Minutes of the SGB Meeting March 19-20, 2005 Hilton O'Hare Chicago

The meeting began at 6:30 pm with introductions and a roll call conducted by SGB Chair Walker.

1.0 State of the ACM (White)

John White discussed the general state of ACM. Overall membership is on the rise for the third year. Professional Membership is at about 60K while Students are at 20K. Similarly, the SIGs are projecting to net $500K in conference revenue in FY'05. The Digital Library return is continuing to increase with an expectation of $1.23 million in FY'05 and possibly $1.5 million in FY'06.

Educational Activities include the launch of the Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) on January 1, 2005. The membership stands currently at 2,000 with 1/3 of its members residing outside of the US. The recent hearing concerning the NCAA eligibility for college athletes has caused a great deal of concern in the computer science industry. As of August 1, 2005, computer science will no longer be considered a requirement within the core courses for college athletes seeking NCAA eligibility. With support from various universities and technical institutions, ACM and CSTA have made it a priority to provide support to the CS industry by requesting an immediate reversal in the decision. Additionally, CSTA is willing to work with the NCAA and provide suggested guidelines (i.e. ACM K-12 guidelines) to maintain the core curriculum that includes computer science education.

ACM is continuing its multi-year brand awareness initiative. ACM and its members have and will continue to advance computing as a science as well as a profession. We need to enhance our skills, broaden our community and promote our perspectives. Additional focus is being placed on public relations in areas such as: SIGs, Awards, CSTA, and Policy activities in Washington DC. ACM recently appeared as a question/answer in the televised game show, Jeopardy attesting to the importance of the public awareness of ACM as a whole.

A Council offsite has been scheduled to review and set strategic direction for ACM. A task force was established to conduct pre-work on how ACM can better serve professionals (practitioners/managers) and the profession. The recommendation from the Task Force was to launch a major initiative to services relevant to practitioners and position ACM as really serving both the science and the profession. The initiatives suggested included: support for professional career development; major enhancement of professional development resources; introduction of an ACM certification program that is valued specification of individual capability; introduction of graded membership categories; increase professional recognition for practitioners and managers; increase local activities and integrate them better into ACM and actively promote and be an advocate for the IT profession.

2.0 DL Return Recommendation (Berenbaum, Chesnais)

Alan Berenbaum and Alain Chesnais presented information and suggestions on the increasing ACM Digital Library revenue. Currently the SIGs are awarded the revenue based on the total number of hits registered for their conference proceedings and/or material on the DL. Based on the amount of material included in the DL as well as the popularity of the work, some SIGs are seeing a greater return than others. The minimum allocation requirement for each SIG is $10K and increases based on the SIGs total expenses. It was suggested that the minimum DL revenue distribution also be a minimum of $10K. The current projected returns include: FY'05 - $900K, FY'06 - $1,200K, and FY'07 - $1,400K. These numbers reflect when the individual SIGs actually receive the revenue.

The proposed redistribution formula will be especially helpful to new SIGS such asSIGITE and SIGBED. Chesnais indicated that the key to higher revenue distribution lies within the promotion of the DL and that each SIG should be prompting its conferences to include the proceedings on the DL. This guideline/formula for distribution will be reviewed in conjunction with the discussions of the allocation delta during future meetings.

The SGB discussed the proposal and reviewed the documentation which indicated the amounts by which each SIG would be affected. It was noted that SIGPLAN, SIGCHI and SIGGRAPH would lose the most. All 3 SIGs were represented and indicated strong support for the proposal.

Motion:	Modify the DL revenue distribution mechanism by adding the phrase: No SIG will receive less than $10,000 in DL revenue. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and passed by the SGB.
Action:	Ramdin to modify the DL revenue distribution mechanism so that no SIG will receive less than $10,000.

3.0 CSTA Task Force Recommendation (Chesnais)

Alain Chesnais presented the recommendation from the CSTA task force to commit $100K per year from the DL revenue to CSTA before distribution to the SIGs for the next 5 years and recommend that CSTA address issues raised with respect to international aspects and perceived focus on only training computer scientists.

The task force included members of both the SIGITE and SIGCSE communities and was set up as a result of the fall meeting where ACM made a request to the SGB for financial support of the Computer Science and Teachers Association.

Many members of the SGB voiced support for CSTA but were concerned about the effect that funding the program for $100K/year would have on their budgets. Chesnais reminded the SGB of the original intent for the DL revenue distribution in that half of the revenue would be reserved for 'good works'. Until now, there were no proposals put forth and so the entire revenue was distributed amongst the SIGs. Chesnais suggests that the SGB consider its original intent and include the CSTA funding request as 'good works' proposal.

The SGB requested additional information on the CSTA program and budget in order to make a decision. The CSTA task force provided details at the close of the meeting and agreed to pick up the discussion the following day to give the SGB time to review.

4.1 SIGACCESS Viability Review (Hanson)

Leading up to this meeting, SIGACCESS had been in transition. The SIG continues to have financial challenges but the SGB's earlier decision to provide a minimum of $10K in DL revenue will certainly help. To alleviate financial pressures the SIG leaders have decided to provide future newsletters electronically rather than in print. Volunteer support is increasing and the flagship conference (ASSETS) is moving to an annual occurrence rather than every other year. NSF support was received as well as financial support from ACM for the use of sign language interpreters, thus allowing a new stream of attendance at its conferences. The SIG's membership has been steadily increasing.

Motion:	The SGB thanks the SIGACCESS EC for the steps they have taken to move the SIG out of transition. The SGB applauds their fiscal responsibility and moves the SIG out of transition and into permanent status for the next 2 years. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and unanimously passed by the SGB.
Action:	Baglio to inform appropriate staff that SIGACCESS has been taken out of transition and placed in permanent status for a 2 year period.
Action:	Frawley to modify viability schedule and schedule SIGACCESS for March'07 review.

4.2 SIGMICRO Viability Review (Ebcioglu)

Since the last viability, SIGMICRO has increased its sponsored conferences from 1 to 5. Finances have shown healthy improvement and membership is stable at about 400. The new online newsletter includes live e-seminars. The SIG is looking forward to continued coordination between its conferences and ACM's digital library.

Motion:	The SGB finds SIGMICRO viable and will continue its status for the next 4 years. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and unanimously passed by the SGB.
Action:	Frawley to modify viability schedule and schedule SIGMICRO for March'09 review.

4.3 SIGMM Viability Review (Jain)

Since the last viability review, SIGMM has built a strong volunteer development program with a large number of active people from various countries who are generating new activities within the field. Although there has been a slight decrease in membership, the fund balance remains relatively secure. The MM&Sec conference was started last year and joins Multimedia's two other sponsored events. Additionally the Multimedia Information Retrieval workshop will be held independently from the flagship conference.

Motion:	The SGB finds SIGMM viable and will continue its status for the next 4 years. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and unanimously passed by the SGB.
Action:	Frawley to modify viability schedule and schedule SIGMM for March'09 review.

4.4 SIGSAC Viability Review (Jajodia)

Since the last viability review, SIGSAC has continued with its 2 yearly conferences (CCS and SACMAT). The member benefits include 2 conference proceedings every year in addition to reduced registration fees. Membership remains stable and the fund balance has improved significantly. The CCS conference has increased to a 5 day event with several co-located workshops. Both submissions and attendance have gone up drastically over the past few years. Volunteer development is strong and active volunteers are working in all areas of the SIG including conferences, workshops and awards. The SIG will go through elections at the end of this fiscal year.

Motion:	The SGB finds SIGSAC viable and will continue its status for the next 4 years. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and unanimously passed by the SGB.
Action:	Frawley to modify viability schedule and schedule SIGSAC for March'09 review.

5.1 SGB/SGB EC (R. Walker)

R. Walker provided a status of the SGB EC action items. The following actions have been completed:

The dechartering of SIGGROUP
The continuation of the SIGGROUP conferences
CSTA task force appointed
Conference submission task force appointed
Discussed recognition of Fellows with the Awards Committee

5.2 ACM Council (R. Walker)

Bob Walker reported on the recent Council meetings and discussions. Following the previous SGB meeting, ACM Council met to discuss CSTA which was ultimately supported. Other discussions included the president's concerns about the lack of younger participants on various boards and committees. There was a general desire to provide increased publicity for the computing industry (i.e. via the ACM Turing Award).

During the October 2004 SGB meeting, Walker suggested that SIGs actively "endorse" members of their community for ACM Fellow, and also actively "recognize" members of their community who become Fellows. He carried this suggestion to ACM Council, and to the ACM Awards Committee.

As a result, the ACM Awards Committee will now notify the SGB Chair of the new Fellows, soon after the Fellows themselves are notified that they have received the award. The SGB Chair will then distribute that list to the SGB.

The SGB was encouraged to consider providing additional recognition for the Fellows in their community, perhaps at a conference. The only constraint on this additional recognition is that the SIGs realize that the primary recognition of new Fellows is at the ACM Awards Banquet, where they officially receive their Fellow award, as in the past. SIGs can offer additional recognition, perhaps a certificate or a plaque at their conference, but that additional recognition should follow the ACM Awards Banquet (usually scheduled for mid-June).

5.3 Membership Services Board Report (Konstan)

Konstan provided an update on Membership Services Board activities. The Chapter Services Committee is looking for a representative from a smaller and/or medium SIG that is interested in forming SIG affiliated chapters (as opposed to location affiliated chapters). Interested SIG leaders were asked to contact Konstan.

ACM's website is currently undergoing a redesign. There is an extensive amount of work being done and the technical challenges are substantial.

The Digital Media Collection group is moving forward with the anticipation of an inexpensive yet high quality outcome. Konstan requested feedback and/or questions that can be directed to the MSB.

5.4 Education Board (Lawson)

One of the main priorities for the Education Board at this time is the recent changes concerning eligibility within NCAA. The Ed. Board is collaborating with other bodies within ACM as well as outside computer organizations and universities to influence a reversal of the recent requirement changes. Other activities within the Ed. Board include an overall need to modernize the board, seek out involvement by younger members and widen the demographics with regards to specialized areas. Curriculum initiatives are calling for more continuous guideline revisions (due to rapidly changing information). Other curriculum projects include the Ontology Project, the Java Task Force and the Great Principles of Computing project. SGB leaders interested in working with the committees responsible for any of the projects were asked to contact Lawson.

5.5 Publications Board (Irwin)

Publications Board Co-Chair, Mary Jane Irwin, provided a report on Pubs Board activities. She reminded the SGB of the primary responsibilities of the board which included: copyright policies, rights and responsibilities, editorial range and coverage. The Pubs Board also has the duty of monitoring existing journals (i.e. financial and/or editorial health), approving proposed journals, and eliminating the journals which no longer meet the standards for publication.

A task force is being developed to define the future direction of CACM. The next stage in the Digital Library development is how to increase its growth potential (i.e. TR "Grey" Literature, Conference Video etc.). Issues the Pubs Board will continue to review include: electronic vs. print publications and the long term direction for ACM; plagiarism issues and policies. It is obvious that stricter policies and guidelines must be enforced.

Wolf indicated some concern regarding the communication between the Pubs Board and the SGB in the development of new Journals. Irwin agreed that there have been communication issues in the past but that she and the board are committed to changing that. The intent is to secure SGB feedback from appropriate SIG leaders before the publications board makes a final decision on approving a journal. That was done successfully with the newly approved KDD Journal.

5.6 USACM (Volcheck)

Emil Volcheck provided information about the public policy committee of the ACM (USACM). USACM grew out of the policy positions taken by Council back in the 1970's. It was decided that issues such as national identity numbers be dealt with by a separate committee.

In general the committee takes positions on general public policy and in return provides education/information to the decision makers. The committee (as well as ACM) is careful not to take a specific stand on a particular issue but rather provide background information and general ideas as to how the legislation can be more effective. The SIGs can help support USACM by promoting good government. Volcheck indicated that there is an open seat on the USACM EC and volunteers from the SGB community are welcome. He also invited leaders to learn more by visiting the USACM blog.

5.7 CRA Report (Rexford)

Jennifer Rexford along with Eugene Spafford are the ACM representatives to the Computer Research Association. CRA is an advocate for Computer Research for the United States and Canada. Rexford discussed information gathered at the CRA summit that was just held in February. There is a current US federal funding crisis amongst computer research. There is also a concern about the decreased interest in computing; both domestically as well as for incoming international students. Action items include improving image, and engaging different groups; raising awareness for computer science policy issues.

6.1 SIGSAM Viability Review (Volcheck)

Emil Volcheck provided a report on SIGSAM activities. Membership has increased slightly since June 2004 and includes a stable professional membership of about 220 people. The ISSAC conference has been relatively successful over the past two years and looks forward to Beijing in '05 and Genoa in '06. The member benefits include a quarterly bulletin that has recently caught up to date with distribution schedule. The SIG is working to improve its finances. Rather than issue the ISSAC conference proceedings to the membership in print, they are creating a CD which wil be much less expensive. It is expected that the cost savings as a result of producing/shipping the CD (in lieu of a printed manual) will help improve the financial status of the SIG.

Motion:	The SGB is concerned about SIGSAM's financial situation. The SGB suggests that the leadership consider making the newsletter available electronically rather than in print. SIGSAM will continue their permanent status for the next 2 years and will be required to have a viability review in March'07. The SGB requests a written update be given to the SGB EC in March'06. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and passed by the SGB.
Action:	Frawley to modify viability schedule and schedule SIGSAM for March'07 review.
Action:	Volcheck to provide SGB EC with written update on SIGSAM activities and finances in March'06.

6.2 SIGSIM Viability Review (Tufarolo)

John Tufarolo reported that the Digital Library revenue has helped SIGSIM achieve a healthy fund balance. Cooperating conferences are on the rise and the SIG looks forward to promoting the ACM DL to the conference organizers in hopes of including their conference proceedings. The sponsored conferences remain stable and SIGSIM has recently taken over the MSWIM workshop (previously sponsored by SIGMOBILE). SIGSIM is preparing for their upcoming elections in June.

Motion:	The SGB finds SIGSIM viable and will continue its status for the next 4 years. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and unanimously passed by the SGB.
Action:	Frawley to modify viability schedule and schedule SIGSIM for March'09 review.

6.3 SIGSOFT Viability Review (Wolf)

Alex Wolf reported on the activities of SIGSOFT. The SIG has made a conscious effort to reduce costs (specifically in the area of newsletters and proceedings) by making the information available electronically. Furthermore, the SIG has increased its control/discretion over conference finances and has increased the fund balance by approximately $150K. This allowed conference leaders for smaller conferences to budget at a zero or near zero profit. While there has been a slight decrease in membership the long-term retention remains at about 75%. Volunteer development is strong but there seems to be a strain within the conference organization (ie general chairs) vs. steering committee and/or SIG leadership(s). Student participation is on the rise and this is great for the conferences as well as the community however it poses some difficulty in regard to conference budgeting. The SIG is seeking to initiate major bylaw changes by moving to a single 3 year term.

Motion:	The SGB finds SIGSOFT viable and will continue its status for the next 4 years. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and unanimously passed by the SGB.
Action:	Ignatoff to modify viability schedule and schedule SIGSOFT for March'09 review.

7.0 SGB Vote on DL and CSTA Recommendations

The discussion to provide financial support to CSTA continued.

Chesnais indicated that the projected growth of the DL revenue is expected to be $200K in FY'06. To help prepare the incoming SIG leaders, he suggested that $100K from that growth be used for the CSTA support. This would still leave the SIGs with $100K more than the previous year.

The SIG leaders indicated support for the program but were concerned about committing for the full 5 years. What would happen if the DL revenue didn't continue to grow or decreased? They suggested providing support for various lengths of time and decided that 3 years would be most appropriate. Rather than provide 3 years of support automatically they discussed making the funding annually renewable. The expectation is that CSTA will report to the SGB annually on its activities and finances, after which the SGB at its fall meeting shall vote on renewal.

CSTA should be urged to address the SGB concerns about the focus on US education only and the perceived focus on training computer scientists vs. CS training for a more general audience.

There was general support from the SGB for the program but concerns about how funding would affect each of the SIGs. It was agreed that if the SGB supported funding, SIG leaders would not be asked to revise their recently completed budgets and would be permitted to carry a deficit in the amount of CSTA funding each provided.

Motion:	The SGB allocates $100K per year, from DL revenue, to support the CSTA. The first year for such support Is FY'06. The SGB funding shall be annually renewable, for a period of 3 years. CSTA shall report to the SGB annually on its activities and finances, after which the SGB at its fall meeting shall vote on renewal. The SGB strongly urges CSTA to address its concerns about the focus on US education only and the perceived focus on training computer scientists vs. CS training for a more general audience. Motion proposed by the SGB EC and passed by the SGB
Action:	R. Walker to send note to Chris Stevenson informing her that the SGB allocated $100K per year for CSTA funding. Note should indicate that the funding is renewable for 3 years with the endorsement of the SGB, the concerns of the SGB and the reporting requirements of CSTA.

Motion:

The SGB allocates $100K per year, from DL revenue, to support the CSTA. The first year for such support Is FY'06.

The SGB funding shall be annually renewable, for a period of 3 years.

CSTA shall report to the SGB annually on its activities and finances, after which the SGB at its fall meeting shall vote on renewal.

The SGB strongly urges CSTA to address its concerns about the focus on US education only and the perceived focus on training computer scientists vs. CS training for a more general audience.
Motion proposed by the SGB EC and passed by the SGB

Action:

R. Walker to send note to Chris Stevenson informing her that the SGB allocated $100K per year for CSTA funding. Note should indicate that the funding is renewable for 3 years with the endorsement of the SGB, the concerns of the SGB and the reporting requirements of CSTA.

8.0 Report from Conference Task Force (Wolf)

The conference task force was created to discuss the impact of increasing conference submissions. The task force confirmed that there has been an increase in conference submissions but not evenly across conferences and time. There is a problem for certain conference structures. In response the leadership is increasing PC size, culling early, adjusting publication styles (e.g., first-class posters), coordinating events and adding new events. Larger PCs are less manageable while smaller PCs result in overworked reviewers

Wolf suggested gathering more data from multiple perspectives internally and externally to ACM. Hard data from the PC, PC members and authors to include:

PC - size, membership, overlap, load
PC member - PCs, rotation, authorship, load
Author - submissions, resubmissions
Survey data from: PC Chair, PC members, authors, attendees and readers.
The task force suggested that the SGB consider holding a SC Chairs summit to understand the broader community effects, discuss and share data and discuss and share PC procedures. It could be convened by the ACM President and the SGB Chair.

It was also suggested that the ACM and IEEE-CS Presidents convene a greybeard panel to rethink the role and relationship of conferences and journals. The taskforce was thanked for their report.

9.0 Conference Program Committee Discussion (Patterson)

Dave Patterson presented information on ACM membership and program committee members. He highlighted the benefits of ACM membership including being part of a prestigious society, access to valuable information via publications and electronic data and discounted rates at sponsored conferences. Patterson selected some of ACM's conferences and gathered information on the percentage of PC members that were also ACM/SIG members. The SIG Leaders were asked to guess the percentage of PC members who are ACM and/or SIG members for their conferences. The result was somewhat lower than expected by some of the SIGs.

Patterson has asked ACM EC members to add a slide on "why join ACM" to their talks and he encouraged the SGB to do the same. Non-membership does not indicate a poor selection of PC members but rather that additional/better marketing needs to be done so that PC members become members of ACM and/or the sponsoring SIG. The SGB requested that Patterson make the slide he put together on "why join ACM" available.

10.0 Best Practices - SIG Governance Focus (R. Walker)

Bob Walker requested that the SGB leaders come prepared to discuss their governing structures. Several SIGs have recently modified their bylaws to allow more flexibility with officer positions and elections. Leaders were asked to share their governance goals and intentions with the group.

SIGDA has a 5 person EC with those officers having the right to vote. They also have an appointed advisory board that doesn't have voting rights but comlements the officers. In the past SIGDA found 2 great candidates for each position and it was difficult to lose one of them in the election. The new SIGDA model allows a slate of 8 plus people with membership voting in the top 6 to the EC. The EC will then vote among themselves for the named positions. That allows the best 2 people stay involved.

Some SIGs have indicated they're grooming someone for Chair and have requested exemptions from the SGB EC to run a single candidate. Other SIGs have a crucial position and have asked to run one person. Some of the bylaw changes now permit SIGs to run single candidates.

SIGCSE has the standard structure of officers but did change length of terms. 2 years was short and they were requesting an automatic extension. Terms are now 3 years with officers being allowed to run again but not permitted to extend.

SIGDOC has the standard officer positions with 2 year terms but now includes 2 or 3 members at large.

SIGCOMM may consider changing their term length. 3 year terms seem attractive. 2 years is not enough and 4 years is too long. They have concerns about all leaders having to agree to renew. It can force an overcommitted leader into a position they don't really want.

SIG METRICS has the standard structure of officers and appointed officers.

SIGMICRO finds 2 candidates to run for the position of Chair and 5 candidates for a 4 person member at large committee. The distribution of tasks is decided by the Chair and Nominating Committee for continuity

SIGART was a conference only SIG with appointed officers. The new single SIG designation has forced them back into the election process. They will run 2 candidates for each of the 3 officer positions with 3 year terms.

SIGPLAN VC is the conference overseer and for 4 elections in a row and they've asked for an exception to run a single candidate each time. The have modified their bylaws to allow a single candidate for this position. They will run 2 candidates for Chair, 1 or more for VC and at least seven consenting candidates for the remaining six elected positions of the Executive Committee.

SIGCHI has made many changes to governance and has of elected officers run in pairs. The President and VP run as a pair as well as VP of finance and Pubs. SIGCHI also has members at large. Other positions are appointed so that an individual can continue even under a new board. There is a long tradition of an extended executive committee of who at any given time 4 or 5 are active. SIGCHI is lucky to have a long list of willing volunteers and the officers are being encouraged to delegate.

SIGMIS has a standard structure of 3 officers with 2 year terms. Three year terms may be better so the SIG may consider this in the future. They also may want to separate the positions of Secretary/Treasurer.

SIGOPS has a standard structure of 3 officers with 2 year terms. The EC position of Chair plus Members-at-Large may be a better way to govern. SIGOPS may consider a change in the future.

SIGACCESS has a standard structure of 3 officers with 2 year terms.

SIGIR runs 2 candidates for each of the 4 elected offices for a 2 year period. They often extend so they are considering moving to a 3 year model. They have no trouble securing candidates. There are lots of opportunities for involving people making a nice advancement path.

SIGACT has 3 named officers and 2 members-at-large. They will run at least 2 candidates for chair and 5 candidates for the other named positions.

SIGAda has a large slate of officers: past chair, VC for conferences, VC liaison, Secretary, Treasurer, Int'l Rep. Terms were always 2 years and 2 candidates for each.

SIGAPP was a conference SIG so the current 4 officers were appointed. They are up for election and are running 2 candidates for each position. Terms are 2 years. The slate includes 3 of the current officers that are standing up for reelection. All people that lose will be appointed to a committee.

SIGSAM experienced a problem with the requirement to have all officers renew. This could force a SIG to bring along someone that doesn't want to renew.

Some SGB members suggested that there be no automatic renewals just longer terms.

The SGB will look at this topic again with the expectation that the SIG leaders that have modified their structure provide an update on how it is working.

11. Other Business

R. Walker indicated that he would send a follow-up e-mail to the SGB requesting feedback on the meeting format as well as the time allotted for each of the items. All SGB members were encouraged to respond.

The next SGB meeting will be held on August 13th. It will be preceded by a day of new officer orientation. SIG leaders were asked to inform their executive committees and candidates.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 pm.

Participants:

Donna Baglio, ACM SIG Services
Victor Bahl, SIGMOBILE Chair
Alan Berenbaum, Past SGB Chair
Hans Boehm, SGB EC
Barrett Bryant, SIGAPP Chair
Michael Burke, SIGPLAN Chair
Jamie Callan, SIGIR Chair
Alain Chesnais, SIGGRAPH Chair
Erin Dolan, ACM SIG Services
Kemal Ebcioglu, SIGMICRO
Matthew Farrens, SIGARCH Sec/Treas
Hal Gabow, SIGACT Chair
Maria Gini, SIGART Chair
Erik Goodman, SIGEVO Chair
Vicki Hanson, SIGACCESS Chair
David Harrison, SIGAda Vice Chair
David Hicks, SIGWEB Vice Chair
Mary Jane Irwin, Pubs Bd Co-Chair
Ramesh Jain, SIGMM Chair
Tom Jewett, SIGCAS Chair
Joe Konstan, SGB EC/SIGCHI Chair
Eydie Lawson, SIGITE Chair
Jeanna Neefe Matthews, SIGOPS Treas
Peter Nuernberg, SIGWEB Chair
Tamer Ozsu, SGB EC/SIGMOD Chair
David Patterson, ACM President
Darren Ramdin, ACM Finance Dept
Jen Rexford, Council/SIGCOMM Chair
Pat Ryan, ACM COO
Janice Sipior, SGB EC/SIGMIS Chair
Scott Tilley, SIGDOC Chair
John Tufarolo, SIGSIM Chair
Emil Volcheck, SIGSAM Chair
Henry Walker, SGB EC/SIGCSE Chair
Robert Walker, SGB EC/SIGDA Chair
Michael Wellman, SIGecom Chair
John White, ACM CEO
Alex Wolf, SGB EC/SIGSOFT Chair