ALA Council,
2000 Annual Conference

The long-awaited, much-debated Core Values Statement was the most hotly debated topic when ALA Council met July 9, 11, and 12 during the Association’s Annual Conference in Chicago. After nearly an hour of discussion that reflected the strong feelings behind the issue, Council voted to launch an Association-wide discussion on the need for such a statement, effectively sending the process back to square one after a year of effort by the task force charged with the document’s development.

“Without common values we are not a profession,” said task force Chair Donald Sager as he presented the document (CD#32.1) to Council. Sager cited the statement’s threefold purpose: to guide members of the profession, to aid library-school faculty in developing curricula, and to help us respond to questions from the public and media.

Among the host of objections raised by councilors was the absence of a specific reference to intellectual freedom in the document. Intellectual Freedom Committee Chair Stephen Herb said that even though the concept was dealt with implicitly, “any core values document that may reflect intellectual freedom in a broad, general way but not use the term cannot be a core value of our Association.” The lack of support from such a major component of ALA as the intellectual freedom community was enough in itself for many councilors, including Past President Ann Symons, to oppose the statement’s adoption.

Other councilors viewed the statement’s approach as overly prosaic. Vivian Wynn felt that in an effort to offend nobody, the task force had produced a compromise statement “that contains, in my personal opinion, no passion whatsoever.” Sally Reed agreed, finding the document “generic” and lacking “heart.” Moreover, she said, rather than unifying the profession, the statement “is not binding us. It is dividing us.”

James Casey, one of the few councilors speaking in support of the document, noted the lack of unanimity but pointed out that “we’re trying to reach out beyond ourselves, and even beyond our membership, to . . . a global community.”

Rather than rejecting the document, Council approved a motion by Peter Graham for the ALA presidents, building on the existing policy documents and work of the task force and the other units of the Association, to establish a process to enable discussion across the Association on the need for and content of a core values statement for librarianship, leading to a proposal to Council at the 2001 Annual Conference. After the document was referred, Sager asked that the task force be discharged, adding that “We’ve done our best. We have provided the Council with the document that we were charged with.” The committee then received a standing ovation for its efforts.

Later, Sager told American Libraries that he was disappointed over the vote, but glad that the majority of Council supports the need for a core values statement. “We’ve identified some major concerns,” Sager said, “and hope that’s of value to whoever or whatever follows in our path.” He added that the task force would pass along the input it had received—including some 800 e-mail messages—to their successors.

Outrage over outsourcing

The other major item on Council’s agenda was a study commissioned by ALA on the impact of outsourcing and privatization on libraries. The report (CD#59), which maintained that outsourcing per se has had no negative effect on library services and management, was roundly attacked by councilors, who viewed such activities as a threat to values like professional service and free access.

Robert Martin, who prepared the report with a team from the Texas Woman’s University library school, warned that “We did not expect these conclusions to be popular.” He said the team found “no evidence . . . that would lead us to conclude that outsourcing represents a threat to the way of American librarianship,” adding that “outsourcing is a management tool, and like most tools, it is in and of itself neither benign nor evil.”

Janet Swan Hill called the study “a report of facts and of money and of management”; what it lacked, she said, was acknowledgment of the profession’s values and the effect of outsourcing on them. Herb Biblo noted that one thing the previous day’s core values debate made clear was that “the profit motive is not one of our core values.”

“Outsourcing all your selection really is abdicating your role as a librarian,” maintained Kay Cassell. “To say this is okay is relinquishing one of our really important roles, and I think that we should think twice about endorsing this kind of recommendation.”

The iconoclast once again, James Casey was the only councilor to speak at length in defense of the report. “For-profit is not akin to profanity,” he argued. “The whole idea of outsourcing has to be viewed objectively in a scholarly manner.” Casey agreed that outsourcing “might be wrong for most institutions. But I think it’s a management issue.”

Although noting he was skeptical about its use, Stephen Matthews admitted that “outsourcing’s going to happen” and that ALA needed to build upon the report by gathering more information. “I thought this was an information profession,” he said. “Let’s get more and let’s move along.”

Council finally voted to receive the report, to ask the ALA president to identify mechanisms to bring together guidelines developed by divisions and committees, and to develop definitions of outsourcing as a management tool vs. privatization. It also passed a resolution by Rita Auerbach that ALA work with other appropriate agencies to encourage and foster further research into the impact of outsourcing and privatization on library services and management.

Disability dissention

A resolution setting an ALA policy on library services for people with disabilities (CD#64) proved to be popular in principle but fractious in actuality. The policy, which directed libraries to comply with ADA guidelines and take other steps to serve persons with disabilities, met objections from councilors who favored strong recommendations rather than mandates—“should” instead of “must.” Ross Atkinson maintained that the policy was “written in a language that is so unequivocal and so mandatory that it virtually guarantees noncompliance.”

Noting that “the language and the tone here is one that is absolute,” Julie Cummins said that rather than furthering the cause of disability rights, the measure was “hamstringing the individuals who feel they must be in compliance with this.”

For nearly every councilor who felt the policy should be less prescriptive, a speaker voiced heartfelt support for its strong language. James Casey said the policy “puts ALA squarely on the side of right and good, and it puts some ammunition in our hands.” Mitch Freedman pointed out that even though “intellectual freedom is violated every day” in libraries, “it doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have a strong, powerful statement in favor of intellectual freedom.”

In the end, by a narrow 71–70 vote Council approved Atkinson’s motion to refer the resolution back to the Association of Specialized and Cooperative Library Agencies, and that its requirements be changed to strong recommendations in sections not relating specifically to ALA meetings and publications.

New initiatives

Outgoing Treasurer Bruce Daniels highlighted the new programmatic initiatives reflected in the FY 2001 ALA budget (CD#13.8, 13.9, and 13.10): the launch of a national public-relations advertising campaign, continuation of the Spectrum Initiative, enhancement of ALA’s literacy and programming efforts, solidifying the Association’s technology infrastructure, strengthening professional-development efforts, and creating new business opportunities. In addition, he said, a diversity unit will be created within the Association and a new compensation plan for staff is expected to take effect this year.

Daniels also identified several areas of budgetary concern: New revenue-generating activities will need to be identified as dues revenues become a smaller percentage of the revenue pie, and staff recruitment promises to pose obstacles.

With little discussion, Council approved FY 2001 budget projections totaling $46,003,000 with the following ceilings: general fund $26,359,000; divisions $15,989,000; round tables $463,000; plant-fund income $172,000; grants and awards $2,426,000; and long-term investments $595,000.

Yet another attempt to open the door to socially responsible investment (SRI) of ALA’s endowment was rejected by Council when a resolution directing the endowment trustees to submit the Association’s portfolio to professional examination using SRI criteria and to present an implementation plan to Council (CD#65) failed by a 54-to-67 vote.

Membership Committee Chair Michael Golrick announced that ALA membership stood at an all-time high of 60,309. As part of “an aggressive, multifaceted campaign for the recruitment and retention of members” (CD#38), the committee submitted a proposal revamping dues and benefits for organization members. However, concerns that the higher dues might result in the loss of organization members, as well as over language indicating how the revenues would be spent, prompted Council to send the measure back to the committee. Council also voted to place a proposed bylaws change on next spring’s mail ballot that would adjust the salary limit for the category of “other” members from $18,000 to $20,000.

Council swiftly passed four resolutions presented by the Committee on Legislation urging withdrawal of Defense Department exemptions from the Freedom of Information Act (CD#20.4), urging Congress to fully fund the Government Printing Office (CD#20.5) and the Patent and Trademark Office (CD#20.6), and asking for a study to examine the proposed transfer of Superintendent of Documents operations to the Library of Congress (CD#20.7).

Also adopted with no discussion were four revised interpretations of the Library Bill of Rights submitted by the Intellectual Freedom Committee, as well as one new interpretation on “Intellectual Freedom Principles for Academic Libraries” and a revision of the Freedom to Read Statement (CD#19.6-8).

Council takes action

Among other actions, Council:

• Established a standing Committee on Literacy to raise awareness of literacy within the Association; work with the Office for Literacy and Outreach Services, Washington Office, and other ALA unis on efforts that have a literacy focus; and develop partnerships with national literacy organizations (CD#67).
• Adopted four recommendations from the presidential Special Committee on Council Mentoring: that one-on-one mentoring be offered to all newly elected councilors; that newly elected councilors be encouraged to attend the Annual Conference immediately after their election to begin mentoring; that individual mentoring be made the responsibility of the Committee on Council Orientation; and that the presidential special committee be discharged (CD#23).
• Approved a resolution urging the Universal Service Administrative Company’s Schools and Libraries Division to accept the recommendations submitted by ALA’s E-rate Task Force, particularly those regarding technology-plan requirements, consortium plans, and simplification of the application process (ED#63).
• Adopted four policy changes recommended by the Policy Monitoring Committee on electronic submission of Council resolutions, foreign credentialing, official representatives to outside organizations, and exhibit passes for those not attending ALA conferences (CD#17.1-4).
• Referred three recommendations of the Library Information and Technology Task Force on Privacy and Confidentiality in the Electronic Environment to the Intellectual Freedom Committee (CD#62).
• Adopted five recommendations of the Electronic Meeting Participation Task Force: that ALA continue to support chat-based tools; that the task force conduct an informational session demonstrating real-time chat at Midwinter Meeting; that the task force work to define electronic meeting participation; to provide chat room access by next January for committees that request it; and to refer a review of ALA policy with respect to electronic meeting participation to the Policy Monitoring Committee (CD#61).
• Approved changes recommended by the Committee on Organization: a revised charge of the Council Orientation Committee; the merging of the Armed Forces Round Table with the Federal Librarians Round Table; and revised mission statements for the Office of Information Technology Policy and the International Relations Committee (CD#27.1).