Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics
Minutes of Meeting
1. Convene – Roll Call
Frauenfelder called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm on Sunday, 21 October 1990.
Hans Frauenfelder (Chair), Kenneth W. Ford (Executive Director), Roger A. Bell, Robert T. Beyer, Nicolaas Bloembergen, Peter B. Boyce, Paul L. Carson, John O. Dimmock, William Duax, H. Frederick Dylla, Judy R. Franz, Robert A. Frosch, William W. Havens, Jr., James R. Heirtzler, John N. Howard, Carl Kisslinger, Arlo U. Landolt, David Lazarus, Harry Lustig, Eugen Merzbacher, Jarus W. Quinn, Thomas D. Rossing, F. Dow Smith, A. Frederick Spilhaus, Jr., Hugo Steinfink, Murray Strasberg, Martin Walt, Gerald Wheeler, Jack M. Wilson, Kurt F. Wissbrun.
Frederick H. Fisher, Thomas E. Graedel, Shirley A. Jackson, Herwig Kogelnik, Walter E. Massey, James S. Murday, Jean St. Germain, Jerry M. Woodall
Robert Beck Clark (Chair, Audit Committee), Bernard V. Khoury (Executive Officer, AAPT), H. William Koch (Former Executive Director, AIP), Robert Sears (Treasurer, AAPT), Richard Werthamer (Executive Secretary Designate, APS)
Robert E. Baensch, Director of Publishing; Arthur T. Bent, Treasurer; Alicia A. Masterson, Assistant to Secretary; John S. Rigden, Director Physics Programs
2. Report of the Secretary
Minutes of the 30-31 March 1990 Meeting
The minutes of the 30-31 March 1990 meeting were approved after minor corrections were noted and made.
Request for Affiliated Society Status – N.Y. Museum of Holography
Grant reported that the Executive Committee voted to recommend to the Governing Board that the application of the New York Museum of Holography for Affiliated Society status be accepted. He noted that the criteria adopted by the Governing Board in 1975 for Affiliated Societies does not exclude a museum, which is an organization rather than a society, from attaining such a. status. The Handbook for Member Society Officers states: “An Affiliated Society is any local, regional, or national organization interested in physics.”
Questions followed including: How is the museum supported? What is the nature of its membership? What are the mutual benefits, to AIP and to the museum, if they become an Affiliated Society? Do we need a new category of membership, to cover organizations such as museums?
The following motion was made by Spilhaus, seconded by Boyce, and was CARRIED.
MOVED that the motion to accept the N.Y. Museum of Holography as an Affiliated Society be tabled in order to:
Consider the general criteria and purpose of the Affiliated Society category of membership in AIP.
Consider possible new categories of affiliation with AIP, including one for museums and similar public education enterprises, and
Obtain further information concerning the New York Museum of Holography.
Report on Defeat of Amendment to add International Associates Category of Membership
Grant reported that the proposed amendment to add an International Associates Category of Membership was defeated as the result of NO votes by APS and AVS. Neither society stated the basis for their vote in correspondence received by the Office of the Secretary.
Society Membership Figures for 1990-91
Grant reported on Member Society membership figures submitted to his office. On the basis of these figures, AGU will add one member (for a new total of six) to the Governing Board for 1991-92. [The figures for all societies are shown in Appendix A.]
3. Report of the Chair
Actions of the Executive Committee Since March 1990
Frauenfelder noted the report on the Executive Committee actions since the March meeting as prepared by Grant. He commented that the overall tone and working relationships within the committee and among the society representatives has improved greatly in the past six month resulting in positive steps in the area of relocation planning, as well as renewed optimism for the future of AIP in partnership with its Member Societies.
21 September Meeting of Executive Committee with Member Society Elected and Staff Officers
Frauenfelder reported that the Woods Hole meeting in September was more productive and positive than any in the past. He commended Ford for his thoughtful paper “The Nature and Mission of AIP” which was the focus for discussion at that meeting, particularly as it was written while Ford was recuperating from his operation.
4. Report of the Executive Director
A. “The Nature and Mission of AIP”
Ford stated that the working relations within the following activities are exemplary of the theme that emerged from the Woods Hole Meeting: “Partnership” between AIP and its Member Societies.
The AAPT/AIP/APS Relocation Task Force has successfully worked together on very difficult issues; their work has resulted in the documents to be submitted for approval by the Governing Board at this meeting.
The Physics Center Advisory Committee, with representatives appointed by Franz, Frauenfelder, and Merzbacher are working well together.
An APS task force, chaired by John Toll, has recommended a development effort called a “Campaign for Physics”. A development counsel has been retained, and is working well with AIP's development officer, Joe Ianolli. A discussion of the feasibility and structure of such a development effort, of potential dividends and pitfalls, and of the opportunity for additional societies to join at this preliminary planning phase, will be held at a meeting on 29 November, to which all Member Societies have been invited to send a representative.
Responses from participants in Executive Committee – Member Society Retreat at Woods Hole, MA, 21 September 1990
General Discussion – “AIP in Partnership with its Member Societies”
Written responses to Ford's paper on “The Nature and Mission of AIP” and to the concept of “AIP in Partnership with its Member Societies” were solicited from participants at the Wood’s Hole retreat, and were distributed with agenda materials.
Ford stated that the purpose of AIP, now approaching the 60th anniversary of its founding, has not changed; it is a dual purpose of serving the societies and serving the physics community. AIP has grown much larger, as have the Member Societies who have larger staffs and many do not need AIP to provide the same services that were needed in the past. The tension between AIP and the Societies that arises mostly from AIP's dual purpose can and should be minimized. Spilhaus (AGU) emphasized in his letter the concept of partnership. Krumhansl (APS) chose to emphasize the service role of AIP to the societies and had little to say of AIP’s broader service to the community of physics. Wissbrun (SOR) focused on the appropriateness of AIP's general mission and how it serves the interests of the smaller societies who do not have these capabilities. Dalrymple's (AGU) letter supports a productive relationship between AIP and Member Societies whereby both work together to accomplish goals of mutual interest and to advance physics. Franz (AAPT) also emphasized partnership and the need to work to avoid competition.
Ford said that the guidelines adopted by the Governing Board on public policy statements, and the mission statement are very helpful to him as Executive Director, as they define the framework within which we can operate and boundaries outside of which we should not operate. He said that he is committed to completing guidelines for the educational activities of AIP. These will be presented to the March Governing Board after review by AIP committees.
Frauenfelder invited additional comments on the “Partnership” paper from the participants at the Woods Hole meeting.
Beyer said that AIP was formed as service organization, publisher and an organization that can carry out projects that the other societies could not do alone. In recent years drives to enter more into education caused conflict with AAPT. He feels that, in its drive move to Washington, AIP management has forgotten its original role as a service organization. AIP is considered no longer to be an ally by ASA officers and staff.
Wissbrun said there should be an effort to provide better communications among AIP staff and the societies. He wondered if AIP be considered solely as another vendor; SOR values the relationship as a part of the physics community, and not solely as a vendor.
Franz commented that communication should take place staff to staff; AIP committees have not been effective as a means of communication via liaisons. Disagreements should be confronted directly by officers and staff from both sides.
Spilhaus was uncomfortable with “vendor” and “customer” as applied to societies. Individual members are the market, not the societies per se. A stronger interrelationship is necessary between AIP and its member societies.
Smith voiced his view that it is important for AIP to have a life of its own. Without AIP, the member Societies would be missing the tremendous opportunity for public outreach, to promote physics widely, to foster cooperative activities, and to develop a real trust in each other as physicists with common needs and goals.
Frauenfelder agreed, noting that AIP is the only organization in the country that provides a connection among all the physics-related societies.
The Governing Board recessed for the evening at 8:50 pm.
Monday, 22 October 1990
Frauenfelder called the Governing Board back into session at 8:30 am.
5. Report of the Director of Finance and Administration
Financial Report for Six Months Ended 30 June 1990
Bent reviewed the Statement of Revenue and Expense for January-June 1990 and the Balance Sheet as of June 1990, and responded to questions. [These statements are attached to the official minutes as Appendix B.]
Status of Investments
A status report on AIP investments was enclosed with the Agenda for information only. [It is included with the official minutes as Appendix C.]
Report of Audit Committee
Robert Beck Clark, Chair of the Audit Committee, presented the report of the committee. He began by stating that the Committee was pleased to note the continuing improvement in the timeliness of financial reporting and notes with further pleasure the completion of the 1989 Audit by May 18, 1990.
On behalf of the committee, and on their recommendation, Clark presented the following motion which was unanimously CARRIED.
MOVED that 1989 Audit by Deloitte & Touche be accepted.
Deloitte & Touche has served as the AIP auditor for nine years. There was some discussion concerning the advisability of changing auditors from time to time. Bent pointed out that we have worked with different principals from Deloitte & Touche over the years, so he didn't view this as a problem. It was also stated that it may be desirable to retain this firm until the move to Washington DC is completed in order to maintain stability and continuity in this area. The following motion, on recommendation from the Audit Committee was CARRIED: 27 (YES), 1 (NO), 5 (ABSTAIN).
MOVED that Deloitte & Touche be retained for 1990.
The Audit Committee further commented that it was pleased with AIP's response to a letter from the auditors to AIP Staff noting internal communications concerns in the following areas: (1) year end closing. (2) bank account reconciliations; (3) authorized signers; (4) inventory and accounts payable.
6. Report of the Director of Physics Programs
Rigden called attention to his written report to the Governing Board, and called particular attention to the finances of Physics Today. He said that an advertising revenue shortfall of 10-15% is predicted [for] Physics Today as the result of a declining number of classified ads for jobs. This reflects that the job market for physicists is very tight.
Werthamer asked how this loss will be covered. Rigden responded that production costs have been trimmed, open positions will not be filled, and the number of editorial pages may be reduced.
Merzbacher noted that there has been a recommendation that Member Society dues of $2.00 per individual member be increased. This money has been designated for Physics Today by the Governing Board. He asked when and how this change could be effected.
Grant stated that the dues are established in the Bylaws by the Governing Board. Changes in the Bylaws require 2/3 affirmative vote of the full membership at the second meeting after the proposal is first made and approved. Therefore, 1992 fiscal year would be the earliest date on which such a change could be put into place. The upper limit, set by the Constitution, is 10% of the average regular annual dues of the member societies, which currently is $6.50.
Rigden reminded the committee that Physics Today has never been self-supporting; deficits for the last two years ran between $100,000-200,000 with a total budget of about $4 million. The expected shortfall first left from budget in 1990 is $400,000.
The following motion was made by Wilson, seconded by Landolt, and CARRIED with 23 (YES), 4 (NO) and 3 (ABSTAIN).
MOVED to amend Article VIII – Dues of the Bylaws of AIP so as to remove the provision that the dues paid to AIP by Member Societies are set at $2.00 per member, and to replace it with a provision that such dues are to be set annually by the Governing Board at its Spring meeting, subject to limits set by Article VIII – Dues of the Constitution.
[Note: Article XIII–Bylaws of the Constitution requires that this motion to amend the Bylaws be adopted by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the full membership of the Board (ie, by at least 27 of the 40 voting members) at a meeting following the meeting at which the change is initially proposed – in this case, at the March 1991 meeting.]
Revised SPS Constitution
Rigden reported that the SPS Council has recommended and approved the new Constitution. One substantive change results in an increase of the number of SPS zones from 12-18, which decreases on average the distance chapters must travel to meetings. The cost increase has already factored into budget. He stated that the SPS Constitution requires that the AIP Governing Board ratify such changes once they are approved by the SPS Council.
The following motion, recommended by the SPS Council, was made by Frosch, seconded by Wilson, and unanimously CARRIED.
MOVED that the AIP Governing Board hereby ratifies the revised Constitution of the Society of Physics Students (SPS) as approved by the SPS Council and its Chapters.
Report on Discussion of Guidelines for Educational Activities
Rigden reported that the Committee on Physics Education has requested that they be given the opportunity to review the Guidelines for Educational Activities by AIP which have been developed by Ford, Franz and Rigden. Once this has been done, the Guidelines will be presented for approval at the March Governing Board meeting.
Frauenfelder read from a letter signed by John Knox, Chair of AIP Physics Programs Advisory Committee. The Committee carried unanimously a motion which states:
“The AIP Physics Programs Branch is encouraged to use its available strengths, talent, and financial resources to carry out its mandated purposes and mission on behalf of the physics community. In choosing the programs that is sponsors, Physics Programs should be sensitive in avoiding conflict with established programs of Member Societies, and wherever possible, it should use the expertise of Member Societies in carrying our new projects.”
Frauenfelder paraphrased the letter which stated that the AIP Physics Programs Policy Committee reacted initially to Ford's white paper by noting the large number of Physics Programs activities that have come to be a part of our professional lives and which would have to be reinvented if they were altered in any major way. The list is headed by Physics Today. He quoted:
“It was clear from our discussion that the committee has a very deep concern that AIP not be increasingly subject to general constraints and specific veto powers by the Member Societies. Turf fights will do nothing but hinder progress in everyone’s quest to carry out the missions of AIP. The normal functioning of the various physics programs advisory committees can and should be expected to provide the communication and controls necessary to initiate appropriate collaborations.”
Concerns of Science Writers
Frauenfelder stated that he felt the Executive Committee had found a good solution to the current dissatisfaction among the science writers regarding the revised procedures for making awards. He said that he was convinced during the discussion with the writers that this was a two-culture problem, and that we either should give up the award to a journalist, or revise our rules so as to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest which now appears through our procedure of reviewing/approving the recommendations of the panel of judges.
Grant reported briefly on the discussions that were held the previous day, prior to the start of the Executive Committee meeting, with three science writers and members of the Executive Committee. Based on these discussions, the following motion, on recommendation from the Executive Committee, was CARRIED by a vote of 17 (YES) 8 (NO).
MOVED to establish as Governing Board Rules:
- The Panel of Judges for each AIP Science Writing Award shall be appointed through action of the Governing Board. (Replaces Rule I.C.18.)
- Each Science Writing Award Panel of Judges is authorized to select a winner according to rules to be formulated and approved by the Governing Board. (Modifies Rule I.B.6).
This change requires that the Governing Board look very carefully at the nominations of people who will serve as their representatives on the Judging Panels. Once the Governing Board accepts and appoints those individuals, they then are acting on behalf of the GB and will select the award winner.
The Governing Board recessed from 9:45-10:15 am.
7. Publishing – Report of the Director
Proposed New Journal: Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science
Baensch introduced David Campbell, Editor-Designate of Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science. Baensch reported that the Executive Committee has recommendedthat we proceed to begin publication of this new journal.
Campbell briefly addressed the Governing Board. He said that currently there are four journals in existence and did not think all would survive. He does believe that Chaos... will. The concept will be international and interdisciplinary. Focus issues will give the volumes archival value for individuals and their libraries alike. The use of color is essential in the fields to be covered, though it raises costs. He believes the subscriptions will exceed the numbers projected.
Ford reported on the meeting of the Journals Subcommittee who suggested that a review on an annual basis with a five year rolling budget by which the journal be evaluated financially and for its scientific value to the physics community. The committee suggested it would take 3 to 5 years to reach a final decision on the long term viability of the journal.
Frauenfelder stated the Governing Board should not be concerned with the mechanics, but with the impact the journal could have. He also stated the Executive Committee had directed Baensch to look at the page charges for the journal, and to make every effort to lower them. Baensch said there are three things he will look into: 1) charges for color; 2) page charge even if its nominal; 3) adding a membership subscriptions category in addition to institutional and individual subscriptions. When asked what effect high page charges had on financial projections Baensch responded by saying it gives an earlier return or break even point.
Following additional discussion, the following motion, made on recommendation from the Executive Committee, was CARRIED by a vote of 21(YES), 2 (NO), and 3 (ABSTAIN).
MOVED to authorize the publication of a new journal, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science.
Spilhaus stated his concern with the proposed subscription rate; it is simply too high compared to other AIP and Member Society journals, and sends the wrong signal to libraries at this time.
The following motion was made by Wilson, seconded by Spilhaus, and CARRIED.
MOVED that the subscription price of the journal be set initially at $160 per year.
Ford reported on a series of Soviet American conferences; the topic continues to be Chaos and Nonlinear phenomena. The second conference, in Tarusa, USSR, was attended by 20 Soviets and 20 American scientists and was very successful. A third is being planned for the last week of August 1991 in Woods Hole, Falmouth, MA. The U.S. steering committee is comprised of David Campbell, Mitchell Feigenbaum, and Charles Tresser. Approximately 20 American and 15 Soviet scientists are expected to attend the 1991 meeting.
Ford reported that when last in the Soviet Union this past August an oral agreement concerning revision and extension of our present agreement with VAAP was made. It was agreed to be revised in two principal respects: 1) the major Soviet party to the agreement would become the Soviet Academy of Sciences. 2) the terms of the agreement would include a call for expanded cooperation intended to strengthen the Soviet Journals. It would not be just a translation rights agreement. The term would be extended to the year 2000. We agreed on guaranteed royalty payments of $7,000,000 for the seven-year extension period, with suitable escape clauses. The most recent draft protocol was handed out. In this draft protocol, the guaranteed royalties are $10,000,000 over ten year rather than $7,000,000 over seven years. We expect by spring 1991 to sign this agreement. It might well happen in the next ten year that the Soviet Russian language physics journal decline in quality, significance and acceptance in the English speaking world. After discussion with ourselves and the journals subcommittee we concluded that the most significant single thing we can do to help the Soviets is to achieve and maintain near-simultaneous publication of the Russian and English-language journals.
Ford asked the Governing Board for their comments on proceeding with this protocol and the subsequent steps leading to the signing of an agreement that will follow.
Dylla pointed out that the statement “AIP will keep abreast of technological improvements in the storage, retrieval, and dissemination of information and will share this information with the Academy” might be illegal, or dangerous to the protection of proprietary information. Frauenfelder suggested inserting the clause “Consistent with U.S. Law” to cover this problem.
A written report was included with the agenda for information only.
A written report was included with the agenda for information only.
Frankfurt Book Fair
A written report was included with the agenda for information only.
Resolution on Membership and Fulfillment Costs
At the conclusion of the Report of the Director of Publishing, Spilhaus returned to his concerns over the costs of publishing, distributing, and marketing journals. He stated that it was his opinion that member services and fulfillment costs were far too high, and that AIP should look carefully into this problem. He then offered the following motion, which was seconded by Lustig, and CARRIED.
MOVED to ask the staff to present a proposal as part of 1991 budget that would charge both AIP publications and member societies an estimated subscription fulfillment cost that approximates the cost of comparable services in the open market and to charge any excess charge to the administrative account where they can be highlighted. A plan for reducing the excess cost to zero as quickly as possible should be presented at the same time as the budget.
Bent stated that in 1989, 1990, and 1991 we have reduced the prices charged to societies for membership and fulfillment efforts recognizing that our internal costs are higher. At the September meeting, 1991 costs for five societies were approved. To make the review at the same time as the budget is impossible to do; there simply is not time for management to complete the study in time to affect the 1991 budget. At the September meeting a suggestion to review the membership and fulfillment costs was approved by the committee and will be done between now and September 1991.
Spilhaus and Lustig agreed that preparation of such a report for discussion at the September 1991 Executive Committee would be acceptable.
8. Relocation Planning
Update on Human Resources Planning
Bent reported on the employee survey by PHH Home Equity. They estimate that 35% of those AIP employees whose jobs are being relocated will move. The Executive Committee approved a relocation policy at the September Executive Committee Meeting which allows employees to consider relocation without the concern of financial hardship. It includes comprehensive assistance to staff in areas of home sale, apartment lease termination, home purchase, moving of household goods, spouse career assistance, and a stay bonus and career assistance for those employees who choose to remain. All full time employees whose jobs are scheduled to move and were hired before 1 September, 1990, and whose job performance has been deemed fully satisfactory, will be offered the opportunity to relocate. Individuals hired after that date will be considered on a case by case basis. The cost of this package is $2.7 million for AIP and APS staff. The cost is approximately $40,000 per employee who moves.
A broker has been engaged in New York City to sell the building at 335 E. 45th Street, and one offer has been received. Negotiations are underway at the present time. In regard to financing the new facility Bent has met with the Maryland Industrial Development Financing Authority concerning tax exempt bond financing, and has been encouraged by these talks. Management is looking for an investment banker to represent us. This debt will be an obligation of the three organizations – AIP, APS and AAPT.
The lease on the presently rented space (13,000 sq. ft.) at 140 E. 45th Street will expire in September 1991. This is approximately enough room for the 40 + AIP and Member Society employees who will remain in New York. It is a possible solution following the move.
Resident Society Relocation Planning
Frosch reported on the meeting of the Committee on Services to New York Based Societies which was held on 27 August 1990.
Each Society remaining in New York has been requested to provide to AIP management its specifications for which services they wish to have continued. In response to this information, AIP will state approximately how much it will cost to provide those services. Frosch stated that there are some societies that are not certain at this time whether they will remain in New York.
Frosch stated that the following recommendation was made by the committee in the form of a motion to the Governing Board, which was CARRIED.
MOVED to establish an Ad Hoc Committee to investigate and report, by Spring 1991, on the current availability of rental and/or ownership space in New York City, keeping in mind the reasonable requirements of staff security and travel.
The Governing Board recessed for lunch from 12:10 pm to 1:10 pm.
[Note: At this point in the meeting the discussion concerning the Science Writing Awards was held; this was reported earlier within the report of the Director of Physics Programs.]
Legal Documents Related to Proposed New Center Corporation
Ford presented and discussed three documents related to the proposed new center corporation. The following motions were made and each was CARRIED.
MOVED to approve the “Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement” and its Appendices, substantially in the form dated October 12, 1990.
MOVED to authorize the Chair of the Governing Board to appoint three representatives to the Steering Committee established under the “Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement”.
MOVED to authorize three AIP representatives to the Steering Committee to incur financial commitments to a maximum total of $800,000, of which AIP will bear the responsibility for 5/8 as described in the “Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement”.
In the discussion of these motions, Ford reported that attorneys representing AIP and APS have looked at numerous possibilities for organizing the efforts to acquire land and to build a new building, and finally have suggested that forming a new corporation is the most attractive alternative. They propose a 501(C)(3) corporation, a facilities corporation, which will own the land and own and operate the building, and be governed by the member organizations (initially AAPT, AIP, and APS, but with provisions for other societies to join at a later date).
Ford outlined the makeup and duties of the center Steering Committee, introduced on page 3 of the “Memorandum of Understanding”. It will be responsible for:
- selection of property for the ACP headquarters building, including entering into an option agreement for acquisition thereof.
- Procurement of architectural and other design services.
- Procurement of consulting services in the areas of real estate acquisition, legal requirements and financial transactions, as well as any other services deemed necessary or appropriate by the Steering Committee in furtherance of the project.
- Participation with the architect and other consultants concerning the interior and exterior design.
He further outlined the matters reserved to Governing Boards of the respective societies, as stated on page 7:
- Final authorization of the acquisition of the property for the project.
- Authorization of construction expenditures in accordance with specific designs, plans and specifications.
- Final authorization of the arrangements for financing the Project, including the pledging of any assets of any member organization.
Khoury responded to questions on how a society would invest equity into the new corporation a later date. He told the committee that the extra space that the new corporation is planning to have will be offered at an agreed price depending on when they choose to join.
Ford then quoted from his October 12 memo:
“... because of everyone's desire to make the center welcoming to all Member Societies that might want to join it, the documents are drawn up to specify only one class of member organization and to make possible equity participation and a role in governance for all Societies that might later become tenants and join the center. The question of the voting power to be assigned to new member organizations is left open. When the (n + 1)st organization joins, its voting power will be determined by the first n members, and this would be an item of negotiation with the new member.”
Smith stated, with support from several others, that the name “American Center for Physics” is undesirable for the real estate entity, and perhaps should be reserved for the organization itself. He made the following motion, which was seconded and CARRIED by a vote of 16 (YES) 7 (NO).
MOVED that AIP Representatives to the Steering Committee seek to find a name for the building corporation which is not necessarily descriptive of programs which are to take place within the structure.
Werthamer responded that American Center for Physics is the real estate entity (the Corporation which holds title to the property). He reaffirmed that the name can be changed at any time before the charter is completed; the steering committee will charter the corporation; which means all three organizations through, the Steering Committee can modify the name.
Frauenfelder concluded the discussion by announcing that he had named Arthur Bent, Kenneth Ford, and Jarus Quinn to be the AIP representatives on the Steering Committee for the American Center for Physics.
Report on Architect and Site Selection
Bent reported the committee had looked at [at] least 10 sites. They will reduce this to three sites and place them before the Steering committee. The Steering Committee will then select a site and the Governing Board will subsequently be the authority to approve it for AIP.
9. General Discussion
A brief, general discussion of the educational needs of the country, and possible AIP and Member Society responses to these needs.
10. Other Business
No other business was presented for action by the Governing Board at this time.
11. Future Meetings
FUTURE MEETINGS OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND GOVERNING BOARD
|9-10 Dec||5 pm Sun – 4 pm Mon||Executive Committee, NY, NY|
|14-15 Feb ’91||5 pm Thurs – 10 pm Fri||Executive Committee, Wash DC|
|##14-15 Mar’91||1 pm Thurs – 12 N Fri||Assembly of Society Officers (## Cancelled for 1991)|
|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 Jun ’91||5 pm Mon – 4 pm Tues||Executive Committee, NY, NY|
|5-7 Sep ’91||9 am Thurs – 12 N Sat||Executive Committee, Woods Hole, MA|
|5-6 Dec ’91||5 pm Thurs – 4 pm Fri||Executive Committee, NY, NY|
* The above March '91 meetings will be held in Cincinnati, Ohio.
12. Executive Session
Staff was excused at 3:45 pm so that the Governing Board could meet in a brief executive session. Minutes of the executive session are recorded in the official minutes book only.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:50 pm following the executive session.