projects with higher priority until at least the end of the year.

Jim D: would this reduced fee give them access to current / future development? Jim S said basically yes, they would be a member just like the current membership.

Gene: cost recovery means they would be charging individual libraries and at some point they might be making money. How to ensure costs are fair? Can we come up with a uniform price?

Gene: if grant money was obtained, what would it go for? Jim S stated that it would fund items as prioritized by the entire steering committee.

Gene: Gates might still be a possibility if a research component were included about pre- post Plinkit and public's use of the library.

Jim S: a task force to work on grant concept would probably would be needed.

Bev: for cost recovery, Illinois has been trying to keep it low initially to get libraries up and willing, with costs to go up slightly in the future. In Illinois they have a regional infrastructure that helps to provide training.

Jim S: We might agree to the $10,000 for membership for both for one year and require them to take the lead on developing and submitting an IMLS Leadership grant, overseen by the collaborative.

Bev: It will be important that states can always join individually regardless of which region they're in.

Tine: Wonders if the membership fee for someone like PALINET should be a flat fee or based on the number Plinkit sites they're hosting.

Can we ask they not sign on whole states/regions?

Jim S: If Virginia (who we have been talking to), for example, outsources hosting to PALINET, they would still need to join the Collaborative as a state member and not be a member by virtue of the fee paid by PALINET.

Darci reminds the steering committee that it was agreed to have a future discussion (sometime in the next 12 months) to determine a new cost model beyond FY 2008.

Deborah: It will be interesting to see how the network services are developed over the next year and based on their progress, have the appropriate cost model developed.

Jim S: Do we have the capacity to bring them on board? Deb: Texas is stretched. Darci: new documentation will be part of Plinkit 2.0; additional training will be the responsibility of new members. Bev: Would be willing to assist INCOSLA face to face and video conference and share how they've done it.

Next step: steering committee is open to the idea for them to make a written proposal and Jim will provide them with feedback based on this discussion.

(INCOLSA / PALINET are not planning to make a July 1 deadline)

Project Manager Orientation and Work Plan

Darci reviewed what was covered in the orientation and the follow up tasks that Justine has (a one on one conversation with each individual state, etc). Darci will be drafting the initial work plan which will be reviewed by the Project Coordinators at their face to face meeting at ALA next month.

Future meetings:

Would a regular schedule work better? Quarterly or every other month?

How to handle to projects as decisions are needed? Project Coordinators would like every two months to assist with development and feedback.

Agreement on six meetings for next FY.

Third Fridays at 9:00a PT as the standing meeting date/time and adjust as necessary, starting in July. Justine will send dates and time and book conference calls for those. Decision: Steering Committee agreed to use BCR's service and charge the Collaborative budget.

Meeting dates:

July 18, 2008 9a / 10a / 11a

Sept 19 (ARSL Conference -- shouldn't be a problem)

Nov 21 (IMLS Conference, Deborah will have Tine sit in as needed)

New Chair Selection

Volunteer? New chair will have Justine to assist as needed. Jim Duncan stepped forward and by acclamation was selected as new Chair. Jim S and Jim D will have a transition phone call before the next meeting.