Present: Richard Wyatt, Frank Ford, Viera Proulx, Ingrid Russell, Amruth Kumar, Lawrence D'Antonio, Danny Kopec, Richard Close, Bill Taffe, Karl Wurst, Scott McElfresh, Michael Gousie, David Hemmendinger
2. Nominations for Board, David Hemmindinger, Michael Gousie
Both are elected.
3. Michael Gousie agrees to take on position of Editor.
4. Chair's report (Richard Wyatt)
National has set up a PayPal account for online registration (question arises as to how regions will get registration information in a timely fashion).
Questions arise about the National's database. Should Northeast send a specification for database? SM says that this has been done previously. Membership secretary should have access to database and registrations from each conference. AK would like to see design document for database. Agreed that further suggestions about functionality should be sent to Chair.
If we don't hear from National, should we pursue contact with UPE ourselves? IR: we had similar problems with Microsoft. Will Mitchell on National board will handle national vendors. Website site for national vendors is outdated (BT: more than 1.5 years out of date).
5. Gifts at 10 year meeting
IR suggest Java Sticks as attendee gift. DK makes suggestion of registration discount for board members.
6. 2007 conference - Wentworth or Brooklyn
Is Wentworth really interested? Problems with Brooklyn, can they fit all sessions in one building?, is a Sunday/Monday meeting feasible?, are there reasonable hotel rates and locations?, and what about parking problems? RIT is also a possible 2007 site.
7. Editor's report (Larry D'Antonio)
There is a potential problem in the future with the size of the proceedings. Board not in favor, at the present time, of CD publication of proceedings. DK suggests making past conference proceedings available on CD.
Suggestions about student posters. Consistency in formatting instructions for abstracts (one place on the Web said 500 words another said not exceeding one page). Suggestion was made, 500 words, not exceeding one page). Suggestion also made to eliminate student posters abstracts from the proceedings, tabled for next meeting.
8. Webmaster's report (Karl Wurst)
KW suggests creating a Wiki that will allow for updating position responsibilities.
9. Treasurer's report (Scott McElfresh)
Issues with Conway's honorarium seem to be resolved.
RIC catering problem (about the amount owed) seems to be resolved.
SM will work on preliminary budget for 2006.
10. Membership secretary's report (Danny Kopec)
DK will work on idea of collecting department chair email list. FF will try to find if such a list can be obtained from the AMS.
11. Registrar's report (Frank Ford)
Need better information on late registration (e.g., cutoff dates, info. about onsite registration). Late registration would guarantee a meal.
12. Relation between conference committee and board
AK makes motion: The conference committee is bound by the rules of the board. When there is no board policy in place the board will make the final decision.
SM observes that we previously had one meeting with conference and board members all meeting together. Later we divided meeting into two parts.
RW: the conference committee does not have carte blanche to do what they want.
BT: Friendly amendment to drop the second part of AK's motion.
RW reiterates question, should board members be expected to attend conference committee meeting?
RW makes motion (seconded by DK): The seven board officers (Chair, Secretary, Treasurer, Editor, Membership Secretary, Registrar, and Webmaster) are expected to attend the conference committee meeting in an advisory role, with no voting rights (unless they are a member of the conference committee).
Motion passes 10-1.
BT makes motion (seconded by FF): Board members who are not officers and not on the conference committee are welcome to attend the conference committee meeting as observers.
Motion passes 7-2.
Question arises as to whether the number of student posters should be a board issue.
RW: People should be tolerant and flexible. The conference committee and board should work together for the success of the conference.
BT: Board should have a document on document specifications
13. Motion to adjourn
RW brought up concerns of some conference committee members that at the previous January meeting an issue arose about a possible case of plagiarism. This reverted to a board discussion, which some conference committee members felt was intrusive.
(1) Should all board members attend the conference committee meetings?
(2) Should the board "take over" when policy issues arise?