|
|
|
ACSP Governing Board MeetingSaturday,
April 13, 2002 Chicago, Illinois(Draft Minutes, 6.17.02) Members And Others Present/Participating:
Wim Wiewel, President; Chris Silver, Vice President/President-Elect; Thomas Clark, Secretary/Treasurer; Bruce Stiftel, Past President; William Page, Northeast regional representative; Margaret Dewar and Sanda Kaufman, North Central regional representatives; Paul Zwick, Southeast regional representative; Elise Bright and Mickey Lauria, South Central regional representatives; Barbara Becker and Deborah Howe, Western regional representatives; Laura Lanza and Blake Roberts, Student representatives; Michael Hibbard, JPER Co-Editor; Nancy Frank, UPDATE Editor and ACSP web master; Lewis Hopkins and Cheryl Contant, PAB; Patricia Pollak, Institutional Governance Committee Chair and FWIG; Sandra Rosenbloom, Nominating Committee and the Guide to Undergraduate and Graduate Education in Urban and Regional Planning. The meeting was called to order by President Wiewel at 8:30am. The day’s consent agenda was adopted without change. The Minutes from the last ACSP Executive Committee meeting that was held Saturday, March 10, 2001 in New Orleans were reviewed. Motion: To accept the minutes of the Governing Board Meeting of November 7, 2001 in Cleveland, as corrected. Passed without dissent. Bursar’s Report: Rolf Engler/Tom Clark
Rolf Engler, our Bursar, was unable to attend the meeting. Tom Clark, in Rolf Engler’s absence, provided a brief overview of the Bursar’s Report. Transactions during the period 10.31.01 to 3.10.02 were first reported. These yielded a net gain of $10,019 for this five-month period and an ending bank balance of $239,427. Next discussed was ACSP’s Financial Report for the full fiscal year from 7.1.01 to 6.30.02. This Report accounts for all actual transactions occurring during this interval, including those anticipated for the period between our meeting date and the conclusion of the fiscal year (3.67 months). The FY 01-02 beginning balance was $196,458. FY cash transactions totaled $6899, yielding a year ending balance of $203,357. Because the Bursar tabulates only net cash, his figures take into account neither revenues nor expenditures that remain outstanding at the end of each fiscal year. Also, the Bursar’s accounts deploy aggregations that are not coterminous with categories required for effective decision-making within the organization. As a result we working now to establish new budgetary protocols and to institutionalize these to insure a transparent bridge among the Bursar, the Treasurer and the Governing Board. Secretary/Treasurer’s Report: Tom Clark
The Secretary/Treasurer reiterated the recent purchase of insurance from the Chicago Insurance Company for $2,000,000 per claim, and $4,000,000 per aggregate. He also noted the recent purchase of insurance from the Zurich Insurance Company: Fidelity Coverage (Employee Dishonesty, $200,000), Forgery/Alteration ($200,000), Office Personal Liability (Property Loss, $2000) and Commercial General Liability ($1 million per occurrence). Claims under the Zurich policy may not exceed $2 million per annum in the aggregate. The first two items sound alike but they differ. The first covers employee malfeasance, the second, acts by someone outside the organization. The annual price tag on the Zurich policy is $947, and about half of this is for the Forgery/Alteration coverage whose ceiling is meant to match maximum assets believed at risk. ACSP continues to work with the accounting firm of Purvis Gray & Company. Purvis Gray is in the process of completing our third financial review for the fiscal year 2000-2001 and filing our 990 federal tax forms. The Company is also working to improve our financial record keeping. We aim to install a new system of accounts by the start of FY2002-3. This will entail close coordination between the Bursar, Secretary/Treasurer and Purvis Gray enabling codification of each transaction (check and deposit) in accord with the ACSP Chart of Accounts, as updated to accommodate all new sub-accounts that may be created, in concert with the ACSP General Fund Account. Vice President’s Report: Chris Silver
The ACSP is currently an unincorporated tax exempt 501(c)(3) organization. But on November 7, 2001, the Executive Committee passed a resolution directing the President to pursue “the incorporation of ACSP as a not-for-profit organization under the laws of a state as yet unspecified”. It did so in order to realize the benefit of incorporation which is to reduce the potential liability of Officers and members for the actions of the Association, were it to be the object of litigation. But once incorporated the ACSP must then reapply for tax exemption under 501(c)(3). Loss of this status might out-weigh the potential gain of incorporation itself. Responding to a query from ACSP, the law firm of Ausley & McMullen of Tallahassee soon thereafter reported to Bruce Stiftel (on November 27, 2001) that “….. the organization is likely to be recognized as an organization described in 501(c)(3) if it were to incorporate and resubmit a FORM 1023 Application for (Federal Tax) Exemption”. The letter proceeded nevertheless to say that “This is no guarantee, however, that upon submission of an application to the IRS that (sic) it would ultimately issue a determination letter recognizing such an entity as described in 501 (c) (3)”. In sum, if the ACSP applies for incorporation it must subsequently reapply for tax exempt status (which it now enjoys), as a 501 (c)(3), so there is at least a chance that the latter valuable status might be lost. To avoid this eventuality, Ausley & McMullen recommends that we form a “shell” corporation that would not be funded unless a favorable exemption letter (re-granting 501(c)(3) status) is obtained from the IRS. They caution also that we weigh any potential state tax burden that may arise were ACSP to become incorporated in the State of Florida, or any other state for that matter. President’s
Report: Wim Wiewel
Wim Wiewel noted the major gains achieved in past presidential terms in building a strong and pliant organization. This process, he asserted, will continue. But we must view these as but the foundation upon which sits an edifice of broader purposes. ACSP is now a strong organization. Its time therefore to consider what purposes this strength should serve. He reiterated his determination that ACSP continue to perform its fundamental tasks well. Of these our annual conference and JPER remain our highest priorities. But these, in turn, are means serving broader purposes: to nurture the organization’s capacity to offer useful insight and advice to society at large, and to secure for these insights their rightful place of influence in the affairs, of communities, cities, regions, and nations. Four adjoining objectives were noted. A first is to increase ACSP’s visibility. A second is to promote global awareness in planning. The third is to advance diversity in both the composition of our students and faculty, and the span of subjects addressed in the service and research of faculty. And a fourth is to cultivate useful collaborations and favorable relations in general with the planning profession at large. With each objective were noted areas of activity and specific committee responsibilities. Success in each area, he noted, will require that each relevant ACSP committee become more active and aggressive in its work in pursuit of these important objectives. He called an every committee chair to pursue a vigorous agenda. The full text of his presidential address will appear in JPER. Chris Silver, who as Vice President appoints the Chair of the Conference Committee and oversees our conference in this capacity, reported that the ACSP Conference in Cleveland went remarkably well despite the events of September 11, 2001. He, in turn, invited Blake Roberts, one of two student representatives present, to report on the Conference “Job Bank”. Blake indicated the Bank was largely successful, but saw opportunities to improve it still further. The “Bank” consisted of Job lists and CV’s that had been placed in binders. Folders served as “mailboxes”. In the future CV’s should be grouped by specialization. A follow-up survey of participants yielded a generally positive appraisal. Motion:
Chris Silver moved that “ACSP write a letter to the organizers of the
Cleveland Conference expressing the Governing Board’s thanks for hosting a
most successful Conference”. Passed
without dissent. ACSP’s next Conference in November 2002 in Baltimore, hosted by the University of Maryland and Morgan State University, promises to be even better attended. This joint local host will proceed to secure donations to off-set conference expenses. The Cleveland Conference attracted 604 abstracts. Baltimore, according to Donna Dodd’s Summary has secured 708 submissions, of which 50 were still incomplete at the time of this meeting. The Fannie Mae Foundation held a “pre-conference” conference in Cleveland. Its contribution will be blended into the regular conference schedule on Thursday in Baltimore. It will sponsor and host several concurrent sessions at that event. The first 200 to enroll in the FMF event will be provided free lunches, putting to rest an old and now disproved adage. A reception will be held at the Baltimore Aquarium. Mickey Lauria noted that the JPL Editorial Board will convene in Baltimore. Paul Zwick expressed his concern that a number of scheduled participants were “no-shows” in Cleveland. Mickey Lauria bemoaned the two hours he spent registering for the Cleveland Conference using the COS option. Alternatives to COS were offered by others: systems developed by the European Regional Science Association (Chris Silver) and the American Academy of Management (Sanda Kaufman). Chris Silver then indicated adoption of the ACSP/AESOP Memo of Agreement regarding the joint ACSP/AESOP Conference set for July 8-11, 2003 in Leuven, Belgium. Robyn Boyle is serving as ACSP’s Representative to the Conference Steering Committee. He and Seymour Mandlebaum are assisting in the development of conference tracks. AESOP will oversee local logistics while ACSP will manage the abstract solicitation and processing, so ACSP will play a very substantial role in staffing this joint conference. Bruce Stiftel next addressed the subject of the ACSP “Administrators’ Conference”, referring to the handout dated April 1, 2002. This event, he noted, occurs every other year. Possible dates for the next such conference are in October and November, 2003. He offered for consideration the prospect of combining this conference with two other meetings in Florida in the fall of 2003: (1) the Semi-annual Governing Board Meeting and (2) the ACSP Annual Membership (i.e. Business) Meeting. Since ACSP’s annual conference will be held in Leuven, Belgium, with AESOP in 2003, this combined meeting might insure a larger audience for each than it would achieve were it non-concurrent. Several expressed their concern that many faculty of member units would not be present in Florida for any of these events. Wim Wiewel suggested that there occur an “informal” membership meeting in Leuven. Chris Silver then offered brief comments on the next ACSP Conference in North America, set for Portland in 2004, and co-hosted by Portland State University and the University of Oregon. Discussion turned next to locational options for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 conferences. Motion:
Chris Silver moved and Paul Zwick seconded that “the ACSP accept three
proposals from host institutions—University of Texas at Arlington (Site:
Dallas or Ft. Worth), Clemson University (Site: Charleston, South Carolina), and
University of Milwaukee (Site: Milwaukee), and that the President and Vice
President proceed to negotiate the assignment of dates to places, with the
understanding that each host would actively solicit local contributions to
defray expenses”. Passed without
dissent. JPER: Edward Weeks and Mike HibbardMike Hibbard reported on the general health of the Journal of Planning Education and Research. Drawing on his Report dated, April 12, 2002, he noted the receipt of 70 manuscripts during 2001 of which 7% were accepted outright, another 1% were conditionally accepted, and 16% were returned for revision and resubmission. Twenty-five manuscripts have been received through March 20, 2002. He noted also that the JPER rejection rate has increased steadily since 1991 (29%). Over half were rejected in 2000. He also noted that ACSP’s recent efforts to recruit new student, particularly doctoral student, members yielded 42 new student members, each of whom received both JPER and Update. The student membership fee, he observed, has been set at $25 which is equal to the $25 capitation rate that Sage is charging ACSP for each student member. As a result there is no surplus to cover all other ACSP services consumed by student members. Motion:
Elise Bright moved, Bruce Stiftel seconding, that the “student
membership fee be increased to $35 per annum”.
Passed without dissent or abstention. Mike noted that we will need to develop a means to inform students when their membership has expired, and that this new rate will pertain. Membership, he observed, is by JPER volume, so renewal is simultaneous. Donna Dodd and Rolf Engler were then enlisted to develop a means to inform students of the new rate and time of renewal. Progress was also noted in improving the review process related to JPER submissions on the subject of “teaching”. He also reported that the co-editors of both the JPER and the JAPA have worked together to provide a writing workshop for new planning academics in each of the last two summers. Thirteen persons attended the first, and 19 the second at Portland State University. Sage publications is updating the JPER brochure anticipating another targeted mailing to scholars in adjoining disciplines in search of subscriptions and submissions. One issue of Volume 22 of the JPER will include a reader survey. All presenting at ACSP’s annual conference will continue to receive submittal invitations from JPER. Chris Silver offered additional comments regarding the relationship between JPER and Sage. ACSP UPDATE and Website: Nancy FrankNancy Frank reiterated key items noted in her memo to the Board of 4.13.02. Our Web Site, whose domain name is “acsp.org”, continues to attract a sizable number of hits. The daily hit report for the period from February 18 to March 31, 2002 recorded daily totals from 32 to 3,916. The acsp-org Web Site Report also indicates which directory names were sought most frequently Leading the list was “Themes” (16,277). The Guide secured 9,211 requests; Jobs, 7,692; JPER 1,896; and Membership, 577. Guide to Undergraduate and Graduate
Education/Institutional Data Project: Sandi Rosenbloom
Sandi Rosenbloom circulated a draft of the 2000-01 Academic Year’s “ACSP Institutional Data Collection” document, dated April, 2002. The Guide, she notes, is now on the ACSP Web Site. APA, she notes, is concerned that availability of the Guide on-line may harm hardcopy sales. She, however, asserts that a presence on the Web only accelerates hardcopy sales. Sales of the hardcopy version are, of course, a prime means to offset production expenses, yielding between $10,000 and $15,000 per annum. Production of the Guide costs ACSP $5000 and her University subsidizes the remainder. Surplus sales revenues from the Guide might subsidize the Institutional Data Collection project in the future. Sandi noted we may not need to produce a new edition of the Guide immediately. There remains some concern regarding the overall utility of the Data Project as a vehicle for informing various constituencies including University administrations regarding the comparative status of the schools of planning. These concerns, which ultimately challenge the legitimacy of this document as a resource for decision-making, involve matters of both definition (e.g. “Hispanic”, “refereed journal”, and so on), and reliability (particularly regarding the quality and codification of financial data). Regarding the Guide to Schools, Sandi observed that our data are in need of frequent updating and that much of the roster and contact information of the Web Site is dated. Several raised the prospect of our doing only an updated electronic copy. Margi Dewar and others said paper copy must be retained since it serves promotional purposes that an electronic version cannot easily serve. Chris Silver, noting the expense of an update, suggested we delay onset of preparations for a new Guide until late in the 2002-3 fiscal year. Wim Wiewal agreed. In the end the Board determined to commence next editions of both the Guide and the Institutional Data Project Report, but only late in the current fiscal year (spring 2003). Institutional Governance: Patricia Pollak and Tom Clark
Patti noted with some pleasure, and not a little relief,
that the ACSP By-laws were approved following the adoption of several friendly
amendments during the Business Meeting held in November 2001 in Cleveland.
Tom Clark, Secretary/Treasurer, has completed a final edit and
incorporated several non-substantive revisions to achieve clarity as instructed
by the Board. The final version
will shortly be available to all Board Members and Chairs, and posted on the
ACSP Web Site in May 2002. Jay Chatterjee, Patti noted, has been a regular member of the
Institutional Governance Committee. Planning Accreditation Board: Lew Hopkins for Fritz SteinerLew spoke for Fritz Steiner in his absence.
Fritz continues as PAB Chair however.
As of today, 4.13.02, accreditation may now be for a term of up to seven
years. Until now this ceiling has
been but five years. Any such
change may provoke some lumpiness in the annual schedule of reviews.
But PAB has resolved to adjust the review cycle for individual
schools—allowing both extensions or stipulating reduced terms—only for
compelling substantive reasons. School
fees for PAB services will not increase until at least FY2002.
The Site Visitor Pool is in need of continuing nurturing.
Significant turnover was noted in the PAB Board.
Four of the eight meeting tomorrow (6.11.02) are new to the Board.
Beatrice Clupper notes that ACSP must appoint a new ‘public” member
to the PAB, and that his/her term is for up to six years. STANDING COMMITTEES
Nominating Committee: Sandi Rosenbloom
Sandi Rosenbloom indicated our new By-laws call for one election each year. There are five ACSP Regions. Coins were tossed to determine the length of terms for regional representatives from each. Our new By-laws include these provisions (By-laws VII (d)1,2,3): First:
“The Terms of Office of the President, Vice-President, Secretary and Treasurer
shall be two years, and run
concurrently. The elections for
Vice-President/President-Elect, Secretary and Treasurer shall take place in
odd-numbered years and be concluded no later than 45 days prior to the date of
the Annual Meeting. These terms of office begin at a fall meeting, in
odd-numbered years. The President shall not succeed him/herself to a term in
office. One U.S. Regional Representative from each region is elected annually,
for a two-year term. Second:
“The Vice-President/President-Elect shall assume the office of President at
the fall meeting two years after having assumed the office of Vice-
President/President-Elect. The term of office of
the Vice-President shall conclude later that year with the beginning of the term
of office of the President which the President-Elect assumes. Third: “Upon the conclusion of his/her term, the President shall serve
for a term of one year as Past-President”. Moreover, (By-laws VIII (C)) “There shall be two representatives from each region on the Governing
Board. Regional representatives shall serve two year terms and must be capitated
at a Full Member institution in the represented region at the time of election.
A vacancy in the seat of any regional representative will be filled by
appointment of the President.” Sandi reported that 70 of 87 eligible schools voted in the just-completed elections. Chris Silvers was elected Vice President/President Elect. The regional results are as follows: Robin Boyle, North Central; Dowell Myers, West; Elise Bright, South Central; Rolf Pendall, Northeast; and Roberto Quercia, Southeast. These newly elected Board Members take office following the fall Business Meeting. Membership Committee: Wim Wiewel called for volunteers to serve on the Membership Committee. SPECIAL COMMITTEES
Academy and
the Profession Bruce Stiftel, a member of this Committee, Chaired by Gary Hack, provided a brief update. ACSP/AICP Joint Committee on Planning Education and Practice: Eugenie Birch Eugenie
Brich and Uri Avin, Director of Community Planning in Columbia, Maryland,
Co-chair this Committee.
Diversity: John Betancur John Betancur chairs this five-member committee. He noted four activities: a survey of schools, a survey of minority students, a workshop at an upcoming conference to review survey findings, and APA/ACSP Minority Scholarship (1). Note was also made of the availability of internships in multiple cities. Paul Zwick ofofered several approaches for achieving greater minority representation on the Governing Board. Wim Wiewel said more can be done to insure the nomination of minority persons for election to the Board.
Doctoral ( Ph.D. Workshop): Chris Silver The
Doctoral Committee was established in the mid-1990’s to explore and, as
appropriate, act upon a wide range of issues relevant to doctoral education in
planning, following publication of a well-regarded study by an earlier ACSP
Commission. The Committee
sponsored its first doctoral (student) workshop in California last year and will
offer a second in Chicago, overseen by the two University of Illinois Planning
Programs. This Workshop seeks
students who are ABD and active in dissertation research.
The University of Wisconsin and other neighboring schools have been
invited to assist in this effort. The
Fannie Mae Foundation provides partial support for student travel.
Students must also pay a $350 registration fee this year.
Deborah Howe reported on the parallel effort of the JAPA and JPER Editors
to provide a writing workshop for doctoral students that targets students who
have not yet achieved candidacy. Faculty Mentoring: Wim Wiewel
Wim Wiewel reported briefly.
Planning Globally Taskforce: Ruth Yabes Ruth Yabes noted this Taskforce was established only in early February, 2002. It serves three purposes: to address curricula, promote study abroad, and foster international exchanges and contact. The Global Planning Educators Interest Group (GPEIG) commenced its work in the late 1980’s . Johanna Looye and Nihal Perera are its current co-chairs. The Taskforce plans to remain active and will report its accomplishments at the enxt ACSP Meeting. Its members plan also to convene at the AESOP Congress in Greece in July 2002.
Reassessing Scholarship This
Committee will require a new Chair now that Phil Clay has ascended to new
administrative heights, as Chancellor, at MIT.
Strategic Communications
Consult our new Membership List. INTEREST
GROUP REPORTS Global Planning
Educators: Ruth Yabes for J. Looye This Group has established both a Listserve and Web Page.
Technology Committee:
Varkki George will assume the Chairmanship of this Committee. Faculty Women:
P. Pollak Patti Pollak reported on a number of activities undertaken over the last year. These include a very successful FWIG luncheon at the Cleveland Meetings attended by around 150 persons, a Professional Development Workshop having 40 participants, and construction of a new expanded email list. She also noted the importance of FWIG’s Marsha Marker Feld Award, granted every two years. FWIG’s resume book is now available and copies have been sent to all schools having posted jobs. This book, however, is not on-line. FWIGWare—t-shirts—may appear once again at the Baltimore Conference. STUDENT
REPRESENTATIVES REPORT: Laura
Lanza and Blake Roberts Laura and Blake
reported there were two student-organized sessions at the Cleveland ACSP
Conference, and there too occurred a reception that attracted upwards of 60
students. New items on the student
agenda include an improved job bank, increased outreach to students,
augmentation of the “Bowling League” member
list-serve (now serving over 400 students), and possible creation of a
new web page. Further, the group pledges to develop a new session or sessions at
the Baltimore Meetings, perhaps to be co-sponsored with the Doctoral Committee.
Mention was made of a new group charged to examine research design
stressing multi-disciplinary perspectives, arrayed in an action orientation. Laura proposed establishment of a panel involving both
faculty and students, able to address a variety of student issues. OFFICERS’
PROPOSED BUDGET 2002-2003: Wim
Wiewel and Tom Clark A beginning
General Fund balance of $131,750 was reported for FY2001-2.
The equivalent proposed for FY2002-3 is $127,299.
The Reserve Fund mandated in the new ACSP By-laws for the approaching
fiscal year will be $68,950, less than FY2001-2’s $80,000.
Total proposed General Fund Revenue during FY2002-3 will be $114,475,
down from $124,769 projected through the end of FY2001-2 (June 30, 2002).
Total Expenditure proposed for FY2002-3 has been set at $124,888, down
from FY2001-2’s equivalent of $140,225. The
year-ending balance of revenues less expenditures proposed for FY2002-3 is a
negative $10,413, up from a negative $15,456 for FY2001-2.
This leaves a Year-Ending Balance in the General Fund of $116,886 which
is very close to the equivalent for FY2001-2.
As a result, it is anticipated that Total Assets remaining in ACSP’s
General Fund at the conclusion of FY2002-3 will be $197,836.
This figure is the sum of the General Fund “Ending Balance” on June
30, 2003 plus an “outstanding” (i.e. a pay out from the General Fund that
remains in the JPER Account on that day) and the cash reserve of $68,950
(determined in accord with the formula in our By-laws). Currently the ACSP maintains two sets of accounts, those assembled by the Bursar that group actual transactions by time period and highly aggregated budgetary categories, and those assembled by the Treasurer, working with Officers. The latter include a General Fund and a series of ancillary “funds”. Among these ancillary funds are those for the annual conference and JPER. Money flows, on paper, between the General Fund and each of these other funds. In coming months the Treasurer will work with the Officers, our Bursar and Purvis Gray & Company to achieve a more effective coordination between the Bursar’s accounts and those required by the Officers and Board to guide the organization. To this end, every transaction would be encoded in accordance with budgetary categories that, when aggregated, will enable the maintenance of both sets of accounts. Motion:
Mickey Lauria moved, Chris Silver seconding, that “The Governing Board UNFINISHED
BUSINESS AND GENERAL ORDERS NEW BUSINESS: Wim Wiewel
Collaboration
with ACSA Wim
Wiewel noted that the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture has
proposed that our two organizations pursue two activities in collaboration.
A first would examine extant forms of collaboration between Architecture,
and Urban and Regional Planning in universities offering both programs.
There was general agreement that this matter should be pursued, and
several noted the significance attached to Planning’s cohabitation with
Architecture in many schools across North America. A second would explore the impact of sprawl and the
limitation of sprawl upon housing affordability.
Tom Clark observed that opponents of metropolitan growth management
across the nation have found in the issue of housing affordability one of the
most politically charged objections to densification and in-fill.
ACSA proposes that there be developed a joint ACSP-ACSP proposal on this
subject for consideration by the Fannie Mae Foundation.
There appeared to be a general consensus that this matter should be
pursued. Motion:
Barbara Becker moved, others seconding, that “ACSP enter into
discussions with ACSA regarding a possible joint proposal to the Fannie Mae
Foundation on the subject of sprawl and housing affordability, while protecting
our own extant FMF support”. Passed
without dissent or abstention. EPA Project Wim Wiewel
suggested that ACSP respond favorably to a proposal by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency seeking to commence a collaborative “University-Community
Partnership Initiative”. Wim has
proposed to the EPA that ACSP faculty enlist to compose a series of case studies
on this topic. EPA countered that
it would prefer to hire a consultant to assemble these 5-7 studies but that our
faculty members would advise EPA and presumably the consultant on the conduct of
their conduct. case studies.
Three conference track chairs have been alerted to this opportunity: land
use, economic development and environmental planning. Motion:
Mickey Lauria moved, Bill Page seconded, that “ACSP pursue an ACSP-EPA
collaborative “University-Community Partnership Initiative”.
Passed without dissent or abstention.
GENERAL GOOD AND WELFAREADJOURNMENT |
