ACM SIGGRAPH Executive Committee Meeting
Saturday, January 28-29, 2011
Marriott San Mateo
Attendance: Tony Baylis, Rob Cook, Paul Debevec, Thierry Frey, Jeff Jortner, Dinesh Manocha, Jacki Morie, James O’Brien, Scott Owen, Turner Whitted, Joe Marks, Jackie White, Ginger Ignatoff, Erin Butler, Bob Niehaus, Gregg Talley
Stephen Spencer, Brian Wyvill and Daniel Schmidt participated by phone.
Jeff Jortner called the meeting to order at 9:00 am PAC.
Stephen Spencer and Brian Wyvill joined in this discussion via phone. There is an issue with the Symposium on Computer Animation (SCA). This is a long-standing co-sponsored conference between ACM SIGGRAPH and Eurographics. The conference alternates location; when in the US we hold copyright; when in Europe, Eurographics holds the copyright. The Proceedings are always in both DLs. – ACM policy—any amount of sponsorship, it must go in DL.
This year, the SCA Steering Committee is proposing that the Proceedings be published in a special issue of Computer Graphics Forum. If published in this journal, the publisher Elsevier Wiley will not allow the Proceedings to go in the DL. There are other small conferences that would like to have their Proceedings published in a journal. This is important for tenure in Europe.
The SCA Steering Committee did not receive complete information when making this decision. They were not told the Proceedings would not go in DL. ACM policies are firm on this issue; if the conference is sponsored by ACM SIGGRAPH, the Proceedings must go in the DL.
The EC recommended that Stephen and Brian go back and negotiate with Elsevier Wiley about putting proceedings in DL. As a sponsor of SCA, the proceedings must go in our DL and this is a clear departure from our agreement with Eurographics.
ACTION ITEM: Stephen Spencer and Brian Wyvill continue negotiations with SCA and publisher about allowing the Proceedings in the DL.
SVR—SIGGRAPH Video Review
SVR has been losing money for years. Going forward, what should we do? We can’t afford to keep producing DVDs, streaming and continuing the Encore presentations.
The EC agreed that we should not budget for DVDs in 2013. Stephen and Dana should proceed with a streaming model.
The question remains about what to do with SOMA. Stephen will talk with Dana about her interest in taking this on.
The Finance Committee met on Friday and reviewed the first draft of the budget. The draft includes plans/budget numbers from all the committee chairs. The plan is to work toward $5 million in our fund balance. This would allow us to cover a bad conference year/economic recession. With the $800,000 revenue generated by SIGGRAPH 2011, SIGGRAPH has achieved its required fund balance.
Action Item: Develop a plan for reserve fund. Include process for requesting reserve funds.
The conference changed locations to all west coast cities to help rebuild the fund balance. The conference and the organization also made budget cuts which helped achieve the required fund balance. It’s time to add a little back to the conference content and to the organization to achieve some strategic initiatives.
The budget is due to ACM in March; a final draft budget will be sent to the EC for approval in late February.
ACM wants a plan to replace the allocation that used to come from SA. This could be a flat fee or a percentage of revenue (5.35% was discussed with Darren and Alain). When we moved SA under Koelnmesse, The EC would like projections of a successful SA, a stable SA or a failing SA.
Action Item: Projections for different SA models.
Jim Kilmer is managing SIS. Going forward, the SIS contract will move from the conference to the organization to help identify priorities. SIGGRAPH has been paying for SIS; SA has not been paying their share. In addition, the organization now has requests for SIS (Student Volunteer applications). The plan is to have the conferences both pay a maintenance fee and the organization cover the rest.
Reserve Fund Requests
ACM SIGGRAPH has had a moratorium on reserve fund requests, but now that we are at our required fund balance, we could start funding requests. A committee was formed to review these requests, but no process was ever put in place. This will become part of the larger fund balance proposal discussed earlier.
The electronic motions were reviewed and approved, adding Rob Cook’s approval to the Vancouver plan.
SIGGRAPH 2012 Budget
Bob Niehaus presented the final budget for 2012 and the preliminary budget for 2013.
Both are conservative, based on 3900 full conference attendees.
2012—In LA, we receive a busing rebate that we don’t get anywhere else, and we receive $100,000 as part of our 5 year deal with LA. The hotel commission is lower in LA since hotel rates are lower.
2013—Increased budget for some content additions—Geek Bar, additional funds for reception, ETech and Art.
Motion to approve SIGGRAPH 2012 final budget
Frey (motion), O’Brien (second), Baylis, Cook, Debevec, Jortner, Manocha, Morie, Whitted
Motion to approve SIGGRAPH 2013 preliminary budget
Frey (motion), Manocha (second), Baylis, Cook, Debevec, Jortner, Morie, O'Brien, Whitted
Automatic Membership for Conference Attendees
Motion to approve automatic membership for full conference non-member attendees for an added $50 for a one year-term commencing on date of registration
Morie (motion), Frey (second), Baylis, Cook, Debevec, Jortner, Manocha, O'Brien,Whitted
This formalizes an expense policy for ACM SIGGRAPH. It’s based on ACM and the conference expense reimbursement policy. The policy will amend our policy to remove boarding pass requirement.
Motion to approve expense policy as amended
Baylis (motion), Morie (second), Cook, Debevec, Frey, Jortner, Manocha, O'Brien, Whitted
DAC needs to work in collaboration with the CSE of SIGGRAPH and SA on submission dates. She will revise the proposal and submit to the EC for approval.
Action Item: Jacki will submit revised proposal.
Computer Graphics Quarterly
The Quarterly has not been published on a consistent basis for several years and the Communications Chair has not been able to reach the Editor. The plan is to replace this
publication with the monthly eblast—Interactions.
Motion to replace Computer Graphics Quarterly with monthly eblast Interactions.
Cook (motion), Baylis (second), Debevec, Frey, Jortner, Manocha, Morie, O'Brien, Whitted
Attendance at Affiliate Conferences
The EC discussed increasing participation at some of the affiliate conferences. Jeff will attend Laval Virtual this year to present ET award. The EC agreed that the President should always go to Eurographics to keep the relationship going. This year it might make sense to send Stephen Spencer because of all the issues with SCA publications.
FMX has given Paul time to speak explaining about SIGGRAPH and the papers process and
a SIGGRAPH Papers Session will be featured at FMX 2012.
40th Anniversary Celebration
The EC needs to begin planning for the celebration of the 40th anniversary. There should be some joint discussion between Mary Whitton, Chair of the History Committee, the EC and the conference as to plans for the celebration. Jacki Morie expressed interest in working on the anniversary celebration.
Action Item: Jeff Jortner will contact Mary Whitton
SIGGRAPH Asia (Daniel Schmidt joined via phone)
Koelnmesse thanked the EC for allowing them to take responsibility for SA. The 2011 conference was successful financially and for its content. The conference made a profit of $225,000-275,000 without Koelnmesse’s expenses. ACM SIGGRAPH will receive approximately $80,000. The conference was close to budget—it exceeded sponsorship budget but fell a little short on registration. Registration total was 7,734 with 1,460 full conference and 3,500 basic.
Few changes are planned for 2012. All programs will continue, including the Symposium on Apps. A game papers program is being added and sketches is being replaced with technical briefs. SA is working with the PAG to get this program off on the right track.
The Chair for 2012 is impressive, organized and energized. The Steering Committee, which is comprised of representatives from different countries and different career backgrounds, seems to be working well.
SA has a proposal from Seoul and interest from Hong Kong now that 2011 was successful. Seoul is offering free convention center and hosting reception. They are also looking at Japan, but the costs are high in Japan and there are not enough subsidies. March is the deadline for finalizing a decision.
Preliminary meetings were held with China in Vancouver with China. The challenges in China is getting to the right people and getting the right decision process. If we want to be in China, we need to help put the proposal together; we can’t wait until they come to us with a proposal.
Sunday, January 29
A group has been formed to write the RFP (Jaime, Teresa, Erin, Jenny, Rob, Ginger). There is money included in the 2013 budget, but not much in the 2012 budget. We might need to approve spending additional funds for 2012. The expectation is that there will be ongoing maintenance costs and likely a paid position for content management.
The Education Committee has some contact with Unity. We are providing space at the conference; they will hold their own sessions. Marc is also talking to others groups about co-locating at SIGGRAPH. Marc is working with Lou and ACM to learn about webinars. Should these be free or should we charge. Likely to start with free webinars. Would Unity be interested in exhibiting or participating in Job Fair? Should touch base with Mike Weil.
Marc is looking at certificate exams from Japan. Thinking about giving these to students. Follow up with Masa on certificate/certification in Japan.
The overall vision is the same, but it needs to be simpler.
• Chapter members and SIG members more connected. Share content both ways.
• Support chapter activities with budget resources.
• We are building trust with the chapters. We’ve included money in the budget for new projects.
• Administrative piece—ACM will cover processing dues for chapters. We need to start immediately helping chapter leaders with the administrative tasks. Thierry discussed a tool that would consolidate the membership application for ACM, the SIGs and chapters and automate the dues collection. This would free chapter leaders from database work so they can concentrate on events.
Need to work with chapters to get actual membership numbers.
SAMPLE MODEL OF DISTRIBUTING DUES TO CHAPTERS
No. Chapters 60
Aver. Dues 20
Total Allocation 24,000
Chapter Member 400 20
SIG member 100 5
Dues 40 10
Return to Chapter 4800 60
Total chapter 16000 200
24000 would go directly to chapters for their use; the other 24,000 would go to projects that benefits chapters, such as the traveling CAF. The EC agreed that rich chapters should not get richer; support should be equal and really help the small chapters.
Move forward on administrative proposal from Thierry about joining
Get chapter data from Scott/Ginger.
Support for SA
Although we now have a contract with Koelnmesse that protects ACM SIGGRAPH from financially, the EC had never formally determined the level of support to provide SA. There are still expenses for the organization that are not covered by the Koelnmesse greement—volunteer travel to SA, SACAG meetings, etc. Strategically, do we treat the two conferences equally, when we have two different manners of operation?
The EC agreed that only those volunteers who have clear-cut objectives should be given travel to SA. They agreed that the organization should cover some expenses such as SIS enhancements.