About NASIG

Date, Time: March 16, 2005, 11:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. PST
Place: Conference Call

Participants:

Officers:
Steve Savage, President
Anne McKee, Past President [left at 12:30 p.m. PST]
Mary Page, Vice-President/President-Elect
Denise Novak, Treasurer
Elizabeth Parang, Secretary

Members-at-Large:
Jill Emery
Beverley Geer
Judy Luther
Kevin Randall
Stephanie Schmitt [left at 11:30 a.m. PST]
Joyce Tenney [left at 12:01 p.m. PST]

1.0 Welcome (Savage)

President Savage called the meeting to order at 11:05 a.m. PST

2.0 Ground rules

Savage note that in addition to the usual Executive Board Meeting ground rules, due to the nature of conference calls, members should identify themselves when speaking.

3.0 Announcements:

McKee announced that for the first time ever a tie had occurred for a Member-at-large position. The Bylaws do cover this situation: the winner will be determined by lot conducted by N&E. The N&E Committee waited until March 15, 2005, for all ballots with a postmark of March 1, 2005, to be received. The ballots dealing with the dues increase were forwarded to a Bylaws Committee member who will count the votes and have the vote verified by a non-NASIG member.

Savage announced that the Strategic Support Task Force had been disbanded.

As of this morning 233 people have registered for the conference. The Award winners have been announced. CPC and PPC are both progressing well with the conference plans. All speaker information has been passed to the Hilton Hotel for reservations. The a-v proposals are being discussed. CPC has received two bids and is awaiting a third. The hotel bid is significantly over the other bidder but the hotel had expressed interest in matching any other bids. Experience has shown that hotels tend to bid high on a-v and food and then negotiate down to an acceptable level. Novak announced that the Minnesota tax-exempt status has been achieved but does not cover food or hotels, leaving mostly supplies. CPC has found a less expensive baker for the anniversary cakes; the cakes will have the NASIG logos.

4.0 CERTF report (Geer)

Questions revolved around the usefulness of ?comments sections'. Geer and Schmitt pointed out the value of comments about speakers both to those selecting future speakers and to the speakers themselves. One of the problems is the huge amount of time spent by E&A members entering the data into the report. Hopefully by next year the form will be online, thus eliminating this burden. Another problem with the existing form is that PPC doesn't find many of the hundreds of comments useful, particularly when they are very contradictory or about insignificant or uncontrollable details; but PPC does need substantive comments. Savage commented that the report consists primarily of raw data, and that more analysis of the comments is needed. In the future this may be a role for E&A, but the Board would need to establish guidelines for the committee to follow.

The Board endorsed adopting the suggestions of the CERTF but keeping the comments on individual speakers.

ACTION ITEM: CPC, PPC and the CERTF will review the draft of the revised form before it is used.
DATE: ASAP

ACTION ITEM: Savage will compile instructions for E&A on how to analyze comments from the completed survey.
DATE: By mid-summer.

5.0 Financial plan draft

Savage introduced the topic pointing out significant ramifications exist for the Treasurer and the Board. Board members expressed admiration for the extensive effort that went into the creation of the plan. Other participants in drafting the plan noted the leadership of Savage was instrumental in achieving the finished product.

Concerning Objective 3, action item 3 [Any line item within a committee's request which includes an increase of 2% or more compared to the same line in the previous year's allocation shall be accompanied by a mandatory justification for the increase]: McKee noted that 2% was recommended as a method of preventing ?budget inflation'. Savage commented that having this justification would make it easier for the Board to make decisions.

McKee noted that a reference on p.11 to Haworth payment should be changed to conference proceedings payment.

5.A. Savage acknowledged that the financial plan hinged on the assumption the dues proposal would pass. The following issues concerning the plan were discussed:

1. CANNOT over-allocate

The amount of the dues proposal was geared towards what had been allocated in the present and most recent years. As the consultant had indicated, membership will probably initially drop due to the dues increase. Novak noted that membership had dropped this year from last year, but that last year's had been higher than the previous year. Therefore the Board must plan conservatively for membership in 2006.

2. Budget process

The basic concept is two budgets: general operating (+reserve) and conference (+reserve). If the general operating budget is increased, the corresponding reserve must be increased. Several factors in the plan that would modify our current budgeting process were discussed.

3. Fundraising aspects

The plan states a development committee will be created to raise funds. Generally speaking, the money needed in an endowment to fund a grant should be 20 to 1 (i.e., need $100,000 in endowment to raise $5,000 yearly income for grants). Endowment earnings fluctuate according to investments' performance. Savage learned that each endowment account must have its own written policy and rules. Parang commented that with librarians aging, retiring and dying, opportunities exist for donations to honor, or in memory of, colleagues. McKee attended a fundraising conference with lots of good ideas; one important point was the need to re-enforce appeals by all means and in many media, to match the diversity of people's styles for learning and taking in information. Page reminded the Board of the need to spend money in order to raise money via fundraising. Savage suggested that other options exist in addition to endowments; we could raise money to be spent immediately for specific purposes. Randall voiced his opinion that during this discussion of the draft financial plan, the Board should concentrate on the question of establishing a committee: call for volunteers and look at their qualifications. Emery suggested the committee could survey how other similar organizations raise money. Savage stated the Board must consider how the type of fundraising selected would affect the overall financial plan. Novak volunteered to email NASIG's accountant inquiring about restraints on endowments. Savage summed up the discussion as being in favor of proceeding with fundraising but to have the Board practice extremely close oversight for the first six months to one year. Page indicated the committee should begin small with four to five members; the Vice-President will also appoint this committee with some input from the President.

4. Membership committee

Luther pointed out the difficulty for some members, especially vendors, to renew at a different time than conference registration. Allowing people to renew at the same time as they register for the conference would be easier for many members but more difficult for the Treasurer. Also, this difficulty would prevent them from voting, participating on committees, getting the member conference rate, etc. At the January Board meeting Luther had suggested targeted efforts at segments such as the commercial sector. Varying age groups might respond to targeted efforts. Randall pointed out the need to increase the benefits for Mexican and Canadian members and the problems posed by varying languages. Savage agreed this was an area that needed more attention. Luther questioned how a Membership Committee's activities would fit into the Strategic Plan. Parang suggested member retention needed to be addressed; some members join only when a conference will be held in their region.

5. Continuing education as new income source

Emery pointed out that both time and money are involved in creating revenue-generating programs. Luther mentioned that in her experience membership growth accompanied a strong continuing education program by an organization. She went on to suggest that NASIG might consider having two tracks to CEC: one to make money and one to administer other continuing education programs. The biggest difficulty lies in asking the current committee to shift gears. Savage summed up the Board's consensus to further develop continuing education programs so that an additional eventual outcome would be revenue generation: start small and progress slowly.

6. Impact on Treasurer's role

The Treasurer will be asked to track more items and provide more information to the Board. Novak noted that the Treasurer would need a new version of Quicken. Although this would be an expense, the new version should provide for more efficient budgeting. Novak also noted that the Board would have to be more involved with finances. Page commented that dissolving the Finance Committee could draw attention to the fact that the Board must be more involved. The Finance Committee had not been as task-oriented as needed. Emery stated that having the committee chairs trained and provided with a Chair's Manual will help with more accurate budgeting.

7. Would this plan accomplish what we need it to do?

Page felt the plan would make the organization more fiscally responsible and establish stable revenue sources. Novak emphasized the plan could be revisited and Randall agreed we can be as flexible with the plan in the future as circumstances require. Geer felt that intelligent caution was being exercised.

8. How would this plan change NASIG?

All felt the plan should strengthen the organization and that the organization is maturing just as the serials industry is evolving. Emery has heard the membership expects a new financial plan to accompany a dues increase. NASIG must move into the 21st century with services offered to members as well as realistic financial management.

9. If adopted-next steps

This topic was only briefly discussed because time was running out for the meeting and it is covered in the Chronology section of the plan.

10. Other? Randall started a discussion of how conference seed money is budgeted.

5.B. If the dues proposal does not pass, the following must be considered:

1. Continue with plan to build reserves

2. Cut budget for remainder of this year during May Board meeting. The President would send a message to the Chairs list asking them to submit lists of expenses that could be cut and those that couldn't be cut this year. The Board would then decide during its May meeting how much, if any, of this year's budget would be cut. If any cuts are made, it will be for two purposes: to less this year's use of current reserves as a result of the lack of budget relief for next year, and to help prepare the way for the larger cuts that will have to be made in Oct. for the 2006 budget.

3. Cut budget for next year to just what the income will be-not including any conference surplus - approximately 40%. This cut will have to be made in the fall, to prevent the 2006 budget allocation from exceeding 2006's anticipated income

4. Continue with fundraising, membership initiatives in the plan

Because three people had to leave the meeting early, the Board decided to take the rest of the week to reflect, discuss, and ask questions. This meeting resulted in only minor changes to the draft. Consequently, if the dues proposal passes (we will probably learn this early next week), Savage will call for a vote about adopting the slightly revised version of this plan. If the dues proposal does not pass, Savage will revise the plan accordingly and the Board will then address it. If the plan is adopted, it will be posted to the NASIG website and be on the agenda for discussion during the Business Meeting at the annual conference.

There being no further business, Savage declared the meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m. PST.