The AMS website will be down for maintenance on October 25th between 6:00pm - 10:00pm ET. This downtime includes registration for the 2019 JMM MEETING in Baltimore. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. For questions please contact AMS Customer Service at email@example.com or (800) 321-4267 (U.S. & Canada), (401) 455-4000 (Worldwide).
MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING DATED MARCH 23, 1978 The Council met on 23 March 1978 in the George Rogers Clark Room of the Holiday Inn in Columbus, Ohio at 5:10 PM. Members present were R. G. Ayoub, P. T. Bateman, R. H. Bing, J. Birman, L. Blum, J. Donaldson, D. Eisenbud, M. Gerstenhaber, R. Graham, E. Pitcher, J. Robinson, L. Rubel, O. Taussky, G. Weiss. Also present were L. Durst, R. Hahn, W. LeVeque, H. MacDonald, and J.L. Selfridge. President Bing was in the chair. 1. The President introduced John L. Selfridge, the prospective Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews, to the Council. Professor Bateman, speaking for the Editorial Committee of Mathematical Reviews, spoke of his qualifications for the position. 2. The minutes of the meeting of January 3, 1978 had been distributed by mail. The Secretary requested the addition of the following paragraph: Professor Robion Kirby, who is a member of the Editorial Committee of the NOTICES, asked for advice from the Council on whether to publish Letters to the Editor which are REJOINDERS TO BOOK REVIEWS PUBLISHED IN THE BULLETIN. These do not necessarily come from the author of the work under review. During the discussion, the same question was posed with respect to reviews in MATHE MATICAL REVIEWS. It seemed to be agreed that the NOTICES was the place for such replies, if there was any place at all, rather than the BULLETIN or MATHEMATICAL REVIEWS. Professor Kirby thought it possible that a rejoinder should be published if it illuminated a mathematical direction or principle or philosophy, but that it should not be published if it primarily stated that a review was "unfair". He thought that one did not wish to publish all rejoinders because there would be too many. He again asked for advice. The opinion of Professor Bartle, which seemed to be accepted by the members present, was that the Editorial Committee should "exercise sound judgment." The Secretary noted that although no action had taken place, a question concerning the content of the discussion had arisen. With this amplification, the minutes were approved. 3. The Treasurer's report was received and is attached. The attached letter from Professor Rossi was received. It requests that the Editorial Committee for the Transactions and Memoirs be enlarged by one so that the successor to Rossi as editor for Complex and Harmonic Analysis may be a member of the Council. The Council agreed to the request effective January l, 1979. 4. Professor Murray Gerstenhaber, Chairman of the Committee on Affirmative Action Procedures, stated that the Committee wished to reprint in the NOTICES, the attached article by James C. Goodwin, Assistant to the Vice President, University and Student Relations, at the University of California at Berkeley, which originally appeared in SCIENCES, the journal of the New York Academy of Science. He stated that reprinting permission had been secured. The Committee wished to publish a preface of its own, also attached. There was considerable debate over whether it contained undocumented material and whether it could be published as clearly not a Society position. The point was made that the Editors of the NOTICES could republish the article without Council authorization but sought guidance. Gerstenhaber noted that the Committee originally conceived its duty as preparing formal procedures and now regarded its duty as educational. A motion to substitute a motion to publish a list of available articles on the related subjects rather than this particular article was defeated. The requests of the Committee were granted. 5. A Committee on Page Charges, established by the Trustees to report to the EC/BT, prepared the attached report. The Committee was of the opinion that publication of its report in the NOTICES would be interesting and useful to the membership and requested approval of publication. Discussion proceeded in irregular order. President Bing spoke in favor of publishing the article, but turned the discussion to the general subject of page charges and reviewing charges, saying that he intended to propose to the Trustees that these charges be abolished. Professor Bateman then moved that the report be published and the motion passed. It was then moved that the Council advise the President to advise the Trustees that page charges and reviewing charges should be abolished. Professor Bateman spoke in favor of page charges and reviewing charges, thinking of the support of MR. The Secretary objected to consideration of the motion on the grounds that it was not on the agenda. A procedural motion to put it on the agenda received the required two-thirds vote. The motion then passed. At his request, it is recorded that Professor Bateman voted against the motion. 6. When annual dues were raised from $24 or $32 to $36 or $48, there was a thought that the line of division between the smaller and larger amount might be raised from $15,000 to $20,000. That point was lost in the discussion and action on dues by the Council. The Secretary made the following motion: It is moved that the annual dues of $36 apply to persons with annual professional income less than $20,000 and that the figure of $48 apply to persons with annual professional income of $20,000 or more. He stated his opinion that the Trustees would concur. The motion passed. 7. Professor David Eisenbud wrote as follows: At the Council meeting in Atlanta, Kirby asked for the Council's opinion on whether some space in the NOTICES should be given to correspondence concerning book reviews in the BULLETIN. I believe that the sense of the Council was that such correspondence should be published, according to its merit though one would probably not publish all rebuttals. No resolution was passed since it was felt that the details were best left to the good judgment of the editors. In the NOTICES Editorial Meeting it was decided, in ignorance, I believe, of the Council's position, that no letters concerning specific reviews would normally be accepted. I believe that in the interest of fairness to the authors of books and of clarification of the reviews in general, rebuttals of high quality and, more generally, interesting correspondence concerning the reviews should be given space. Such controversy as this might generate would do no harm and might increase the interest of the NOTICES. Of course, the editors of the NOTICES should exercise their judgment on the question of how much space should be allotted and which letters exactly should be published. The addendum to the minutes of January 3, 1978, with text presented at the beginning of these minutes, details the discussion in the Council to which he refers. The policy adopted by the Editorial Committee of the NOTICES was "that the NOTICES does not ordinarily publish complaints about reviews of books or articles." The third paragraph of the letter, slightly edited and amended was offered as the following motion: It is moved that in the interest of fairness to the authors of books and of clarification of the reviews in general, rebuttals of high quality and, more generally, interesting correspondence concerning the reviews in the BULLETIN should be given space. Such controversy as this might generate would do no harm and might increase the interest of the NOTICES. Of course, the editors of the NOTICES should exercise their judgment on the question of how much space should be allotted and which letters exactly should be published. The motion was passed. 8. Professor Lee Rubel asked that office and home telephone numbers of members (unless they request otherwise) be included in the Combined Membership List. His letter and the reply of the Secretary are attached. There was a motion that the Council recommends to the Trustees consideration of putting telephone numbers of members in the Combined Membership List. The motion passed. 9. There was extended discussion, initiated by Professor Lenore Blum of the question of holding meetings in states that have not ratified the Equal Rights Amendment. The discussion arose from the expression of sentiment of the Business Meeting of January 5, 1978 "that the American Mathematical Society try to hold all future meetings in states which have ratified the Equal Rights Amendment." There were four meetings in question. It was understood that the meeting of January 1979 in Biloxi was covered by a contract. It was noted with respect to the previously scheduled meeting of November 1978 in Charleston, South Carolina that there is no state in the southeastern section save Kentucky that has ratified the ERA and that Kentucky may be in the process of rescinding ratification (which may have no legal force). Consequently, it would be almost impossible to comply with the sentiment expressed by the Business Meeting in that section. There is a meeting that had been scheduled for November 12, 1978 in Chicago. Professor Bateman pointed out that he had scheduled that meeting for a Sunday in response to another request from the Council and that it was essential that a Sunday meeting in his section be in Chicago. He was considering moving the meeting out of Illinois, but would be unable both to do that and to hold a Sunday meeting. The Joint Committee on Meetings of the AMS and MAA and the Joint Administrative Committee considered the possibility of moving the meeting of August 1979 from Blacksburg, Virginia to some unspecified location and decided against it. It was noted specifically that the meeting in Blacksburg is a joint AMS-MAA enterprise and that its location is not an exclusive prerogative of the Society. There was a motion to open the agenda to a motion concerning the meeting in Blacksburg. It did not receive the requisite two-thirds vote. The following motion was proposed: The Council requests the EC to consider withdrawing the Summer Meeting of 1979 from Blacksburg, Virginia. It was passed. The Council went into Executive Session. The Secretary informed the Council that Donald J. Lewis was resigning from the Editorial Committee of Mathematical Reviews on account of poor health. The Council voted to accept his resignation with thanks. The Editorial Committee of Mathematical Reviews offered the name of Carl M. Pearcy to fill out the term vacated by Lewis. The Council elected Pearcy to fill out the term on the Editorial Committee of Mathematical Reviews. The Council made the following nominations, following in each case the recommendations of the Nominating Committee: Vice President (two candidates for one position) George D. Mostow (Yale) Jacob T. Schwartz (NYU) Member-at-Large (seven of ten candidates for five positions) Chandler Davis (Toronto) Raymond L. Johnson (Maryland) Jack C. Kiefer (Cornell) Wilfried Schmid (Columbia) Martha Kathleen Smith (Texas) Daniel H. Wagner (Wagner Associates) Karen Uhlenbeck (Chicago Circle) Secretary Everett Pitcher (Lehigh) Treasurer Franklin P. Peterson (MIT) Associate Treasurer Steve Armentrout (Penn. State) Trustee Alex Rosenberg (Cornell) Members of Publication Committees BULLETIN Isadore M. Singer (Berkeley) Colloquium John W. Milnor (IAS) Mathematical Reviews Elwyn R. Berlekamp (Berkeley) Mathematical Surveys Donald W. Anderson (San Diego) Mathematics of Computation Daniel Shanks (NBS) Proceedings Lawrence A. Zalcman (Maryland) Transactions (Three candidates for three positions) Michael Artin (MIT) Steven Orey (Minnesota) R.O. Wells, Jr. (Rice) Committee to Monitor Problems in Communication Robert G. Bartle (Illinois Carl M. Pearcy (Michigan) The nomination procedure was handled in two parts. First, candidates for all positions except that of Vice President were nominated. Next, the Secretary explained that the nominating Committee had suggested Schwartz as one candidate for Vice President and had suggested two other persons as candidate for Vice President, both of whom had declined. The Chairman of the Nominating Committee then advanced the name of Mostow, knowing from the deliberations of the Nominating Committee that this was their next candidate but having been unable again to canvass the entire committee. The Council then nominated Mostow and Schwartz. The Nominating Committee proposed that the Chairman of the Nominating Committee and the Secretary be delegated to fill any vacancies that may arise on the ballot prior to the distribution of the ballots. The Council approved. Professor Gerstenhaber asked that an item be put on the agenda of the next meeting requesting the Nominating Committee to make their recommendation of alternates be part of their formal report. It was agreed that he should pursue the request, if he chose, through a letter to the Secretary. Professor Donaldson inquired whether the Committee on Human Rights was keeping cognizant of the problems in the Federal Republic of Germany related to the "Berufsverbot." He was assured by Professor Gerstenhaber that this was the case. The Council adjourned at 7:30 PM, March 23, 1978. Everett Pitcher, Secretary