May 22, 1985

Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

1. Convene – Roll Call

The meeting was called to order, following dinner, at 7:35 p.m. by Chairman Ramsey in his suite at the Summit Hotel.

Members Present
Norman F. Ramsey, Chairman of AIP
Robert T. Beyer
Roderick M. Grant, Secretary
William W. Havens, Jr.
H. William Koch, Director
David Lazarus
Melvin H. Mueller
Robert R. Shannon (23 May only)
Edward N. Sickafus
Jack M. Wilson

Non-Voting Participant
Jean St. Germain (AAPM)

AIP Staff
Gerald F. Gilbert, Treasurer
Robert H. Marks, Associate Director for Publishing
Lewis Slack, Associate Director for 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. Executive Session
The Executive Committee met in executive session following dinner on 22 May. Koch was present for the first part of the session. This session is reported in the official minutes only.

The meeting was convened on 23 May at 8:30 a.m. by Chairman Ramsey.

3. Report of the Secretary

  1. Minutes of 14-15 February and 15 March Meetings
    The draft minutes of the February and March Executive Committee meetings were approved, as distributed, by acclamation.

  2. AIP Rules and Regulations
    Grant noted the draft document, 'AIP Rules and Regulations' which he had prepared. It consists of active motions of the Executive Committee and Governing Board which constitute policies for the Institute. Historical background is included where relevant and necessary. He asked for comments.

    Ramsey thought this document was extremely useful, and others agreed that they found it very informative.

    It was agreed that this document be included in the Handbook for Member Society Officers.

  3. Responses from Member Societies re AGU
    Grant reported on the responses to date from the Member Societies regarding the application of the AGU for member status. Two Societies have formally reported affirmatively: ACA and ASA. AAPM and OSA have given positive verbal responses. (The AAPM written affirmative response was received on 23 May.) AAPT has reported that its Executive Board has recommended approval by the AAPT Council.

4. Financial Reports

  1. Auction of Meggers Coin Collection
    Gilbert reported that the coin auction, held on 28 March, was an outstanding success. It attracted considerable notice, including international, in the numismatic community. He has received the final accounting on the sale from · Harmer Rooke Gallery. A few of the sets were not sold at auction and certain lots were returned. Per prior agreement, the Gallery paid AIP the catalog value of the remaining sets.

    Gross sales (rounded): $525,000
    Adjustment for unsold lots: + 4,800
    10% commission: - 52,500
    Net realized from auction: $477,425

    At Gilbert's request, Dolowich verified the physical inventory with the catalog prior to the auction. He asked the Gallery for a transcript of the realized prices, which shows the catalog value plus changes during the auction, giving the Institute a good accounting backup.

    Proceeds from the sale go into a special fund. The funds were put into investment by the Investment Advisory Division of Bankers Trust, which manages our specia1 purpose funds. Gilbert told the bank that it could be used for long-term investment, but that the principal was to be kept intact. It will be invested primarily in government securities.

    Sickafus asked why, if the Meggers Collection was a good investment, it had been sold. Ramsey s id that it was not useful in that form. We would have use for the income in the area for which it was originally established--education.

  2. Auction of Meggers Stamp Collection
    Gilbert reported that the stamp collection consists of proof sets, not rare stamps. It is not as large or as valuable as the coin collection; the catalog value is about $20,000. The auction is taking place now; it is grouped with four other collections. The returns from this auction will be added to the same fund.

  3. Status of Gemant Estate
    Gilbert referred to a 17 April 1985 letter from George D. Ramsey, attorney for the Gemant estate. It has taken time to settle the estate as we are an out-of-state tax-exempt organization. The attorney states that all the assets of the estate have been transferred. The amount now in the Gemant Memorial Fund is about $165,000.

  4. Refund of NYC Real Estate Taxes
    Gilbert reported that a check had finally been received, for $472,027.92. This covered real estate property taxes paid under protest on the headquarters property for the period July 1980 through June 1984. Resident Societies have been sent their prorata share of the refund. The question of interest remains: it is hard to get interest from New York City; the city is selective when paying interest. Our attorney is watching developments in this area; if other firms are taking action, we will also. The interest could be 1-2%.

    Gilbert said that legal fees relating to the refund of the real estate tax were only $25,000, because he did most of the work for it, rather than having the law firm do it.

  5. Amendment of TIAA-CREF Retirement Plan
    Gilbert reported that in 1984 Congress passed the retirement equity act, effective as of 1 January 1985. Provisions in this act require the Institute to amend the current retirement plan to conform to the new legal requirements. The age requirement for eligibility has been lowered to completion of three years of service, or one year of service and age 26, whichever occurs first. The definition of a year of service is spelled out.

    Another change is in spouse's rights: if someone other than the spouse is named as beneficiary, a waiver must be obtained from the spouse. This has been taken care of in cases in the Institute.

  6. Update on Approved Capital Expenditures
    Gilbert reviewed the status report on the capital expenditures budget for 1983, 1984, and 1985, which was included as an attachment to the agenda. We are close to target in all areas, and there have been no surprises to date.

  7. Recommendation for Establishment of Committee on Finances
    Gilbert, noting that t is idea had been discussed before, said the thinking in the past has been that the Executive Committee constitutes the Finance Committee. His present memo to the Executive Committee explains the background for his current suggestion. He feel that with the larger magnitudes of funds this area should be examined in more detail and that a subcommittee could handle detailed financial matters more effectively. There is no relationship between the role of a Finance Committee and the Committee on Fiscal Policy. (The IRS examined this a few years ago.) The Committee on Fiscal Policy (Society Treasurers) reviews the services performed for the Member Societies; it is not appropriate for them to handle other financial matters. A Finance Committee would be concerned with Institute monies, and the administration and safeguarding of operations. Two other financial areas are fund raising and administration of special purpose funds, both of which require special attention. Special purpose funds now amount to $1-1/4 million.

    His memo gives a partial list of possible assignments for such a committee, as follows:

    1) Recommend prices for subscriptions, page charges, and other AIP products;
    2) Approve special credit arrangements with subscription agencies;
    3) Review the insurance program of the Institute;
    4) Review the annual commission arrangements with IOP and FIZ;
    5) Review the Institute's depreciation policy;
    6) Review the Institute's Special Purpose Funds.

    Gilbert feels such things should not be handled by himself or by ad hoc committees. He is now called upon to make financial decisions, as the Executive Committee does not have time for these details. The proposed committee could handle a lot of these details, with their recommendations guiding the Executive Committee in its actions.

    Havens said that the concept proposed here concentrates on operations of the Institute. He thinks we should detail sectors of financial operations in which a wider group (than the Executive Committee) should be involved.

    Grant said that the Executive Committee, by charge from the Governing Board, is the one that gives final approval, but advice and support could come from other committees. The Executive Committee would still function as the finance committee.

    Havens said it is important how a Finance Committee would be set up and its composition and charge.

    Gilbert pointed out that all the Committee on Investments can do is to make recommendations to the Executive Committee and Governing Board. He suggests that this new committee would also function in an advisory capacity. He envisions their meeting about two to three times a year.

    The following motion was made by Havens, seconded by Beyer, and unanimously CARRIED.

    MOVED that the Executive Committee encourage Management to propose a structure and charge for committees to be advisory to the Executive Committee and Governing Board on financial matters of the Institute and that the Executive Committee recommend to the Governing Board that the title of the
    Committee on Fiscal Policy be changed to reflect more realistically its role.

    Ramsey noted that a meeting of the Committee on Fiscal Policy is planned for August; it would be well to get their comments at this time.

    Beyer hoped that by September the purposes and scopes of these committees would be delineated.

    Grant said that the charges to the committees should make this clear, and should serve to minimize overlap.

    Koch noted that there had recent discussions of the scope of the Committees for Public Policy and Educational Policy, and a comparable need exists here. There is a need to delineate responsibilities and why they are needed.

    Grant suggested that the name of the Committee on Finances be changed now to reflect its function with investments. However, it was decided that the Executive Committee could not take this action as the committee had been established by the Governing Board.

  8. Designation of Membership of Committee on Fund Raising
    Koch noted that authorization was given in February to establish a fundraising committee. Management was waiting on this because of considerations regarding a Finance Committee and the responsibilities of the Committee on Fiscal Policy. He noted three possible responsibilities for a fund raising committee, as follows: 1) develop a long-range strategy for development of new special purpose funds and general purpose funds; 2) examine and recommend proposals for use of special purpose funds and general purpose funds; 3) raise funds. He suggested that the Committee on Fiscal Policy could in a continuing way look at policies established for operations at AIP as they affect Society operations.

  9. Experience with 1984 Variances
    Gilbert said the fourth quarter variances were settled earlier this year, very close to the quoted prices, with refunds being made to the Member Societies in several cases. He read the percentages for each Society.

    Marks noted that APS had changed in mid-year from acid-free paper to the less expensive ground-wood paper, which resulted in a refund to them of $30,000.

  10. APS Use of Data General Terminal
    Gilbert reported that Burton had had recent discussions with him and Dolowich regarding the use of the Data General computer for the APS accounting records. He has just received a letter from Burton stating that APS wishes to implement use of the Data General system and terminals for the APS general ledger for their 1986 fiscal records. This will be an additional source of support for AIP's computer.

5. Status of AIP's Data General Computer System

  1. Accounting System
    Dolowich reported that the 1984 audit has progressed at a good pace. He expects to have the auditors sign off within the next week, one month earlier than last year. One reason for this is the computerization of prorations. Because the audit went so well, the variances could be done precisely; therefore the estimation process for the final quarter was not required.

    The Accounting Division is reviewing Fixed Assets, which is now on the Univac. They are trying to get everything off the Univac as soon as possible, as maintenance costs are very high. He has looked at packages and is considering a Personnel Report system, which would be rewritten for the Data General. Advertising and Pubs and Reprints Billing will be next. Some of the operations of SPS are being absorbed into Pub Sales. Tile goal is to lower costs both in Pub Sales and SPS.

  2. Subscription Fulfillment System
    Dolowich said that progress continues on the project. He has signed off on critical file maintenance; they are now programming that area.

    The Selector (a utility used to query the system) is a different type of problem. It was found that the AZTECH Selector utility was not as broadly useful as had been anticipated, since some of the logic of the program requires great user expertise. No decision has been made in this area as yet.

    Dolowich recently had reviewed the status of ·programming with AZTECH. The time frames given by AZTECH do not include conversion or backup and restore. AZTECH ' s estimate of remaining programming time is 1650-1800 hours, which means it could be completed around mid-October. (Tiley have completed about 40%.)

    AIP has about 30 man-weeks of work; it is doing some of the programming rather than AZTECH, as AZTECH's estimates and charges were too high.

    Efforts are being made to control AIP costs in the subscription fulfillment area by shifting personnel.

    Grant said that there is a need for internal evaluation in the conversion and testing areas.

    Dolowich said that the staff has been testing some modules. They plan to continue to use Gudes as a consultant to AIP in discussions between AIP and AZTECH. Systems testing has always been built into the system, and staff will be getting into this more.

6. Report of Committee on Publishing Policy

  1. Recommendations on Journal Subscription Prices and Page Charges for 1986
    Marks noted the recommendations of the Committee on Publishing Policy which were included as an attachment to the agenda. (All approved prices, as discussed below, are contained in Appendix A of these minutes.)

    Page Charges for JMP
    Marks reported that the Committee had recommended eliminating page charges for JMP in 1986. Klauder (the retiring editor of JMP) was present at the meeting of the Committee on Publishing Policy for this discussion; he has been in favor of this action. There is uncertainty in this area; some increases in the number of pages are projected but the editor expects to control this.

    Following discussion of page charges generally and for JMP in particular, the following recommendation was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that page charges from the Journal of Mathematical Physics be eliminated for 1986.

    Shannon said that the erosion and elimination of page charges will have a major effect on member subscriptions and financing of journals. This is now being done as a convenience, to get more papers. We have been fighting a battle with commercial publishers. So far, the page charge system has kept Society subscription prices much lower.

    Koch said that there is a major restructuring going on. Members are likely to get more information from online and single articles than before. The selectivity which is possible with online will make this more desirable.

    Shannon said that this matter should be considered now before a forced change occurs.

    Ramsey said that the change has already occurred, with large increases in subscription prices. If we eliminate page charges completely, libraries would be somewhat but not greatly worse off.

    Havens said that APS had debated the question at length. They decided to eliminate free reprints and cut page charges. It was concluded that it was better policy to maintain a minimum page charge rather than to eliminate it totally. They have been driven into modifying the traditional policy by the competition with commercial journals. He agrees that the mechanism has been changing, which is due to the commercial journals.

    Lazarus said that the change in policy is not a sudden one. Our journals have been underpriced, authors have been complaining, and articles have been lost to commercial journal. Our journals are still a bargain compared to commercial journals. He thinks we have encouraged the growth of commercial journals by grossly underpricing our journals and overcharging authors. Revenue received from page charges is down to 20%. There is also the fear of the government’s eliminating page charges.

    Havens said he had been chairman of a committee to consider the question of page charges for JMP a few years ago. There was a long discussion on this, with the conclusion that JMP was no different than other journals. The editors of JMP felt that this journal was in a different area, and that the quality of the publication was declining as good papers went elsewhere. The change made here is considered an experiment, as this is a small journal. Although he is opposed in principle to eliminating page charges, he thinks this is a logical decision.

    Wilson said that AAPT reached the same conclusion regarding page charges but on different grounds. They dropped page charges and it has been successful. He thinks the handwriting is on the wall for the demise of page charges.

    Regarding page charges for other journals, Marks said that the Committee on Publishing Policy was not recommending the reduction of page charges for 1986. If eliminated completely, it would be hard to reinstate them. He noted that AIP has no major dues income. More time is needed to see how this shakes out. Circulation has not been seriously affected by the near doubling of prices in the last four years.

    Reprints
    Havens asked if budget figures include 100 copies of free reprints. Marks said they did. Havens said that APS has found that these are not so useful anymore. Lazarus said the author pays for these in page charges and the cost might better be directly allocated.

    Marks said that no recommendation is being made this year to eliminate free reprints. Some institutions justify page charges on the basis of the free reprints. He does think that 100 copies are not needed. He noted that AIP does a fairly good business on reprint sales. OSA does not provide free reprints.

    The following recommendation was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that the question of free reprints be referred to the Committee on Publishing Policy for discussion for future consideration.

    Journal Subscription Prices
    Marks reported that increases in non-member subscription prices range from 10% to 20%. The frequency of APL will increase from semi-monthly to weekly, so this has a higher price increase. JMP is higher due to elimination of page charges. PoF is higher because of many more pages being published.
    The following recommendation of the Committee on Publishing Policy was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that the subscription prices and page charges for 1986 be set at the levels as recommended in the agenda attachments.

    Translation Journals
    Marks said that subscriptions for the translation journals had decreased an average of 4%. The recommended increases average 15%, with one journal at 30% because the frequency of issue has been doubled.

    The following recommendation of the Committee on Publishing Policy was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that the recommended increases for the AIP translation journals be approved.

    Computer Tape

    Marks noted the recommendation that no increase be made in the prices for SPIN and Advance SPIN. The revenue is small from these services, and there are no subscriptions to Advance SPIN as yet; it is now out on approval.

    The following recommendation of the Committee on Publishing Policy was unanimously APPROVED.

    MOVED that the prices for SPIN and Advance SPIN remain at 1985 levels.

    AIP Package Prices
    Marks said that three package plans have been proposed. There is great disparity in subscription numbers within these packages. Management is anxious to try this plan; such a plan has been used successfully by some scientific societies, i.e. OSA and IOP. A university can save money with such a plan and it makes it easy to order. This first offering gives a saving of 20%.

    Havens asked how this would work with agencies such as Faxon. Marks said that the agency has to demonstrate that all subscriptions are for one address. There was discussion of multiple copies going to one university.

    The following recommendation of the Committee on Publishing Policy was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that the package subscription plan be approved as recommended.

  2. Recommendations on New Journals and Books Journal of Materials Research
    Marks said that it had been originally proposed that AIP publish this journal for the MRS. Various financial bases were discussed, but it has now been decided that the MRS will own it as they have the financial resources. Data and draft letters of agreement were given in attachments to the agenda.

    Grant asked if we have published journals for affiliated societies.

    Marks said that we had published journals for AVS, AAPM, and AAS when they were affiliated societies. He noted the draft letter of agreement from MRS, which is largely satisfactory but has some points to be resolved. The MRS wants to place the journal with a printer of their choice. Marks prefers that AIP have the choice of printer; the other way could be counterproductive. It is anticipated that the first issue will appear in January 1986; six issues a year are planned. Delays could come from setting up the editorial board and selection of papers.

    Koch pointed out that the draft letters of agreement of the MRS and of AIP had crossed in the mail. If this publication is approved, a meeting will take place on 7 June between the MRS and AIP to negotiate the agreement. Duke has agreed to be the editor of this new journal, which implies that AVS and MRS will be working closely on it. Koch thinks this will be a useful relationship. Koch noted that he has a balance sheet (confidential) for the MRS which demonstrates that they have significant financial reserves.

    The following recommendation of the Committee on Publishing Policy was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that the AIP publish a Journal of Materials Research on behalf of the Materials Research Society.

    Chinese Journal of Lasers
    Marks noted the 5 April 1985 memo from Scott to him regarding publication of a cover-to-cover translation of the Chinese Journal of Lasers, to be jointly sponsored by the OSA and AIP. They would share the financial risk.

    The following recommendation was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that AIP and OSA jointly sponsor the publication of the Chinese Journal of Lasers.

    Agreement with Tomash and 20% Discount on Books to Members and Book Dealers
    Marks reported that a contract had been signed with Tomash, as previously reported upon. Built into this agreement was a 20% discount to booksellers and members for titles in AIP's books program.

    The following recommendation of the Committee on Publishing Policy was unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that prices for books, including Conference Proceedings, be set at levels that allow 20% discount to members and to book dealers.

    Three Translation Books
    Marks reported the recommendations of the Committee on Publishing Policy regarding English language translations and publications of books.

    Shannon noted that no translation cost was listed for the Japanese book. Marks said that the Japanese will provide the translation in exchange for a certain number of free copies.

    Seyer said that, regarding the cost of translation of the Russian text, it would be useful to employ a separate editor who can read 'the text after it is translated, as this would enhance the value of the book. Marks said this would be possible.

    The following recommendations of the Committee on Publishing Policy were unanimously APPROVED:

    MOVED that AIP negotiate for the English language translations and publications of the following books:
    1) The Russian book Lithium Hydrides by Shipl'rain et al.
    2) The Russian book Errors in Calculation of Radiation Shielding by Bolyatko et al.
    3) The Japanese book Laser Glass by Izumitami, to be translated by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, pending favorable reviews.

    Sickafus asked the original publication dates of these books. Marks did not have the dates, but they are recent titles.

    Shannon said he had a report that all of the suggestions made by OSA for books had been turned down by the AIP Books Committee.

    Beyer said he would look into this. There had been problems with books which were already in print or ones already being reprinted. The committee had received long lists, and some titles need more research. Marks said that the Books Division is very interested in covering optics.

    Ramsey said that perhaps AIP staff needs to do some research into possible titles. Marks said that there will be a budget for this, and staff will be looking into suggested titles.

  3. Report on Current Projects
    Marks reported on the following projects:

    The Subcommittee on Books is reviewing a possible contract for book authors. Short and long-term plans for book publishing are being developed by AIP staff.

    The Subcommittee on Copyright has met and has looked at various statements, but there were no requests or recommendations to be offered now.

    The Subcommittee on Electronic Publishing is interested in an automatic pagination system. Proposals for electronic services are in progress, and an experiment with SUNY-Stony Brook in electronic information transfer is being investigated. There will be further reports at the September meeting.

    The Subcommittee on Journals is considering ideas for a journal on computers in physics. This is still in the early stages. More will be reported on it at the September meeting.

  4. AIP Subscription Prices for Reciprocal Arrangements
    Koch referred to his 21 May 1985 memo to the Executive Committee regarding this matter. Background: APS has been active in developing reciprocal arrangements with foreign physical societies. This raises implications for AIP journals. It has been discussed in the Committee on Publishing Policy: there are concerns over physicists in developing countries, due to exchange problems. His memo sets forth definitions and proposals for consideration by the Executive Committee in the following categories: 1) Complimentary Society Membership; 2) Matching Grant Programs; 3) Foreign Physical Societies.

    Havens and Lazarus said that these definitions need to be tightened. APS has had various subscription arrangements for problem areas. They decided that they will deal only with individuals. They have set up a subcommittee which looks for sponsors for foreign physicists. The program seems to be working well.

    Lazarus said such a program needs to have a limit and to decide who is deserving. He suggested that we should determine which of the developing countries cannot afford even a library and then determine physicists who can cover various areas of the country, so that copies can be accessible throughout the country.

    Koch thought it good to consider a Matching Fund Program for Physicists in developing countries.

    Havens said that such a program has to have a cap. Koch thought the cap would be the identification of a needy person in a Member Society. He suggests a certain number of sponsors as the cap, say 100.

    Lazarus said that suggestions will go to the Member Societies.

    The following was unanimously CARRIED: [no motion made or seconded]

    MOVED that the proposal to offer special reciprocal arrangements for certain foreign physical societies be approved, as amended. (The proposal is given in Appendix B to these minutes.)

7. Status of Publishing Agreements

  1. Licensing Agreement with FIZ
    Koch said that he plans to attend the ICSTI (International Council of Scientific and Technical Information) meeting, which will be held in Germany next week. FIZ is hosting the meeting. He expects the agreement with FIZ to be signed and to be noted during this meeting.

    Koch reported that he had recently given a talk at the STM Publishers meeting on the relationship between primary and secondary publishers, and more attention will continue to be paid to this. He made reference to the Gordon & Breach suit against secondary publishers, who use abstracts from their journals. This suit is upsetting to secondary publishers.

    He also noted that Marks and Gilbert had recently visited IOP (both Bristol and London offices) and INSPEC. They had discussions at INSPEC on use of our tape of abstracts. Don Hunter (Treasurer of IEE, of which INSPEC is a subsidiary) recently visited AIP-Woodbury. These sorts of discussions are increasing.

  2. Marketing Agreement with Kinokuniya
    Marks reported that the Kinokuniya contract has been continued for another year. They have done a fine job, and initial communication problems have been worked out.

  3. Agreement with Maruzen re PHYSICS TODAY
    Marks reported that negotiations have gone very well and he expects they will sign an agreement with AIP soon. Maruzen officials will visit AIP in the summer. We have English rights to Japanese articles in this periodical. He expects the first issue to be published in January 1986.

  4. Marketing of Physica Scripta
    Koch distributed a 13 May 1985 letter from Mr. Kai-Inge Hillerud, Head of Administration for Kungl. Vetenskapsakademien, which publishes Physica Scripta. It is a not-for-profit publisher. This journal is a joint venture in the Scandinavian countries, and they are anxious to have it distributed more widely here. AIP is interested in making foreign publications available in the U.S. Koch noted that we have a marketing arrangement with IOP and also market Proceedings of the Israeli Physical Society.

    Marks said that we propose the same marketing arrangement as we have with IOP, except our initial percentage would be higher, about 30%, as we have to develop a market for it. The project can be easily handled by the subscription fulfillment system. We would use the same contractor we use for IOP.

    The following motion was made by Lazarus, seconded by Wilson, and unanimously CARRIED:

    MOVED that Air enter into an arrangement to market Physica Scripta in the U. S.

8. Status of Governance Instruments

  1. Memoranda of Agreement
    Marks said that Management has studied the current agreement and the needs for tailoring this agreement to the individual Member Societies. Management is not sure what the next step should be. He suggests that each Society look at the draft and make suggestions as to what they would want so this can move ahead.

    Lazarus said he had gone through the current agreement with Burton. APS only wants to update it to reflect the current practice.

    Shannon said it is up to AIP to talk to each Society individually. OSA wants to have this sort of meeting. This discussion will prod the Societies into considering and evaluating the agreement.
    The Executive Committee agreed that the staff should proceed with discussion on contracts with individual Member Societies.

  2. Participation in Committee Meetings
    Koch said that the matter of participation in various AIP meetings is not too clear. There are Society representatives on the Governing Board. It is permitted to have officers of the Member Societies present, but on a non-voting basis. At the Executive Committee, only named members may cast votes. At policy committee meetings, the same principle applies. The reason for this is that members have been named to the committees and it is not desirable to encourage non-attendance of committee members and then have non-committee members be allowed to vote.

    Wilson noted that a resolution was passed in the October 1983 Governing Board meeting that the only people who may be present at meetings are those invited by committee chairpersons.

    Lazarus said it should be clear that expenses are not paid for non-voting participants. It was pointed out that this appears in every communication regarding AIP meetings.

    St. Germain said she thought the question arose because AAPM had a representative at a recent meeting as a proxy, but it was stated in the meeting that one Society was missing.

    Grant pointed out that AIP does not have proxies. The Governing Board elects members to committees on recommendation of the Nominating Committee. St. Germain asked if this was written out. Grant said it was not stated per se, but there was no mention of proxies in the Constitution; if proxies are allowed, it must be explicitly stated in the Constitution.

    Havens said that the Committee on Constitution and Bylaws had considered and rejected the idea of allowing proxies.

    St. Germain thought th t this was not spelled out clearly. She said that AAPM is concerned over its representation and wants this clearly stated.

    Ramsey said it should be made clear to members that there is no proxy. Grant said this would be added to the letter of appointment sent annually to committee members, and added to the instructions to the Nominating Committee.

  3. Titles of Officers
    Grant said that based on recent discussions, including the executive session of 22 May, certain changes in titles of Management have been advised) as these titles better r present the positions they hold. He made the following motion, which was seconded by Lazarus and unanimously CARRIED:

    MOVED that the Executive Committee recommend to the Governing Board in October the following changes in titles: Director of the Institute be named the Executive Director; Associate Director for Publishing be named Director of Publishing; Associate Director for Educational Programs be named Director of Educational Programs.

9. Meeting of Committee for Public Policy and Resolution re Scientific and Technical Information
Slack reported that this committee had met on 13 May 1985 at the OSA Building in Washington, DC. Reports were heard from Societies on their activities in this sphere. Mitchell Wallerstein of the NRC staff reviewed its concerns on national security and controls. A new study is to be made on this matter, chaired by Lew Allen. The DoD is now circulating new guidelines for contractors regarding information that, although not classified, may affect the national security.

The bulk of the discussions at that meeting dealt with the preparation of a statement regarding dissemination of scientific and technical information. This has been forwarded to the Executive Committee for their consideration. He reported that Elsa Garmire (OSA representative on the committee) had told Jamerson (committee chairperson) that the OSA board has adopted this statement as OSA policy since the meeting. Slack emphasized the importance of a positive statement rather than one with a negative tone. Also if IP acts on its own, and then submits a statement to the Member Societies for consideration, it should be done soon, as a DoD statement is due out this summer. The CPP recommends that if the Executive Committee supports this statement, they consider forwarding it to the Governing Board for a possible mail ballot. In addition, AIP should consider making the report available to Societies as a guide to their meeting organizers. He has discussed certain points with Lehrfeld (AIP attorney), regarding possible actions if threatened. Lehrfeld said he could develop a report on this.

A statement of purpose and scope for the Committee on Public Policy was also discussed, but is not yet ready for Executive Committee approval.

Ramsey asked what the next step for this statement would be. Grant said that the statement is drawn up on behalf of the Governing Board. Lazarus said he thinks it would be satisfactory, if this comes from the Executive Committee, for a mail ballot to be sent to the Governing Board.

The following motion was made by Lazarus, seconded by Mueller, and CARRIED without dissent:

MOVED that the statement on Dissemination of Scientific and Technical Information, as developed by the Committee on Public Policy, with modifications by the Executive Committee, be sent to the Governing Board for a mail ballot. (The statement is included as Appendix C to these minutes.)

Ramsey said that preparatory material to accompany the ballot is needed, there is a need for urgency, and the Member Societies need to consider this. The vote is for recommendation to the Governing Board and for a mail ballot.

Koch said that the CPP would meet in September and could then consider two related topics. 1) Do we want to notify authors of papers that the burden of acceptance is on the authors? 2) Do we want to disseminate a how-to manual prepared by Lehrfeld? He has given us some statements for this procedure.

Havens said that the APS had discussed the matter of notifying authors and had reasons for not asking authors.

Grant noted that in the 23 October 1983 Guidelines for Issuance of Public Statements passed by the Governing Board, a 2/3 majority of the entire Board (or 21 positive votes) is required for approval.

(The meeting recessed for lunch at 12:30 and reconvened at 1:15 p.m.)

10. Developments re: ad hoc Committee on Space Needs
(Boyce was present for this portion of the meeting.)

  1. Status Report
    and

  2. Letter from AAS re Washington Property

    Havens quoted from a letter he had recently received from Weinbaum which stated that prices of East Side real estate (rental and construction) are very high. The possibility of cashing in on the headquarters building in some way seems remote. More ingenious solutions to solve our space needs in New York have to be investigated.

    Presently, PT and Advertising are housed in marginal space in New York. There is some possibility of joining up with other organizations but nothing tangible has developed as yet.

    Another issue is what should be done regarding an office in DC. The committee has not considered anything in a concrete way. This was considered before the Woodbury office was purchased and developed. APS and AIP are presently jointly renting space in the Joseph Henry Building. The NAS is giving up its space on Pennsylvania Avenue and moving to headquarters on Wisconsin Avenue which are not satisfactory for our needs. Park had discussed with the AAAS the possibility of rental of space in or near their offices.

    Havens noted the letter from Boyce to Koch. Parks had discussed this with Boyce; Havens was surprised that this was presented, as Parks had thought this idea was too expensive to implement. Havens thinks more thought and discussion is needed on which direction to go.

    Wilson said that when he first joined the staff of AAPT, he visited the Societies based in Washington, including OSA, AAS, and also the AGU. Societies ' in that area did not have a sense of the whole as ·n the New York offices; the Societies there have the feeling of being outsiders. Contact with AIP for New York-based Societies is beneficial. Since then, there have been several developments: the APS and AIP DC office and AAPT's move to Maryland. He thinks a DC presence is desirable, and Park has emphasized that personal contacts are useful. There is a question of whether we would be overextending ourselves. The townhouse for which Boyce has provided architect's drawings would cost about $1.2 mi l lion if renovated. If this order of magnitude is what is under discussion, he notes that this year $452,000 was spent on facilities in New York and in 1984 $532,000 for Woodbury.

    Lazarus said the basic issue is whether AIP has a responsibility to provide space for Member Societies. He thinks this is not an obligation.

    Boyce said that this is a double-barreled situation.
    1) AIP's role in the DC area;
    2) AIP's responsibility to provide equal services to all Societies.

    He said astronomers have long felt a need to be in DC. The traditional ways of funding science are changing, and there is a need for a presence there. Within agencies there is competition for programs, and a need for a link. There is now a serious challenge to free and open exchange of information.

    Boyce said there is now a three-fold operation in Congress:
    1) Budget process. Under Reagan, the number of available dollars is continually decreasing. 2) Need for educating Congress so that they understand the need for keeping science funding going. 3) Political statements.

    There are a number of scientific societies in DC, ·and networking is important. He thinks a number of societies have realized this. Tile role of PT has increased there and needs more coverage. He suggests that the natural focus is for AIP to buy a building and share information and plans. The proposed townhouse is in the area of a number of activities and his impression is that Park thinks it desirable to be in this area. AIP's reason to be involved is the interaction with Member Societies. It is an understood principle for AIP to provide equal services to Member Societies and to enable Societies to do their work better.

    Lazarus thought that this is a separate issue. AIP is not a lobbying group for Member Societies, and should not serve as a spokesman for individual Societies.

    Boyce said that AIP should aid the individual societies to get together. There are two sides to lobbying: 1) gathering information and disseminating it, and 2) making contacts with officials.

    Lazarus asked if it is logical for AIP to provide housing to DC-based Societies. We would lose liquidity by investing in a building. Wilson said he does not think that AIP should run out and buy space without proper consideration, but we are involved in real estate whether we should be or not.
    Shannon said, that regarding the money flow to science, DC is where it's at. It is a good idea for AIP to have a more visible role in DC. Regarding space needs, one of the reason for having a partnership is to buy services. This is a time of opportunity to look at the issue of space.

    Havens said that history has to be considered. The decision to buy Woodbury took some time. "nle question at that time was whether AIP should move to DC. It was decided that major operations would remain here, and not in LI or DC. Woodbury is now an anchor to publishing and other operations in the New York area. He does not see the options for a move to DC as viable now as they were in 1974.

    Shannon said that the publishing operation in Woodbury is an entity. The basic question is whether some of the educational and functional operations should be in DC to build a greater presence there.

    Ramsey said that his feeling is that AIP does not have an absolute obligation to be a landlord. On the other hand, one of the valuable things it does it to provide housing. We are, at a penalty, doing things to serve Member Societies here. There is increasing interest in the DC area. We may be cut out and divorced from the DC operation if we don't have a presence there. However, we need to assume that the major presence of AIP is in New York. Our real estate adviser is not positive regarding acquiring more space here at present.

    Lazarus said we should consider if there should be an additional presence in DC, perhaps in the educational area.

    Koch said that he is concerned with service to the Member Societies. We need to address the question of what is a society and what is a society of societies. We need to be responsive to a need for communal help. The question of serving as a landlord is a logical one to consider. This is more important than moving units to DC or, which is a long range question.

    Lazarus asked what the total investment would be for the three DC townhouses, for which information and drawings were distributed to the Executive Committee.

    Boyce said that this is a total of about 10,000 square feet. He put this proposal in as it was in hand. These townhouses need extensive renovation and he does not know if they are still available. The immediate reason for this proposal is that OSA needs its entire building, of which AAS is renting 1,100 square feet, and so AAS needs to find space by the end of 1985. In response to questions regarding taxes, Boyce said that non-profit tax is the same as the homeowner’s tax.

    Koch suggested a real estate evaluation of these properties.

    Havens said that we would need to know what the assessment would be after renovations.

    Shannon said that renovating a building is not an easy job; it requires an on-the-spot person to tend to details. In return, you get an excellent investment, with excellent growth potential. The OSA, having bought its townhouse property, has fine space but anticipates a need for more in a few years. It has been known for a year that the OSA would need the remainder of this space. Once you fill up a space, a huge increment is required for additional. The OSA now has about 8,000 square feet. He says it is better to buy an entire block of space, which the OSA could have done and now regrets not having done.

    Wilson made the following motion, which was amended, seconded by Shannon, discussed and unanimously CARRIED in the following form:

    MOVED that the Director of AIP work with AAS toward the purchase of a building in the DC area, with the understanding that the total investment be under $2 million, and that he prepare plans as to how such a building would be used to accommodate AIP and Member Society wishes to have a presence in Washington. These issues are to be discussed at the September meeting of the Executive Committee.

    Havens said that he thought this was moving too fast, and that we need more discussion of AIP's presence and what is needed in DC; it is too soon to get to the particulars of a building.

    Shannon said that the function of this motion is to investigate availability. He said that a greater question is: what ought to be a reasonable presence for AIP in DC. This is a policy question.

    Havens said he would favor a parallel motion of study and reporting on utilization.

    Wilson suggested adding to the motion a study by the Director for presentation in September.

    Ramsey said that a double motion is better; the results don't have to be synonymous.

    Sickafus asked if this would mean DC or the DC area.

    Shannon said that OSA considered the DC area, but decided on DC, because of good transportation, which is very important for staff and visitors.

    Ramsey said that one consideration is the usefulness of contacts. This is a good reason for being in a metropolitan area.

11. Comprehensiveness of List of Meetings
Slack said that his office has regularly maintained a list of meeting dates. It has seemed useful to list meeting dates of other societies, specifically the MRS, in order to avoid conflicts. If agreeable to the Executive Committee, this list will begin to include such affiliates as the MRS. These was no disagreement with this suggestion.

The Committee on Publishing Policy has asked the Institute to investigate the possibility of putting this list on telemail.

12. Agreement with NAS re 1987 IUPAP Assembly
Koch referred to the letter of agreement between the APS and the NAS which was included as an attachment to the agenda. Also included was a draft of a letter from Press, President of NAS, to Ramsey. Koch had raised the question of any surplus funds that might remain after this meeting. The NAS proposes that such funds go back into the USLC/IUPAP liaison account. Koch, in the annual billing to the Corporate Associates in the fall, will suggest in an advance mailing that the billing be double the normal contribution (for this year only) in order to raise funds for the
1987 meeting. He also will get assistance from NAS in getting funds from agencies. AIP will go to selected larger Corporate Associate members, asking for additional contributions. A total budget will first be agreed upon, then we will work within this framework. Tile estimated total is $180,000. Only if the budget is exceeded would we tap the liaison money. Any surplus could go to the liaison account.

Ramsey said that he had written to NAS and had also had discussions with NAS officials regarding their withdrawal from the traditional financial responsibility for such meetings. Koch noted that the AAS was also involved in this discussion. Ramsey thought that Press' response was not too helpful, although subsequent conversations have indicated NAS assistance.

Boyce said that the letter from Press said that the NAS would not go out to raise funds from private sources, as they had their own endowment. Regarding funding for the AAS meeting, AAS has about $80,000 in a special fund for this, but prefers to leave this trust fund intact, and their situation has not yet been resolved. There have been discussions of splitting the surplus.

Koch asked if there was any objection to signing the letter which had been distributed in draft form. No objections were raised.

13. Designation of Observers to Physics Olympiad
Slack noted that the Governing Board had authorized expenditure for sending two observers to the Physics Olympiad, which is in Yugoslavia the last week of June. Koch asked for suggestions and has been given several names.

Wilson said he has contacted several capable people. Ronald Edge and Arthur Eisenkraft would be able to attend.

No action was required on these names.

14. Future Meetings
Koch outlined the schedule for forthcoming meetings, as follows:

5-7 September: Executive Committee, Woods Hole meeting.
9 a.m. on Thursday, 5 September, to noon on Saturday.
20 October, Executive Committee, Rochester, NY.
Rochester Plaza, starting with 12 noon lunch.
20-21 October, Governing Board, Rochester, NY.
Starting with 6 p.m. dinner at Eastman House; meetings and accommodations at the Rochester Plaza.
12-13 December, Executive Committee, New York.
Starting with dinner at 6 p.m.
13-14 February: Executive Committee, New York.
Starting with dinner at 6 p.m.
7-8 March (or the following week): Governing Board and ancillary meetings, Woodbury.

15. Other Business

  1. Status of Corporate Associates Meeting
    Merrill distributed and reviewed the tentative schedule for the Corporate Associates meeting to be held at Eastman Kodak in October. The schedule has been sent to McIrvine for review. The first notice will be sent in early August. Invitations will be mailed in early September.

  2. Election of New Corporate Associate
    Merrill said that we now have 112 Corporate Associates.

    He submitted the names of two applicants for Corporate Associate membership:

    Selenia SpA. in Italy, a 30-year old electronics company. They are applying for a $500 membership. They report 70 physicists on their staff, which would be a $2,000 rate. He suggests approval, with the notification that their rate would be $2,000. They are ordering two journals.

    Imperial Chemical Industries at the $500 rate. They are not ordering any journals.

    The following motion was made by Mueller, seconded by Wilson, and unanimously
    CARRIED.

    MOVED that Selenia SpA and Imperial Chemical Industries be accepted for Corporate Associate membership, subject to confirmation of levels of membership.

  3. AIP Host of ICSTI Meeting
    Koch said that he had received an exploratory letter, inquiring if AIP would be interested in hosting the 1987 ICSTI meeting. It would be a meeting of about 70 people in the end of May that year. He plans to see them to discuss the idea further. There were no objections. No action was required at this time.

16. Executive Session
There was no executive session at the conclusion of the meeting.

17. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 3:13 p.m.