ISBA governance: Is it time for change?

Are the ISBA's 27-member board and 203-member assembly too big for today's association environment? That and other questions are under review by a pair of special committees, and they want to hear from you.

Leaders of the ISBA Board and Assembly Governance Committees are soliciting comments about the association's current governance structure in the November Illinois Bar Journal. Among their questions: are the costs inherent in supporting these large groups justified? One factor cited by authors Vince Cornelius, Celia Gamrath and Tim Chorvat is a "declining interest in governance" by the ISBA's electorate and candidates.

"Since 2001, electoral turnout in ISBA elections has trended downward from 28 percent in 2001 to 22 percent in 2010 (the last year of universal paper ballots), 16 percent in 2011 (the first year of electronic voting), and approximately 14 percent during the last three elections," they write.

"In addition, the number of candidates running for office has been low. Over the last 10 years, 50 percent of Board of Governors races have been uncontested. During that same period, 50 percent of Cook County Assembly elections have been uncontested (including four of the last five years)," as were 89 percent of recent downstate Assembly races, they write. And participation has been poor as well. "For the 203-seat Assembly, delegate attendance at the seven meetings since December 2010 has never exceeded 150." Read their article and find out more.

Posted on October 30, 2014 by Mark S. Mathewson

Member Comments (3)

to limit the numbers now would mean to put control of the association in the hands of a few. This means less input from the membership. This also removes the check that the membership has upon what the association can or cannot do. Let the members vote count . The association is not a buddy buddy system. This is a professional; association. The more we hear from the members, more new ideas will will result. More heads a better than less.What it means is that the board and the assembly must work harder to answer more questions from the membership.

I don't know if transparency would help participation, but lack of transparancy has certainly not helped. I am sure that failure to let the membership know what's going on, including failure to send around actual agendas and failure to include attachments to agendas when you can even find the links seems like a great way to run an orgaization. It may be. I have brought this up several times with both the elected officials and the director. I think on balance, this is an organization run by the bureaucracy more than the representatives.

I would also like to see the ISBA remove itself from social issues which do not implicate lawyers' special skills. It's hard for me to feel good about an organization which could, at any moment and without prior notice to its membership, announce some policy about genetically modified food, animal rights or global whatever it is this year.

It is not too late for the ISBA to recognize and adapt to the transforming effect of the Rules of Professional Conduct on members who once thought of themselves as adults being guided by a code of ethics instead of uniformed members of the Defense Department.. The ISBA then lost to the A.R.D.C. much of what attorneys formerly looked to it for guidance and leadership of independent contractors. The ISBA to become more useful and relevant to its members might consider emulating the services provided to their dues paying members by federal government employee unions who now closely resemble today's tightly regulated practitioners.

Login to post comments