First Session -- February 11, 1998

Attendees:

Board of Directors: President John Hotchner; Immediate Past President Randy Neil, Vice Presidents: Patricia Stilwell Walker, Gordon Morison; Secretary Janet Klug; Treasurer John Apfelbaum, Directors-at-Large: Jeanette Knoll Adams, Lloyd de Vries, Ann Triggle, Wayne Youngblood.

Staff: Executive Director Robert E. Lamb, Director of Administration Frank Sente, Attorney David Flood, Director of Shows & Exhibitions Ken Martin.

Guests: Tom Alexander, Lois & Bob de Violini, Rob Haeseler, Ed Lettick, Jo & John Lievsay.

Call to Order:

The meeting of the American Philatelic Society's Board of Directors was called to order by President John Hotchner at 7:05 p.m. in the Travis meeting room of the Doubletree Hotel in Houston Texas. President Hotchner welcomed Board Members, Staff and guests and asked the guests to introduce themselves. He indicated this would be a hard working Board and that all the Board members will be and have been active in a wide range of issues. The days when APS Boards could meet twice a year, do all the work at Board meetings, and then forget about it the rest of the time is past. We are communicating on a daily basis and that is important for us to continue to do so.

Announcements: Vice President Dr. Peter McCann would be joining the Board tomorrow due to a last minute change in his schedule. Former APS President John Foxworth recently had a stroke and is in intensive care.

Motion: Hotchner requested a motion to suspend the rules to allow the agenda to be taken out of order. Moved by Morison. Seconded by Neil. Passed unanimously.

Executive Director's Report:

Lamb: The state of the Society is strong. The membership of the Society was higher on January 1, 1998 than it was the year before. It is the third straight year of growth. It is clear in looking at membership statistics we will have to work hard to keep this growth. We still have not completely recovered from the loss of membership due to the last dues increase. If, in the future, we have to consider a dues increase it will cost us members. Frank Sente has been very creative in finding new ways to advertise the Society. The credit for this growth really goes to Sente and his creativity.

The Board has a handout prepared by Ken Martin on fund raising activities and contributions to the Society. We found with the dues notice this year we were able to raise $40,000 in contributions compared with $33,000 last year. The number of donors has increased 20%. While the John K. Tiffany Endowment Fund is popular with big donors, the Building Fund is more popular with smaller donors. We propose to use the Building Fund again on the dues notice this year. We must try to balance the fund raising program to appeal to different groups with different interests. Our contributions are becoming more sophisticated. We have started to get more contributions of stock, a very attractive option for our members from a tax point of view. We also are negotiating our first remainder trust, an option we hope to be able to offer widely. This, too, is an attractive new option. We are also getting more money left to us in members’ wills and substantially more "in kind" contributions. This year we received over $300,000 of "in kind" contributions, more than the combined amount received in the last two years. All "in kind" contributions are welcome. We had one member who gave 150 pounds of stamps. This was immediately recycled into the youth program. Others have contributed stamps that are useful in the expertizing program. Any stamps given us are used for the benefit of the Society.

The Finance Committee held a conference call on January 23 to review the policy governing the Society’s investments. The committee concluded that while there was probably some advantage in changing the nature of the investments, the investment manager had sufficient latitude with existing policy to act on behalf of the best interests of the Society. Therefore the policy was not changed.

Over the past few weeks we have received an increasing number of messages suggesting the APS should get involved in urging PACIFIC 97 to release information on its financial situation. This has been a ticklish matter for us because that is a separate and independent corporation and the APS has no role in its financial management. However, Hotchner urged Lamb to begin discussions with PACIFIC 97 and make certain they were aware of the concerns of our membership regarding the lack of information that has been forthcoming. We have just issued a press release that reports the substance of that communication. PACIFIC 97 has committed themselves to issue a final report complete with detailed budget information and a narrative. It will be made available to the APS and the philatelic press.

There has been some reporting in the philatelic press about shows recently. For the record, the APS normally makes a small amount of money on its shows. We foresee some problems with upcoming shows, especially getting the winter meetings established, but we intend to do everything possible to make certain those shows, like our previous shows, make money.

We have begun to convert the membership files to an in-house data base using a software package called iMIS. Although it is "off the shelf" it offers an incredible amount of flexibility and we believe it will be a good system for us. We expect to be able to report at Santa Clara that the system has been substantially installed.

Lamb also hopes to report at the Santa Clara Board meeting a date the Sales Division automation can begin.

Hotchner: The motion made by Ken Lawrence at the State College Meeting in December regarding the Sales Division has been under discussion at State College and will be taken up at the Board Meeting in Santa Clara in August. Tom Horn will be attending that meeting.

Lamb: Lloyd de Vries has made a generous offer to our Chapters and Affiliates.

De Vries: The Delphi Stamps, Coins and Postal Forum will put together a simple web page for any chapter or affiliate of the Society free of charge. If they don't have the ability to scan logos or illustrations, we will do that for them. If they don't know how to do the HTML programming, especially the Delphi protocols they would have to use, de Vries will do that as well. They would just send us the information they want on the website, hopefully electronically. De Vries will put together one or two pages for these chapters or affiliates. They will follow the Delphi format which means the left side of the screen is used by Delphi and the right side of the screen is theirs. It would be a fairly static page with few changes. The site would tell who they are, what the dues are, where they meet, and if they have a show coming up. Hopefully they would include an e-mail link. Delphi will take care of programming and scanning.

Hotchner: Is it likely the chapters and affiliates, as they get their feet wet with this process, will want to spin off to their own website?

De Vries: It is likely they would, but we would have no problems with multiple pages. If an organization wants 14 pages, there would be no difficulty with that. We are not looking for exclusivity.

Triggle spoke with Tom Fortunato, chairman of Chapter Activities Committee and Jim McDevitt, chairman of the Affiliates Committee, and they both think this is a tremendous offer but the problem is they would like the sites to be dynamic and would like the ability to change them at their own will. Furthermore, many of the Chapters and Affiliates are not capable of sending information electronically. In many cases, they would be submitting paper copies of what they would like on the website. There has to be an intermediate step to send them on their way.

De Vries would prefer to receive the information for the web sites electronically but for those who don't have access to electronic media de Vries can do the data entry. Those at the other end of the spectrum who want the websites to be dynamic, should make their own. Delphi would not want to get into that. Delphi can't give outsiders access to the area in which we put up the web pages. They have to maintain some controls.

Lois Evans de Violini: Is it possible to link these websites to the APS home page? We would like to put the links on the APS home page.

De Vries indicated Delphi can do that. Additionally, if there are not too many of these chapter and affiliate sites, we can list them on the Delphi main page, thereby increasing the visibility of the chapters and affiliates.

Neil: Before this is instigated it needs further discussion.

Hotchner asked what Neil was suggesting.

Neil: Each one of these pages put up by an affiliate or chapter helps promote the Delphi site. In essence, if the APS signs on to this we are in effect endorsing the Delphi site and giving advantage to the Delphi site. It is something we may wish to explore further. There are a number of different sites on the Internet with similar offers. Why would we give this endorsement to Delphi and not the others?

Apfelbaum: If they are not asking for exclusivity, how does that harm us?

Neil: We have to make it known to our affiliates and chapters there are other services out there that would also offer them free websites. We need a fairness doctrine.

Lamb: This is the only group that has come to us. The Society provides no direct support for it. It is a Delphi project that offers a service to our chapters and affiliates. We would consider offers from others as well.

Neil had no objections to our affiliates and chapters signing on to Delphi on their own, but preferred the APS not advise them to do so.

Hotchner: We should tell the affiliates and chapters what Delphi has made available to them, but that there is no compulsion for them to do so.

Neil: The affiliates and chapters should be told that by signing on they are also helping to promote the Delphi site at the same time.

Lamb: We have $12 million in inventory in our Sales Division. We are considering introducing larger sales books. It is not easy to change book size. Books sent out over a decade ago are only now coming in with stamps for sale. We are looking at a long term project that needs to be structured so that we have larger books being shipped at the same time as the smaller books. Despite the problems, we believe that we have to go to bigger books. Stamps are getting bigger, and we need to cater to modern philately. We have made one change that will be announced soon. In the future when a member buys a stamp from the Sales Division and submits it to our Expertizing Service (APEX) which finds the item to be altered or fraudulent, the APS will reimburse the expertizing fees as well as refund the purchase price of the stamp. In the past we have only refunded the purchase price. We believe that to be unfair, because the Society needs to stand behind its sale. If the stamp is simply misidentified, then we will not reimburse the cost of expertizing.

One of the philatelic publications recently reported hat we were projecting an annual income of $140,000 from insurance. Actually, we expect to make $40,000 by the end of the first year if the conversions continued at the expected rate. The "end of the year" meant the 12 month period from October to October and not as of December 31. We are still spending a lot of time on insurance. Changing a program of that magnitude is not easy. The plan office in New York has been deluged with calls, and some members have complained their calls have not been returned. Lamb has instituted a series of controls by having people make calls to the New York office and measure the response time. There is not a single test case that took longer than 24 hours to get a response back. We will continue to use measurements. Part of the start up problem has been getting policies out to people. Chubb did not want to produce the policies until they have been approved by all insurance commissions in the fifty states. This is not an easy thing to do because different states require different wording in the policies. That process has now been completed and a computer system has been installed in New York and the policies have started to go out last week.

Dan Walker has paid the Society the "per insured" money he owed from 1996 and 1997.

The Space Requirements Committee will be meeting in State College on February 21 to sort out requirements for the Society and library and narrow the options.

Lamb has shared with the Board most of the correspondence we have had over the past four months with a Danish mail order firm. We began getting complaints last fall about direct mail solicitations from Denmark. Members felt they had not gotten their money's worth. We put a notice in American Philatelist indicating members should call us before doing business with this firm. When members call, we tell them the owner of the company has been expelled from APS and we cannot represent their interests if they are dissatisfied with their dealings with the company. We continue to receive complaints, though the number is declining. We have no complaints from people who did not receive a refund. The latest exchange of correspondence with the firm deals with clarifying their refund policy, so we can report this information to our members. We still have not gotten a satisfactory response from them, but we have made it clear we expect our members to be treated fairly.

Apfelbaum believed this was the same company that advertised in Linn's several years ago and that Linn's had been instrumental in having the postal inspectors investigate them. There may be some sort of restraining order already in effect. We may be able to get some help from Linn's on this.

Lamb: Some Board Members have asked Lamb to clarify the procedure we use to approve minutes when Boards change. Once a Board is sworn in, it is the APS Board. Only the official Board has the right to take formal actions on behalf of the Society, which include approving minutes of the meetings to which you were not a party. However, as a courtesy, Lamb telephones all the participants of the previous meeting and asks for their comments and changes to those minutes.

Beginning with the April American Philatelist we will carry the e-mail addresses of all Board Members. If Board Members do not wish this to be published they should contact Bill Welch by the end of next week.

Motion: That the Executive Director's Report be accepted. Moved by Neil. Seconded by Apfelbaum. Approved unanimously.

[Director-at-Large Wayne Youngblood joined the Board at this juncture.]

Society's Attorney Report:

Flood provided the following written report to the Board:

"Since the last Board meeting, the Society Attorney's office has been instrumental in the following areas.

1. Review and preparation of documents for AP advertising contract.

2. Review and approval of correspondence re Huys and Thomsen matters.

3. Review and revision of Complaint Procedures pamphlet.

4. Review and revision of Ethics Guidelines.

5. Review, revision and approval of Copyright and Confidentiality Agreement with Preservation Technologies.

6. Review Laurence/Skinner matter and advice to the Board of Vice Presidents.

7. Conferences and advice to the Executive Director on various matters.

8. The Society Attorney has rendered opinions to the Board of Vice Presidents, Board of Directors and others relating to general Society business, agreements, complaints of Members, expulsions, appeals and other matters of a similar nature."

Flood: The revisions to the American Philatelist advertising contracts involve adding a responsible individual to the contract. Too many corporations are hiding behind their corporate names and deciding nobody is responsible for paying us. Now we are requiring an individual who is a member to accept responsibility for payment.

Helen Bruno and Flood have streamlined the complaint procedure.

The remainder of the report is self-explanatory.

Motion: That the Society's Attorney Report be accepted. Moved by Walker. Seconded by Apfelbaum. Passed unanimously.

Treasurer's Report:

Apfelbaum: This year the APS will be in the black. Our accounting will change. We as an organization have taken as current income all of the income on our investments. We did very well. It also means if we don't do very well on our investments some year we will have to take into income all of our losses. The Finance Committee looks on how the Society is operating on a cash basis. Once again we are going to have a small loss. This shouldn't trouble us too much. A few years ago we looked on expanding our revenue base. We realized that raising dues was a poor way of raising income. If we raise dues $5 per member, we can expect to lose 10% of our members. The net effect of this would be revenue neutral. We are able to raise that money on the credit card program and the change in the insurance plan alone. We have been looking at ways of growing our revenue by marketing services to our members and we have been pretty effective at that. Additionally, three years ago we moved our investments from very stable certificates of deposit into the stock market. A number of us on the Finance Committee felt it is now time to pare back some of our stock portfolio. The investment advisor said he would consider that. In the three or four weeks since he said that we have made $125,000 by not doing anything. We feel we have hired competent investment advisers. We have given them a mandate that we want high returns with absolute security. We have been pretty fortunate. In the past four years we have made almost $1 million on our investments. By just doing some administrative things such as tweaking the pension plan for our employees and our new investment income, we have increased the Society’s net by $1.5 million. We have done this with no dues increase and we have no dues increase on the horizon to recommend to the Board. We rely on our investments to subsidize the Society. It is a hundred year legacy that has been given to us all. We should be very cautious about dipping into those resources for something like an expansion of the State College facility. When the Society is not increasing its membership it is difficult for me to understand why it needs to increase its space. The Finance Committee is looking at ways to increase our revenue. We have implemented a change in our insurance plan which Lamb hopes will give us $40,000 this year. We have not even touched the concept of Sales Division user fees which I proposed while on a Board of Vice Presidents. We need to look at ways to raise revenue efficiently without alienating our membership by raising dues. We can look at Library user fees. We have a Society in which on the average year 3,000 people (5% of our membership) use the library. When we add up all the costs, a free lending library service is really a huge tax for the 53,000 members of the Society who don't use the library. Apfelbaum is not suggesting we make a change, but it is an avenue that has been looked at by the Finance Committee as a potential revenue source. The money the APS has accumulated is a sacred trust. We have the ability but not the right to squander it.

Motion: That the Treasurer's report be accepted. Moved by Neil. Seconded by Morison.

Triggle: Solicitations for credit cards are not wholly acceptable to all our members and some are getting cross. What provision is there to have their names removed from the solicitations?

Apfelbaum expressed unhappiness with the current credit card program.

Lamb: We do get letters from members who don't want to be solicited by our credit card company. Lamb tells our members that we raise about $40,000 a year through our credit card program and asks members to put up with the extra mail for the good of the Society. We do, however, have the ability to remove their names from the solicitation list and any of our members may ask to have their names removed from that list.

Apfelbaum: Dues increases are not the way to raise revenue. It finally dawned on us five or six years ago that dues increases are not an option. If we could lower our dues by a few dollars we might find it to be a revenue neutral thing by the time we are finished selling all the kinds of services we can to our members. Look at the competition in insurance plans. We had a very good program under Walker. Now Walker and Hugh Wood are both offering better programs than we had before. The marvelous thing about capitalism is that sometimes it works.

Hotchner called for a vote on the motion to accept the Treasurer's report. Passed unanimously.

Hotchner agreed that only 3,000 people used the Library services but as with some other things the Society's members are involved in relatively small numbers, a lot more people and the hobby benefit from that use than the 3,000 who actually take books out.

Flood: We should be careful on user fees for the library. It could jeopardize the library's tax exemption.

Committee Coordinator Report:

Triggle presented a written summarized report to the Board of the activity of all the APS Committee. The complete reports from committee chairmen were given to Hotchner.

Motion: That the Committee reports be accepted. Moved by Apfelbaum. Seconded by Adams. Passed unanimously.

De Vries: Does the Entry Level Committee concern itself with not only youth and retirees but also middle aged adult collectors experiencing the hobby for the first time or coming back into the hobby?

Triggle: Yes, the Entry Level Committee covers this in their current report.

OLD BUSINESS

Approval of Phone Votes -- December State College Board Meeting:

Adams: Corrected her vote in previous minutes. Adams abstained from the voting listed in the State College minutes of December approving the minutes of the Milwaukee meeting in August. Adams was not present at the Milwaukee meeting.

Apfelbaum inquired if Board members should abstain from voting to approve minutes at a meeting they did not attend.

Lamb: Board members may abstain on any vote they wish, but may certainly vote on the minutes. Board members are often called upon to approve actions they did not directly participate in.

Flood: Board members are approving the document, not what was said in the document. If the document makes sense, a Board member should feel free to approve it. If a Board member is puzzled by something and does not get a satisfactory answer, then a Board member should abstain or vote against approval.

Adams: Took opposite opinion and said if a Board member is voting on the substance of the document and if a Board member is not present to observe the transactions, the Board member should not vote to approve.

Motion: That the phone vote of the minutes of the December Board Meeting in State College be accepted with Adam's correction. Moved by Apfelbaum. Seconded by Youngblood. Passed unanimously.

Approval of PACIFIC 97 Phone Votes:

Lamb: There was an exchange of correspondence between PACIFIC 97 and APS that has subsequently been reported in a press release that went out yesterday. There is one item not in the press release, that being that PACIFIC 97 has asked this Board to withdraw its billing for $24,253.17 on the basis that PACIFIC 97 has made substantial progress to settling its debts and that this was spent on the youth area to the benefit of the hobby as a whole.

Triggle asked for a recap of the phone vote on the PACIFIC 97 matter.

Lamb said Adams voted no, Triggle abstained, and the remaining Board members voted to approve. Lamb asked Adams if she wanted to explain her "no" vote for the record.

Adams indicated she was not comfortable waiving the billing for the debt. Adams wanted more information from PACIFIC 97 on how they were settling their other obligations.

Youngblood: The youth area served its purpose. He thought it was something we can move on with. He did not feel that to forgive the debt, it should be acknowledged that there was indeed a debt. He was not fully sure that had happened.

Hotchner: If we were to get into protracted discussions we would never be able to resolve the issue. We have an obligation to ourselves and to the hobby to get on with business.

Apfelbaum: Lamb and Hotchner indicated to him this was the best we could get out of PACIFIC 97 and so Apfelbaum voted to approve.

Klug wondered if this was a matter we should be discussing. The Board has already voted on approving the letters to PACIFIC 97 and we are merely voting to approve the phone vote that has taken place.

Hotchner: This is the first time we have been able to discuss this as a group and Hotchner wanted everyone to have an opportunity to voice their opinion.

Walker wanted to go on record that when this was presented to her for a phone vote she did not know patrons might get their some of their money back. If she had, she would have abstained as well.

Lois Evans de Violini: It is highly unlikely patrons will receive any of their original money back. What they are likely to get back is some of the additional $2,000 they were requested to send.

Motion: That the phone votes on the PACIFIC 97 matter be accepted. Moved by Apfelbaum. Seconded by Neil. In favor: Youngblood, Klug, Neil, Morison, Apfelbaum, de Vries, Adams. No opposed. Abstain: Walker and Triggle. Motion to approve phone votes on PACIFIC 97 passed.

NOTE: Walker and Triggle abstained from voting and took no part in the discussion.

Board Ethics Guidelines

Hotchner: Tom Alexander is present to answer questions and provide clarification on the Board Ethics Guidelines drafted by Lamb, Alexander and the Ethics Committee.

The draft of the Board Ethics Guidelines follows:

The American Philatelic Society relies on deliberate, thoughtful and disinterested decision making by members of its Board of Directors. Members of the Board are expected to exercise the utmost good faith in all transactions touching upon their duties to the Society, its members and its property. Each director is in a fiduciary position with the members of the Society and owes the membership a duty of loyalty in exercising his or her functions as a director.

By accepting office as director, each acknowledges that with regard to any Society activity the best interests of the Society and its members must prevail over the director's individual interests.

In their dealings with and on behalf of the Board, the directors shall be held to a strict rule of honest and fair dealings between themselves and the Society and its members. No director shall use his or her position as such, or knowledge gained therefrom for personal profit in such a way that a conflict of interest might arise between the interests of the Society and those of the individual director. Similarly, no director shall participate in any Board decision which may, directly or indirectly, result in personal financial gain to that director.

In order to implement these principles, the Board adopts the following guidelines to govern the relationship between the individual directors and the Society.

Employment with the Society

No director may be an employee of the Society. No employee of the Society may be a member of the Board of Directors.

While it is not inherently improper for a relative of a Society employee to serve on the Board, any such relationship, by blood or by marriage, must be disclosed to the membership. This disclosure must occur in a timely manner at the time of the director's candidacy for the Board or when a change in relationship occurs which would require disclosure.

Contracts with the Society

No director or his or her spouse or minor child or any corporation, partnership, association or other organization in which a director, a director's spouse or minor child has a beneficiary interest, shall enter into any contract with the Society or the APRL for personal financial gain, unless approved by a majority vote of the Board of Directors after full disclosure to the members of the potential conflict of interest.

It is the duty of the director involved in such a potential conflict to immediately inform the Board of Directors and the Executive Director of the existence of a prohibited relationship if such a contract should come under consideration by the Society.

Services Provided the Society

Any Board member serving on the APEX Committee of Experts or as an examiner for the Sales Division at the time of his or her election to the Board may continue to serve in that capacity. Any Board member who is asked to perform these functions after election to the Board may do so subject to the approval of the Board. Board members will be compensated for these services at the same rate as others performing the same services.

Publications

Members of the Board may write articles for The American Philatelist, the Philatelic Literature Review, or other Society or Library publications, for which they will receive compensation at standard rates, except that no Board member will be compensated for regular columns in any Society publication reporting on Society activities or written as a result of the member's official duties on the Board. Acceptance of a manuscript from a Board member for publication will be subject to the same approval process as manuscripts from any other source.

The Society may publish a book or pamphlet written by a member of the Board, provided that the editor believes that it has sufficient merit and the Executive Director believes that the publication meets the Society's financial criteria that it will make money. Any publication contract with a Board member is subject to approval by the Board of Directors. The Board may delegate this responsibility to the Finance Committee, provided that if such director/ author is a member of the Finance Committee, he may not participate in its deliberations respecting his work or vote on the acceptance of the same.

From time to time the Society may accept a book on consignment from a director for sale at the headquarters building. This may be done when, in the opinion of the Executive Director, it is in the Society's financial interest to do so or when it would promote the hobby or philatelic research. In such cases, there will be no advance payment for the publication.

Assistance to Society Members

Members of the Society occasionally approach a Board member for advice about the disposition of a philatelic collection or other related materials. if the director is recognized by the APS as a dealer and is listed in the Handbook of Services as such, no further disclosure is required, since it is assumed that the member knows of this commercial relationship and understands that a dealer may give advice which will result in his or her financial benefit.

However, members should reasonably be able to assume that advice received from a director who is not known to be a dealer will be completely disinterested under the terms of that director's fiduciary duty of loyalty to each member of the Society. In such cases the director is expected to give the member his or her best advice. If the director refers the member to a dealer by whom the director is employed, even on an occasional basis, the member must be informed in a timely fashion that a business relationship exists between the member and the dealer. in any case where the director may receive a finder's fee or otherwise benefit from the transaction, the director shall so inform the member. Should compensation occur unexpectedly after the fact, the director must infor

Reimbursement of Expensesm the member promptly.

No member of the Board shall receive compensation for his or her services as a Board member.

Members of the Board may receive reimbursement for actual expenses for attending Board meetings and for other official travel on Society business when such reimbursement has been specifically approved in advance by the Executive Director. Reimbursement shall be within limits established by the Society's approved travel policy.

In the exercise of their responsibilities, individual directors may travel to stamp shows or represent the Society at philatelic events. As a general rule, directors will receive no compensation for such activities. Exceptions will be when a director has been specifically asked by the President or Executive Director to represent the Society or when the Board has approved in advance the reimbursement of specific expenses.

Other documentable expenses, such as telephone and copying charges, may be reimbursed when directly related to Society business. For most directors these charges are small and the director is encouraged to donate the expenses to the Society. Where reimbursement is appropriate, the bills must be submitted with supporting documentation to the Executive Director for approval.

Board Responsibilities

Any violation or apparent violation of these guidelines should be reported to the Chairman of the Board of Vice Presidents, who will inform the President and the Executive Director. If, in the opinion of any one of these three, there is reason to believe that a violation of these guidelines may have occurred, they will recommend to the Board steps to correct the situation. The Board of Directors may take action to implement its decision in accordance with the by-laws."

Motion: That the Board Ethics Guidelines be accepted. Moved by Neil. Seconded by Adams.

Neil: The Board Ethics Guidelines are something that has long been needed. The document is concise, well worded, and covers all the bases. If we had this in place six or seven years ago a lot of problems would have been avoided. Neil said it is outstanding and complimented Alexander for the work he has done.

Triggle: Complimented Alexander for his excellent work.

Alexander: The initial Guidelines document was drafted by Lamb and was sent to the Ethics Committee for evaluation. While concurring with what he had provided, the Ethics Committee felt the preamble to the document needed to be more explicit as to what the obligations of the Board Members were to both the membership and to the Society.

Adams: Commended the Committee for their work and stated the Guidelines being presented today has come around 360 degrees from the Guidelines the Board saw at the State College Board Meeting in December. It is truly an excellent document, especially with its emphasis on disclosure. Adams recommended a change to the section Employment with the Society along the following lines: "A Board Member may have one or more relatives who are employees of the Society, however any such relationship, by blood or by marriage, must be disclosed to the membership."

Alexander agreed to that change.

De Vries: Asked for a change to section Contracts with the Society to read: "No director or his or her spouse or minor child or any corporation, partnership, association or other organization in which a director, a director's spouse or minor child has a beneficial interest, shall enter into any contract........" De Vries wondered if the Guidelines should talk about not only people who own a company entering into contract, but also people who work for a company that would benefit from a relationship.

Flood: It would be difficult to enforce a Guideline that dealt with an employee of a corporation that might be incidentally benefited by the Board Member's affiliation on the Society's Board. If a corporation is controlled in effect by a Board Member or any of the prohibited relatives then the relation to that corporation comes under the ban.

Apfelbaum: Suppose the President of the Society would get a job at a stamp company at which he was an employee and not the owner of the corporation. Does that mean it should be disclosed and approved by the Board?

Flood: If the employee directly benefits from a contract in which the Society is entering, then he has a duty to disclose it. For example, if the employee was going to receive a bonus if a contract is signed even if he has no ownership interest in the company, he has a duty to disclose. Any kind of interest the employee has that means cash in pocket should be disclosed. If the employee works for a salary or stipend and it doesn't change, then there is no duty to disclose.

Alexander: The Guidelines are not cast in stone. We have to have some experience with the Guidelines to determine how well they will work when applied to individual situations.

Apfelbaum: The value of someone on this Board becomes more as an employee of a corporation and it should be disclosed. The Guidelines should be very clear about that.

Lamb: We rotate our auction firms periodically for STAMPSHOW. If we were to move it to a firm that has employees represented on the Board, the employees would have to inform the Board.

Apfelbaum: As a practical matter, in situations like this in the past Board members have recused themselves. The new Guidelines mandates that.

Flood: If the Guidelines become too specific you run the risk of making your Board Members second class citizens. Rights they would ordinarily enjoy they give up by joining the Society's Board.

Youngblood: Flood's test that if it puts money in your pocket is the easiest yardstick to use.

Neil: We could go into specifics as deeply as we want to. The bottom line is that it is incumbent upon the Board Member to decide if a potential for conflict of interest exists and disclose it to the Board.

Adams: Each person will have to decide for his or herself what constitutes a beneficial interest.

Hotchner: Recommended we pass the Board Ethics Guidelines with the provision that if it needed to be amended, we could do so at any time.

Call for vote: Motion that the Board Ethics Guidelines be passed with changes recommended by Adams was approved unanimously.

Date Change for STAMPSHOW

Adams: STAMPSHOWs are scheduled for the final weekend in August. Starting dates for schools are determined locally, but in most urban settings in the East and West the first day after Labor Day is traditional. In the Midwest and South the last week in August is traditional. Teachers usually come a week or so earlier than the students begin. Other than people who live near the show, the STAMPSHOW dates as presently structured make it difficult for teachers and families with school-aged children to attend. Our traditional dates are not helping us attract teachers, youths, young adults, Adams recommended scheduling STAMPSHOW a week or two earlier in August.

De Vries: Checked into scheduling conflicts with AMERICOVER, the American First Day Cover Society's annual show. Their feeling was that as long as there were two weeks between the shows in order to give dealers an opportunity to drive between venues, a change of dates for STAMPSHOW would not be a problem. AMERICOVER's dates are only set through 1999, whereas STAMPSHOW's dates are firm through 2001.

Ken Martin: Our STAMPSHOWS have traditionally been scheduled for the last weekend before Labor Day. The latest it can possibly be is what it is for Santa Clara this year, August 27 - 30. The earliest it could be would be August 21 - 24. There are advantages and disadvantages to moving the show dates forward. If we hope to get youth to the shows it would be a disadvantage to move it forward. It would be an advantage to move it later because it is much easier to attract youth if school is in session. From the standpoint of the Champion of Champions competition, we might have to move the current July 1 deadline for qualifying exhibits forward. From the perspective of obtaining the convention space, it depends upon the city. In the majority of cases the weekend before Labor Day weekend is a dead weekend. It was probably selected in the first place because it offered cost advantages. Atlantic City would be better earlier from a cost standpoint than closer to Labor Day. Los Angeles, on the other hand, considers the weekend before Labor Day their slowest weekend and this gives us availability and cost advantages. There is nothing preventing us from moving the dates forward.

De Vries: Kids would be more likely to be tied up in camp if the show is moved forward. If the current dates are kept, families would be more likely to be able to take their kids on a trip then. Have we invited camps to bring kids to STAMPSHOW? If the show is held the first week of school, it would be impossible for kids to attend because the school system is not organized for field trips that early in the school year.

Apfelbaum: The issue revolves around one's feeling whether moving the dates will attract more youth to the show. This is obviously a goal for us, but none of us knows whether moving the show dates will have that desired effect. We could try it and see, but on the other hand our show dates are established. People know when it is and block it out on their calendar ahead of time if they hope to attend. This is one of those issues we should survey our members.

Neil: The efficacy of Adam's proposal is hidden in the fact the weekend before Labor Day is the deadest weekend in the year for conventions. We have to ask the question "why"? It goes beyond whether we can draw kids to our shows because they are tied up in back to school activities. Numerous times over the years collectors have told me that weekend before Labor Day is a double-edged sword for them. If they have plans for Labor Day, they don't want to go out of town the weekend before. Additionally, the weekend before Labor Day is a big weekend when parents take their kids off to college.

Triggle: Why do we have to wait till the next time we have a survey to ask the members what weekend they would prefer to have STAMPSHOW? Either Lamb or Hotchner could ask the members in their next columns when they would like to have STAMPSHOW.

Apfelbaum: These types of surveys tend not to give you the type of evidence you want. The people who respond are those who read Hotchner or Lamb's columns and like to write letters. They are not necessarily the people who attend STAMPSHOW.

Triggle: It comes down to a question of waiting two years for the next survey or questioning the members now in one of the columns.

Hotchner: It is the sense of the Board that we don't have enough information to come to a consensus. Recommended tabling the proposal to move STAMPSHOW's dates forward until some membership data is acquired.

The Board concurred with Hotchner

Apfelbaum: When we ask Hollander to do a survey it is like a full medical checkup. For much less cost Apfelbaum believed Hollander would do a survey that would ask a dozen questions rather than an hundred.

Youngblood: Before we get too far along in talking about moving STAMPSHOW forward, Ken Martin should check the costs. The date changes would put us into summer rates and our costs could be significantly higher than they are now. If we would look at moving the show backward to mid September, we would have a better chance of getting school groups in and still get favorable rates.

Martin: We have other difficulties if we move STAMPSHOW back. We run into other WSP shows and their established dates. From Labor Day weekend to Thanksgiving there is no weekend that is available to us. Traditionally we have used STAMPSHOW as the kickoff to the season.

De Vries: Since Martin is already looking to Atlantic City in 2002 and he said it was better a week earlier perhaps we should try STAMPSHOW earlier in 2002 in Atlantic City to see how it goes. In the meantime we could look into it further as a permanent move to see if we would get more kids and more families.

Life Membership Committee Report

Morison: The Life Membership Committee was asked to look at two questions. One of the questions was how should we communicate with and recognize our long term members who joined the APS after January 1, 1974 and who won't qualify for free lifetime membership after they have reached 30 years of membership and age 65. That program was abolished in 1973 by a bylaws change.

The second question was a mandate that we take a broader look at the current lifetime membership fee to see what is in the best interest of the Society and its members. We were asked to look at what sort of lifetime membership should be offered and if changes should be made today. We also looked at whether the lifetime membership fund adequately financed the Society's position in taking care of all the free lifetime memberships we have granted in the past.

The proposal our Committee had was to establish a new membership category and to do a great deal of communication to the members that the new category would be a replacement for free lifetime memberships. We propose to offer members a gold membership or a classic gold membership after they reach their 65th birthday and have been a member for 30 years. The life membership is not free at that point. They would still have to buy into life membership.

Presently, any member who joined before January 1, 1974 who has attained the age of 65 and has been a member for 30 years receives free lifetime membership. Members who have joined after January 1, 1974 and have attained the age of 65 and membership in the Society for 30 years may expect a free lifetime membership.

Frank Sente: To see the extent of the problem, we have to look back to the growth of the Society in the 1960s and 1970s. A lot of those who joined then are still members. In 1998 we are estimating adding 450 to 500 free lifetime members. But five years down the road there will be over 1,000 members who aren't going to get a free lifetime membership though some may expect it.

Morison: The question is how do we recognize those people who may be expecting free lifetime membership and aren't going to get it.

Sente: This problem will continue well into the next century. It will finally disappear in the middle of the next century.

Neil: How many total members who have not been activated as free lifetime members will be eligible for it?

Sente: Probably around 5,000 or roughly 10% of the membership. We will probably end up giving out about half that number.

Morison: The question is how do we want to recognize these people....or do we want to recognize them?

Apfelbaum: Are we feeling a pressure from these people who aren't going to get free lifetime membership?

Hotchner: No, they are not yet aware they won't be receiving free lifetime membership.

Sente: There are people who are expecting free lifetime membership. When they receive their 25-year certificate they think in five years time they will receive a free lifetime membership. We need to be telling them now that won't happen. There are some advantages to signing people into life memberships, but not free life memberships. We should try to increase our paid life memberships. We increase our total membership by maintaining life members who might otherwise drop out because of age or infirmity. We also have the benefit of increasing gifts and donations from life members. People who can afford to buy life membership are also more inclined to donate to the Society.

Lamb: We need to recognize these members in some way.

De Vries: We already recognize members when they have achieved 25 years of membership. We could combine the 25 and 30 year members into gold membership and give them a certificate and gold membership card.

Apfelbaum: That would be an excellent marketing tool and would do something for our older members. If we reduced the dues by $1 for every year a member pays from age 65 on, it would be a great incentive for our members to live to be 90 when their dues would be free.

Hotchner: Morison and Lamb have agreed we should kick this back to the staff for the best way to recognize those people who will not be receiving free lifetime membership. Staff will come back to us at Santa Clara with a specific plan on how to recognize our members.

Youngblood: Whatever is decided should not be tied to age, but rather to length of years as a member.

Hotchner would like to see a special "gold" name tag available for gold members who have been members for 25 or more years.

Apfelbaum: There is nothing anyone can do to get something like that if they haven't joined when they were young. That is a problem in marketing our services to older people who weren't members before. An older new member seeing someone with a 25 year name tag would be discouraged because they could never achieve that.

Morison: In essence the Committee found that our free lifetime memberships were not a financial disaster and were adequately funded through investments on behalf of the life membership fund, although we still need further discussion with the Finance Committee. Another question we looked at was should younger life members pay more for their life membership than older members. The fees are the same for all age groups at present. Should we have a staggered sliding scale for lifetime membership fees based on age of the individual when they apply for life membership? We need to look at that and run the numbers before the next meeting at Santa Clara before further recommendations can be made. The actual membership data we have today indicates we could probably not make any changes and still be safe. Once we look at the data we will have to send our recommendations to the Finance Committee because this is really a finance decision.

Apfelbaum: We have allocated some of our endowment to fund Life Membership. There is no Life Membership Fund per se, it is simply an accounting. What we have done over the course of time is that, when people are brought into life membership, an amount of our endowment is earmarked for their perpetual care. If a member resigns, we actually make money on that basis because we can take money out of one fund and put it into another. In reality we have just moved the money from one pocket to another. If we can use this as a measure to attract and reward older dues-paying members, that is where we want to go.

Morison: Was concerned that money we were able to make use of is a liability account and we only get 1/20th of those dues in. Several years ago we took less than that. Instead of getting 1/20th of the life membership dues moved over to our current funds, we only took half of that. That says our life members are not using all the services of the Society if we aren't making them pay a full year's dues from the life membership fund. The interest that is being earned on that money is satisfactory. We don't have to worry about paying for all the free lifetime memberships because we have enough money to do that. The question is in the future how do we want to structure our lifetime membership program. From a payment standpoint, if we do what we have been doing in the past we are only going to use half the dues. If that is the case do we need to charge $400 or is $200 enough? That is a policy issue that needs to be decided.

Triggle inquired if those who bought life memberships were paying for the free life members.

Sente: We have always sold life memberships. Right now a person joining the Society can buy a life membership for 20 times the annual dues. That money does get placed into a life membership fund. Right now we are drawing 1/20th of that fund out to support current life members. There was a time back in the 1970s when they did away with the free life memberships knowing that we had this huge potential liability coming. That time is here now. In addition to doing away with the free life memberships there was a time in the 1970s and in the 1980s when the Society did not draw out any money from the life membership fund knowing that we were going to have this liability today and that the Society was operating okay on its growth in the 1970s and 1980s. About the mid-1980s when our growth slowed we started taking money out of the life membership fund, originally at less than the current 1/20th we presently draw down. Now we are taking our fair share because we need it to fund the dues for our lifetime members.

Morison: From a bookkeeping standpoint Morison believed whatever interest the life membership fund is earning should be credited to that fund so at least we know where we are.

Walker: Will the Life Membership Committee look at the advantages and disadvantages of having life members? Are they cheaper to administer? Are there unnamed benefits to having life members because they are prone to donate money?

Apfelbaum: It is generally considered disadvantageous to take lifetime memberships. That is why the APS does not market them effectively because the Society already retains a high percentage of its members. It is a disadvantage to the APS unless we price it absolutely correctly.

Hotchner: Numerous people like to buy life memberships because they don't have to concern themselves about sending in dues year after year. With a one time payment, they are done. At this point Hotchner sent the proposal back to the Life Membership Committee for further work and asked for a report again at the Santa Clara Board meeting.

Lamb: It doesn't have to be disadvantageous to have life memberships. Life memberships encourage and reward loyalty to the Society. We should look at the actuarial tables and see how much life memberships cost us. Lamb would not want to see life memberships abolished.

[At this juncture the Board took a 10 minute break and resumed at 9:05 p.m.]

Committee Home Pages:

Lamb: Lamb reported that it was no longer necessary to have the first part of this item on the agenda, since the Committee chairman concerned has agreed to accept the established procedures. Lamb distributed a statement which he worked out with Hotchner laying out the procedure which members follow to put up pages on the APS website. Any member who wants to place material on the APS website should submit it to Lois de Violini or Joe Picard. If the material is considered appropriate to the website, the requested additions or changes are made. If there is any question about the appropriateness of the material, it is checked with Frank Sente. All material submitted to Sente is reviewed for appropriateness. The material may also be referred to the responsible department head who will review the subject matter. Other department heads and outside experts may be brought into review. Difficult cases come to Lamb for resolution.

Lamb suggested the Board review the paper and let him know if there were any problems. It was the sense of the Board to affirm the Committee Home Page policy as outlined by Lamb.

Future of the APS Website:

Lamb: We are very pleased with the website we have today. Lois Evans de Violini and Joe Picard have done super work in establishing and maintaining it. We have 85,000 hits on the website as of this morning. It's popular. It's attractive, and, it is growing. Like everything in the electronic world, we are going to have to look to the future. From our point of view we are delighted that everything is being done at no cost to the Society. This includes thousands of volunteer hours to maintain the site. We can't assume we will have this forever. If it were necessary to bring it in house, we do not have the resources to replace what the volunteers are doing. If we took it over today we would need about one half of an employee year that is currently not on payroll.

Lois Evans de Violini: When websites became of interest, Ed Jackson insisted the APS get in on this with its own website. We looked into it locally in California and found we had a very good Internet provider who would allow us 10 megabytes of hard disk space with our regular accounts. That is a lot for web pages. The whole APS website uses about 5 megs on our site, but we have more on Ed Jackson's site. The material on his site takes up more space. The website started to grow. We found we added one page after another as people requested material be put up on the site. That is how it has grown. We have no objections to keeping it, but it is taking a lot of our time. It is going to continue to take a lot of time. It isn't costing us or the APS any money. We just did a major overhaul of the website and put up some new lead-in pages. It is taking a lot of time. Every page we put up we run past the people in State College, although most of the material we receive comes from there initially.

Hotchner: We should be planning several years into the future. Hotchner appointed a committee to see where the APS Website is headed. Committee consists of Randy Neil (Chair), Lois Evans de Violini, and Janet Klug. The mandate of the committee is to do long range planning for the website (3 or more years ahead). The committee should look at what we should be doing, how much it will cost, what we see as the technology that will be available at the time and how we should be using it. Define what the APS should be gaining from its website.

Triggle: Suggested as part of the mandate to look into possibility of adding additional part time staff to maintain the website.

Neil: We should look at the part time staff or its equivalent cost. Many corporations have their websites in-house but sub out the maintenance.

Hotchner: Lamb should name a staff resource to the committee to whom the committee could go to for help. [Lamb subsequently appointed Frank Sente.]

Flood: Any approval for editorial changes to the website should rest with Lamb or Hotchner.

Internet Ethics Statement:

De Vries suggested the APS Code of Ethics could be applied to someone who is misbehaving on an on-line area such as some of the newsgroups. Granted, if the person isn't an APS member we have no leverage whatsoever. In those cases where they are APS members, is it a valid complaint for someone to say they don't like the manner in which someone is conducting themselves? APS members should have a right to complain about those who are abusive on the Internet.

Hotchner: Believed the Code of Ethics provision on conduct unbecoming a member does apply to these situations.

De Vries: Some of the Internet participants are behaving like filthy-mouthed bad children. [De Vries named several specific behavior problems.] It is destroying the newsgroups, but it doesn't just happen there. There are people misbehaving in many of the on-line areas. On moderated areas there are safeguards because the moderator can clean this up. On the Usenet, it is impossible to block out offensive material. There is no moderation. People are looking for a place to complain and expect or would appreciate the APS taking the forefront in this issue.

Klug: There is no way in the world we can control the people on the Internet and trying to would be a mistake. However if we state the APS Code of Ethics for members applies to Internet users maybe it will sink in to some of these people and they will behave themselves.

Apfelbaum wondered what would happen if somebody pressed charges.

Triggle asked if these abusive people state they are APS members? Klug replied that some certainly do.

Flood: In the Society’s Code of Ethics it says, "Any member found guilty by the Board of Vice Presidents of failure to pay an indebtedness to the Society, any fraudulent or unethical conduct as a stamp collector or dealer, and/or any conduct which has been declared by resolution of the Society or the Board of Directors to be conduct unbecoming a member, may be reprimanded, placed on probation, suspended for a definite period of time, or expelled." The other part of the Code of Ethics that may be stronger and apply to the Internet situation is, "As a member I agree to conduct myself so as to bring no reproach or discredit to the APS or to impair the prestige therein or to philately." Flood thought the collection of evidence to present a case against a member would be difficult. Several members of the Board pointed out simultaneously that it would not be difficult using on-line archival services such as Deja News.

Apfelbaum: The question we are dealing with is do we want to get involved with this. Apfelbaum believed we do want to be involved. There is no excuse for people to be disrespectful of one another on-line or off line.

Flood: If a case comes in that can be proved, we might want to look towards simply revoking their membership instead of trying to take any other sanction. The other options would be difficult to enforce, and Flood sees a lot of additional work for the Board of Vice Presidents.

Lamb: There are clear cases where offensive language has been used on the Internet. These can be documented. Some of the accusations regarding spamming are judgmental. Our Complaints Department is swamped. For us to arbitrate spamming and other entirely new concepts would be difficult. When we get complaints against an auction house, for example, there are rules that we can determine if someone violated. In rec.collecting.stamps there are no rules. We therefore have to judge a violation as to what is conduct unbecoming a member. That is awfully vague. Just the use of profanity would be a tough case to uphold as a reprimandable offense.

Youngblood: We are not just talking about profane language or spamming. We are talking about very abusive relationships which are unbecoming in any setting. That type of behavior very much warrants our attention.

Walker: The first thing we will have to deal with as the Board of Vice Presidents is the same sort of thing we currently deal with on paper occurring on-line. That is one person complaining about another, troubles with on-line auctions. That is the kind of thing we will probably deal with first and most easily before we branch into whether it is offensive doing some strange esoteric Internet thing.

Hotchner: Asked de Vries to draft a Society policy on Internet Ethics that can be announced as an introduction as to how we expect our members to behave on the Internet.

Morison: Was concerned about writing a new Code of Ethics and suggested we apply the existing Code of Ethics.

De Vries later submitted the following Internet Ethics Statement that was approved unanimously by the Board.

The American Philatelic Society expects its members participating in philatelic activities on the Internet and on on-line services (computer networks) to behave in accordance with its member Code of Ethics.

The Code, which can be found on the Internet's World Wide Web at http://www.west.net/~stamps1/apsmisc/ethics.html, reminds stamp collectors that 'Membership in the American Philatelic Society is a privilege extended to those persons and organizations deemed worthy thereof and is not a matter of right. Membership may be maintained unless the Board of Directors determines that the conduct of a member has been such that, in the best interest of the Society, membership should be suspended or terminated.'

The Code calls for ethical conduct in all transactions, including those that may be initiated on these services, such as sales and auctions.

In accepting membership, members of the Society further pledge that 'I agree to conduct myself in accordance with accepted standards of morality and courtesy in philatelic activities not specifically cited in the code.' (Paragraph 12).

Violations of these standards of behavior by members may be reported with substantiating evidence to the American Philatelic Society via electronic mail (complaints@stamps.org) or by regular mail (Internet Complaints, American Philatelic Society, P.O. Box 8000, State College, PA 16803-8000).

Complainants should include their real names and electronic or physical addresses so that the matter may be followed up. APS membership by the complainant is not required."

New Member Packet

Lamb: We reached an arrangement with Linn's last year to include information about Linn's in our new member's packet. In exchange, Linn's is including information about the APS in their letters to new subscribers. This has been beneficial to both organizations. The agreement is that we would include 5,000 cards in our new member's packets and they would include 5,000 cards in their new subscriber’s letters. It started in December. In less than a month we have gotten about a dozen new members. Youngblood has raised the question as to whether it is appropriate to have this in the new member's packet. We think it is beneficial and would like to ask permission of the Board to continue this arrangement. We are prepared to make a comparable offer to Stamp Collector or another weekly. We would consider other offers on the basis of their appropriateness.

Youngblood has two problems with this arrangement, one as a publisher, one as a Board member. As a publisher it places Youngblood at an unfair disadvantage, particularly when he rents all the new APS members names anyway. If they are already being exposed to a competitor in their new member's packet it places him at a serious disadvantage. To open a new member packet and have a full-color brochure for Youngblood's competitor is unfair. With this type of situation occurring without his knowing the availability of it, what is the point of Stamp Collector continuing to rent names of new APS members when they come out? From a Board member's perspective, Youngblood has trouble with the idea of combining commercial promotions of any kind with Society business. It gives the impression that it is Society business or is endorsed by the Society. It could be done in a membership renewal, but in a new member's packet the person is already deluged with the sales division, library, and other Society benefits and then sees an flyer for Linn's or Stamp Collector and it looks like it is another member service.

Apfelbaum asked if the offer was made to Stamp Collector, would that overcome Youngblood's objections from a publisher's standpoint?

Youngblood: From a publisher's point of view, it would. If Stamp Collector's card goes out in the same packets, then Youngblood has no problem with it. From a Board member's point of view, Youngblood still objects on the basis that a commercial product is being offered with APS services.

Flood: There should be a note in the new member's packet that this is not an APS service, but that other members enjoy the product and they may wish to consider it as well.

Youngblood: If the Society is going to promote a commercial product in its new member packet, it behooves the Society to mark it as such.

Hotchner asked if the cover letter stated that the new member's packet was also enclosing commercial offers that may interest the member, would that satisfy Youngblood's objections as a Board member? Youngblood said that it would.

De Vries: The American First Day Cover Society recently began sending its new members a coupon booklet which included paid advertisements and discount coupons and makes money off of it. It looks commercial and it is commercial, and was announced to everybody who advertises in the journal. Would the APS want to look at something like that rather than selecting a few offers randomly.

Hotchner: If this is then open to 85 entities the welcoming packet gets lost in the advertising. We do have to discriminate some way. The weekly philatelic press is a good, manageable entity and we should probably limit it to them.

Adams: In the cover letter going out in the new member’s packet, besides saying there is some commercial matter enclosed, we should say the new member may find these offers helpful but the Society does not specifically endorse their products.

Morison inquired if we were advertising a competitor of our own American Philatelist.

Hotchner: This is why we should limit the offer to only the weekly philatelic press. Once we open this up to the monthlies, then we are directly advertising a competitor.

Morison: The weeklies are also competing for the same advertising dollars we want in the AP. One of the major services we are offering the new members is the American Philatelist. Should we be encouraging them to go to another publication.

Lamb: Sente has been very creative in looking for places to advertise and promote our membership. Linn's. is an important market for us to hit and we would like to continue. This is the kind of creative activity we have to do if we want to continue to grow our membership.

Apfelbaum: As a practical matter, the little cards that are sent out to Linn's and stamp dealers to put into their mailings is the major source for us to get new members. We need to be inventive in the number of ways we can get those cards out to people. It is difficult to get outside the nucleus of people like us who are deeply involved with the hobby. But at the same time we have to be very fair. It has to be a level playing field.

Hotchner: It is the sense of the Board the matter be given back to Lamb with the admonition that the cover letter in the new member packet be changed to indicate we are enclosing commercial offerings not specifically endorsed by the Society. Lamb should also enter into negotiations with other weeklies if they wish to participate.

Triggle: We should also say we don't want the promotional packet for our Society to be lost.

Flood: It should be made clear that we reserve the right to limit the people we may ask to participate in this program. This should be done in a diplomatic way so it doesn't look as though we are discriminating.

Motion: That the Board meeting adjourn and reconvene at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, February 12. Moved by Apfelbaum. Seconded de Vries. Passed unanimously.