Meeting Minutes for 11/09/2021

Bibliotheca - cloudLibrary Demo and Pricing (Brett Ward, Bibliotheca)
Demo Recording

Q & A

• Q: Do the additional formats (eMagazine, eVideo, etc.) require separate apps in a mobile environment?
• A: Currently, they do require a separate application with ComicsPlus, cloudLibrary NewsStand, and BiblioPlus. All three are going to be incorporated into the cloudLibrary app in the next year. The magazines will be first. Next will be the ComicPlus entire catalog. Lastly, the video format will be added.     
• Q: As new libraries join Marmot, would the consortium-wide platform fee be available for them?  Or would we be locked into the list of libraries that are currently members?
• A: As Marmot’s membership continues to grow, Brett does not see a large price increase. He would need the population service area and more details to structure any new pricing.   
• Q: On the demo, pins were used. If we are not set up for pins yet are other options available through the API for authentication?   
• A: If a library wants to use pins that functionality is available. Otherwise, you would use the patron barcode for authentication. 
• Q: With cloudLink, you are borrowing because your copy is in use. Is there a way to set up a priority so Marmot’s content fills requests before going to outside libraries?
• A: If the consortium moved to cloudLibrary, any of the Marmot members would be able to place holds on the Marmot-owned materials. When your patrons do not use the Marmot-owned materials, they would be available for borrowing from the other libraries. Marmot members would always have visibility on their owned content so patrons can place a hold. When the other library is finished your patrons would be able to borrow the content. 
• Q: Would the individual libraries have any say over what content goes outside to the cloudLink participants?
• A:  It is an all-access collection so all titles will be available for all libraries to borrow. A library cannot pick and choose what titles they want to add for shared borrowing. 
• Q: If a library has a hold list with 5 patrons who want a title and my library only owns one copy, and all the other libraries do not have available copies for borrowing, what keeps my patrons from going to the pay per use model?
• A: The holds would be filled by the pay-per-use catalog, so a library would be paying that smaller price point for the checkouts. Patrons do not have to wait for those holds like they would if it was just the ownership model. Individual libraries have the ability to cap the max price point for pay-per-use (PPU) checkouts. The same is true for a maximum monthly budget that can be set for an individual library level for eBooks or audiobooks, or you can turn off PPH. Pay-per-use is something a library would need to turn on. If you were doing this as a consortium, it would be a consortium-level decision. 

cloudLibrary / cloudLink Discussion

• The group did not see the point of leaving OverDrive until the cloudLibrary content is integrated into one application. The group wanted to wait at least a year to see how much progress they make moving content. 
• Jo pointed out that OverDrive has access to their databases such as LawDepot.
• Adam mentioned that he will take the cloudLibrary platform maintenance fees back to OverDrive and see if we can get some improvements on what Marmot pays.
• Ashley pointed out that moving from OverDrive to cloudLibrary would be a complete loss of functionality in Pika if we were to migrate everything. The APIs that we currently have for OverDrive in Pika is very robust.  Also, in Ashley’s experience with Discovery Partners and other organizations, the MARC records for cloudLibrary are, historically, not very good. Sideloads for cloudLibrary content would need to be used until the API integration was created. 

   OverDrive Best Practices Document (Adam)

• Adam brought the document to the Marmot Board to review.
• They found the document was a little too prescriptive for Marmot’s culture.  
• Adam will be working on revisions of the document for the full committee to review before bringing it back to the Marmot Board.
• Adam mentioned that while the $1.06 per FTE or LSA was a great goal, Marmot does not want directors to drastically restructure their budget to accommodate this spending by giving up other electronic resources to pay for the increase. 
• Adam mentioned that it is useful for libraries to do a cost-per-use study of all their electronic resources in order to make sure they are allocating their budget appropriately, but we certainly do not want the OverDrive best practices to dictate where funding should go. 
• The takeaway from this topic is to not worry about the $1.06 for FTE or LSA item for building budgets for next year. 

Curation Team Member Update (Tammy)

• We need a member to work on the adult collection list curation team.
• Any new curating team member would receive permission and a training video on curating lists. This person would be working with two other library members. 
• If no one comes forward we could always go back to having the OverDrive Account Team help by creating lists for us.
• Please send your interest to Tammy by email (tammy-at-marmot.org)
• Yuliya asked if it was possible to see usage stats from curated collections.
• Action Item: Tammy will get the curation reports out to the committee to review

Other Business

• eContent Committee Chair
  • The committee still needs a member to fill the chair position
  • The chair position would not start until at least January
  • The chair replacement still needs to be approved by the Marmot Board
  • Please send your interest to Tammy by email  (tammy-at-marmot.org)
• EBSCO sent out an email about removing Project Gutenberg titles (Ashley)
  • Ashley wanted to clarify that Marmot does not have a shared EBSCO sideload 
  • If your library has an EBSCO sideload that maybe includes those Gutenberg titles that would be reflected whenever you update your record set in the FTP server versus the Pika team making changes like they would for a shared sideload.
• Hoopla Deal for Marmot
  • Tallie asked if Marmot had a group deal for Hoopla
  • Tammy mentioned that originally Hoopla could not make a deal with Marmot due to their pay-per-use content model.
  • Now, they have changed their lending model to include a way for consortiums to have a shared collection. However, they are not ready for consortiums just yet. 
  • Tammy met with one of the Hoopla reps to discuss what Marmot needed in order for a group deal to work for everyone. As things progress, the rep will contact Tammy. If we find that they are where we need them to be, we could do another demo and go from there.  
  • The Pika team also met with the Hoopla support team to discuss some of the functionality for different borrowing platforms for the migration of entire collections. Ashley talked about that there would need to be a lot of development work that would have to happen.  

The next meeting is on  December 14  at 1 p.m.