Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics
Minutes of Meeting
1. Convene – Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 7:15 a.m. in Conference Room C of the AIP Woodbury office by Chairman Ramsey.
Members Present
Norman F. Ramsey, Chairman of AIP
Robert T. Beyer
Roderick M. Grant, Secretary
William W. Havens, Jr.
H. William Koch, Executive Director
Melvin H. Mueller
Jarus W. Quinn
Edward N. Sickafus
Jack M. Wilson
Member Absent
David Lazarus
Guest
Hans Frauenfelder, Chairman-Elect of the Governing Board
AIP Staff
Gerald F. Gilbert, Treasurer
Robert H. Marks, Director of Publishing
Lewis Slack, Director of Educational Programs
Bernard Dolowich, Controller
Lawrence T. Merrill, Assistant to the Director
Nathalie A. Davis, Assistant to the Secretary
For clarity in presentation with reference to the printed agenda, events recorded here are not necessarily in the same chronological order in which they occurred.
2. Review of Governing Board Agenda
It was announced that financial statements would be distributed at the Governing Board meeting.
3. Report of ad hoc Committee on Physics Olympiad
Koch noted Lane's recommendation that AIP act as a sponsor of, and provide financial support for, U.S. participation in the 1986 Physics Olympiad. This will be discussed at the Governing Board meeting. The Executive Committee must decide if it wants to make a recommendation to the Governing Board or have the Governing Board decide on the action to be taken. We also need to ask what happens after 1986. He said that if AIP were to be involved in the administration of the Olympiad this could be done from the AIP office in the AGU building.
Ramsey suggested that since Lane's report is to the Governing Board, it would be best to let it come up there for action. He said that there are several ways for AIP to proceed:
1) Contribute a sum but have the administration and fund raising done by AAPT.
2) Have AIP assist with the fund raising.
Wilson said that APS, especially Lustig, has been helpful. Lustig is chairing a task force on the Olympiad. There would be a steering committee appointed to evaluate this year's involvement. He suggested that AIP's role this year might be assisting with publicity and logistics. He would be happy to turn over some of the administrative work to the AIP staff person in Washington next year.
Havens said there are two factors to consider: fund raising and publicity. AIP is better equipped to handle the publicity part. He noted the statement by Erich Bloch regarding the purpose of the NSF. The importance of science education has not been adequately demonstrated to the public. We can make use of this statement in promotion of the Olympiad.
Further discussion was held at the Governing Board meeting the same day.
4. Report of ad hoc Space Needs Committee
Havens, Chairman of this Committee, reported that a meeting had been held with Coldwell Banker in February to obtain a picture of the real estate situation in Washington. Foreign interests are buying up real estate, and prices are increasing dramatically. The consultant thought that it would be difficult to find a suitable building in the downtown Washington area. Their suggestion was to contract with a developer to build a building for our purposes as AIAA has done. Real estate operators and speculators have picked up most of the property around the metro stations. It would be necessary to go along with a developer who owns property.
Koch said that while a smaller size building would be feasible financially for AIP, it might be desirable to aim for a much larger building which could be a joint venture with the Member Societies. There is more to be said for a large building, e.g. 400,000 square feet, than for a smaller one, e.g. 40,000 square feet. The AIAA has followed this course, with ten floors of 40,000 square feet each.
Quinn said the concept of a building of 50-100,000 square feet which would be a joint venture is quite different. The smaller size would be a building tucked into a vacant lot.
Havens said the committee ha ask d AIP staff to get reports on what could be developed on the 45th Street site in New York.
Koch said AIP management has had discussions with Touche Ross, which has a corporate move group. The cost for a study of alternatives would be a minimum of $35,000. Touche Ross representatives will meet with AIP management shortly to discuss possible kinds of studies.
Koch itemized various alternatives:
1) Tear down the headquarters building in New York and build the largest new building that the zoning will allow. This could be 100,000-200,000 square feet. This would involve temporarily moving AIP and Society staff, perhaps some staff to Woodbury for up to two years. This alternative involves questions of development agency funding.
2) Establish a headquarters building in Washington. Within this framework, there are several alternatives:
a) A small building entirely for AIP.
b) Joint venture in a larger building.
3) Move all of the AIP operation to Washington, Alexandria, or another Long Island site.
4) Expand the Woodbury location to accommodate headquarters functions.
Koch said he is concerned about a large-scale venture; it could be very risky for AIP because of national concerns which could have an effect on AIP. There is need for a careful analysis, and to go into such an undertaking very cautiously. A delay of a few months would be more useful in the long term.
Quinn said the Member Societies have not been mentioned here. They are the driving factor in determining what to do. Some have requested more space in New York, while others have opted for the Washington area.
Havens agreed that if there is to be a major move to Washington, the impetus would have to come from the Societies. They would have to indicate their cooperation and commitment in a binding way. AIP has thrived in New York.
Beyer asked what offices are desirable to keep in New York. He noted that ten years ago the History of Physics Division felt the need to be in New York and APS wished to remain in New York.
Havens said that the physics community has to have a headquarters in a large city and APS wants to be in an urban area. It is not yet known what the AIP staff needs are, nor what could be done in Washington and what opportunities we would have there.
Discussion continued for some time, and included information concerning the alleviation of the short term space needs in New York, the need for long-range as well as short-range planning, considerations of Member Society involvement, financial arrangements for a new building in New York or in Washington, and the desirability of a study of the impact of a corporate move on AIP and its staff.
Ramsey, referring to Quinn's earl· r point, said that the concept of move is very much Society-driven, but it hard to g t the long range view of so many Societies whose plans may change in a relatively short time. AIP has at least made one step by renting space in the AGU building, which provides a means of doing something in Washington. He felt somewhat dubious about the idea of a joint venture. An advantage is the low rental rate, but at the end the party ends up without a building. One thing AIP has benefitted from is our own building. If we sell the land and go into a joint venture with developer, it may be hard to accumulate a lot of money in the bank for a future time when the joint venture terminates.
Havens said that one possible way of proceeding he could do is to make a statement and a motion at the Governing Board meeting to the effect that the AIP started in New York and has been prosperous there, and we declare that it will continue in New York.
Grant asked if it is reasonable to ask this of the societal representatives to the Governing Board before they have had an opportunity to discuss this with their Societies.
Ramsey felt that interaction with the Societies is required and this is not possible at this Governing Board meeting.
Frauenfelder suggested that the basic question is, if we were to start from scratch, where would we be? He thought that a letter could be sent to the Societies, giving background information from the Space Needs Committee, and asking if they would be interested in a commitment to space in an AIP building, and requesting an expression of their feelings as soon as is practicable.
Havens pointed out that we would not want the entire headquarters in New York or Washington, as it would be too expensive. It cannot be done in only one location. We are talking about two, possibly three locations.
Ramsey said we need a sense of desired objectives. Two answers are needed: where do the Societies want their headquarters, and what would the problems and costs be for greater separation of AIP facilities.
Wilson made a motion, which was discussed, reworded, and then seconded by Havens, and unanimously CARRIED.
MOVED that the Chairman of the Governing Board be asked to inquire of each Member Society to ascertain to what extent they
1. support the concept of an increased presence of the physics community in the Washington, DC area, and
2. might choose to participate in such an increased Washington
DC presence by sharing space, either through a lease or purchase arrangement, with other Member Societies and/or AIP.
The Executive Committee further states that in its discussions concerning options for resolving AIP's long range space needs, no move of the operations currently at its Woodbury facility is being contemplated.
5. Status of AIP's Data General Subscription Fulfillment System
Koch reviewed the four instructions to AIP management given at the e February 1986 meeting. Material supplied for this meeting is in complete response to the committee's instructions. He noted that one of the instructions authorized expenditure of funds through April to keep the subscription fulfillment project moving forward. He said that Dolowich sees it as essential that AZTECH be involved in the remaining critical jobs so that AIP can take over the billing in August, and that it is urgent to expend funds through the end of June. This would require an additional $40,000. He then read from Lehrfeld's report, which noted that the contract has shifted from a fixed payment to a time-materials basis. Lehrfeld said the minimum cost for a lawsuit of this nature would be $75,000 and would probably not be successful; he recommends spending the money on getting the job completed.
Dolowich said he thinks we are in a better position to bargain now than in September 1985. The management plan on which he will negotiate is for AZTECH to complete five critical areas, and AIP will do the rest. He hopes in the negotiations to set milestones for payment on completion of the remaining tasks, with warranty that they will complete the tasks.
The following motion was made by Sickafus, seconded by Havens, and CARRIED, with one abstention.
MOVED that AIP management be authorized to expend up to an additional $40,000 through June to continue the development of the new Subscription Fulfillment System.
6. Request for Corporate Associate Membership
Merrill reported that MCC Corporation (Austin, TX) had requested Corporate Associate membership at the $500 level.
The following motion was made by Wilson, seconded by Havens, and unanimously CARRIED.
MOVED that MCC Corporation be accepted as an AIP Corporate Associate at the $500 dues level.
7. Executive Session
No executive session was held at this meeting.
8. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 a.m.