DRAFT

Annual Meeting of the Corporation
Friday, August 5, 2005, 9:30A.M.
Lillie Auditorium
President of the Corporation: Dr. John E. Dowling
Clerk of the Corporation: Christopher M. Weld, Esq.

Dr. John Dowling, President of the Corporation, welcomed everyone to the 117th MBL CORPORATION MEETING.

Dr. Dowling called attention to the documents at the back of the auditorium:

• The Annual Report for 2004: He thanked Pam Hinkle, Director of Communications, and associates for producing it.
• Abstracts of Standing Committee reports
• A statement for consideration when we get to agenda item “Corporation Views” and applications for Corporation membership.
• Agenda
• Minutes

Picnic
Dr. Dowling announced that the Picnic to honor MBL course alumni and faculty will be held this afternoon from 4:30 to 6:30 PM in the Associates courtyard. That will be followed by the Friday Evening Lecture at 8 PM, which will be our first Distinguished Alumnus Friday Evening Lecture by Wise Young on “Stem Cells: A Paradigm Shift”.

Changes in the Agenda:

1. The Chairman of the Board of Trustees was called out of town unexpectedly and will not be able to present his report to you this morning. One thing he was to talk about was the status of the Director’s Search, and Dr. Dowling will make some comments on that.
2. To encourage more discussion of committee reports, each chair has been asked to introduce their reports, with a one sentence (no more than 25 words) description of the most important issue.

Approval of the August 6, 2004 Corporation Meeting Minutes
Dr. Dowling called for a motion to approve the minutes of the Corporation Meeting of 2004. Motion was seconded and approved. No Discussion.

Report on Corporation Membership
Dr. Dowling called on the Assistant Clerk of the Corporation, Marcia Donovan, to report on membership.

	2005
Regular Members	509
Life Members	87
Total:	596

Dr. Dowling noted that there is concern about the slow attrition of Corporation Membership, so a small group have begun to meet to discuss how to encourage younger investigators, students, post-doctoral fellows and instructors to join the Corporation. They are discussing such things as Corporation benefits, dues structures and how we might better recruit members to the Corporation. He suggested that if Corporation members have any ideas to please pass them along to him or to Ann Stuart, who is spearheading this effort.

Life Membership: Dr. Dowling reported that this issue was raised last year, and there seemed to be some confusion about what is meant by Life Membership in the MBL Corporation.

• In many organizations, Life Member is a designation given to individuals who have paid a substantial amount to become members of that organization for life. And with that, of course, they remain a voting member for life. Here at the MBL the designation, Life Member, refers to those who do not pay dues and are non-voting members. Through the 1980’s it was automatic that a person beyond the age of 70 was transferred to life membership. Then the bylaws were changed to make this change optional for a member who had retired from their home institution, upon application to the Corporation, to be designated a Life Member. We may wish to change this designation of Life Membership, because of the confusion, and that is something their committee is looking at. Again, any suggestions in this area are most welcome.
• Dr. Dowling noted that at any time Life Members who would like to become voting members, can revert back to regular membership by application to the Corporation and payment of dues.

In Memoriam
A moment of silence was observed in memory of the following members and MBL employees who passed away in 2005 and for whom the Marine Biological Laboratory gratefully acknowledges their service and support:

Thomas A. Borgese	W. D. Russell-Hunter
John B. Buck	Dorothy Skinner
Sherwin J. Cooperstein	William Trager
Patricia L. Dudley	Robert C. Warner
Dennis Flanagan	Angel Alonso
George T. Reynolds	Employees
Herbert Rosenkrantz	Barry Fleet
Jay S. Roth	George Goehl

Report of the Director
Dr. Speck said he would say a few words and then ask Dr. Beers, Chief Academic and Scientific Officer, to comment on some of the educational activities at the MBL. Ms. Pooser, Director of External Affairs, will talk about fund-raising activities for the Whitman Building, Ms. Hinkle, Director of Communications, will talk about communication strategy and getting ready for the next capital campaign.

Dr. Speck highlighted the following:

• The summer educational program is well underway, and in 2005 there were 484 students from 300 institutions from 52 different countries. He noted that the number of students over the last 5-6 years has remained more or less constant, but the non-US-citizen students continue to increase, which this year increased from 38 to 52.
• Summer Research activity is also well underway, and there are126 Principal Investigators this summer.
• He was pleased to report that in 2005 there were 33 fellows, and the MBL was able to give them close to $700,000 in scholarships, which compares to $450,000 in 2004 and $400,000 in 2003. He said that the idea is to continue to increase the amount of fellowship support we can provide, so that coming to the MBL is not a cost issue.
• The Year-Round Program was also active over the past year, and there was an outside review of the Josephine Bay Paul Center, which was very favorable.
• He reported that a search committee has been established, chaired by Dr. Beers, to identify a new director of the Ecosystems Center, due to the retirement of Dr. Hobbie.
• Dr. Speck noted that research activities continue at a fast pace in the year-round laboratories. In 2004, $28 million in new federal awards were received compared to $12 million in new awards so far this year. He said there is great concern, being a soft-money institution, about what’s happening with the NIH and NSF budgets. (Note: The total amount of federal grant funds received in 2004 was $17.6 million and in 2005 $17.5 million, so we are holding our own so far.)
• Finally, a great deal of effort has been spent over the last 6 or 7 months, not just raising money for the Whitman construction and other capital projects, but to position MBL for a major capital campaign. He said that over the next two years a number of capital projects are planned or even are underway:
  • Renovate and/or expand Whitman
  • Resurface the Loeb building, which is in a state of disrepair
  • Build a new animal care facility, so that we are compliant with government regulations
  • Renovate laboratory space in Loeb and perhaps Lillie
  • Upgrade the cottages and make some improvements in Swope.

Dr. Speck concluded by noting that 2005 has been a very active year in the summer and year-round programs. He introduced Dr. Beers, CASO, and asked him to say a few words about the Brown/MBL Graduate Program and the Boston University Marine Program.


Report from the Chief Academic and Scientific Officer
MBL/Brown University Joint Graduate Program

• Dr. Beers reported that the second year of the joint program with Brown University is about to begin. Last year there were two advanced students who were in Dr. Hajduk’s lab that came with him from University of Alabama in Birmingham. They are entering their fourth and fifth year of graduate studies this year, and there were three first year students who began their studies this year in Providence. He noted that one of those students has decided to work with Dr. Melillo in the Ecosystems Center; the second student has decided to work in the Bay Paul Center; and the third student is a bit undecided, although she spent the summer in Dr. Smith’s lab.
• This fall, there are six students that are entering; four of whom will likely wind up in the Ecosystems Center and two more in biological disciplines on the campus.
• He said that the program is going along according to plan, and they anticipate admitting five students a year. It’s a five-year program, so we should have a steady state of 25 PhD students in the program, which would mean 15-20 on this campus, since the first year to year and a half are spent in Providence. He noted that the quality of students applying to the joint program is extremely high.
• Dr. Beers reported that there is a second program with Brown University that has been approved, although there are not any students in it yet. It is a five-year master’s program in which students will take their bachelor’s degree program at Brown, and following graduation from that, they will come to the MBL in the summer and work in the Ecosystems Center for approximately 15 months. During that time they will have completed a body of research and written a thesis that will be submitted for a master ’s degree awarded by Brown.
• Finally, Dr. Beers said that they are trying to create an endowment to support the joint program, and the current target is $30,000,000. He said that Brown has committed to raising endowment funds for the joint program, and that is now underway with a couple of large gifts that have been received.

In summary, Dr. Beers noted that they everyone is very pleased with the joint program.

Boston University Marine Program
Dr. Beers reported that Boston University will be ending the BUMP program, at the MBL, and they will be leaving the campus by June of next year. He said that this is a result of BU’s desire to reduce the cost of the program to a level that will not cover the costs and this is unacceptable to the MBL. Dr. Valiela will be staying here, according to an agreement between the MBL and BU which will allow him to rent lab space in Loeb, and to continue his research on Waquoit Bay.

Decennial Review
Dr. Beers reported that the decennial review process has begun and a committee has been formed, chaired by Dr. Tim Goldsmith. The review is required by the terms of a 1924 gift from the Crane family. The members of the committee, which meet the criteria set forth by the gift terms, are Paul DeWeer, Barbara Ehrlich, Sue Gerbi (a professor at Brown), Woody Hastings, Luigi Mastroianni, Tim Mitchison, Jim Quigley and Osvaldo Sala, an ecologist from Brown. He noted that the committee has met during the last six or seven weeks, and they are presently drafting a final report. He noted that the purpose of this committee is to review all aspects of activities at the MBL: Education, Scientific Research, and Management. He also noted that this is the only review that actually reviews management at the institution. He said the MBL should receive the final report soon.

Dr. Dowling asked Dr. Beers to comment on the affiliation between members of our faculty and the Brown faculty.

Dr. Beers reported that the agreement with Brown allows that MBL faculty can apply for joint faculty status at Brown and Brown faculty can be jointly appointed here at MBL. He said there are currently sixteen members of our faculty who are appointed as joint faculty at Brown, and there are now four members of Brown’s faculty that are in the process of applying for joint status at MBL. All go through a rigorous review at both institutions.

There then was discussion and concern about the loss of the BUMP program at the MBL, including the loss of students and programs to replace lost revenues.

Dr. Dowling commented by saying it may not be totally out of the question that something might work again with Boston University in the future. BU has been approached about regularizing the MBL’s relationship with the BUMP program, but with lack of top leadership at BU there was no one there to make such a decision, and it came down to a matter of dollars and cents. He said that with new leadership at Boston University, it is possible we may find an arrangement that works for both institutions in the future.


Fundraising
Ms. Pooser, Director of External Affairs, reported that the campaign for $20 million for renovation of the Whitman building was started, and the first portion of the campaign was the solicitation of the Board of Trustees. She noted that about $4 million has been raised with about 30% of the Board still considering gifts.

Ms. Pooser also reported that discussions are ongoing with potential donors for very substantial gifts. She said that one of these gifts could be one of the largest gifts the MBL has ever seen, and a resolution on that gift may be seen by the end of the year.

Image and Identity
Ms. Hinkle, Director of Communications, reported on the next capital campaign saying that one of the shared beliefs that emerged from the Strategic Plan is that we need to work hard to expand the external reputation of the MBL.

Ms. Hinkle noted that about a year ago, a communications audit was done to take a look at how the MBL is doing business.

• One of the recommendations that came out of that was that they undertake a branding and positioning initiative for the institution, so consultants were engaged to work with staff, and a task force was put together with representatives from various constituencies at the MBL to take a look at how the MBL is presenting itself.
• She said that everyone in this room knows what makes the MBL special, but they need to figure out ways to explain that to those who don’t know the MBL as well, and that involves taking a look at every way that the lab is presented outside, whether visually or in words – in all areas. That was the group’s charge. One of the more visual parts of the project is taking a look at the MBL logo and how that translates, reproduces at various sizes, etc.
• She said that some initial concepts have been developed, which were presented to various groups at the MBL this summer, and a lot of feedback was received- some comments were positive, and some were not so positive. They have now gone back to the drawing board with the consultants, and they are looking at new ways to treat this, both typographically and by taking something from the existing seal.
• She assured everyone that the seal is not going away. It will be here for a very long time, and the intention is to use it ceremonially, on T shirts and on letterhead. The problem is that it does not reduce well, so when it is used on stationary or on a business card the logo cannot be seen. This has been an interesting process which they will continue to work on.

Report from the Board of Trustees
Dr. Dowling again informed the membership that Mr. Zeien, Chair of Board, was unexpectedly called out of town and would not be able to make his report.

Dr. Dowling, as Chair of the Search Committee for the Director/CEO, reported on the search saying they have reviewed and interviewed a number of excellent candidates. But the Search Committee wants to make sure that no stone is left unturned, so they recently engaged a search firm to help identify additional candidates. He noted that it is the same firm that recently identified the new Presidents for MIT, Boston University, and the Rockefeller University, as well as the new Dean of the Brown University Medical School. He said the search is moving along, and we have learned a lot in the past year. The timetable presently calls for naming a new director by February 2006.

Dr. Dowling said that one other item that Mr. Zeien would note is that at the July 23rd meeting of the Board of Trustees they passed several bylaw amendments to Article V (the article that deals with Trustee committees). He said that these were mainly clarification amendments, defining the membership and responsibilities of the executive, nominating and governance and audit committees. He said that they also called for the merging of the Finance and Investment Committees, which had been recommended. He added that the one substantive change to the Trustees committee structure was the addition of a new committee called the Academic Affairs Committee. He read the charge of the committee as approved by the Board of Trustees at their July 23rd meeting.

Academic Affairs Committee:
There shall be a committee of the Board responsible for the general consideration of scientific and educational activities of the Laboratory, such as the deliberations of Science Council, Center and general (i.e. Decennial) Laboratory reviews, senior faculty appointments and reviews, and academic programs and institutional affiliations(i.e. Brown University).

He said the Trustees believe this will be an important committee, which has been under discussion for some time and has been talked about extensively in Science Council meetings. Dr. Dowling added that the complete amendments to Article V are available in the Director’s Office.

Results of the Science Council Election
Dr. Peter Armstrong presented the results of the Science Council ballot election:

• Summer/Visiting Research: Paul De Weer
• Resident Research Centers/Programs: Anne Giblin(serving out the remainder of the unexpired term of Dr. Norman Wainwright)
• Resident Research Centers/Programs: Stephen Hajduk
• Education: Catherine Carr

Dr. Armstrong thanked all members of the Science Council and the Nominating Committee for their service, and the nominees .

Dr. Dowling thanked Dr. Armstrong, the nominating committee and everyone who helped with the process for the election of new Science Council Members.

Report of the Science Council

• Dr. Paul De Weer, Chair of the Science Council, reported saying that the Science Council is composed of ten (10) voting members and other ex officio members (non-voting members);
  • four represent resident scientists; three represent education and three represent visiting scientists. With 10 members and three-year terms, the Corporation must elect 4-3-3 people every three-year cycle, and that’s what we now do.
  • It’s an advisory body whose primary role is to advise the director and to inform the board about matters concerning research and education.
  • It’s a Corporation committee, which is elected by the Corporation
  • The Council reviews membership applications, reviews and recommends appointments and promotions, and reviews and updates MBL policies.
  • In addition, they hear quarterly reports from the Director and they communicate with the Board of the Trustees. The Chair is an ex officio voting member of the Board of Trustees and a member of the Nomination and Governance Committee. If the plan to have an Academic Affairs Committee comes to fruition there will be co-chairs, one of whom will be the Chair of the Science Council.
• During the past year the Science Council reviewed policy documents and finalized an important document on scientific appointments, reviews, reappointments and promotions.
• The Council reviewed 17 applications for membership in the Corporation. You will see the list in a moment to vote on them, but the Science Council reviews all those applications. He thanked the various sponsors who have taken the time to encourage new members to apply and especially Ann Stuart, who was very active in this effort.
• The Council reviewed 15 dossiers accompanying requests for appointments and promotions; senior scientists, associate scientists, assistant scientists (a total of 15), some of them are still pending. One candidate on the list for designation as “Distinguished Scientist” is Dr. John Hobbie, and Dr. De Weer congratulated him on that distinct honor.
• As requested, Science Council agendas and approved minutes will be put on the web, subject to constraints about personnel matters
• The Council reviewed a proposed name change for the summer or visiting investigators. Dr. Haselkorn suggested that such investigators be designated “Whitman investigators”. The designation honors a founding father, it is non-controversial and it is not incompatible with a name change of the building. The designation could still be a Whitman Investigator in the “Enron Building” for example.
• The Council continued discussions with the Board of Trustees regarding their creation of a Trustee Committee responsible for looking at scientific and educational activities. The initial proposal was for them to form a science committee with that name. The Council voted to endorse the newly proposed name, Committee on Academic Affairs. It was noted that the Council had very considerable input into phrasing the charge of that committee.
• Finally, Science Council recommended discontinuation of the General Scientific Meeting, and recommended replacing them with more focused forums. Because such forums already exist, like the symposia in the various clusters, the symposia for Grass Fellows, MBL Fellows, Dart Fellows and also the newly proposed First Annual MBL Young Scientist Symposium where young investigators can hone their skills in public presentations. This recommendation was not taken lightly, and it was based on the collective observation that attendance at the General Scientific Meetings has been going down steadily and has reached abysmal levels that may constitute an embarrassment for the institution. So the Council agreed that young investigators need practice in scientific presentation, but the Science Council believes (although it is open for discussion) that such forums already exist.

Election of new Corporation Members
Dr. Dowling presented the following seventeen new applications for Corporation membership. He noted that they all have been vetted and approved by the Science Council.

Dwight Bergles Johns Hopkins	Rae Nishi University of Vermont College of Medicine
Seth Bordenstein MBL	Stephen Redenti Hunter College Biology Department
Joseph D. Buxbaum Mt. Sinai	Paul Andrew Rhodes Stanford University
Jonathan Harry Davis END, Lexigen	Alavaro Sagasti UCLA
Joseph DeGiorgis NIH	Eric J. Simon NYU Medical Center
Richard R. Fay Loyola University	Daphne Soares University of Maryland
Robert Greenberg MBL	Judith Venuti Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center
Gal Haspel Mass. General Hospital Cancer Center	John T. Williams Vollum Institute
Edwin William McCleskey Vollum Institute

Dr. Dowling noted that this list represents people from graduate school to professors emeriti, a very balanced group. A motion was made and seconded to approve the applicants for Corporation membership. There was no discussion. The motion carried.

Report from the Treasurer
Mrs. Mary Conrad, Treasurer of the Corporation, presented the Treasurer’s Report for the Fiscal Year 2004 which was the MBL’s 116th year of operation.

The highlights of the financial statements are:
1. Value of Assets
2. Where money comes from
3. How we spend it
4. Performance of our endowments

1. For the first time in history, the MBL’s stated assets exceed $100 million dollars. Assets involve everything from the Rare Book Library, to our real estate. The facilities, the plant and equipment at 36% of assets are significantly understated, because all of our property and plant is valued at historical cost. She said that $100 million is a very conservative estimate of total assets.
2. Our operating support includes NASA, NIH, and NSF. The balance of the pie is from miscellaneous categories, Education, Conferences, the Library, etc. Again, grants have been very substantial. The spending down of those grants has taken more time than expected and that has created an accounting nuance, but the level of grants remains compelling.
3. In terms of our expenses, salaries are clearly the main component. Subcontracts are Sodexho and other categories like utilities and equipment. She noted that the strategic plan emphasizes a conservative approach to monitoring expenses, and they have put a lot of time and effort into keeping expenses controllable and level.
4. She noted that the value of the MBL’s Endowment portfolio shows stellar results for investment returns in what has been a very volatile period in the market. The MBL portfolio never lost more than 10% of its value, and it has appreciated by 20% since the peak of the market and is now at about $51 million.

Dr. Dowling thanked Mrs. Conrad and the MBL CFO, Homer Lane.

Dr. Inoue asked about the percentage of salaries for science and administration.

Mr. Lane said that about half the salary monies go to scientists and half goes to administrative staff, which includes support staff.

Dr. Dowling added that there is a huge difference in the growth of the number of scientists over the last ten years as compared to the growth in administration. He further added that the number of scientists has gone from approximately 57 full-time to 157, and the administration has increased by approximately 15%. He noted that these were not exact figures.

Center and Program Reports
Ecosystems Center
Dr. Hobbie, Distinguished Scientist and Co-Director of the Ecosystems Center, gave highlights of the center with its annual operating budget of $9 million dollars, and some 50 government grants providing 82% of that figure. He noted that the Ecosystems Center staff includes 11 Principal Investigators and 43 support staff, including postdocs. He also reported on the Semester in Environmental Science, which is in its 8th year, noting that 60 colleges belong to the consortium, which now includes Brown University

Report of the Program in Molecular Physiology by Peter Smith
Peter Smith, Director of the Program in Molecular Physiology, introduced the Corporation members present to this new program, which includes the following:

• The Laboratory of Robert Greenberg, who is new to the MBL and whose research interest is in Schistosomiasis and in particular, looking at calcium channel diversity in the development of drugs to overcome this disease. He is also interested in infectious diseases and forms a strong link with the Bay Paul Center.
• The second group has been with the Program for some years and that is the Laboratory for Reproductive Medicine, directed by David Keefe, Brown University, which is a complement of four people. Dr. Keefe has been offered the Chair in Gynecology at the University of Southern Florida, so he will be leaving the MBL. However, Dr. Smith is hopeful that he will remain an active collaborator, even at a distance, and there are plans for him to come back as a Visiting Scientist.
• The biggest component in the Molecular Physiology Program is the Biocurrent Research Center and its related activities. Its current personnel are up to 12 people.

Whitman Center Report
Bob Goldman, Director of the Whitman Center, reported that it has been another very successful year for the Whitman Center. Whitman Investigators continue to collect a remarkable array of awards and honors every year.

• This year, most notably, Whitman Center member, Avram Hershko, received the Nobel Prize. His discovery was the Ubiquitinmediated degradation of proteins, and his Nobel Prize was in Chemistry.
  

He reported that all the labs are filled this summer.

• There are 246 Whitman Investigators, including senior scientists, postdocs, graduate students and others.
• There are 115 non-government institutions represented and numerous branches of the National Institutes of Health. In addition to U.S. institutions, there are numerous foreign institutions and countries represented. So in addition to the U.S., there are people working in the Whitman Center from Argentina, Canada, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, which includes Scotland, and Venezuela. He noted that this demonstrates how attractive the MBL continues to be during the summer months.

Highlights:

• This summer “Coffee Breaks” have been established each day, from 10:30 to 11:00AM, (with funds provided by the Director’s Office). He said that many people have met each other for the first time due to these coffee breaks.
• Also, he said that the lab has paid serious attention to concerns about common and core facilities. He said, for example, there was a problem with incubator space in the Tissue Culture Room, but after approaching the Director and with support from Dr. Beers, they bought a Tissue Culture incubator. He said that this made an enormous difference when it was installed on the 3rd floor of the Whitman building.
• He noted that they have been working closely with the Marine Resources Center to improve collection, especially of clams and other organisms, so that research is maintained at a very high level throughout the summer months. That has been working quite nicely. In his opinion, the future of the MBL lies to a great extent, especially for the summer program, on the existence of important marine systems and the promotion by the MBL of these systems.
• Members of the community are working on several ‘mini-genome projects’. One is headed up by Joe DiGeorgis of the NIH, who has been working on developing squid EST library. A group including Bob Palazzo, Avram Hershko, and himself have been hard at work trying to establish a similar library for the clam, spisula. This is important for the future of summer research at the MBL, creating genomes of marine organisms that are useful for a wide-range of studies in neurobiology, cell biology, and developmental biology.

Dr. Goldman concluded by saying that the renovation of the Whitman Laboratory is probably the most exciting project on the agenda, and for the future of the summer research program. Even though it will become a year-round building, this is exactly what is needed to continue the high quality of work that goes on in the Whitman Building every summer and for the next hundred years.

Report of the Bay Paul Center for Comparative Molecular Biology & Evolution by Mitch Sogin, Director
Dr. Sogin gave a brief status report of the Center, which is made up of three interlocking programs which revolve about molecular evolution.

• Some highlights of this year: There was an external review of the Center, and the reviewers were quite pleased with the high quality of the integrative science that occurs; they were very enthusiastic about the productivity of the younger scientists and their ability to attract funding and their ability to produce high-quality publications in what one would call ‘cadillac’ journals. They were quite pleased with the visiting scholar program which is quite unique.

Dr. Sogin highlighted the research of Matthew Meselson, who recently received the Lasker award; the research of David Mark Welch, Bob Sabatini and Jennifer Wernegreen. He noted that Steve Hajduk’s lab continues to produce publication after publication.

The future directions of the Bay Paul Center:

• The development of a transposable genetic element cluster: This will principally be a cluster much like the clam cluster in Whitman but will reside within the Bay Paul Center. It is being organized by Dr. Reznikoff, and brings in Dr. Meselson and Dr. Belfort, who is at the Wadsworth Center, along with investigators at the MBL, to take advantage of Dr. Reznikoff’s expertise in transposable genetic elements. This will include both prokaryotic and eukaryotic systems.

Dr. Dowling thanked Dr. Sogin and all the Center/Program directors for their informative reports.

Corporation Views
General Scientific Meetings
Dr. Armstrong said he would speak briefly to the, hopefully temporary, demise of the general scientific meetings.

He said that the dismal picture of the GSM overstates the situation. He said that the audience is small, but it’s not one or two- it’s typically more like twenty or thirty. He noted that the level of presentations in the General Scientific Meetings are, of course, variable from excellent to not as polished, but in general he was of the opinion that they are pretty good. Secondly, he said that the General Scientific Meetings have real value to the Laboratory. They have a venerable history, but furthermore, even in their diminished state, have value that he has tried to touch on.

Dr. Armstrong said that his point in bringing this matter forward is firstly to determine whether a significant fraction of the membership of the Corporation feels that the General Scientific Meetings are worth continuing in their present form or some modified form; and secondly, if that sentiment exists to request that the Science Council re-examine the matter and possibly modify or reverse their decision to do away with the General Scientific Meetings.

There were many comments and opinions raised by the membership.

Dr. Dowling then asked for a hand vote from the members to determine how many think the General Scientific Meetings should be reconsidered. Then he asked for a hand vote of those who feel that they should move in other directions.

As a result of the vote Dr. Dowling noted that a majority voted to re-examine the issue, and he asked the Science Council to take the matter under advisement.

Standing Committees & Other Reports
Dr. Dowling noted that the Standing Committees of the Corporation have provided abstracts of their full reports, which have been made available to the members present, and the full reports are in the Library reading rooms, as well as in the Director’s Office.
He asked if any of the chairs of the Standing Committees would like to state their most important issues in 25 words or less.

Fellowships Committee
Thoru Pederson, Chair: He noted that they need the following:

• More candidates, please find
• More money, please give;
• Summer science, please believe.

MBL/WHOI Library Advisory Committee
David Sheprow, Chair, noted that every year they face cuts and budget decreases.

Biological Bulletin
Jim Olds, Editor-in-Chief, noted that they are managing the things happening in the publishing world with regard to open access and online; and focusing on increasing the scientific quality of the Biological Bulletin.

Education Committee
David Burgess, Chair, noted that the Education Program is suffering from tremendous successes with 22 courses essentially being supported by public and private funding, along with tremendous numbers of applicants to the courses. He added that the challenge is that there is little room for new courses being offered, and without more housing, they just can’t offer more courses.

Research Services and Research Space Committee
Hans Laufer, Chair, noted that the Whitman Building is full, although there are six fewer investigators than last year, despite the fact that there are more fellowships this year. They did a survey, and the general feeling is that those people are happy.

A member from the floor thanked the Director for improvements made in the cottages, saying that life with an internet connection and a phone is wonderful. Secondly, he said that it is very important to continue to renovate the Devil’s Lane and Memorial Circle cottages. He believes good people are not coming to the MBL, because their families find the living conditions unsatisfactory.

Dr. Dowling thanked all the committee chairs and their committee members for the enormous amount of work they do on behalf of the MBL. He noted that their reports are looked at carefully by the Science Council and considered carefully by the administration.

New and Old Business
Dr. Dowling called for any new or old business, and as there was none he asked for a motion to adjourn. A motion was made, seconded and approved.

Dr. Dowling thanked everyone for coming, and the meeting adjourned at 12:15 PM.