Council Minutes
February 5-6, 2005
Washington, DC
President Rand Jimerson called the meeting to order at 1:00 pm on Saturday,
February 5. Present: Vice President/President-Elect Richard Pearce-Moses, Treasurer
Fynnette Eaton, and Council members Frank Boles, Mark Duffy, Elaine Engst,
Aimee Felker, Peter Gottlieb, Kathryn Neal, Christopher Ann Paton, Peter Wosh,
and Executive Committee Member Joel Wurl. Also present were SAA Executive Director
Nancy Beaumont, Publishing Director Teresa Brinati, Education Director Solveig
DeSutter, and Webmaster/Graphic Designer Brian Doyle.
I. A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Wurl proposed several changes to the agenda, per an Executive Committee
discussion on February 3. Pearce-Moses moved and Engst seconded adoption
of the agenda as amended. PASSED.
I. B. APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 2004 MINUTES
Felker moved and Eaton seconded approval of the August 3 and August 7, 2004,
Council meeting minutes as amended. PASSED.
I. C. REVIEW OF THE AUGUST 2004 ACTION ITEM LIST
Council members reviewed the items listed on the August 2004 Action Item
List and provided an update on completed and incomplete items.
II. A. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Wurl reminded the group of the rationale for grouping of agenda items into
"Council Business," "Reports," "Action Items," and "Strategy Session" and
emphasized that reports not on the action agenda should be discussed only
if specific questions arise about their contents. The focus of the meeting
should be on action items and the strategy session. He then reported on the
following items that had been discussed and/or acted upon by the Executive
Committee between meetings of the full Council:
The Executive Committee had agreed to sign on to the following on behalf
of SAA:
- The "Geneva Declaration on the Future of WIPO," which calls on the World
Intellectual Property Organization to focus more on the needs of developing
countries and to view intellectual property as one of many tools for development,
not as an end in itself. (October 2004)
- Citing the need to "preserve an accurate record of the past to guide
future actions and decisions," SAA joined with the ALA's Freedom to Read
Foundation and the ACLU in a "friend of the court" brief urging reversal
of a lower court's decision to allow the government to retain the original
writings of Ted Kaczynski, who pled guilty to the "Unabomber" crimes, in
order to permit him to place his papers in an archival repository. (October
2004)
- An amicus curiae brief with the District of Columbia Circuit Court
of Appeals supporting public access to information about the makeup of
Vice President Cheney's National Energy Policy Development Group. The amici
argued that the Court should accept the Supreme Court's invitation to develop
an innovative procedure for accommodating the competing interests asserted
in this case. (November 2004)
In addition, he noted that the Executive Committee had been involved in
1) monitoring and responding to developments regarding the appointment of
Allen Weinstein to be Archivist of the United States and reasserting SAA's
position that the process was flawed, and 2) conducting the Executive Director's
performance evaluation.
Wurl then reviewed the newly adopted procedures for electronic voting by
Council members between meetings, noting that several Council members had
offered suggestions for improving the process. And he noted the need to appoint
Council liaisons to the SAA/ARMA Joint Committee on Records and Archives,
as well as to any other joint committees whose liaison has been the Executive
Director.
II. B. PRESIDENT'S REPORT
Jimerson's written report covered a wide variety of items, including the
following:
- His representation of SAA at several
conferences and meetings at which he had been asked to participate
in session panels, to present formal papers, or to offer plenary addresses:
International
Congress on Archives, Vienna, Austria, August 2004; Association of
Manitoba Archivists, Winnipeg, October 2004; Midwest Archives Conference,
Des Moines,
October 2004; Society of Georgia Archivists, Atlanta, November 2004;
American Historical Association, Seattle, January 2005; and Association
of Library
and Information Science Educators, Boston, January 2005.
- Involvement in various advocacy issues,
including those associated with the nomination of Allen Weinstein to
become Archivist of the United States as well as activities mentioned in
Wurl's
report from the Executive Committee.
- Interaction with allied associations
and organizations and with the National Coalition for History, of which
SAA is a member.
- Engagement in diversity efforts on
several fronts, including appointments to committees and task forces
and planning for
SAA's Annual Meeting in New Orleans in August 2005. He noted that,
as of February 2005, he had made 60 appointments, of which just over 23%
represent
SAA members
who are also members of racial or ethnic minority groups. Because SAA
does not collect demographic information on its members, he suggested that
this
estimate may be low. He noted that several appointments made by the
president are ex officio, which may limit flexibility to appoint
members from underrepresented groups, including efforts to balance geography,
gender,
sexual orientation, institutional type, and ethnic/racial groups.
- Policy and planning activities, including
Council procedures and agendas.
- Fundraising efforts, and discussions
with the Fellows Steering Committee about the role that the
group might play in
SAA fundraising activities.
II. C. VICE PRESIDENT'S REPORT
Pearce-Moses reported on the status of several items:
- 2005-2006 appointments.
- Council Handbook revisions. He has undertaken
to review the entire Council Handbook to determine where inconsistencies
have crept into the document over time and to update it with current
procedures. He is working with staff to create a "record copy" in Word to ensure that changes
are not lost, as well as a PDF version of the Handbook. He suggested that it
may be appropriate to create a position of Council Secretary, an individual
who would be either elected or appointed and whose role would be to take minutes
of Council meetings and ensure that the Council Handbook is kept up to date.
Wurl suggested that the Council Handbook be renamed as one step in making it
more accessible to members. Suggestions included "SAA Governance Manual" and
"SAA Handbook."
- Since August 2004, he has represented
SAA in presentations to the University of Maryland and University of
North Carolina, Chapel Hill, education programs and he will present at
the National
Archives and Records Administration in March 2005 and to the Society
of Southwest Archivists (as plenary speaker) in May.
- Working with staff, in October 2004
he submitted an NHPRC grant proposal to fund tribal archivists' travel
and expenses to attend the SAA Annual Meeting.
II. D. TREASURER'S REPORT
Eaton reviewed the FY2004 Audit Report, noting that the auditors' management
letter contained no suggestions or requirements for alterations in procedures.
Eaton provided highlights of the written FY2005 Year-To-Date Financial Review
Report. There were no questions.
II. E. STAFF REPORTS
Executive Director: Beaumont's written report provided updates on membership
development (with a new high in membership of 4,069), advocacy and public awareness,
the A*CENSUS survey, Annual Meeting planning, Web site changes, governance,
and fundraising efforts. There were no questions.
Education: DeSutter's written report provided updates on activities
since August 2004, including the status of existing continuing education programs,
new programs under consideration for development, and a summary of marketing
efforts. DeSutter noted that the following individuals have agreed to serve
on the Content Advisory Group that Council had approved in August: Chris Prom,
Ed Galloway, and Danna Bell-Russel. Several slots remain to be filled. Following
a brief discussion of the status of planning for a management institute, DeSutter
indicated that she had not yet received a call for grant proposals from NHPRC
that she was anticipating. Jimerson said that he would work with DeSutter to
prepare a report for Council review upon receipt of the NHPRC information.
Gottlieb suggested that SAA should take the lead on developing a management
institute whether or not grants are available to fund it.
Publications: Brinati's written report provided updates on activities
since August 2004, including the status of The American Archivist, Archival
Outlook, Employment Bulletin, and the 23 book publishing projects
that are underway in some form. She noted that sales to date are robust in
comparison with budget, and that the bookstores at the Annual Meeting in Boston
and at the ICA meeting in Vienna yielded significantly more revenue than had
been projected.
Wosh expressed his disagreement with re-purposing of content for The American
Archivist, noting that he would prefer to see re-purposing of Journal
content for other publications rather than publication of non-original work
in the Journal, which he believes does not add value to the Journal. Wurl
said that he is not troubled by an occasional occurrence of re-purposing
into the Journal, but would not like to see it done too often. American
Archivist liaison Frank Boles will share Council members' concerns with
the Journal editor.
III. ACTION ITEMS
III. A. Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct: SAA Code of Ethics
Following a review of the work done by the Committee on Ethics and Professional
Conduct, Council members voted to approve a revised Code of Ethics, with
the striking of the phrase ", especially those who have had no voice in the creation,
use, or disposition of the material" at the end of the first sentence
in Section VII. Privacy.
MOVED That the following revision to the Code of Ethics be adopted:
Society of American Archivists Code of Ethics
Preamble
The code of ethics for archivists establishes standards for the archival profession.
It introduces new members of the profession to those standards, reminds experienced
archivists of their professional responsibilities, and serves as a model for
institutional policies. It also is intended to inspire public confidence in
the profession.
This code provides an ethical framework to guide members of the profession.
It does not provide the solution to specific problems.
The term "archivist" as used in this code encompasses all those
concerned with the selection, control, care, preservation, and administration
of historical
and documentary records of enduring value.
I. Purpose
The Society of American Archivists recognizes the importance of educating
the profession and general public about archival ethics by codifying ethical
principles to guide the work of archivists. This code provides a set of principles
to which archivists aspire.
II. Professional Relationships
Archivists select, preserve, and make available historical and documentary
records of enduring value. Archivists cooperate, collaborate, and respect each
institution and its mission and collecting policy. Respect and cooperation
form the basis of all professional relationships with colleagues and users.
III. Judgment
Archivists should exercise professional judgment in acquiring, appraising,
and processing historical materials. They should not allow personal beliefs
or perspectives to affect their decisions.
IV. Trust
Archivists should not profit or otherwise benefit from their privileged access
to and control of historical records and documentary materials.
V. Authenticity and Integrity
Archivists strive to preserve and protect the authenticity of records in their
holdings by documenting their creation and use in hard copy and electronic
formats. They have a fundamental obligation to preserve the intellectual and
physical integrity of those records. Archivists may not alter, manipulate,
or destroy data or records to conceal facts or distort evidence.
VI. Access
Archivists strive to promote open and equitable access to their services and
the records in their care without discrimination or preferential treatment,
and in accordance with legal requirements, cultural sensitivities, and institutional
policies. Archivists recognize their responsibility to promote the use of records
as a fundamental purpose of the keeping of archives. Archivists may place restrictions
on access for the protection of privacy or confidentiality of information in
the records.
VII. Privacy
Archivists protect the privacy rights of donors and individuals or groups
who are the subject of records. They respect all users' right to privacy by
maintaining the confidentiality of their research and protecting any personal
information collected about them in accordance with the institution's security
procedures.
VIII. Security/Protection
Archivists protect all documentary materials for which they are responsible
and guard them against defacement, physical damage, deterioration, and theft.
Archivists should cooperate with colleagues and law enforcement agencies to
apprehend and prosecute thieves and vandals.
IX. Law
Archivists must uphold all federal, state, and local laws.
Support Statement: The revision prepared by
the Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct is responsive to Council's
charge and has been appropriately vetted through the general membership.
Moved by Felker, seconded by Eaton. Amendment moved by Pearce-Moses, seconded
by Wosh. PASSED. (Opposed: Duffy)
In response to a request from the Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct,
Council members then voted on the following:
MOVED That the Committee on Ethics and Professional Conduct develop three
examples of "guidelines" that might assist members in applying the principles
cited in the Code of Ethics to the work done by the profession in order to
assist Council in determining the need for "Best Practices on Professional
Conduct and Institutional Responsibility," with a report to Council in May
2005.
Support Statement: The Committee has suggested that members would
benefit from guidance regarding how the Code of Ethics might apply in "real life." Because
Council members do not wish to create legal issues by distributing guidelines
inappropriately, it would like to see some examples of what the
Committee proposes and to vet those examples through legal counsel. Moved
by Felker, seconded by Engst. PASSED.
III. B. Committee on Education and Professional Development: Online Education
Directory
In a written report to Council, the Committee recommended that SAA discontinue
the practice of charging schools to list information in the online education
directory, create a list of all archival education programs in the U.S. and
Canada, and provide a URL link within the directory to the Web sites of these
programs. Council chose instead to address the following:
MOVED That staff develop, for implementation in FY2006, a plan for revision
of the Online Education Directory to include two components: 1) a free basic
listing intended to ensure the comprehensiveness of the directory, and 2)
a fee-based enhanced listing that will provide education programs with a
marketing opportunity and SAA with non-dues revenue.
Support Statement: The current model for the Online Education Directory
does not contribute to SAA's critical goal of serving as a clearinghouse
of information for the profession because participation has not been widespread.
A fresh approach to the directory—aimed at making it as comprehensive
as possible—could have the following benefits: contribute to SAA's
position as the leading source of career information; assist in enhancing
public awareness
of archives as a career in order to build the base of young people who may
be interested in a career; make it easier for prospective students and members
to explore academic education offerings; provide an important service to,
and enhance the relationship with, key member groups (i.e., member institutions
and individual members who work within archival education programs); and
enhance
non-dues revenue. Evaluation of the program will be ongoing as part of the
budget monitoring process.
Moved by Paton, seconded by Engst. PASSED. (Opposed: Wurl)
III. C. Committee on Education and Professional Development: Reorganization
of CEPD Into Two Committees
In a written report, the Committee responded to a Council request to provide
its perspectives on the idea of splitting CEPD into two committees, one to
address continuing education and the other to address graduate education. The
issue had arisen because of the Committee's workload and planning efforts.
The Committee report provided a thorough and thoughtful examination of the
issues. Wosh noted that feedback received from the archival educators community
indicated no significant concerns with such a split. Council discussion focused
on structure and the critical need to ensure cross-fertilization of the two
appointed groups.
MOVED That a Council task force be charged to review and clarify the role(s)
of the Committee on Education and Professional Development with regard to
graduate education and continuing education matters, and that it recommend
appropriate changes to the current structure that may serve to enhance SAA's
ability to address these areas, with a report to Council by May 1, 2005.
Support Statement: SAA should periodically reexamine its appointed
group structure in order to ensure that it remains nimble in addressing key
issues within the profession. "Education" is a very broad domain,
and the Committee, Council members, and staff have expressed concern that
the Committee has had
many conflicting demands on its workload and has not had clear direction
regarding its priorities. A change in structure may mitigate these concerns.
The following
task force members were appointed: Duffy, Paton, Wosh, DeSutter (ex officio).
Moved by Paton, seconded by Pearce-Moses. PASSED. (Unanimous)
III. D. Executive Director Performance Appraisal
Council members met in executive session to discuss the executive director
performance appraisal conducted by the Executive Committee.
III. E. SAA Information Systems Infrastructure
Responding in a written report to an August 2004 charge from Council, staff
provided an overview of SAA's current information systems infrastructure and
its limitations, staff's view of current and future needs and opportunities
for strategic change, and a brief scan of state-of-the-art association management
systems.
The report noted that SAA currently employs a highly distributed network of
information systems to manage communication and transactions among staff, leaders,
members, customers, and vendors. The diffuse nature of this infrastructure
derives from limitations in the primary system that ideally would serve as
the core for a tightly integrated network. Such limitations include the fact
that the system is not intuitive and user-friendly. In addition, poor staff
training and vendor support have resulted in an overdependence on customized
solutions. Among the most serious limitations of the current system: no integrated
Web content management; inability to import Web-based transactions (e.g., membership
applications, event registrations, publication orders), resulting in manual
re-keying of information; excessive use of custom reports; no support for real-time
credit card transactions; and no integrated email lists/broadcast email.
MOVED That staff retain the services of a consultant to assist in developing
a request for proposal for replacement of SAA's current association management
software system, with interim reports on the project to Council in February,
March, and April 2005 and a final recommendation on a preferred vendor in
May 2005.
Support Statement: SAA objectives such as enhanced interconnectivity
and the electronic aggregation of information cannot be achieved with existing
systems, and the inefficiency of SAA's current infrastructure is a significant
obstacle to effective execution of such tasks as inventory management and
fulfillment, meeting registration, electronic marketing of products and services,
management
of committee appointments and other volunteer activities, and fundraising—all
of which are critical to meeting current and emerging member needs and
expectations.
Fiscal impact: $5,000-$10,000 for consultant.
Moved by Pearce-Moses, seconded by Eaton. PASSED. (Unanimous)
III. F. Petition: Annual Meeting Proposal Endorsements
A petition signed by 69 members was submitted to Council liaison Peter Wosh
during the 2004 Annual Meeting in Boston and was forwarded to Jimerson for
Council consideration at its winter meeting. The petition reads as follows:
"Finding a lack of clear guidelines for the program committee, a lack
of a stable set of guidelines for the endorsement process, and a lack of
institutional and functional diversity in many program committees, we the
undersigned members
of SAA petition the SAA Council to review the role of the program committee
and establish Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the committee to
ensure continuity in the process from year to year, to take effect for the
program
committee for the Washington, DC, meeting. We also request that Council
consider incorporating these SOPs into the by-laws for the Program Committee,
which
were last updated in 1988.
"We specifically request that the Council address the following concerns:
- Clarify the role of section and roundtable
endorsements in the session selection process.
- Provide guidelines to Sections and Roundtables
for endorsing sessions and inform them how their endorsements will be
used.
- Establish stronger guidelines for ensuring
institutional and functional diversity on the program committee, as reflected
by the
various Sections and Roundtables.
- Publish the guidelines on the SAA website
as SOPs to ensure that they are consistent from year to year, from committee
to committee.
- Incorporate guidelines into the program committee
by-laws as appropriate."
MOVED That a task force of the SAA Council review the Society's guidelines
for the Program Committee, particularly those related to the submission process
and the effect of section and roundtable endorsement of session proposals,
and report to Council for possible action by May 2005.
Support Statement: The motion is responsive to a direct request from
the 69 members who signed the petition. The following individuals will serve
on the Council task force: Felker, Jimerson, Neal, Pearce-Moses, and Beaumont
(ex officio).
Moved by Duffy, seconded by Felker. PASSED.
III. G. 1. Petition: Metadata and Digital Object Roundtable
SAA received a petition to form a new Metadata and Digital Object Roundtable.
The petition included the requisite number of member signatures.
Council members expressed concern about the "proliferation" of roundtables,
noting that the proposed roundtable might consider forming a subgroup within
the Description, Electronic Records, or Reference, Access, and Outreach roundtables,
per the Council Handbook notation that: "In considering the petition,
Council may weigh how closely the proposed area of interest may overlap with
other
organizational units and the economic impact on the Society of the proposed
organizational change."
MOVED That the petition to form a Metadata and Digital Object Roundtable
be approved.
Support Statement: The petition contained the requisite number of member
signatures.
Moved by Boles, seconded by Duffy. PASSED. (Abstentions: Pearce-Moses, Felker)
III. G. 2. Petition: Issues and Advocacy Roundtable
SAA received a petition to form a new Issues and Advocacy Roundtable. The
petition included the requisite number of member signatures.
MOVED That the petition to form an Issues and Advocacy Roundtable be approved.
Support Statement: The petition contained the requisite number of member
signatures.
Moved by Wosh, seconded by Wurl. PASSED. (Abstention: Pearce-Moses)
III. H. LAGAR: Expenditure of Funds
Acting upon a request from the Lesbian and Gay Archivists Roundtable:
MOVED That the Lesbian and Gay Archivists Roundtable be approved to expend
its current reserve of $1,000, obtained from Scribner's/Gale Group in payment
for use of LAGAR repositories data in the Encyclopedia of LGBT History
in America, for the purpose of funding the Annual Meeting registration
fee of an individual of LAGAR's choice through a "Lesbian and Gay Archivists
Roundtable Outreach Fund," until such time as the fund is exhausted.
Moved by Boles, seconded by Engst. PASSED.
III. I. Journal Editor Recruitment/Selection Timeline
Boles noted that additional revisions to the Council Handbook, Section
VII. Standing Committees and Boards, American Archivist Editorial
Board, I. Purpose through VIII. Performance Evaluation Process for Editor
of the American Archivist, were required in order to spell
out the timeline for recruitment and selection of the Journal editor. (The
bulk of the Handbook revisions for this section had been adopted by Council
in June 2004, but the timelines proposed at that time were considered unrealistic.)
The regular and extension terms of the current Journal editor expire in December
2005, and the process for recruitment and selection of a successor will be
implemented beginning immediately (i.e., February 2005).
MOVED That the following timetable for recruitment and selection of the
Journal editor be included in the Council Handbook, Section VII. Standing
Committees and Boards, American Archivist Editorial
Board, V. Editor Selection Process:
V. Editor Selection Process
In years in which the incumbent editor is eligible for reappointment, see
Section VIII. below.
In years in which the incumbent editor is not eligible for reappointment,
a selection process will take place. In January of the year prior to the expiration
of the incumbent editor's term of office, the Executive Director will:
- Form a selection committee that will consist of the President
(who will serve as chair of the committee), the Council liaison to the American
Archivist Editorial Board, the chair of the Publications Board, a member
of the American Archivist Editorial Board selected by the President,
the Executive Director, and the Managing Editor.
- Consult with the selection committee regarding appropriate
text for a call for applicants. The deadline for initial applications
should be no later than May 15.
- Prepare advertising for the position for: a) placement in Archival Outlook and,
depending on the publication schedule, in American Archivist;
b) posting on the SAA Web site and on electronic mail lists; and
c) dissemination via
broadcast email to the SAA membership.
- Consult with the selection committee to identify other
venues for promoting the position and/or identifying prospective candidates
who
might be encouraged to apply for the position.
The selection committee will review the applications and make recommendations
to Council prior to the SAA Annual Meeting. Should the selection committee
believe that there are no qualified candidates, or that additional qualified
candidates would be desirable, the committee is empowered to solicit additional
nominations to supplement those already received.
Council, with due consideration of the committee's report but without requirement
that it act in accordance with the committee's recommendations, will select
an editor during the SAA Annual Meeting.
The following timetable is suggested:
January–May: Position
is advertised.
May 15: Application
deadline.
May 22-June 15: Selection
committee receives applications and begins review process to identify 3-5
candidates to proceed to the next stage.
June 15-July 15: Selection
committee conducts phone interviews with 3–5 candidates and prepares
report for Council recommending candidates to interview in person during
the SAA Annual Meeting.
July 20: Council
invites candidates to interview during the Annual Meeting.
August: On
the day prior to the first Council meeting, interviews are conducted by
the selection committee, which ranks candidates and prepares a recommendation
to Council.
August: On
the day of the first Council meeting, the selection committee delivers
its recommendation to Council, Council deliberates and either passes a resolution
endorsing the recommendation or agrees on a process and timeline for further
solicitation and review of candidates. Selection committee chair notifies
candidates.
September: Executive
director executes contract with editor.
January 1: New
editor officially assumes duties.
Support Statement: The revised timeline provides a more realistic—although
very ambitious—target for this process. The timeline will be evaluated
upon completion of the process and updated as appropriate.
Moved by Boles, seconded by Eaton. PASSED.
MOVED That paragraph 9 in Section VIII. Performance Evaluation Process
for Editor of the American Archivist, Council Handbook,
Section VII. Standing Committees and Boards, American
Archivist Editorial Board, be deleted, as
it is redundant with previous paragraphs.
Moved by Boles, seconded by Eaton. PASSED.
III. J. Gray Literature
Council discussion of "gray literature" first came up when reviewing a February
2004 report of the Electronic Publishing Working Group in which EPWG Chair
Rob Spindler provided an update of various items from the December 2002 Task
Force on Electronic Publishing Report. Several Council members expressed concern
at that meeting about whether SAA should publish "gray literature" (i.e., material
that has not been subjected to rigorous peer review) and, if so, what sorts
of items would be appropriate or not appropriate for publication. Due to lack
of time, Council members asked that the issue be placed on the June 2004 agenda
for "philosophical discussion." Again due to lack of time, the
issue was not discussed at the June 2004 meeting.
Council spoke with Spindler via phone during its August 2004 meeting. He
reminded the group that it had "decided last year not to pursue publication of Pease
Award finalists." He concluded that "the underlying issue is whether
SAA feels that there is benefit to publishing materials that may not be ready
for formal
publication. There is a distinction between scholarly publication and scholarly
communication, which is now quite prevalent in engineering and science communities."
Following extensive discussion, Council members determined that the current
priorities of the Electronic Publications Working Group preclude the necessity
to resolve the issue of gray literature at this time. The Council will discuss
this item online.
III. K. Committee on the Selection of Fellows
Council members reviewed a list of fellows who are eligible to serve on the
committee and, in the interest of time, decided to conduct the election of
Committee members via online vote, with a deadline of February 28.
The February 5 session was adjourned for the evening at 4:50 pm.
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 9:00 am – 1:00 pm
President Rand Jimerson called the meeting to order at 9:00 am.
IV. REPORTS
IV. A. Membership Committee: Key Contacts
Neal noted that the Membership Committee is moving ahead on its Membership
Development Action Plan and has begun the process of transitioning the leadership
functions from long-time chair Scott Schwartz to incoming chair Gerrianne Schaad.
IV. B. Section/Roundtable Annual Reports
Beaumont noted that all but one component (section or roundtable) had complied
with the requirement to submit an annual report for Council review, although
the process of obtaining that compliance was tedious in that it required
repeated reminders to section and roundtable leaders. She had prepared for
Council a
consolidated report reflecting the responses to two key questions—diversity
initiatives and questions/concerns for Council consideration—and linking
to the full component reports. Each Council member was responsible for reviewing
her or his components' reports and bringing forward items for Council consideration.
IV. C. Diversity Committee
Wurl reported that La Nina Clayton resigned as chair of the Diversity Committee
for personal reasons and that Jimerson appointed Lynda DeLoach and Michael
Doylen to serve as co-chairs. The Committee will meet in Chicago in March to
develop an action plan. He suggested that, based on the section/roundtable
annual reports, the Diversity Committee might do some education with sections
and roundtables to help them understand the sorts of initiatives they might
undertake to support SAA's diversity agenda. Orientation of leaders is a high
priority for the Committee, and Wurl will touch base with Pearce-Moses and
Paton as they develop orientation activities for the 2005 Annual Meeting.
IV. D. Other Reports from Council Members
Engst brought to Council two issues that had been raised by the Standards
Committee via its chair, Nancy McGovern: 1) Describing Archives: A Content
Standard (DACS) had been published by SAA recently but had not gone through
the Standards Committee review process and been officially adopted by the Council,
and 2) there is interest in establishing a formal liaison relationship between
SAA and the Rare Books and Manuscript Section of ALA. Engst agreed to bring
forward these two items for Council discussion and vote, as appropriate, between
meetings.
V. STRATEGY SESSION
V. A. Follow-up on "Planning Day" Session
Reviewing the work that had been done on February 4 with facilitator Jim
Dalton to identify the "mega issues" that are of greatest concern
for the future of the profession, Council members identified Issues 1 (Technology),
2 (Diversity),
and 5 (Public Awareness) as the highest priorities. A subgroup comprising
Felker, Gottlieb, and Paton had reviewed the issue statements and refined
them further.
Jimerson asked Council and staff members to volunteer to serve on one of
three workgroups assigned to develop a list of current activities associated
with
the issue (i.e, what is SAA doing currently to support these areas), identify
stakeholder groups associated with the issue, and develop a list of possible
future activities or outcomes associated with each. He noted that it will
be important to set aside funds in the FY 2006 budget to support strategic
initiatives,
and Wosh added that it would be helpful to indicate how the budget breaks
down to support these activities. Beaumont said that the current budget program
planner is easily modified to reflect which activities support strategic
initiatives
versus "bricks and mortar."
V. A. 1. Follow-up on "Joint Planning" Day
Jimerson noted that, due to time constraints, it would not be possible for
Council members to conduct a complete review of the discussions held on February
5 with the governing boards of the Council of State Historical Records Coordinators
and the National Association of Government Archives and Records Administrators.
He congratulated the group on the work done in creating an action plan to help
restore funding for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission
and indicated that he would be appointing three individuals to represent SAA
on a newly formed Joint Task Force on Advocacy (with COSHRC and NAGARA). He
encouraged all to remain actively engaged in implementing the action plan that
had been developed.
V. B. 1. Fundraising / Consolidating Funds or Establishing a Foundation
Eaton updated the group on the progress to date, noting that other priorities
had intervened to slow the process of investigating options to SAA's current
fundraising infrastructure. These activities will be a high priority for spring
2005.
V. B. 2. Fundraising / Makeup of Board / Fellows Steering Committee
Jimerson noted that the Fellows Steering Committee has a charge to be involved
in SAA fundraising, and that should be considered as SAA proceeds with options
for development of a funds/foundation board. Members of the Fellows Steering
Committee are: William Joyce (chair, 2004-2007), H. Thomas Hickerson (2004-2005),
James Fogerty (2004-2006), Linda Matthews (2004-2006), and Karen Benedict (2004-2007).
V. B. 3. Fund to Support Archival Charity for International Purposes
Council reviewed a proposal from Trudy Peterson to "create a 501(c)3 fund
to which persons can contribute to support archival projects in other countries." In
light of the broader issues to be dealt with regarding the fundraising infrastructure,
Council agreed to postpone consideration of this item until May 2005. The
group thanked Peterson for her efforts in raising this issue.
V. C. SAA Dues Structure
Eaton led a brief discussion of the issue of evaluating the dues structure
and fees in light of the following information:
- The last SAA dues increase became
effective in November 1999. Since that year, the Consumer Price Index
has increased by
approximately 13.4%.
- Based on the FY2005 budget, the
average dues revenue per individual member is $98, and the average dues
revenue
per institutional member is $245.
- The average cost to provide services
to individual and institutional members is $136.
- Based on the FY2005 budget, dues
revenue represents 31% of SAA's income; non-dues revenue represents 69%.
Be association
industry standards, this is a good position. However, SAA's reserves
represent just 28.3% of operating expenses (equivalent to 3.4 months of
operations),
against an industry standard of 40-55%.
As SAA addresses the "mega issues" from Planning Day and begins
to link strategic objectives to budgeted programs and expenses, there may
be a significant gap
between what the Society is currently doing and what it might be doing to
address those critically important professional issues. Council members agreed
to address
the issue of dues again as they review the proposed budget for FY2006.
To-Do List
Eaton reviewed the Action Item list resulting from the meeting and noted
that two additional items—the Spotlight Award and Nominating Committee procedures—would
be handled via online discussion and vote.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:30 pm on Sunday, February 6, 2005.
Approved by the SAA Council on May 19, 2005.
|
