Connect with us

The ISA Reorganization Plan: An Update and Commentary

Cast your vote by October 22!

Published

on

By now, we assume that most Signs of the Times subscribers have received their October issues. In it, we published information about the Intl. Sign Assn.’s (ISA) Reorganization Plan (RP). We published most of a Texas Sign Assn. email that questioned numerous aspects of new, proposed ISA bylaws, and we published ISA chairman Duane Laska’s subsequent commentary on those concerns. Since then, the RP Bylaws Committee responded to some of the concerns and offered some changes. Duane subsequently provided the following additional information on September 17 (in italics).

As was discussed, at its Board Conference call meeting on August 22nd, the ISA Board directed the By-Laws Committee to review the changes that were proposed, and see if new language would clarify the intent and address some concerns raised by membership. On Sept. 12, the By-Laws Committee presented revised language to the ISA Board, which was ACCEPTED. The revised language clarifies or concurs with concerns that were raised by the membership.

Most notably,

A)
Article VI, Section
Was revised from previously suggested language to add…” A
marjority of the board must be sign companies and four of the six designated sign
company Directors must be from the Affiliated Associations Sign Company Member Council.”

B)
And the following was ADDED “At all times a majority of the total Board of
Directors shall be sign companies. All Directors must be official representatives of member companies.”

C)
The following was added
“The Leadership Development Committee
will take into consideration geographic diversity when developing the Board nominations.”

Advertisement

D)
The section regarding amendments to the bylaws was reverted to its original language, thus, Any amendments to the bylaws must STILL be approved through a vote of the full membership.

Subsequently, as of today, the following organizations have either voted to ENDORSE or verbally expressed endorsement of the reorganization, being proposed to the Membership.
? Arizona Sign Association
? California Sign Association
? Colorado Sign Association
? Illinois Sign Association
? Mid South Sign Association
? Midwest Sign Association
? Nevada Sign Association
? Northeast States Sign Association
? Northwest Sign Council
? Sign Association of Canada
? Southern States Sign Association
? Utah Sign Association
? Western States Sign Council
? Wisconsin Sign Association

 

Wade Swormstedt’s commentary:

However, I must vote “no” regarding the RP. In general terms, I view attempts at a consolidation/centralization of power as dangerous. I view it primarily as ISA’s desire to control more of the industry. While I’ve said for decades that the tiny sign industry needs to speak as one voice to the outside world, I never said ISA, or any singular existing group, should be that voice.
     I’m pondering the irony of any industry that places First Amendment protection of freedom of speech on a pedestal, yet we have an RP proposal that prohibits “affiliate” local sign associations from expressing any sentiments contrary to “official” ISA statements, especially when nothing indicates whether there might be 10 or 500 such positions. Meanwhile, the RP declares all affiliate associations are completely independent.
     I’m leery of a board of directors’ election process that puts complete control into the hands of a five-member Executive Committee, even though I endorse the pragmatism of reducing the board from 28 to 15. While the idea of “qualified” board members is appealing, it would be too easy for that characteristic to become synonymous with “ISA loyalist.”
     The question I ask about ISA could be applied to any association and any city/county/state/federal government. Is it a means to an end (serving its constituents) or an end unto itself? Obviously, any organization’s number-one concern must be self preservation, but I was taught, and believe to this day, that if you truly serve your constituents, the other automatically occurs.
     During these difficult economic times, I suspect that industry involvement is at an extreme low. When you’re trying to keep your company solvent, association events and participation can easily take a back seat. And if you don’t participate, your complaints about industry matters should fall on deaf ears. Yet a defined amount of power resides within any circle. Consequently, lack of participation leaves a power void. It will get filled, somehow. Surely those in favor of the RP will make an effort to vote for it. The apathetic won’t vote at all.
     Am I adamantly against the RP? No. Am I skeptical about its real intent? Yes.

Wade Swormstedt
Publisher/editor
Signs of the Times magazine
 

Advertisement

Most Popular