March 30, 1990

Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

[Note: Minutes are recorded herein in the order of the meeting Agenda for clarity, and not necessarily in the chronological order in which the discussion took place.]

1. Convene – Roll Call

Frauenfelder called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.

Members Present:

Hans Frauenfelder (Chair), Kenneth W. Ford (Executive Director), Roger A. Bell, Robert T. Beyer (fri.pm), Nicolaas Bloembergen, Peter B. Boyce, Praveen Chaudhari (Fri.pm), William Duax, H. Frederick Dylla, Frederick H. Fisher, Judy R. Franz, Thomas E. Graedel, Roderick M. Grant (Secretary), William W. Havens, Jr., James R. Heirtzler, John N. Howard, Shirley A. Jackson (Fri.pm), Carl Kisslinger, Arlo U. Landolt, David Lazarus, Harry Lustig, Walter E. Massey, Eugen Merzbacher, James S. Murday, Jarus W. Quinn, Thomas D. Rossing, Jean St. Germain, F. Dow Smith, A. Frederick Spilhaus, Jr., Hugo Steinfink, Murray Strasberg, Martin Walt, Jack M. Wilson, Kurt F. Wissbrun, Jerry M. Woodall

Members Absent:

Paul L. Carson, Robert A. Frosch, Herwig Kogelnik, Gerald Wheeler

Member Society Elected and Staff Officers Present:

Marion Churchill (AVS), Lawrence L. Kazmarski (AVS), Christopher Marshall (AAPM), John Noonan (AVS), Elaine P. Osterman (AAPM)

Guests:

H. William Koch (Former Executive Director)

Staff:

William Attick, Controller; Robert E. Baensch, Director of Publishing; Arthur T. Bent, Treasurer; Terri Braun, Director of Human Resources; Cecilia Brescia, Executive Director’s Office; Joseph J. Iannoli, Jr., Director of Development; Timothy C. Ingoldsby, Director of Information Technology; John S. Rigden, Director of Physics Programs; Nathalie D. Wagner, Assistant to the Secretary

1. Introductions of New Members

   Grant called the role of the Governing Board for 1990-91, and introduced new members as their names were read.

2. Introduction of Joseph J. Ianolli, Jr., Director of Development

   Ford introduced Joseph J. Ianolli, Jr., who recently assumed the position of AIP Director of Development with offices in Washington, DC. Ford said that Ianolli would talk briefly about plans for his office later in the session.

3. Other Introductions

   Ford introduced H. William Koch, former Executive Director of AIP, and Member Society Elected and Staff Officers who were present for the meeting. (see list on page 1)

2. Report of the Secretary

1. Minutes of 1-2 October 1989 Meeting

   The minutes of the 1-2 October Governing Board meeting were approved as distributed.

2. Report on Status of Constitutional Amendment

   Grant reported that, to date, six Member Societies had approved the proposed Constitutional amendment whose purpose is to establish an International Associates category of membership in AIP. No opposing votes have been received. The deadline for responses to be received from the Member Societies is May 12, 1990.

   Grant said that, as Chair of the Committee on Constitution and Bylaws, he has received informal requests from a number of Governing Board members that consideration be given by that committee to the question of representation on the Executive Committee. Grant asked for additional comments from members of the board, and said that he would draft a constitutional amendment, for discussion at a subsequent meeting of the board.

3. Motion on Affiliated Society

   Grant stated that the Executive Committee recommends to the Governing Board that Affiliated Society status be granted to the International Centre for Diffraction Data. The following motion, from the Executive Committee, was CARRIED unanimously.

   MOVED that the application of the International Centre for Diffraction Data (ICDD) as an AIP Affiliated Society be accepted.

3. Remarks by the Chair

1. Actions of the Executive Committee Since Last Meeting

   Frauenfelder called attention to the summary of these actions which was included with the meeting Agenda.

2. Report from Andrew Gemant Award Committee

   Frauenfelder reported that Andrew Gemant Award Committee, and the Executive Committee, have recommended that the 1990 Andrew Gemant Award be given to Jeremy Bernstein. Frauenfelder commented that Bernstein is a first rate physicist, who has contributed much to the general public's knowledge of physics through his writing. The following motion, from the Executive Committee, was CARRIED unanimously.

   MOVED that the Governing Board name Jeremy Bernstein as the winner of the 1990 Andrew Gemant Award on recommendation from the Andrew Gemant Award Committee and the Executive Committee.

3. Report from Assembly of Society Officers

   Frauenfelder stated that the Assembly of Society Officers, just concluded, continues to provide a useful forum for discussion among society representatives of issues of mutual interest.

4. Report of the Executive Director

1. Annual Report for 1989 and Authorization to Publish in Physics Today

   Ford referred to the draft of his Annual Report for 1989 which was included with the meeting Agenda. He called attention to highlights of the report, including:

   1. a special focus on publishing, (a) as publishing is the largest element of AIP's business, and (b) as the result of the unusual amount of change, reorganization, and progress in this area during the year;
   2. the expansion AIP offices in Washington, DC, including the move of the Education Division from Woodbury, and the opening of new Development and Public Information Offices; and
   3. the introduction of new strategies, products and services, including the co-publication of Wonderscience (with ACS), the startup of new PINET services, the near completion of the FAMIS system, and the release of the first product under the Physics Academic Software Program.

   Lazarus asked for comments on projections for both Computers in Physics (CiP) and PINET in view of the fact they have been large net expense items for AIP. Baensch replied that he and the CiP Editorial Board are optimistic about the long-term prospects for the magazine, and that it is projected to be in the black within three years. Ford said that PINET acceptance has been slow, and, despite the expanded services being offered, it now appears that PINET will continue as a net expense for the foreseeable future.

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

   MOVED that the annual report of the Institute for 1989 be accepted and authorization be given to publish it in Physics Today.

2. Issues facing the Institute

   Ford then spoke on four major issues which face the Institute.

   1. Space – although the most divisive issue, and one which must be resolved, it is far from being the most important issue facing AIP in the future.
   2. Changing Technology – Changing Society Capabilities and Expectations – with the availability of new technologies, and of larger staffs, societies can and may decide to do their own work, and societies increasingly look on AIP as “just” a vendor, and even as a competitor. In response, AIP must be as cost Competitive as possible, must cooperate with societies as much as possible, and must seriously consider going from an actual cost to a fixed price basis for doing business. Finally, we must be open to admitting new Member Societies, and reducing the financial barriers of large surcharges for business done for Affiliated Societies.
   3. Science Education in America – study after study tell us of the problems which face this country, and AIP must try to find ways to have a significant impact on elementary and middle school science during the next decade.
   4. Customer Orientation – an active Society Services Committee and a Task Force on Customer Service will be called upon to help in an AIP – wide effort to work to improve all aspects of our services to our customers.

3. Soviet-American Relations

   Ford remarked that a joint venture approach may be the best avenue open to us for maintaining our Russian-English, English-Russian publishing efforts. Baensch and Ford, along with attorney Levin, will travel to the Soviet Union in June to begin negotiating a continuing agreement to maintain our publishing relations through the next decade.

4. Update on Gordon & Breach Litigation

   Ford reported briefly on the status of the Gordon and Breach suits in Switzerland, Germany and France.

5. Report on Development Activities

Ford introduced Joseph J. Ianolli, Jr., who recently assumed the responsibilities of Director of Development for AIP, with offices located in Washington, DC. Ianolli spoke briefly on his early impressions concerning the potential for fund raising for AIP and its Member Societies. He said that he sees tremendous opportunities ahead in this regard. He remarked that it was important to remember that whatever foundations we lay in the coming months and years, they will be important for the long range future of physics and physics education.

6. Report of Annual Meeting of Corporation

Grant reported that the 1990 Annual Meeting of the Corporation had been held just prior to the start of the Governing Board meeting. All proxies were found in order; new members of the Governing Board were seated; the Executive Director and Treasurer presented reports on the status of the Institute, as dictated by New York State law.

7. Report of Executive Committee

Frauenfelder reminded the Governing Board that candidates for the position of Board Chair and Secretary are nominated by the Executive Committee. Frauenfelder and Grant were excused briefly from the meeting, and Ford chaired this part of the meeting. The following recommendations from the Executive Committee were separately and CARRIED unanimously.

MOVED that Hans Frauenfelder be elected Chair of the Governing Board (his fifth term) for 1990-91.

MOVED that Roderick M. Grant be elected Secretary of the Governing Board (his ninth term) for 1990-91.

Frauenfelder resumed as chair of the session. He said that he had been asked to devote time for a discussion of the role of non-voting participants attending the Executive Committee meetings. The questions were raised as a consequence of the defeat of the Constitutional Amendment which would have raised number of members of the Executive Committee from 7 to 9, and an attendant Bylaw revision which would have governed representation by the Member Societies on the Executive Committee. He asked Wilson to speak.

Wilson reported that non-voting participants had been allowed to vote on issues of space during Executive Committee meetings. He then read a motion which had been drafted. He said that the purpose of the motion was to direct the Executive Committee to take into account the views of the nonvoting representatives on all issues before that body.

The following motion was made by Wilson, seconded by Spilhaus, and CARRIED by a vote of 20 YES, 8 NO, 7 ABSTAIN.

MOVED that, in its actions, the Executive Committee take into account the views of participants from Member Societies not represented by a voting member.

During the discussion of this motion, several objections were raised to the apparent conflict of this motion with the constitutional meaning of elected representation. Wilson agreed that the motion is intentionally vague, but that he didn't feel that it was un-constitutional as it stands. It is about listening, not voting. An implementation of this motion would entail straw votes of all present, as is current practice, with formal votes recorded for elected representatives only.

8. Report of the Nominating Committee (James S. Murday, Chair)

1. Elected Member-at-Large of Governing Board

   Murday presented the report of the Nominating Committee. He began by reviewing the background of John O. Dimmack, candidate for the Member-at-Large position on the Governing Board.

   The following motion, on recommendation of the Nominating Committee, was CARRIED unanimously.

   Moved that John O. Dimmock (Vice President, Research, McDonnell-Douglas Corporation) be elected Member-at-Large of the Governing Board for 1990-92.

2. Report on Other Nominations

   Murday then reviewed the nominations for committee positions as presented by the Nominating Committee.

   The following motion was CARRIED unanimously.

   MOVED that the report of the Nominating Committee be accepted as presented.

3. Other Recommendations of the Nominating Committee

   Murday reported that the Nominating Committee had considered the question of representation on the Executive Committee, and desirability for continuity as well as change in the membership.

   The following motions were made, on recommendation of the Nominating Committee, amended during the meeting as stated herein, and each CARRIED unanimously.

   MOVED that no person shall serve simultaneously on the Executive and either the Nominating or the Audit Committee.

   MOVED that beginning in 1991-92 no person shall serve more than five consecutive years on the Executive Committee.

   Questions were raised about conflicts between these motions and the election just held for positions on the Executive, Nominating and Audit Committees. During the subsequent discussion, Beyer resigned from the Audit Committee in order not to become a solo grandfather, and so that he could serve on the Executive Committee.

   Grant said that these motions would constitute a portion of his instructions to the Nominating Committee in the future.

4. Appointment of Chairs of Committees by Chair of the Governing Board

   Frauenfelder said that appointment of Chairs for each of the AIP Committees would be reported on the final list of committee members to be distributed subsequent to the meeting.

9. Appointment of Subcommittee Members and Chair

Frauenfelder said that appointment of AIP Subcommittee Members and Chairs would be announced and published as soon as all appointees have been contacted. These appointments are made in consultation with the Chairs of parent committees, with staff liaisons, and with Ford.

10. Finance and Administration Items – Report of the Director

1. Preliminary Unaudited 1989 Financial Statement

   Bent handed out Financial Highlights of the Institute as of 31 December 1989, a summary of the preliminary, unaudited 1989 Financial Statement. This showed:

   Net Operating Revenue	$181,000
   Net Investment Revenue	2,213,000
   Net Revenue*	2,394,000
   Compared to Budgeted Net	864,000

   * This figure reflects a write-off in 1989 of $695,000 to bring our investment in the arbitrage account to current market levels as of December 31.

   Variance from Budget	+$1,530,000
   Due to (major items)
   Publishing Operations	+1,433,000
   Program Operations	+401,000
   Investment Income	+258,000
   General & Admin Expense	–625,000
   Cash & Short Term Investment	$7,929,000
   Long Term Investments
   Cost	$20,929,000
   Market	22,483,000

   Bent briefly addressed the causes for the variances which occurred, as depicted in this summary. Significant elements included:

   1. An increase in subscription income, largely the result of the publication of more volumes of Soviet journals than had been budgeted.
   2. A decrease in composition and mechanical expense. Primarily, the result fewer pages published.
   3. A reduction in book division net revenue, the result of the publication of fewer volumes than anticipated, and the establishment of a new book division in mid-year.
   4. An increase in net revenue in Grant and Contract Activities, largely the result of the receipt of two major grants in the Education Division.
   5. An increase in G&A expense, the result of (a) additional vacation pay accrual, (b) an increase in MASS costs absorbed by AIP as the FAMIS system came on line, (c) severance payments, amounting to $100,000, to two long time AIP employees, and (d) fees paid to our relocation consultant.

   Finally, Bent reviewed the Unaudited Balance Sheet of the Institute as of 31 December 1989. This showed Total Assets and Total Liabilities and Fund Balances amounting to $44,322,000 on this date.

2. Summary of Approved 1990 Operating Budget

   Bent presented the approved 1990 Operating Budget, and noted that, since its adoption in December, it had been modified by Executive Committee action resulting in AIP absorbing MASS costs amounting to $282,000 in 1990 which otherwise would have been passed along to the Member Societies using the system. The Summary Statement of Operations calls for a budgeted net Income of $1,388,000 for fiscal 1990 as follows:

   Publishing Operations	$4,835,000
   General Operations	(3,790,000)
   G & A	(1,750,000)
   Net Investment Income	2,375,000
   Grand Total	$1,670,000
   Less Revision	(282,000)
   Revised Net	$1,388,000

   SUMMARY (Rounded)
   AIP	35,647,000
   Societies	22,531,000
   IOP	3,500,000
   Total	61,678,000

3. Report of Investment Advisory Committee

   Bent reviewed the activities of the Investment Advisory Committee, and presented summaries of the Long Term Investment Portfolio, and of Investment Income, as of 31 December 1989.

4. FAMIS Update

   Bent reported that FAMIS is now up and running on the WANG system. The Univac was deactivated in December. Processing is ahead of last year, except for FAXON and EBSCO, the largest subscription agencies with which we deal; these will be completed within a week. The performance of the system is below expectations, as has been reported previously. A new version of the ORACLE software was received within the past week, well before it was expected. Benchmark tests run to date seem to indicate that it will provide a significant enhancement in response time and in the number of users which can be supported simultaneously on the system.

5. Financial Handling Charge for 1990

   Bent reviewed the Constitutional requirement that the Governing Board annually establish the financial handling charge for business done on behalf of the societies.

   The following motion, on recommendation from the Executive Committee, was CARRIED unanimously.

   MOVED that the financial handling charge for 1991 be fixed at five-eighths of one percent of business done on behalf of Member Societies.

11. Proposal to Change Name of AIP Corporation

This proposal, from Krumhansl, was noted but not discussed at the meeting.

3:55 pm – Recess and Coffee Break, during which time the annual photo of the Governing Board was taken. The meeting resumed at 4:15 pm.

12. Space and Other Long-Range Issues

Frauenfelder stated that he was seeking a resolution at this meeting to the problem of space for AIP which has been with us for a long time. He noted two “driving forces” behind the need for change. (1) AIP currently operates in six different locations: two each on Long Island, in New York City, and in Washington DC. This is inefficient. (2) The headquarters building at 335 E. 45th Street is not well used. It is a four story building that makes very poor use of a very expensive site.

Frauenfelder said that, as we consider our options, we should plan for the future – for adequate space for expansion and consolidation of AIP operations (and those of Member Societies if they choose) on one site – and we should consider the importance of the impact we can have by working together on behalf of physics. He said that his goal is to attract as many of the physics societies as possible to one place where they can live and work together.

Frauenfelder reminded the Governing Board that, as discussion about possible options proceeds, it should be kept in mind that the decision has been made to keep AIP publishing operations on Long Island. The two possibilities before us are (1) to keep the majority of our operations in New York City, with a small operation in Washington, DC, or (2) to relocate our headquarters to a site near Washington, DC, with a small operation in New York City to serve Member Societies who elect to remain there, and to carry on certain AIP activities which are best done there.

Frauenfelder noted that the Governing Board recently had received from Woodall a well-considered outline of his thoughts on space and relocation issues, and containing a proposed motion for consideration. The Executive Committee, working with Woodall's memo, has made a recommendation to the Governing Board. Grant read the MOTION as recommended by the Executive Committee. An AMENDMENT was offered by Frauenfelder, and seconded by Franz, to replace the original words a site with headquarters. The amendment CARRIED by a vote of 17 YES, 15 NO (Abstentions were not recorded). The amended motion CARRIED by a vote of 20 YES, 10 NO, 5 ABSTAIN (The request was made and herein honored to include the roll call vote in the minutes.)

In favor of the motion:

Roger A. Bell, Nicolaas Bloembergen, Peter B. Boyce, William Duax, Kenneth W. Ford, Judy R. Franz, Thomas E. Graedel, James R. Heirtzler, John N. Howard, Carl Kisslinger, Arlo U. Landolt, Walter E. Massey, Eugen Merzbacher, Jarus W. Quinn, Thomas D. Rossing, F. Dow Smith, A. Frederick Spilhaus, Jr., Hugo Steinfink, Martin Walt, Jack M. Wilson.

Opposed to the motion:

Robert T. Beyer, H. Frederick Dylla, Frederick H. Fisher, William W. Havens, Jr., David Lazarus, Harry Lustig, James S. Murday, Jean St. Germain, Murray Strasberg, Jerry M. Woodall

Abstaining:

Praveen Chaudhari, Hans Frauenfelder, Roderick M. Grant, Shirley A. Jackson, Kurt F. Wissbrun

(The motion is shown here in its final form – with the amended portion so indicated – a summary of the discussion follows the motion.)

MOVED that in order 1) to respond to the need to consolidate AIP operations into fewer locations with adequate space for current operations plus anticipated growth, 2) to respond to the future needs and interests of the Washington DC based Member Societies, and 3) to maintain a level of AIP operations needed to support those NYC resident societies who wish to remain in New York City,

It is RESOLVED that AIP operations shall be consolidated at three sites located on Long Island, in New York City, and a site headquarters within a fifty mile radius of Washington DC. Member Societies shall be offered the opportunity to take an equity position in any properties acquired by AIP.

Franz stated that she objected to the use of the words “a site” in the motion, as they did not address the issue of the location of AIP's headquarters. Frauenfelder said that it was his opinion that if the motion is adopted, the headquarters will be moved to College Park, MD; the motion could be amended so as to make it clear that the headquarters will be moved. Woodall replied that he would withdraw his motion if this were done; his intent was to leave it to management, with the advice and consent of the Executive Committee, to decide what parts of AIP would move, and what parts would remain in New York. [It was pointed out subsequently that the motion came as a recommendation from the Executive Committee, and therefore could not be withdrawn.]

Those who spoke in favor of the original (Woodall) version of the motion expressed the view that no case yet had been made which persuaded them that a move of AIP headquarters from New York City was in order; in part they argued (1) that the issue of relocation had been discussed for such a long time, and had become so emotional, that the motion offered them a way to agree on a principle of a three-site plan, after which the Governing Board could get on with deciding how best to locate those AIP operations that were best done at each of the three sites, (2) that there appeared to be reasonable opportunities to relocate AIP headquarters within New York City that had not been fully explored as yet, and (3) that the disruption would be so severe, at best, for the current resident societies that a move of the major portion of AIP away from New York was an unsatisfactory solution to the space problem.

Those who spoke in favor of the amended version expressed the view that it was time to make a clear statement of principle that AIP's headquarters should be moved to the Beltway area near Washington DC; in part they argued (1) that this would provide for the eventual possibility that all societies could join together at a single location, (2) that there was a strong possibility that the three organizations directly involved in physics education (AAPT, APS, and AIP) once again would be co-located, and (3) that a location near Washington DC would make it possible for these organizations to have a larger impact on behalf of physicists and the physics community than has been the case to date.

Ford clarified that, if the motion is passed, it is the intent of AIP management to move the major part of current activities in New York to College Park, leaving in New York only those units which can operate best there, such as Advertising. In addition, they would expect to provide support services in New York for those Member Societies who elect to remain there.

Merzbacher reported that the Executive Committee of the APS had met recently to discuss the issues of space and location. One recommendation to the APS Council that came out of that meeting was that APS should make an effort to co-locate with AIP, either in New York, or in the Beltway area near Washington DC (but not in either Baltimore or Philadelphia). An amendment he proposed as a clarification of the Woodall failed for lack of a second.

At this point, Frauenfelder offered the amendment to change the words a site to headquarters. The motion to amend was seconded by Franz. After further statements directed to the amendment,which is summarized in the paragraphs above, the motion to amend was CARRIED.

Following further statements addressed to the amended motion, the question was called, and the motion was CARRIED as recorded in a roll call vote above.

The Governing Board recessed for dinner and the evening at 6:00 pm.

The meeting was reconvened by Frauenfelder at 8:35 am on Saturday, 31 March 1990. Item 18. (reported below) was taken up as the first order of business.

13. Report of the Director of Publishing

1. Journal Publishing Program

   Baensch reported that, over the past year and a half, a major effort has been made to reorganize the journal publishing program. The principle motivations for this effort have been the need (1) to cope with two separate composition systems, (2) to handle an increasing number of pages in the journals, and (3) to respond to increasing cost pressures.

   One change has been the decision to use a cottage industry approach to help in the areas of copy editing, keyboarding, page makeup, and indexing. This has resulted in a 19% reduction in the full-time publishing staff (from a 1989 budgeted level of 180 to 144). This was achieved while maintaining an on-time schedule for the journals. The long-range strategic plan is to do 65% of the keyboarding offsite during the 1991 fiscal year.

   Considerable attention has been to the Soviet Journal Translations program, which is now managed by Maya Flikop. Over the past year, the time from receipt of a volume from the Soviet Union and the publication of its English language version has been reduced significantly (from 8 down to about 6 months).

   Our current agreement with VAAP expires in 1993. Baensch, Ford, and AIP’s attorney, Martin Levin, will visit the Soviet Union in June to pursue negotiations with VAAP; the proposal will be for a seven year renewal. This is a very important program for us, as 30% of AIP’s revenue comes from this source.

2. Book Publishing Program

   Baensch noted that it has now been eight months since we contracted with the American International Distribution Center in Vermont to handle our book warehousing and distribution needs. 924 titles are now listed by AIDC, with an inventory of about 200,000 books on hand – a reduction in inventory which resulted in a writeoff in 1989.

   Book sales have risen from an average of $52,000 per month to an average of $121,000 per month over the past four months (including sales from our IOP inventory).

   The Vade Mecum, 2nd Edition, is now available, thanks in no small part to the dedicated efforts of Barschall and Faye Ajzenburg-Selove. The volume has been chosen as the June feature selection by the Library of Science Book Club. AIP's Marketing manager, Dale Cunningham, is exploring the possibility of using this and other book clubs in the marketing of AIP's list.

3. Information Services Manager

   Baensch commented that we are very fortunate to have found Stacie Bradford to fill this position as we explore how best to deal with the complex issue of non-print distribution of the information that we handle or physicists.

4. Chaos Journal Project

   Ford commented briefly – a written status report on this project was included with the meeting agenda. The Task Force which has been discussing the proposal for this journal included physicists, chemists, mathematicians, and geophysicists among its members. The Task Force will meet again in early May to formulate a recommendation to AIP's Publishing Policy Committee which meets in mid-May. The Task Force has concluded (1) that such a journal does make sense, (2) that the journal should be interdisciplinary, and (3) articles, including research as well as tutorial papers, should be accessible to non-specialists. A tentative title for the journal is Chaos: An International Journal of Nonlinear Science.

   Frauenfelder remarked that he was pleased to see the direction that this project was going, stressing that the importance of such an interdisciplinary journal cannot be overemphasized. He said it is important to recognize new fields as they are developing, and to bring them into the fold by providing support, such as the publication of the literature, as soon as the field gains some measure of recognition.

14. Report of the Director of Physics Programs

1. General Report

   This written report is included as Appendix A of the official minutes, only. Rigden briefly elaborated on several items in that report. There was no discussion of the report during the meeting.

2. Report of 27 January 1990 Meeting of Committee on Physics Programs Policy

   Rigden called attention to this report of actions taken by this committee, which was included with the Agenda.

3. Project SEEP (Students to Explore and Experience Physics)

   Rigden reported that project SEEP was held for the second time at the January 1990 AAPT/APS meeting in Atlanta. A total of 125 6th grade students participated in the sessions held on one morning of the meeting. CNN covered the session, and filmed many of the demonstrations as they were presented. There resulted about two minutes of air time, which offered Gerry Wheeler, President of AAPT, to express concern over the state of science education in the country.

4. Report on Meggers Award

   Rigden called attention to the Summary of Final Reports from the recipients of the First Round of the William F. and Edith R. Meggers Awards. Judging of proposals for the second round is being conducted during the spring of 1990, and it is expected that awards will be made in June. [The report is attached as Appendix B of the official minutes, only.]

5. Science Writing Award

   Lazarus registered his objection to the fact that the AIP Science Writing Award for a Journalist was being given to Bishop of the Wall Street Journal, and asked how the award winner was selected. Rigden responded that the practice has been that these awards are made by the judging panels which are appointed for this purpose. In this case, the panel was composed of physicists and of journalists. He then reported that the Executive Committee, in its meeting on the previous day, had decided that future awards will be made by the Executive Committee, on recommendation from the judging panel. There was discussion of the criteria used for selecting the award winners, of the procedure for choosing award winners, and of the specific award to Bishop; no action was taken by the Governing Board as a result of this discussion.

15. Report from the SPS Council

Ford, speaking on behalf of the SPS Council, recommended that the Governing Board ratify amendments to the SPS By-Laws which were drafted and approved by that Council. Proposed Constitutional changes have been sent to the SPS chapters for approval, and will then come to the Governing Board for approval in the fall.

The following motion was made by Bloembergen, seconded by Howard, and unanimously CARRIED.

MOVED that the revised By-Laws of the Society of Physics Students be approved.

16. Report from the Committee for Public Policy

Ford reported that, at the 22 March meeting of this committee, the AIP Congressional Fellow program was discussed. The first Fellow, Arthur Charo (1988-89), was chosen from a field of 8 applicants. The second Fellow, Kenneth Goettal (1989-90), was chosen from a field of 15 applicants. The third Fellowship (1990-91) will be selected in April from a field of 37 applicants. The application files for the latter are being shared with APS as it selects its Fellow.

The following motion was forwarded to the Governing Board by the Committee for Public Policy, and was unanimously CARRIED.

MOVED that the AIP Congressional Fellow program be continued for an additional three year period, 1991-1994.

Ford read the following motion, also forwarded to the Governing Board by the committee. Spilhaus moved, and Lazarus seconded, to AMEND the motion to reflect the fact that other Member Societies besides APS have Congressional Fellow program with which AIP should cooperate. The motion to amend CARRIED. The amended motion CARRIED. The final version of the motion, with the affect of the amendment indicated, is given herein.

MOVED that AIP cooperate as fully as possible with APS Member Societies that have Congressional Fellow Programs in the administration of its their Congressional FellowPrograms, and directed that the stipend and benefits for the AIP Fellow be set to matchthose for the APS Fellows.

17. Progress Report of the Customer Services Task Force

Grant called attention to the progress report on the work of this task force, which was appointed by Ford in December 1989, and is chaired by Spencer Weart. The final report of the Task Force will be forwarded to management in August, and to the Governing Board in October.

18. Return to space and other long-range issues

[Note: this item, which is reported here in the order in which it appeared in the meeting agenda, was the first item discussed when the meeting reconvened on Saturday morning.]

Grant reported that the Executive Committee, on the previous evening, had recommended for Governing Board consideration and action a series of six motions dealing with the operational planning aspects of the proposed move of AIP headquarters. After Grant read the proposed motions, the following six motions were MOVED by Quinn as a single resolution, which was seconded by Howard, and was CARRIED after a brief clarifying discussion.

1. AIP Management is requested to prepare a human resources plan that will encourage current staff to remain with the Institute, emphasizing their vital importance, both at present and in the future, to the welfare of the Institute.
2. The Chair of the Governing Board is requested to appoint a Committee selected from Governing Board members whose charge is to work with AIP Management and with resident Member Societies so as to ensure that adequate support services are available to these societies should they elect to remain in New York City when the sale of the current building and a move of AIP headquarters from New York City occur.
3. The Executive Committee is requested to explore the legality of an offer by AIP to pay the employee-related relocation costs for any Member Society that chooses to co-locate with AIP at its new headquarters location, and to make such a proposal if it is found to be legal to do so.
4. AIP Management is requested, in consultation with affected Member Societies, to prepare plans for the locations of and interactions among AIP's operating units.
5. AIP Management is authorized, in consultation with Member Societies, to negotiate for the acquisition of property (1) at a site within 50 miles of Washington DC, and, (2) when appropriate, in New York City.
6. AIP Management is authorized to negotiate for the sale of the AIP property located at 335 East 45th Street, New York, NY.

19. Future Meetings

4-5 June	5 pm Mon – 4 pm Tues	Executive Committee, NY, NY
20-22 Sep	9 am Thurs – 12 N Sat	Executive Committee, Woods Hole, MA
21-22 Oct	6 pm Sun – 5 pm Mon	Governing Board, Albuquerque, NM
23-24 Oct	Tues-Wed	AIP Corp Assoc, Sandia National Labs, Albuquerque, NM
9-10 Dec	5 pm Sun – 4 pm Mon	Executive Committee, NY, NY
14-15 Feb ’91	5 pm Thurs – 4 pm Fri	Executive Committee, Wash DC
14-15 Mar ’91	1 pm Thurs – 12 N Fri	Assembly of Society Officers
15 Mar ’91	12:45-1:15 pm	Annual Corporation Meeting
15-16 Mar ’91	1:30 pm Fri – 12 N Sat	Governing Board
3-4 June ’91	5 pm Mon – 4 pm Tues	Executive Committee, NY, NY
5-7 Sep ’91	9 am Thurs – 12 N Sat	Executive Committee, NY, NY

* The March ’91 meetings listed herein will be held in Cincinnati, Ohio

20. Executive Session

Staff, visitors, and officers (except Ford) were excused at 11:15 am so that the Governing Board could meet in executive session.

21. Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 11:30 am following the Executive Session.