<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hi all,<br>
<br>
I want to provide some background from the perspective of a previous
conference co-organizer, a former EOB member, and a former rep to
the Conservancy.<br>
<br>
Having served in the role as local organizer and also as an EOB
conference committee rep, I can say both roles have their
challenges. I'm sure everyone working on the 2016 conference,
including Tanya and Grace, acted in a way they thought was best for
the conference and for the project as a whole. I don't think anyone
acted out of self-interest or the interests of their employer.<br>
<br>
Looking at the specific communications, as related by Grace, I
believe many of the actions she took and recommendations she made
align with how we previously conducted conferences and with what I
would have recommended if I were still serving in a role as a
standing conference committee rep. For those who have not previously
been involved in organizing an Evergreen conference, I want to
provide some background on why I think these actions were
appropriate.<br>
<br>
- To maintain its non-profit status, the Conservancy has
communicated to the project that sponsorship opportunities cannot be
changed after the sponsorship package has been released. It presents
an issue if one potential sponsor decides to, for example, go with a
Gold package only to find out that another vendor was able to get
more from the Platinum package than was originally advertised. I
participated in the kickoff calls with Tony Sebro, attorney at the
SFC, for both the Cambridge and Hood River conferences. He made this
issue clear from the start of conference planning. I did not
participate in the kickoff call with Raleigh because I was no longer
a conference committee rep, so I can't say whether this information
was communicated for the most recent team.<br>
<br>
- There is some flexibility where we can create new sponsorship
packages, similar to the birthday package Grace outlined in here
e-mail. For example, looking back to the 2014 conference, we created
a new sponsorship for Eventbrite so that they could waive our
registration feeds. However, those who were on the Board at the time
may remember that we had one issue with the Eventbrite conditions
for that sponsorship. They wanted all of the confirmation e-mails to
include a statement saying that Eventbrite was a sponsor for the
conference (I don't recall the exact language). At the time, the
Board felt uncomfortable with this request because the same
opportunity hadn't been provided to other sponsors who had already
committed to the conference. We resolved the issue by acknowledging
all sponsors in the confirmation email. I believe this decision is
one in which the Project set a precedent. Even when it was legally
permissible to create a new package, we didn't want to present
opportunities for new sponsors that weren't available to the vendors
who had already signed up to support the conference. This is a
precedent I think the project should continue to maintain.<br>
<br>
- I think few non-conference-organizers realize that the sponsorship
for a specific function, particularly when it comes to the
reception, supports only a fraction of the cost of that function. To
an outsider, it may seem reasonable to allow the sponsor paying for
a function to determine what type of food or entertainment is
provided at that function. But the project is really funding a large
percentage of that function. I don't now what the numbers were for
Raleigh, but, in the case of Cambridge, the sponsorship didn't even
cover half the cost of the reception. The project needs to have the
flexibility to contain those costs as much as they can while also
meeting contractual food & beverage minimums and providing what
they believe is a quality conference experience to attendees. As
Grace said, the sponsorships are there to offset costs. They are not
there to involve sponsors in the planning.<br>
<br>
- As far as giving welcome speeches at an event, I have attended
other non-Evergreen conferences where speaking opportunities,
perhaps during the Welcome session, were part of a sponsorship
package. If we want to provide that opportunity, we can do so. It
just needs to be part of a package that all vendors have an
opportunity to support. The idea here is that we need to be fair to
all potential exhibitors and sponsors. Changing the rules in the
middle of the game is likely to cause frustrations among other
sponsors who may not feel they were given an equal opportunity to do
receive a particular benefit.<br>
<br>
- Overall, I would say vendor/sponsor communications is something
that can add a lot of stress to a local planning team that is
already working hard to put on a great conference. If there is
anything the Board can do to alleviate that stress and remove some
of the burden from the shoulders of the local planning team, I think
it would be a step in the right direction. There is the expected
stress of getting enough sponsors to keep the conference in the
black. But there was also a lot of unexpected stress. During the two
years I worked on conference planning, we dealt with a) a vendor
that was reluctant to provide a sponsorship because they were
unhappy with a new policy adopted, with community support, by the
Board b) a vendor that wanted additional conference registrations to
go along with their sponsorship, and, in 2015, c) a vendor that
wanted a custom package reflecting the benefits they were most
interested in. In the last instance, we ultimately lost the sponsor,
but we (we being the joint local and standing conference committee,
in consultation with the EOB chair) felt it was better not to set a
precedent that a vendor could pick and choose which benefits they
received from various packages. <br>
<br>
It may not sound like a lot of stress, but, sometimes, vendors can
be very persistent in these requests, which sucks a lot of time from
the conference planning process. It really doesn't need to be the
local planning team dealing with these issues and, in some ways, I
think it's better if the same group handles sponsors from year to
year. When a new team comes along, a vendor may see it as an
opportunity to see if they can get a different answer than they
received for previous conferences.<br>
<br>
As far as the role of Conservancy rep, I believe it has
traditionally been the rep's role to inform the Conservancy of votes
taken by the EOB that require Conservancy attention. For the
Cambridge conference, the rep, who also happened to be EOB chair,
checked in once in a while just to see how our relationship with the
Conservancy was going. However, when issues arose late in the
conference planning process, it was the local planning committee
that handled those issues. I was the rep during the 2015 conference,
but I also was serving on the standing conference committee, so,
even though I was involved in many discussions with the Conservancy,
I don't think it was done in my role as Conservancy rep. Having said
that, I do remember the discussion at the 2015 conference, and I
have long believed that local conference volunteers, on top of
everything else they are doing, should not have to deal with what
can sometimes be unpleasant communications with the Conservancy. If
the Conservancy rep can be an intermediary to resolve those issues,
I think that's fine. Otherwise, I don't think this role should be
include involvement in the particulars of conference planning.
Clarifying this role in the by-laws may be a good thing.<br>
<br>
I also wanted to talk a bit of the handoff that typically happens
from conference to conference. It certainly does need improvement,
as we have all agreed, but I don't want to leave people with the
impression that no guidance is given to the incoming team. We have
also gradually made improvements to the process over the past few
years.<br>
<br>
- When the Vancouver conference wrapped up, Ben Hyman handed off a
Google drive folder to Amy and me with documents, budgets, etc from
the 2011, 2012, and 2013 conferences. He also met with us via phone
to go through the post mortem typically done by the previous year's
committee. Amy and I added a 2014 folder to that Google drive folder
and handed it off to the Hood River team for 2015 and also had a
similar phone call with Buzzy. I don't know if a similar phone call
happened with the Raleigh team, but I do know that I shared the
Google drive folder with Tanya early in the stages of the Raleigh
conference planning process. Indeed, there is a lot of paperwork to
go through in that folder, but Amy and I found it invaluable to
consult it when we were confronted with specific questions about the
conference.<br>
<br>
- I do know Tony Sebro from the Conservancy typically has a kickoff
phone call with the local team where, among other things, he talks
about some of the sponsorship issues outlined above.<br>
<br>
- After the Cambridge conference, in an effort to further improve
the process, the Board created the Standing Conference Committee
that would work on the conference in conjunction with the local
team. The idea was that the local team should not reinvent the wheel
every year. If involved in the planning, this committee may
recognize potential issues before they snowballed. For the 2015
conference, the local planning team met regularly with the standing
committee to go through conference planning activities. I think this
helped with communication. Perhaps we need to be clearer with the
local planning team when they come on board that these joint
meetings should happen.<br>
<br>
- In 2015, in an effort to further improve the process, we developed
the "Expectations of the Local Arrangements Committee" available at
the bottom of
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=eg09:conference_nominations">http://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=eg09:conference_nominations</a>.
Those expectations were shared with potential hosts during the site
selection for the 2016 conference. Previously, local teams had
worked off sample timelines from previous planners. These
expectations included set deadlines for when the EOB expected to
have certain tasks completed.<br>
<br>
- There clearly needs to be more documentation around conference
planning, and I'm confident that the process will get even better
for the 2017 team.<br>
<br>
I also concur with a lot of what Andrea said. The Evergreen
community is a community of users, developers, volunteers and
vendors. I think it's important for vendors to be an integral part
of the community, and community involvement is something I look for
when I am seeking with vendors. It tells me that they care about the
Evergreen project and are not just about providing a service to
customers. If a vendor or any other Board member, whether they are
working for a library, for a state agency, or a library consortium
or in a volunteer capacity, behaves inappropriately, then the Board
should deal with the inappropriate behavior. I haven't seen
indication yet of inappropriate behavior. <br>
<br>
There are also a lot of gray areas in the Evergreen community on who
is a vendor and who is not. We have some developers who have day
jobs working for library organizations, but who also perform
contract work in their off-hours time. Technically, MassLNC is now a
service provider (or will be in another month) and were exhibitors
at the last conference. However, I also consider this organization
to be a strong representation of the Evergreen users who are
partners in our project. We also are customers for the other vendors
in the community. So the vendor/user/customer distinction is not
very clear. I just want people to be careful in whatever direction
is taken because restrictions against vendors being conference
liaisons may impact more community members than originally intended.
<br>
<br>
Overall, as unpleasant as this recent experience may have been, I'm
confident it will lead to better planning processes for future
conferences.<br>
<br>
Thanks to everyone who made it to the end of this e-mail!<br>
<br>
Kathy<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 05/17/2016 01:47 PM, Grace Dunbar
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOrp-BvU+rzBStfDnH1ZpcO4_O1LZwzDKxzn3t5VqUiT-GKXOw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal">All,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I appreciate Tanya’s thoughts on how the
conference planning
can be improved. There are many
things that do need to be improved and the EOB and conference
committee are
actively working on these changes.
However, I do take exception to the implication that there was
a
conflict of interest in my role as the Chair of the standing
Conference
Committee because I am employed by Equinox. This hits me
particularly hard because this is not at all how
Tanya clarified her statements to me, in person, after the EOB
meeting.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I take my Board responsibilities very
seriously and I strive
to ensure that, as a representative of the Project, regardless
of my personal
or professional relationship with any group or individual, I
treat them
equitably. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I invite the current EOB, former EOB
members, and any
previous Evergreen conference organizers to please weigh in
with your opinions
on the guidelines and statements I provided in the course of
the 2016
conference process.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Below I have detailed, as best as my memory
and fast email
scraping allows, the issues that involved other vendors and
sponsorships for
the conference. Please note
that some of the issues that are detailed below are issues
where the Project,
if not following the guidelines, could inadvertently get the
SFC in trouble
with the IRS and they could potentially lose their 501c3
status. Hence, the issues have implications
outside our community.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">1.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>On
May 13, 2015 GPLS broached the idea of a PINES Birthday Party
(separate from
the reception). Tanya asked me how
this should be included in the budget and she and I agreed
that since this was
branded as a PINES birthday party with specific money they
wanted to put
towards it, GPLS should handle that separately – in other
words, don’t put it
in your budget if you’re not in control of how the money is
spent. We agreed that it sounded like a good
“after hours” event separate from the Reception. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">a.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>In October, the SFC weighed in on the idea of a
PINES birthday party when it was brought up again. In
essence, the SFC stated that the conference should add a
specific sponsorship for the “Evergreen birthday party” and
allow all sponsors
to participate, inviting members from PINES to assist in the
planning. I echoed the concerns the SFC had about
the birthday party and gave my support to the SFC’s plan.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">b.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>In January, the Hosts stated that GPLS would be
sponsoring “cake, champagne, and a band” for the reception.
In email I asked Tanya not to make
statements of this nature since sponsors do not get to dictate
exactly how
their contributions are spent. I also expressed concern over
two issues.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>i.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>The
conference was in the red and the Hosts were committing funds
to
non-essentials. For those who have
never done a conference of this size, there is a food and
beverage minimum of
tens of thousands of dollars that must be satisfied in house.
I suggested that it was irresponsible
to spend money on bands and cake from outside sources instead
of satisfying the
food and beverage minimum.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>ii.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>GPLS
wanted to support the party monetarily; however, they were
unable to provide a
sponsorship. They emailed the SFC
in February, restating the intent to provide “cake, champagne,
and a band” for
the “birthday party” with a plan to sell PINES t-shirts and
have the proceeds
go toward the “extras” at the reception.
Tony at the SFC and I both voiced concerns over earmarked
donations for
the conference that wasn’t part of the offered conference
sponsorships. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:2in">1.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>To paraphrase something we have heard from the
SFC in the past regarding conferences, “…allowing sponsors to
circumvent the
project's budget would prevent the project from using
sponsorship income to
guard against shortfalls.”</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>iii.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>My
suggestion at this point to the Hosts was to offer a special
Birthday Party
sponsorship to ALL sponsors. The
Host committee chose not to pursue that option but agreed on
March 3 to strike
the cake and champagne. The Host proposed that the EOB or NC
Cardinal recognize
the ten years of Evergreen at the Reception and invite someone
from GPLS to say
a few words. I agreed with that
approach.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:2in">1.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>Note that the cake was later ordered without any
notification to the conference committee.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>iv.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>The
Host later stated that Emerald Data, who was the actual
sponsor of the
Reception, would provide a “welcome speech” before introducing
someone from
GPLS. I stated that it was
inappropriate for a vendor to receive a platform of this
nature when other
vendors did not. The Breakfast
sponsors and the Hackfest sponsors did not get to speak at
their sponsored
events so I suggested (strongly) that NC Cardinal provide the
welcome and
introduction for GPLS to speak.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">c.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>Emerald Data then requested to provide a “giveaway”
at the reception. The conference
committee was not informed as to what the nature of this
giveaway was and so my
recommendation was to not provide that option. The conference
provides space in the exhibits area for
giveaways and we traditionally don’t allow sponsors to use
their sponsored
event as advertising. Also, the
SFC needs the opportunity to “vet” giveaways.</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">2.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>There
was an issue that was not well understood regarding tote bag
inserts.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">a.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>I did not specifically cover tote bag inserts
with the Hosts until February when I sent a reminder of ‘Phase
Three things to
do before the conference’.
There was confusion over a previous email that listed the SFC
constraints on “swag” that is given out at the conference and
swag was
conflated with tote bag inserts.
The official position of the conference (both the conference
committee
and the SFC) is that we do not allow non-conference inserts
into the official
bags/packets.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">b.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>Unfortunately, the Hosts had already accepted
some tote bag inserts form a local organization NC Live and
the NC Library for
the Blind. To further complicate
matters, representatives from that NC Live were being given
complimentary
registrations to the conference. I
suggested removing the inserts and making them freely
available on a
table. The SFC agreed with the
solution. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>i.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>I
also requested that the free registrations be rescinded and
offered to “be the
bad guy” and explain it to the registrants. The Host assured
me that they would handle correcting this. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>ii.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>One
NC Live free registration was never corrected.</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">3.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>Free
registrations</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">a.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>There were two complimentary registrations
provided by the Hosts to two presenters – David Singleton
(Charlotte
Mecklenburg) and Julie Walker (GPLS).
I notified the Hosts that presenters were not provided free
registrations (with the exception of keynote speakers) and
asked the Host to
correct it or to allow me to correct it. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>i.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>The
Host indicated in email that it was corrected, however, these
were never corrected and these registrants did not pay
registration fees.</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">4.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>Emerald
Data “wrote in” a sponsorship for $500 for Tote Bags on their
Sponsorship
form. This wasn’t a sponsorship
that was offered on the official form that went to all the
potential sponsors
and it wasn’t on the Conference web site. Tanya stated that
Emerald received an
outdated form with a Tote Bag sponsorship on it, however, tote
bags were never
discussed as an official sponsorship. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">a.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>I asked Tanya to remove that sponsorship because
we don’t offer special sponsorships outside the official list
lest we (the
Project or the Host) be accused of vendor bias. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">b.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>Tony Sebro, the SFC counsel also advocated for
this course of action.</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">c.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>The sponsorship was removed.</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">5.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>Due
to issues with inclusion of “extras” in a budget that was in
the red, I sent a
request on February 24 to the Hosts to strike the Band from
the budget until
such time as we could prove enough profit to pay for the extra
expense. The Hosts responded, “ Right
now the Band expense is in the budget and I’m confident that
we will be able to
meet all expenses. Since we are using the Conservancy to pay
bills, I
would assume that the Conservancy will pay the band bill out
of the Band
lineitem. I thought that general sponsorships paid for items
like
this.”</p>
<p class="">My response stated, “The funds that are
brought in to cover the costs of the conference are not to be
spent at the
discretion of the local conference committee. Those funds
belong to the
SFC who directs them to our project. Our project expenditures
are
directed by the EOB, not the local conference committee. We
allow the
local committees a lot of leeway in conference planning since
they know their
area and the venue best. However, the final decision on any
budgetary
matters rests with the EOB and SFC, not the local committee.
As of now,
with the budget still in the red and the matter of how certain
sponsorships are
being handled, please put the entertainment on hold until we
can resolve this
matter.”</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">6.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>Tanya
stated in her clarification, “This conflict created a need for
another contact
point very late in the planning process.”</p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">a.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>On February 17, I was notified by the Board
Secretary, Chris Sharp, that Tanya had been going to him
privately to resolve
issues for the conference and to deal with the SFC, excluding
the conference
committee altogether. </p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:1in">b.<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'">
</span>If the issues discussed between Tanya, Chris,
and the SFC included the PINES sponsorship issues or anything
regarding the
Emerald Data sponsorships, I would point out that there is a
potential conflict
of interest in that involvement since GPLS is Chris’ employer
and Emerald Data is
their vendor.</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">7.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>Lastly,
it is clear that the EOB needs to be more transparent about
issues surrounding
past conferences. This is not the
first year that a conference committee has been asked by
Emerald Data to make
concessions or provide changes to sponsorships. The reason my
responses were so firm on these issues was
because of past problems with this vendor at the Vancouver
conference, the
Cambridge conference, and the Hood River conference. The EOB
has not discussed these issues openly in order to
preserve community harmony; however, it seems it’s past time
to bring more
transparency to the process. </p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">8.)<span
style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times
New Roman'"> </span>The
conference ultimately had a slim margin of profit, roughly
$1,023.00. In my role as conference committee
chair, I felt that I did my best to uphold the conference
values and structure
in accordance with past precedent, Project guidelines, and the
SFC rules. The conference money is Project money
and utmost care should be taken by the Hosts to ensure each
conference is
adding, rather than subtracting from the Evergreen Project’s
coffers. Should, heaven forbid, we end up in
some kind of a legal battle over the Evergreen name or
Trademark, we would need
every dime the Project has and then some. </p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;"> I hope this
clarifies any vendor/sponsor related issues that I managed as
the chair of the conference committee. I am, of course,
available for questions and clarifications.</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;"> Sincerely,</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;"> Grace</p>
<p class="" style="text-indent: -0.25in;">I</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0.5in"> </p>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Ruth
Frasur <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:director@hagerstownlibrary.org"
target="_blank">director@hagerstownlibrary.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Tanya Prokrym has sent this Statement of
Clarification regarding comments made during the Evergreen
Oversight Board meeting at the 2016 Evergreen
International Conference in Raleigh, N.C. This statement
will be discussed during the next EOB meeting in the
#evergreen channel of IRC on Thursday, May 19 at 2:00 p.m.<span
class=""><br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><span
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Ruth
Frasur</span><br
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">
<span
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Director
of the Historic(ally Awesome)
Hagerstown - Jefferson Township
Library</span><br
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">
<span
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">10
W. College Street in Hagerstown,
Indiana (47346)</span><br
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">
<span
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">p
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%28765%29%20489-5632"
value="+17654895632"
target="_blank">(765) 489-5632</a>;
f <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%28765%29%20489-5808"
value="+17654895808"
target="_blank">(765) 489-5808</a></span><br
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">
<br
style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://hagerstownlibrary.org"
target="_blank">Our Kickin'
Website</a>, <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://facebook.com/hjtplibrary"
target="_blank">Our Rockin'
Facebook Page</a>, and <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://nettlecreekplayers.com"
target="_blank">The Nettle Creek
Players</a></b><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</span></div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
eg-oversight-board mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:eg-oversight-board@list.evergreen-ils.org">eg-oversight-board@list.evergreen-ils.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="text-align:left"><span
style="font-size:x-small">Grace Dunbar, Vice
President</span></div>
<font size="1">
Equinox - Open Your Library<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gdunbar@esilibrary.com"
target="_blank">gdunbar@esilibrary.com</a></font>
<font size="1"> <br>
1-877-OPEN-ILS | </font><font size="1"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.esilibrary.com"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.esilibrary.com">www.esilibrary.com</a></a></font><span
style="font-size:12.8px">
</span><font size="1"> </font></div>
<div dir="ltr"><font size="1"> </font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
eg-oversight-board mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:eg-oversight-board@list.evergreen-ils.org">eg-oversight-board@list.evergreen-ils.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board">http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:klussier@masslnc.org">klussier@masslnc.org</a>
Twitter: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier">http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier</a></pre>
</body>
</html>