ATTENDANCE:

Members of the Executive Board:

Societies represented:

AGENDA of the MEETING:

1. Agenda of the business meeting
2. Representation and voting
3. Minutes of the CESM business meeting held during EUREM96 in Dublin
4. Financial situation of CESM
5. Proceedings of the Dublin meeting
6. Progress report of the Brno meeting in the year 2000
7. Proposal for the CESM constitution
8. Election of new members of the CESM Executive Board
9. Proposal for new member societies: Yugoslavia
10. Any further matter to be discussed
11. Closing of the meeting

The business meeting is chaired by W. Baumeister.

1. The agenda is changed, point 9 will precede point 7 and another candidate society (Latvia) is added.
   
   Top

2. The presence of representatives of societies is recorded, the number of votes per society is approved as being two votes, with the exception of one vote for Croatia, Hungary and Slovenia. In all, 17 societies are represented.
   
   

3. The minutes of the CESM business meeting held during EUREM96 in Dublin, August 29, 1996 are approved without discussion.
   
   

4. The financial situation is described by the secretary. At the Dublin business meeting, a total of BF 107,000 (~DM 5,000) was available to CESM. The money is deposited on a savings account at the ASLK in Brussels. Although it was agreed in 1988 that EUREM meetings would contribute 5 Ecu (Euro) per registered participant to CESM, no money was received from the Dublin meeting. Costs for the secretariat during the two years period following the Dublin meeting were BF 54,000, about equally divided between costs for mailing and two contributions to the travel expenses of the secretary. This leaves a total of BF 53,000 available to CESM. This amount of money is too low to allow any budget-based planning for the coming period. In other words, CESM is financially unable to operate in a professional way. The financial report does not include the budget for the printing of the Dublin proceedings, a task undertaken by P. Hawkes and E. Wisse after the failure of the Dublin organizers to produce a printed version of the proceedings. This budget amounts to a total of BF 750,000,-. Financial transactions regarding the proceedings were kept separate from the CESM finances, although the CESM bank account was used to transfer money from companies and subscribers. As auditors, H. Gross and J. Guenter report that they have looked into the details of the financial report, studied the financial documents and found all material in agreement with the financial report.
   
   Top

5. The CD-Rom distributed at the last day of the Dublin meeting was found to be defective in many ways. As a result, the organizers promised to produce an improved version. Another option available was to order a printed version of the proceedings, for which many participants filled in a form. Forty seven participants pre-paid the fee. In the summer of 1997 it became clear that neither the improved CD-Rom nor the printed version of the proceedings would be made available by the organizers of the Dublin meeting. A rescue operation, conducted by P. Hawkes and E. Wisse, was launched and the manuscripts and the pre-paid fees were recovered. Tasks were distributed as follows: P. Hawkes coordinated the contact with the printing firm, sponsors and individual ordering, E. Wisse et al. took care of putting the manuscripts in order, making the index, and received credit card payments, whereas the firm ERI (F) converted the manuscript into a printed version and took care of dispatching the three volumes of 2000 pages. The Secretariat of the French Microscopy Society handled payments by cheque and bank transfers. Thanks to generous sponsoring by Gatan, Hitachi, Leo, Philips and the Spanish (SEME) and Dutch Societies for Microscopy (NVM), about 30% of the costs could be covered, and 345 copies of the proceedings were distributed in the spring of 1998.
   
   Top

6. The progress report of the Brno meeting was presented by L. Frank. Dates for the meeting were set by the local organizing committee to be: July 9-14th in the year 2000. MSA will schedule its meeting at the end of July 2000. The congress will take place in the Trade Fair Grounds in Brno, Czech Republic. The first circular was available to the participants of the IFSEM meeting in Cancun. This circular contains the names of the International Scientific Advisory Board, the Organizing Committee, the Program Committee for sections such as Biology, Materials Science, Instrumentation, Exhibition and Proceedings. L. Frank describes the facilities available for the oral and poster sessions of the scientific program, the exhibition and accommodation of the participants. From his report it becomes clear that a considerable increase in the registration fee is anticipated, that contracts with hotels have not yet been negotiated and that the International Scientific Advisory Board has not yet discussed or proposed an outline of the scientific program. Several participants point to the contract which has been signed between the local organizers, CESM and IFSEM at a meeting in Brno April 10, 1997. This contract stipulates, among other points, that two years before the congress a list of keynote speakers, chairpersons and an updated, detailed budget, including realistic estimates for fees (registration, exhibition) should be forwarded for approval by CESM/IFSEM. Instead, L. Frank announces an increase in the registration fee from US $ 280 at the bid stage (1996) to $ 373 (2000), but hopes to be able to restrict the fee to $ 320. The number of participants expected is 1300. L. Frank explains the increase by an inflation of 10%. Several participants dispute an inflation rate of that magnitude. Another question concerns the presence of a sufficient number of adequate lecture halls. L. Frank informs the audience that acoustic tests will be performed very soon in order to find out whether lecture rooms can be created within the premises of the Trade Fair. The situation regarding the publication of proceedings is not yet decided, i.e. the production of a printed or a CD-Rom version is still open. After a lengthy discussion, the chairman proposes and the assembly agrees that the deadline of December 1st 1998 should be presented to the organizers of the Brno meeting to put the different items mentioned above in order, including a detailed budget and the outline of a scientific program. Information about the congress and pre-registration can be obtained at the web site.
   
   Top

7. Admission of new member societies. The representatives of Yugoslavia and Latvia briefly describe the activities of their societies and a few questions are asked. With unanimous voting, the two new members are welcome to become a member of CESM.
   
   Top

8. The new constitution of CESM and the proposal to transform CESM into a European Microscopy Society is another substantial point on the agenda. The proposal for a new constitution has been distributed twice among the membership and reactions have been collected. The chairman describes the historical development of the proposal and the secretary summarizes the written responses of 9 out of 23 member societies. There is general support for the proposal to change CESM into EMS, nevertheless several points are raised by country societies in their written reactions. Most of the objections are formulated by one society, seldom by two or more. The chairman asks A Verkleij, also on behalf of W. Hax, to describe an additional plan for the development of EMS into a society with personal and corporate membership only, organizing regular European meetings with the help of professional organizers and making use of professional facilities. In this type of organization, scientists could concentrate on their scientific communication and the repeated invention of the organizational wheel for routinely organized meetings could be avoided. Organizing meetings this way would provide regular scientific communication and avoid failure as a result of unprofessionally organized activities. Our industrial partners are demanding continuity, consistency and professionalism in the organization of microscopy meetings, instead of all kinds of surprises such as the ever increasing fees for exhibition space and unprofessional solutions to technical and administrative problems. The chairman expresses his sympathy for this proposal which was, unfortunately, not distributed to the societies. He encourages A. Verkley to prepare a document that can be incorporated in the plans to be discussed at the Brno meeting. After these introductions, a long discussion follows. Several attendees point to the existence of meetings already organized by three or more societies. Should they be discouraged ? EMS should never replace activities of national societies, because young members are being trained there, e.g. in their own language, before they step to the international platform. Different culture and diversity should not be suppressed in Europe by EMS. Because time is running out, the chairman asks the attendance to try to come to a conclusion and gives the opportunity for a last round of arguments before going to a vote on the CESM/EMS proposal. When a vote is taken, 20 votes are in favor of the EMS constitution as formulated by the CESM Board, 3 votes are against. EMS, therefore, is a fact.
   
   Top

9. Election of officers of EMS. The chairman explains that his acceptance of acting as chairman during the transitional period has come to an end in Cancun. Other members of the Executive Board stepping down from office are: D.C. Cottell, P.J. Goodhew and N. Pipan. The chairman proposes P. Hawkes and J. Carascosa as candidates for the Executive Board of EMS, P. Hawkes as president and J. Carascosa as vice-president. They are both elected with 22 votes and 21 votes in favor, respectively. In summary, the new Executive Board of EMS is composed as follows: P. Hawkes (president), J. Carascosa (vice president), E. Wisse (secretary), H. Gross (treasurer), W. Baumeister (past president), members: A. Armigliato, W. Geymayer, J.R. Guenter, I. Herrera Calvet, K. Kovacs, W.M.A. Hax.
   
   Top

10. There are no further questions or remarks and therefore,

11. The chairman closes the meeting.

E. Wisse, Keerbergen, Belgium, November 22, 1998.