2000: Next year's conference is in Bergen, Norway and a call for papers is ready for distribution at this conference. We are in the process of agreeing to a budget and a memorandum of understanding that will apply to this conference (the memorandum of understanding will be discussed in a moment). Once this has happened they will be posted and an electronic vote will be called for their approval. There are some modest changes being made to the budget approved last year, but primarily the format is being revised to reflect the 3 scenario budget definition. Paul Davidsen is not able to attend, but Roberta Spencer may have some additional remarks.
2001: Nathan Forrester has submitted a full proposal to host the year 2001 conference in Atlanta Georgia and I have worked up a preliminary budget. The budget is not yet complete but does reflect the new standards for creating a budget. Both of these items are attached. I have one misgiving about this proposal in that I think the attendance cost for people not staying at the conference facilities is much too high (we are effectively creating a $600 registration fee). This is something I think we need to negotiate hard with the conference center. The draft budget may also have some double counting since the hotel is undertaking some of the conference management responsibility. At this point I would strongly recommend that we go forward with Atlanta and work the details to our satisfaction. We may want to wait until a final budget is available to vote on this and then proceed with an electronic ballot.
2002: China has submitted a proposal to host the 2002 conference. I do not believe that a conference in China (or Japan) will generate the attendance necessary to meet the financial objectives of the society. I am also concerned that the conference will not be accessible enough to grow awareness and knowledge of the field and the society. Portugal, Italy and Spain have all expressed interest in hosting the 2002 conference but have not yet put forward a proposal. I recommend that we delay further action on the 2002 conference until the winter Policy Council meeting.
2003: Khalid Saeed has indicated that WPI has an interest in hosting this conference, though no proposal is in hand. Again I recommend waiting till the winter meeting to discuss this further.
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU): David Andersen drafted a memorandum of understanding for the Quebéc conference. I have, with input from the Administrative Committee, modified that to something I think will be useable going forward. A draft for discussion is attached. The key elements are:
| There is a budget that defines how much money the society will transfer to the conference chair based solely on attendance (for 2000 this is US$0), with a minimum transfer guaranteed. Any change in the budget must be approved by the Administrative Committee.
The duties of the different parties are outlined in reasonable detail.
|
Everybody needs to sign on.
| |
Comments on this draft are appreciated. I believe that we should arrive at an agreeable MOU for the 2000 and 2001 conferences and vote on this electronically before September. Going forward we can either adopt a blanket MOU or vote on a specific MOU for each conference.
Administrative Committee: The Administrative Committee is made up of a number of people and ex-officio the President and Vice President - Finance. I believe the VP - Meetings should also be an ex-officio member of this committee. Since I am currently on the Administrative Committee and serve as VP - Meetings till the end of 2000, there is no need to vote on this at this time.
