ACSP Executive Committee Meeting Minutes

Wednesday, November 1, 2000

Atlanta, Georgia

Members present: Bruce Stiftel, President, Christopher Silver, Vice President, Susan Bradbury, Secretary/Treasurer, Sandra Rosenbloom, Past President, Rolf Engler, Bursar, Wim Wiewel, President-elect, Phil Clay and Salah El-Shakhs, Northeast Representatives, Sanda Kaufman and Johanna Looye, North Central Representatives, Daphne Spain and Nancey Green-Leigh, Southeast Representatives, Elise Bright, South Central Representative, Deborah Howe, Western Representative, Caitlin Janson Waddick and D. Gregg Doyle, Student Representatives, David Amborski, Conference Chair, Seymour Mandlebaum, Incoming Conference Chair, Nancy Frank, UPDATE Editor/webmaster, Patricia Pollak, Institutional Governance Committee Chair, Barbara Becker, FWIG, Cheryl Contant, Fritz Steiner and Lewis Hopkins, PAB Representatives, Beatrice Clupper, PAB Director, Mickey Lauria, Michael Hibbard and Edward Weeks, JPER Editors, Tom Harper, Canadian Liaison.

The Meeting was called to order by President Stiftel at 9:15am.

President Stiftel introduced the new members of the Executive Committee. President Stiftel welcomed Michael Hibbard and Edward Weeks as ex-officio members and Barbara Becker and Mickey Lauria as new regional representatives (as of Saturday). Wim Wiewel, who will assume the office of President-elect as of Saturday, was also introduced. President Stiftel also acknowledged and thanked Cheryl Contant and Nancey Green Leigh and their Georgia Tech colleagues for hosting the ACSP conference in Atlanta.

The agenda for the meeting was approved unanimously.

Motion: to approve the consent agenda which contains a resolution honoring Robert Washington was made by Sandi Rosenbloom and seconded by Phil Clay. The motion passed without dissent.

Minutes - Susan Bradbury

The minutes from the last ACSP Executive Committee meeting that was held in New York, April 15, 2000 were reviewed. There was one correction to the minutes on page 8, correcting the title of the Global Planning Educators Interest Group (GPEIG). The minutes were approved as corrected by unanimous consent.

Bursar's Report - Rolf Engler

The Bursar prepared a summary budget for fiscal year 1999-2000 (the last 12 months) showing the proposed budget and the actual budget. According to the proposed budget we forecasted revenues of $195,225 and expenditures of $198,680. According to our actual budget we had revenues of $374,490 and expenditures of $319,709. As a result, for budget year 1999-2000 we have a surplus of 54,781. Our reserve fund is currently at $75,580. Currently we have approximately $80,000 invested in CDs. These funds have been split between two banks, Bank Boston and Fleet Bank based on the recommendation of Purvis Gray & Company to ensure we don't exceed the $100,000 FDIC insurance coverage. The Activity Report shows the activity from April 12 to October 25, 2000. The current bank balance as of October 25, 2000 is $319,481. The Bursar's report was approved by unanimous consent.

Secretary-Treasurer's Report - Susan Bradbury

An updated version of the Budget that was passed in April was handed out. This up-dated budget shows that our financial situation is actually better than forecasted in April. Membership during 1999-2000 stayed steady despite the dues increase and membership is continuing to stay strong in 2000-2001. In addition, several of our activities for which we have incurred expenses such as the Guide and Recruitment brochures have begun to bring in significant amounts of revenue. We were concerned because the budget that was approved in April was a negative budget with expenditures predicted to be slightly higher than revenues. However, it would appear that revenues will exceed expenditures for 2000-2001 after all. What this revised budget really shows is a positive cash flow situation, rather than an increase in revenues. Much of the money for the Guide has come in earlier than expected.

Vice President's Report - Christopher Silver

ACSP has signed a contract as of September 1, 2000 with Sage concerning the publication of JPER. It was a long but very productive contract process. It was a mutually agreeable process between ACSP and Sage; it took time to work out the language.

ACSP is still working on identifying sites for the 2004 and 2005 conferences. Both these issues will be discussed in greater detail later.

President's Report - Bruce Stiftel

Dr. Grady Bogue from the Department of Education Administration and Cultural Studies, University of Knoxville will be appointed as of December 1, 2000 to public member position on the PAB. Cheryl Contant has been appointed to a second term on the PAB beginning December 1, 2000. Niraj Verma from USC has been chosen as a participant in the AESOP Ph.D. workshop that will take place in April in Poland. Phil Clay has been appointed as Chair of the Committee on Reassessing Scholarship for the next two years. The Committee has been charged with revising the Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure that were produced in 1986. The revisions will take into consideration the Checkoway report on Reassessing Scholarship. Marcia Marker Feld has been appointed as Chair of the Davidoff Committee for 2001 and June Manning Thomas has been appointed as a member to that committee. A Review and Appraisal Committee has also been appointed.

A copy of an Institutional Support Grant application by ACSP to HUD was passed out. In June ACSP applied to HUD for $25,000 for conference support. HUD has set-up an Urban Policy Association Support Program and ACSP is one of four associations eligible to apply for funding under this program. The stipulations for this funding include setting up an awards program consisting of between 5 to 10 awards to paper presenters that were found to be outstanding in the field of urban policy scholarship. However, it should be noted that according to this set-up ACSP would get to keep no money but rather all money would go to the award winners. ACSP objected to this and have proposed a different structure which is contained in the proposal handed out. We have received some communication from HUD that our proposal has been approved, however, there will be contracts to sign, etc. As a result, ACSP will receive $25,000 from HUD and the money will be spent in the following fashion. Approximately $5000 will go to the award winners, $6000 will go to the jury and the balance will go to ACSP's conference budget.

U.S. News and World Report in conjunction with ASPA and NAPA are about mail out their biannual survey of public affairs schools, leading up to their ranking of schools in the field of public affairs. This year this ranking will include a subcategory in urban policy and management. They will be doing this without including schools in the ACSP membership. Apparently according to how the rankings are currently done, no objective data is utilized. The whole process is regarded as a profit making, marketing scheme. We have the possibility of lobbying U.S. News and World Report to have them survey and rank our schools. As an Association we need to weigh and consider the implications of being included in such a ranking and the implications of not being included. They are going to publish a ranking of schools in urban policy and management and we are not going to be considered. We need to consider the implications of not being included and what repercussions that may have on our ability to be visible and recognized.

In September, Pat Gleason, ACSP's Association Manager was diagnosed with leukemia. Her prognosis is very good and she is at home and has continued to work. However, given her illness and her need for treatments she will not be with us here in Atlanta. We have hired a conference coordinator to be on-site in Atlanta during the conference, Donna Dodd. This situation will have a small impact on our budget but the Officers felt that given the importance of the conference to us as an Association, not only financially but also to the membership, that this was money well spent to ensure a successful conference.

Policy on Fund Raising - Sandi Rosenbloom

In your packets you will find enclosed a policy on accepting outside funds dated October 13, 2000. ACSP is now in the fortunate position that people are coming to us with money. As a result, we need to develop a policy that outlines under what circumstances we will accept funds and what they can expect in return. ACSP incurs costs when prizes or awards are given, when special sessions are organized and we need to account for this. We need to ensure that when we accept money that it is consistent with ACSP's mission and we need to ensure that we treat people and/or organizations uniformly. Having a policy would help us to do this.

According to this policy ACSP will accept funds under four categories - named prizes or awards (new or renamed), prizes or awards given by organizations or associations, conference sessions, and conference tracks. In return we require funders to pay an overhead charge of 25% (limited to a minimum of $250 and a maximum of $1000) to cover administration costs. Existing awards will be grandfathered in and thus not subject to this policy. This policy will provide us with structure to help us to make these kinds of decisions.

Questions and concerns about this policy included who would decide whether ACSP would accept money. In the case of accepting money for awards or prizes it would be the Executive Committee who would make that decision. In the case of conference sessions or conference tracks the decision would be made by the ACSP conference chair and/or the Vice President for conferences. Concern also focused on the ability of funders to determine award winners. Discussion focused on whether we should allow non-members of ACSP to be consulted with regard to the appointment of the award selection committees. It was suggested that the last clause of the sentence, "funder may not unilaterally make award decisions" be deleted. This phrase is to be deleted in two places; on the bottom of the first page and also on page 3.

Motion: to accept the policy on accepting outside funds with one revision which strikes the clause "funders may not unilaterally make award decision" on page one and on page three. There were eight yea votes and two nay votes. The motion passes.

A listing of awards and award winners was passed out. Our records are incomplete and we are looking for your assistance to help fill in the gaps.

Institutional Governance Committee - Pat Pollak

President Stiftel reminded members of the Executive Committee, that the Executive Committee does not have a role in the amendment of the Constitution. As a result, the Executive Committee will not be asked to vote on this proposal. However, the Executive Committee, if it deems it appropriate, can take a vote to endorse the proposal. The Governance Committee will sometime soon put a proposal of revised by-laws before the ACSP membership who will vote to either adopt them or not.

The Institutional Governance Committee has worked long and hard on this proposal before you and the members are in agreement on this version. Executive Committee members did have input into the process last April at the Executive Committee meeting and many others submitted comments in writing to the Committee. All comments were taken into consideration by the Institutional Governance committee and most have been incorporated into this version. In the written version you have before you what is new is written in italics and what is located in brackets will be deleted.

A list of items for discussion was developed and include the following:

· Stagger elections for regional representatives

· What happens if there is a tie vote in elections - how will a winner be determined? What does it take to win an election - the greatest number of votes or is a majority necessary?

· Why can't Canadian schools be full members? What about if Mexican or other schools wish to join? If Canadian schools were full members how would regional representatives be determined since geographical representation just refers to the United States?

· Voting rights of affiliate, corresponding and individual members - in this version of the by-laws is silent.

· Why does the reserve fund only involve funds from full members?

· Roberts Rules of Order - which officer should have enforcement responsibilities?

· Vice President for conferences - appointed vs. elected position? Should they have a vote on the Governing Board?

· Role of future governing board in Constitutional or bylaw amendments - should future bylaw amendments be brought before the Governing Board for a vote before it goes to the membership at the Business Meeting to be voted on? Sould a proposed bylaw change need the approval of the Governing Board or could it go forward to the Business meeting if it has the support of 1/6 of the full member institutions in the form or a written petition?

· List of duties for Past President - include diversity committee liaison? - The proposed bylaws are silent on the duties of the Past President

· Size of business meeting quorum - majority vs. current quorum requirement of 1/3

requirement for regional representatives to be 50% FTE or a capitated faculty member of a full member institution

· Must the nominating committee produce a slate of two nominations for each office on the ballot? vs. good faith effort. Perhaps allow for write-in candidates on the ballot?

· Bursar was not mentioned as a non-voting member of the Governing Board; Bursar considered as staff?

· If the Chairs of all other committees, task forces, commissions and interest groups are considered non-voting members of the Governing Board the size of the Governing Board will basically double; it was suggested that both Chairs of Standing Committees and Chairs of all other committees, task forces, and interest groups should be removed from the list of non-voting Governing Board members.

To have a vote on revising the Constitution it must take place at a meeting of the membership and not by a mail vote. Therefore the vote would have to take place either next year at the Business meeting or at a special meeting either at APA or at the administrator's conference in the spring. However, the revision to the Constitution will go before the membership at the Business meeting on Saturday as an information item.

Publications

JPER and the Sage contract - Christopher Silver

The important features of the contract with Sage were reviewed. The contract will run for seven years so that it will overlap with the next set of JPER Editors. The fees to the members will remain the same over the life of the contract at $30 a year. The contract includes a $5000 stipend for the Editors. ACSP will receive 25% of the net revenues in the form of a royalty. As the number of subscriptions increase we will benefit. Authors who publish in JPER will have free use of their materials, no copywrite permission will be needed. If you are an ACSP member and wish to use copywrited materials you can request for free use of materials although other non-member faculty will be charged a regular fee. Lastly, as part of the contract JPER will be indexed on schedule at no extra charge. One of the benefits of this relationship is that Sage will serve as a marketing agent for the journal and thus it is expected that the number of subscriptions will increase over time. The Editors of JPER do maintain control of the content of the journal.

JPER - Mickey Lauria

Mickey present a summary of information on Vol. 19 for JPER, concerning number of submissions of articles and budget. The volume was a little over budget but this cost overrun was paid for by the University of New Orleans.

JPER - Michael Hibbard and Edward Weeks

The transition from the old editors to the new editors was very smooth. The number of articles submitted for review is expected to be approximately 100 by the end of the year. A transition budget of $15,000 was approved and $14,500 of that amount has been requested and used. In the summer JPER and JAPA worked together and conducted a writing workshop for new assistant professors and senior Ph.D. students. ACSP provided $2000 in support of this workshop. The workshop involved 13 participants for four days in Oregon. The total cost of the workshop was $7000. It is not known if this activity will be incorporated as part of the Ph.D. workshop, or if it will continue as a separate workshop.

UPDATE/website - Nancy Frank

UPDATE has a new layout design that can be seen in the latest issue. The Sept/Oct issue should be out to everyone by now. The ACSP web page now has information on the Guide. The website has received 31,000 hits since July 7, 2000. The Executive Committee owes a debt of gratitude to Nancy for all of her hard work. The website just keeps on getting better and better all the time.

Recruitment Brochure - Sandi Rosenbloom

The recruitment brochure has been printed twice in the past year. We are almost out of brochures from the second printing. Should we go to a third printing now or wait until the spring? Also, do we use recycled paper and if we don't perhaps we should consider doing so, and if we do, we should be sure to put that information on the brochure. It was decided to wait to do a third printing in order to build-up demand. Before the next printing, the Chairs will able to make corrections to ensure correct information.

ACSP Guide to Schools - Sandi Rosenbloom

The current Guide only lists Planning Schools and is as a combined Guide that includes undergraduate, as well as Masters and Ph.D. programs in planning. The last Guide was produced four years ago. The new Guide is now back from the printers and copies have been mailed to schools. You should be receiving yours shortly. The purpose of the Guide is to go to high schools and undergraduate universities to encourage students to pick a career in planning. As a result, the Guide was mailed to just under 10,000 libraries, guidance counselors and relevant department chairs across the country. Each school who paid to be in the Guide will receive two copies and the web page version of the Guide is up on the ACSP web page. The Guide was financed in several ways. Schools paid to be in the Guide, plus APA helped to subsidized it by offering to purchase 500 copies of the Guide at $15 a copy (total = $7500). APA Planners Bookstore is selling it for $24.95.

There are some mistakes in the printed version that we cannot correct. However, we can correct the online version and attempts will be made to do that. Any mistakes or errors that were our fault, not the school's fault, will be corrected as soon as possible. Ways are being developed to allow schools to be able to up-date and change information on the web page version. In the past we made money off the Guide. Not every school has paid thus far and efforts will be made to receive payment. Also, along with producing the Guide, institutional data is also being collected by ACSP. As a result, in the spring an expanded budget will be requested to help support these activities over the next two years (the 2002 Guide and the ongoing institutional data collection efforts for 2001 and 2002).

There have been requests to run some analysis on this data base and this will not be done at this time. While it is hoped that some analysis will be forthcoming out of the institutional data collection project it is not possible with this version at this time.

Institution Data Collection - Sandi Rosenbloom

Chairs and Deans have expressed an interest in having information on planning programs. Efforts have been made this year to permit this data to be entered online. Last year data collection for the Guide and the Institutional Data project occurred at the same time. The results of the institutional data collection efforts for 1998-99 were published. There are some problems with the data, some problems with the coding of the data and with the wording of some of the questions. Each Chair was mailed a copy of the results, but we are not sure about the accuracy or quality of the data. New efforts are underway to improve data collection methods. For instance, if respondents left something blank on the form we didn't know if that meant zero, or that they didn't wish to answer that question or if the answer was they didn't know the answer to the question. Therefore this year by being able to input answers on the web, the system will keep prompting respondents to answer blank questions. The new system is being pretested by seven universities so that we can attempt to improve our methodology. The system will be secure; you must logon and use a password. Once the data has been collected again this year, some analysis will be conducted similar to what was done last year at an aggregate level. This data set will be made available to any researchers who come before the Executive Committee with an acceptable research proposal. However, all school identifiers will be taken out. As a means to make some money from this activity, if a school sends a list of schools that it considers to be its peer institutions and thus wants to make comparisons, this can be done for a cost.

One of the key messages members of the Executive Committee should take back to their schools is that this project is worthwhile and to encourage their schools to respond effectively to the survey. This data is important for comparison purposes. Having good institutional data is valuable to administrators. Getting schools to cooperate is crucial to the success of this project. Would it be possible to produce regional reports?

Conferences - David Amborski and Seymour Mandelbaum

2000 Conference Atlanta - Chris Nelson

Donna Dodd was introduced. Donna is filling-in for Pat Gleason as conference administrator. This conference appears to be the largest ACSP conference on record with the greatest number of participants at 751. The Fannie Mae conference is also well attended with approximately 220 participants, the most they have ever had. All the mobile workshops are a go, there are eight of those. Governor Barnes pulled out as our keynote speaker at the luncheon, however, Catherine Ross will be filling in. Buses will be available to take people to the opening reception Thursday evening. Drinks and food will be available at the reception.

Four years ago David Amborski assumed the role as ACSP's first national conference chair. Since that time David has operationalized policy decisions regarding conferences and has worked with local hosts to produce national conferences that we all can be proud. During his tenure the size of the conferences has grown, and they have become more professional involving a peer review process. His term as Conference Chair will expire with this conference and on behalf of ACSP we would like to thank David for all his work.

2001 Conference Cleveland - Dennis Keating

The conference theme is Building Bridges to Sustainable Neighborhoods, Cities and Regions. Preparations are well underway for next year. Mobile tours have been developed and a list is available. Efforts have been taken to keep costs down. The conference hotel is the Sheraton and the cost of rooms will be between $115 to $135 a night. Efforts are underway to get the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame for our opening reception. The dates for the conference are November 8-11, 2001.

2002 Conference Baltimore

A site visit to Baltimore was conducted this summer by our new national Conference Chair, Seymour Mandelbaum. The Omni Hotel has been chosen as the conference hotel and we are currently finalizing the contract with them this week. The room rates will be approximately $139 per night. The dates for the conference will be the third week of November.

2003 Joint ACSP/AESOP Congress - Robin Boyle

Robin Boyle, as ACSP's representative and Louis Albrechts, as AESOP's representative will serve as conference co-chairs. The conference will be held in Brussels, Belgium July 11-14, 2003 (working dates). A draft memorandum of agreement between ACSP and AESOP was handed out and will be signed by both parties at the Atlanta conference. The agreement outlines the responsibilities of the two parties with respect to the conference. AESOP President, Hans Mastop, and AESOP's Secretary-General Angela Hull were both welcomed and introduced. AESOP and ACSP have enjoyed a beneficial working relationship. ACSP has initiated and modeled their Ph.D. student workshop on AESOP's example. Notices were handed out for the AESOP Ph.D. Workshop to be held in Lodz, Poland, April 1-3, 2001.

2004 Conference - Site Selection - Chris Silver

We have begun a process of soliciting proposals for both the 2004 and 2005 conference. The process is still ongoing. We received indications of interest from five schools but so far only one school has submitted a proposal for the 2004 conference. We are currently waiting and working with some of the schools and expect that one or two more proposals will be forthcoming. It is expected that the conference committee will be able to finalize the site selections for both the 2004 and 2005 conferences in New Orleans in the spring.

Student Conference Costs - Caitlin Waddick

The largest cost outlay for the students to attend the ACSP conference is the cost of lodging. The students are also concerned about safety, since the students may, as a means to save money, choose to stay at other hotels rather than at the conference hotel. Advanced planning for conferences is much harder for students and most students are attending the conference for the first time. The student representatives would also like to provide more opportunities for the students to interact with each other, beyond the student reception. The student's would like acknowledgement of this issue and ask that the Conference Committee consider this issue.  

Motion: to create a single student representative position on the national conference committee appointed by the ACSP President was made by Phil Clay. The motion was seconded by Sandi Rosenbloom. The motion passed without dissent.

2001 World Planning Congress - Michael Hibbard

The World Planning Congress will be held in Shanghai, China July 11-15, 2001. The theme for the conference is "Planning for Cities in the 21^st Century: Opportunities and Challenges". Four organizations will be participating as partners in organizing the conference: ACSP, AESOP, APSA and ANZAPS. Louis Albrechts, from AESOP, is the Chair of the steering committee for the Global Congress. Two representatives from the local host committee from Tongji University were introduced. In addition to the conference, there will be post conference tours available as well as cultural activities and tours available for family members during the conference itself. There is a web page that provides complete information on all the available activities associated with the conference: www.caup-tongji.org/wpsc2001www.hku.hk/cupem/worldcongress. The conference committee is hoping to attract 800 participants to the conference. As an incentive, ACSP is offering a door prize of a round trip ticket to Shanghai tomorrow.

2002 AESOP Congress - P. Loukissas

In 2002 AESOP will be holding their conference in Volos, Greece, July 10-15. The theme for the conference will be "Planning in Border Regions". The University of Thessaly, which is located in the center of the country, will serve as host. The AESOP Ph.D. workshop will be held in conjunction with this conference, July 5-9, 2002.

PAB - Lewis Hopkins

Handed out to the Executive Committee are a series of proposed amendments to the Accreditation document. The process involved in changing the Accreditation document is as follows. The PAB initiates the proposed changes and discusses them with APA, AICP, and ACSP who act on these proposals. Once acted upon these proposals can then be implemented by the PAB. The proposed changes include:

(a)  a severance clause

(b) revised diversity language

(c) history and planning theory curriculum guidelines

(d) institutional resources component - allows for easy evaluation

(e) site visitor pool - advertisements & appointment term limits

(f) changes in maximum duration of accreditation from a maximum of 5 to a maximum of 7 years

Concerns about the proposed changes focused on one, which was the lengthening of the accreditation period from a maximum of five years to a maximum of seven years. The PAB currently requires that if certain kinds of changes occur to a program, they are to be reported to the PAB. The conditions under which reports are to be filed include: changes in number of faculty, changes in chair, and if major curriculum changes occur. As it stands now, not all schools are accredited for five years. If the PAB has doubts about a school's expectations they are only accredited for three years. Progress reports are also often required by the PAB. Other accrediting bodies have terms of seven years.

Motion: to approve the PAB text on accreditation duration was made by Elise Bright and seconded by Deborah Howe. The yeas carried the vote. There was one nay vote. The motion passed. 

Motion: to accept all other PAB text recommendations to the accreditation document was made by Sandi Rosenbloom and seconded by Gregg Doyle. The motion passed without dissent.

There is interest in increasing the number of site team members from three to four, with the fourth team member an AICP practitioner. The current compromise that is being considered would require two of the three- team members be AICP. This is currently under discussion.

The agreement with APA, PAB and ACSP is very informal and this has lead to some problems, especially with APA with regard to legal ramifications with how employees are handled. PAB are now negotiating a formal contract with APA. There should be a parallel agreement with PAB and ACSP as well. One advantage to this is that it would provide the use of coalitions with regard to negotiations among the three organizations. There are also legal ramifications regarding such things as liability insurance issues. It was recommended that the Finance Committee be directed to examine this issue of liability insurance and report back to the Executive Committee.

Latin American Schools Association - Roberto Rodriquez

Roberto Roderiquez from Simon Boliver University in Caracas was introduced. With some assistance from Bill Siembieda as ACSP's representative, planning schools in Latin America have established the Association of Latin American Schools of Urban Planning. They have used ACSP's Constitution to help them organize. They will eventually establish a home page as well as hold an annual conference and they are working on exploring publication outlets.

Canadian Liaison Report - Tom Harper

Planning faculty and schools in Canada are concerned about the fact that the official publication of the Canadian Institute of Planners is to be split into two parts -- one for practitioners which has received budgetary approval and one that is to be a web-based electronic journal for refereed publications for which no funding has been identified. This decision leaves no Canadian outlet for refereed work in planning. Despite this disappointing news about the journal, applications to undergraduate planning programs are up across the country and after several years of budget cuts new planning faculty are being hired.

Ph.D. Workshop - Scott Campbell

Inspired by the AESOP Ph.D. workshop, ACSP has decided to hold its own workshop for Ph.D. students. Gen Giuliano has proposed holding ACSP's first Ph.D. workshop on August 15-18, 2001 on Catalina Island, California. It is a beautiful site that is easily accessible from Los Angeles. It is expected that 20 students and 5 faculty will participate. It is hoped that the faculty participants will be selected in the next two months. The on-site costs are quite reasonable, projected to be approximately $250 for students for the four days and approximately $300 for faculty. The travel costs to get to Los Angeles are a bigger concern. The Committee is seeking to identify outside funding sources, such as the Fannie Mae Foundation to help with these costs.

In addition to the Ph.D. workshop, the JAPA and JPER Editors ran a workshop for new academics this summer on how to write for publications. This workshop should not be regarded as something that competes with the proposed Ph.D. workshop. These two activities are aimed at two different audiences.  

ACSP/AICP Joint Committee on Planning Education - Barbara Becker

Charlie Hoch reported on the Applied Research Assessment Project which is a subcommittee to the ACSP/AICP Joint Committee on Planning Education. The purpose of this project is to try and bring together practitioners who are interested in research and thus develop a national planning research agenda. In the next two to three months three meetings will be held, in Portland, Chicago and Philadelphia which will involve matching practitioners and academics. The intent is to develop priorities for a research agenda complete with objectives. The idea is to develop long term relationships between practitioners and academics. A report on these efforts will be made in New Orleans in the spring.

Strategic Communications - Nancey Green Leigh

The results of the Strategic Communications survey will be reported at the conference on Saturday morning. The intent of these efforts is to produce a Healthy Schools Handbook.

Meeting was adjourned at 6:10 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan Bradbury, Ph.D.

Secretary/Treasurer