Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics
Minutes of Meeting
Members Present: Philip M. Morse – Chairman, Robert T. Beyer, W. A. Fowler, L. W. Fredrick, W. W. Havens, Jr., H. William Koch, Sidney Millman, Melba Phillips, Jarus W. Quinn
Nonvoting Participants: J. A. Burton (Chairman, APS Building Committee), R. D. Burbank (ACA), Herbert L. Anderson (MAL), J. R. Knox (SOR), Jacques Ovadia (AAPM)
AIP Staff Present: H. W. Koch, Director; Sidney Millman, Secretary; G. F. Gilbert, Treasurer; R. H. Marks, Assoc. Director for Publishing; Dorothy M. Lasky, Assistant to the Director; Mary M. Johnson, Assistant to the Secretary
Chairman Morse called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m.
1. Minutes
The Secretary explained that the minutes of the March 12 joint meeting of the Executive Committee and the Board Property Committee were still in preparation, and that a draft would be distributed as soon as they are completed.
2. Review of Governing Board Agenda
Koch first reviewed a format for the Governing Board sessions scheduled for Friday evening, March 26, and the next day, Saturday, March 27. On Friday evening, following dinner, an opportunity will be provided for informal discussion of various options advanced for the consolidation of AIP operations. He noted that there can be no official action by the Board until after the meeting of the AIP corporation scheduled for Saturday morning just before the Board session. He will distribute a report entitled "Status Report on the Search for an AIP Building," dated March 25, and read its summary page with the hope that it will prompt some discussion. (A copy of this report will be attached to the minutes of the March 26-27 Governing Board meeting.) Marks will then follow, by presenting the different options in some greater detail. Burton might then make some comments about a packet he intends to distribute to the Board members. (Copies of the material distributed by Burton are also attached to the March 26-27 Board meeting minutes.) On Saturday morning, at the beginning of the formal session of the Governing Board meeting, Beyer will chair a session on the report of his Board Property Committee and we hope to hear from the different Society representatives. At the conclusion of the discussion and Board action on that item, Quinn will give a report on proposed committees for the coming year. In the afternoon, we will have a discussion of the Annual Report for 1975, financial matters, and four reports from committee chairmen.
-
Contents of Beyer Report to the Governing Board on Activities of the Board Property Committee
Beyer presented the following summary of the contents of his intended report to the Governing Board. His Committee has met many times with different groups since early January. The Committee inspected the Lake Success building. An engineering study and an appraisal of the property by expert consultants were made. AIP staff has made many studies, including the calculations of relative costs produced by Marks.
The Committee has been trying to bring together two strongly held positions: (1) that AIP should produce its journals and carry out subscription fulfillment in the most economical way possible, and there is substantial evidence that this can best be done outside of Manhattan, and (2) that a center should remain in New York City and that this should include AIP and APS headquarters, History of Physics, Manpower, and other member-related activities.
The Committee, at its last meeting on March 12, endeavored to effect a compromise the terms of which were spelled out in Millman’s covering letter to the agenda for the Governing Board meeting (see minutes of March 12 Executive Committee meeting Item 2, Page 6, for relevant motion). It was suggested that we purchase the building at Lake Success and attempt to keep the 45th Street building. The cost would require a considerable sum of extra money and this was to be covered by contributions from the Member Societies of $2-3 per member annually for five years. Apparently this suggestion did not sit too well with some people. Beyer can see three ways out: (1) move practically the entire AIP operation to Lake Success, (2) find some generous donor who will give us a building or the equivalent so we can have a presence in Manhattan, (3) APS might possibly purchase or otherwise cooperate in the handling of the 45th Street building.
Morse noted that one decision would have to be made by the Governing Board on March 27, and that is whether or not we make an offer for the Levitt Building. If we say "Yes" it means that AIP and whichever Societies want to tag along go out to Lake Success. If we say "No" that alternative is blocked and we are back where we started from, and we might consider the second or third possibilities mention by Beyer.
Fowler asked Beyer whether his Committee has recommended buying the Levitt Building and retaining the 45th Street building. Beyer replied that it did so, subject to AIP’s ability to manage it financially. In fact, it decided to explore one possibility for raising funds through the member assessment mentioned above.
Koch added that, recognizing that it probably would be difficult to get uniform acceptance of this contribution, he reiterated in his March 25 "Status Report on the Search for an AIP Building" that consolidation at a single location should be the goal of an AIP building search. Although two locations would seem to satisfy everybody, it is just too costly. AIP should consolidate either in New York City or at a place like Lake Success. If we require that the 45th Street building be fully utilized (housing about 150 AIP staff members and 15 Society employees) and want to have the remaining 200 employees located in one building on Long Island, we end up by having two comparable groups each of which would have to have service organizations associated with them.
Fowler stated that, as the President of APS, he felt it was incumbent on him to get the best advice he could within the Society and he appointed an APS Building Committee with Burton as chairman. The Burton documents, mentioned on Page 2, were distributed to the Executive Committee. Referring to these documents, Fowler thought that the first item in Burton's summary, which states "Most of the member related headquarters activities of APS and AIP should be in the same metropolitan location, preferably Manhattan," is the most succinct statement APS has come up with. Part of the reason has to do, perhaps, with his own earlier emphasis on the importance of the Center for the History of Physics, which should be located in downtown Manhattan. If we are considering a move, maybe we should take a long-range point of view and define what we mean by the "presence of the physics community." Should we consider once again having a Center for Physics which includes library facilities, a lecture hall, and opportunities for professionals to come to this Center for information on the things that AIP and the Member Societies are doing? As an APS member, he personally would be very enthusiastic about APS making a real contribution in that direction. If AIP and the Member Societies move to Long Island, that would foreclose the possibility of such a Center within the next decade. An additional argument for keeping physics in the City is to say to the physics community that we are staying where the problems of the inner city are. There is a large, vociferous group in APS who want physics to play a role in public affairs. APS is doing things now that it never did before, such as Summer Studies, which cost money. He added also that there has been a minority movement in APS to move to Washington. He referred to the letters from Buchsbaum, Ramsey, Burton, Havens, Baranger, Lapidus and Piore that were included in Burton's packet. He noted that Piore is a member of the APS Building Committee but did not sign the APS Building Committee report dated March 22, 1976, since Piore has a different point of view. Fowler expressed interest in hearing from the representatives of the other Societies their reports of the grass roots feeling in their respective organizations.
Beyer reported that he sent a letter to some people in the Acoustical Society and got only positive responses on the proposed move to Lake Success except for one negative response from a native New Yorker who now lives in Washington. Most of them cited efficiency and economy as the reasons. Beyer does not regard Lake Success as being outside the metropolitan area. However, he understands the desire of keeping a location in Manhattan. His own view is that the best compromise would be to move almost everything to Long Island and keep the. History of Physics and the APS offices in Manhattan but not sufficiently big to fill the 45th Street building. If funding does materialize in the future, which does not appear to be present now, we would have a foothold for future expansion.
Quinn stated that he could almost duplicate Beyer’s remarks. It is hard to get members of the OSA Executive Committee interested in having two locations since efficiency seems to be their overwhelming consideration. However, the OSA Executive Committee is not convinced that the economies would be as great as painted by a move to Long Island. Questions that are in the interest of the physics community are going to be widely pursued, but he noted that, in reference to Fowler’s earlier statement about APS involvements, that it does not require a lot of additional space to hold Summer Studies.
Phillips stated that most of the present officers of AAPT are from the West and she feels that they do not care where AIP operations are located except for the Center. She would vote for staying in Manhattan, as she was not completely convinced by the economic arguments. She was fairly confident that she could not get AAPT to raise its dues $2 or $3 per member per year for the next five years. The new AAPT Vice-President, Robert Karplus, particularly stressed that no new expenses be undertaken for the next three years.
Burbank reported that the ACA Council has no special attachment to New York City. Its interest is principally in economy and efficiency. Fredrick stated that the feeling is about the same in the AAS. Its steering committee, at a recent meeting, split on this question with one group wanting the AAS headquarters to go to downtown Washington and another to have the Society's headquarters where the services are. As long as they get the services they have contracted for, they could not care less where it is located. Anderson stated that he has been persuaded by the literature he has received, mostly from AIP, that this new expanded space was really essential and that to remain in Manhattan did not seem to offer a good solution.
Havens expressed some skepticism about a resulting possible improvement in the mixing of the Metaxas group, now at Stony Brook, with the Metzner operation now located at 800 Second Avenue. He amplified on Fowler’s comment relative to some pressures to move to Washington. It would be too much of a disruption in both APS and AIP operations. Quinn added that AIP would be buying the same kind of problems in Washington as it is experiencing in New York City.
Morse observed that he is convinced that the present way AIP is operating is not conducive to the best efficiency. A decision to buy the Levitt building while still retaining the 45th Street building would only sound viable to a number of Board members if this decision is accompanied by an offer of APS to help out financially. Burton commented that a headquarters building in Manhattan would accomplish quite a lot of things, since the consolidation of the present Manhattan publications activities would go a major part of the way toward achieving our objective. He mentioned the possible acquisition of the IBM building on the corner of First Avenue and 46th Street as an example. Morse felt that, if there is a reasonable chance of strong support from APS, it might be worth trying to persuade IBM, if they are willing to let their building go, to offer it to the physics community at an attractive price. With the immediate pressure of time off for a while, the necessary leases could be extended and we would have a year or so to see how we can plan for the future. Koch stated that, in that case, AIP would immediately arrange to have the new computer installed in the basement of the 45th Street building where the present computer is located. He added that we would then need the active involvement and leadership of APS to overcome the long-run substantial cost increases to be expected if we remain in the City.
Havens remarked that he did not think the case has been well enough made that changing from the present operation would result in appreciable cost savings. Marks replied that the AIP estimates are based on its experience with the Brookhaven and Stony Brook operations and that of our large typewriter composition supplier in the Huntington, Long Island, area. We know that salaries out there are low—15% to 20% less than in New York City. He has assumed in his calculations, however, not 15% to 20% but a modest 5% and he expects we would do at least that well or better.
Fowler asked that, if something like the IBM building comes closest to matching what he thought would be a Center for Physics, would it also match AIP’s need to consolidate in one place. He recognized that it would not solve the labor problems and would preclude a double shift operation. Marks replied that it would and that savings might be greater than he has projected. Consolidation does help to remove duplication and overlap. This would be the most desirable solution if the requirement is to remain in New York City. We would then concentrate on increasing productivity, and that becomes more feasible when the group is together.
Burton noted that only 7 of the 89 people in the Metaxas group said they would relocate to Lake Success. Marks agreed with that statement. He noted that we already have people coming in to Stony Brook who were previously at Brookhaven and we would certainly lose them if we came any closer to the City. If we left the Metaxas group in the Stony Brook area, we would move some additional people involved in typewriter composition, now at 800 Second Avenue, to Suffolk County, thus adding about 15,000 pages to that operation.
-
Preview of Nominating Committee Report
Quinn, Chairman of the Nominating Committee, said his Committee would bring in a report which contains, in addition to specific nominations for the committee roster, an appendage with some procedural recommendations (copy attached to minutes of Governing Board meeting of March 26-27). He distributed copies of the report and read the recommendations. He noted also that the Nominating Committee is recommending six members for the next Nominating Committee even though the Committee on Committees had recommended only five. This led to the passing of the following motion without dissent:
MOVED that the number of members on the Nominating Committee be increased from five to six.
Quinn remarked that the cooperation his Committee received from the officers of the Member Societies was spectacular. He introduced the following motion which was passed without dissent:
MOVED that the recommendations listed in the report of the Nominating Committee be recommended to the Governing Board for adoption.
-
Preview of Reports by Various Committee Chairmen
Koch suggested that we distribute reports by various committee chairmen to the Board between the two Board meetings and not have them all at one meeting. Morse thought that, if a report does not contain important recommendations for action, it could just be a written report. If it is of major interest, we could schedule it for presentation to the Board. Koch stated that on March 27 the Board will hear a review of the RSI Committee activities by Anderson, a report on the activities of the Publication Board by Frenkiel, a report on Publishing Policy by Quinn, and on Fiscal policy matters by Burton. Koch himself will call attention to a general summary of committee activities which he will distribute.
-
Recommendation of Executive Committee on 1977 Financial Handling Charge
Gilbert stated that he will make a financial report covering 1975 and the establishment of the 1977 financial handling charge. Our bylaws provide that Member Societies pay a financial handling charge not to exceed 1% of the monetary value of business done on their behalf. This financial handling charge must be fixed annually by the Governing Board, and was set at five-eights of 1% for calendar year 1976. The staff recommends the same percentage for 1977. A MOTION to recommend that the Board set the financial handling charge for 1977 at 5/8 of 1% (0.625%) was passed without dissent.
Gilbert commented that the bottom line figure of the financial report for 1975 came as a great surprise. We had projected a net income of about $190,000, whereas it actually turned out to be $456,000. He will explain to the Board the reason for the difference, and that is chiefly because of the erratic performance of the Soviet translation journals. In 1974, we netted only $24, and in 1975 the net came to $312,000. The figure is usually about $150,000 per year. (For 1976 however, we expect to go back down to about $100,000 net income because we are launching four new Soviet translation journals.) The reason for the low net income in 1974 was because the Soviets unexpectedly increased their frequency of issue and the number of pages per issue in two of their publications. In making the budget, we can only guess at the number of pages to be published. In addition, a larger part of administration expense was charged to this account in 1974 because of the heavy involvement in copyright negotiations with the Soviets. In 1975 we increased the subscription prices to take care of royalty payments to the Soviets, and also published 1,500 fewer pages. Another source of savings in 1975 was the better contract AIP has arranged with Plenum Publishing, which publishes about half of our Soviet journals.
3. Future Meetings
It was agreed that the next meeting of the Executive Committee will be a breakfast meeting at the Sheraton-Park Hotel in Washington on Monday, April 26, starting at 7:30 a.m.
It was also agreed to have a meeting of the Executive Committee on Tuesday, June 29, at AIP headquarters, starting at 10:00 a.m.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.