jpranch
Platinum Member
I know this is a very long post but please read. I need a list to provide the ICC of possible discussion topics and I need it quick! Please, no cheap shots. I know, I guilty as charged. Lets make this happen! Thanks in advance. JP
Post Script: The only editing that was done contained personal information. JP
From ICC
A copy of your email to President Zubia and Vice President Lynn was forwarded to me, as I am responsible for oversight of the new Communities of Interest. We appreciate your feedback, and I think I can allay at least one, but certainly not all of your concerns.
The bulletin board archives have not been lost, and we are working on a link to make all the previous bulletin board threads available, as many members have noted that there is a good deal of valuable information in some of the threads, something none of us want to lose.
The decision to move away from the bulletin board was not an arbitrary one, and caused us many concerns. The fundamental issue was that the our old website was based on very old technology that left us incapable of modernizing and expanding the site’s capacity and capabilities. Moving to where we need to be in state-of-the-art web technology to support a badly needed and long overdue new website had the effect of eliminating our ability to continue the old bulletin board due to irresolvable incompatibility between the two technologies. Communities of Interest have become popular in many other associations, and appear to be a good fit with ICC due to the wide diversity of professional backgrounds, issues, and interests of our members in both the public and private sectors. What you see now is the basic skeletons of each Community—enough to get them up and active on the new site. The Communities going forward are largely member driven, and we anticipate each Community will develop its own outlook and style based on the needs and interests of those who join and participate.
Thank you for your openness in putting forward your concerns over this transition. I can only assure you that it is a work in progress and, like most new ventures, will require continuing evolution and work to get it completely right. Now that you have raised it, the whole issue of anonymity of postings is one I will carry back to those engaged in our new website design. I don’t know what the answer is at this point, but I understand the concern you raise, and believe this is an area we need to evaluate further.
From JP: Thanks for the reply. I think the ICC has made a mistake here and some sort of split may be in the wind. Darn shame. I will be in Baltimore on the 30th through Nov 6th. I would love to discuss this along with other topics that I believe could cause major problems for the ICC. Thanks again for the response.
From ICC: I appreciate the professionalism of your reply (trust me, not everyone is being so kind). With this new website, we are still feeling our way, and I am sure we will stick our foot in it more than once before we get it completely right. As a membership organization, but one whose mission is public safety, some of the decisions regarding enhancing the value of membership vs. trying to be everything to everybody do keep us up at night. Both sides make some good points, and there are individual parties on both sides that exhibit some very self-serving behavior as well. I trust this will all work out as cooler heads prevail and the ultimate right decision becomes clearer.
From JP: Thanks. I'm afraid I'm not quite the professional I should be. I was the one who posted "I'd like to kick old Aldof in the nads"! LOL. I have my moments like everybody. Please tell Mr. Zubia if you see him no offence intended. I hope to relay that sediment in person in Baltimore. I would like to propose something for Baltimore. An open and frank discussion with those of us who have issues to discuss? I'm not talking about a "bitch session". It absolutely must have a skilled moderator / facilitator to stay on track and focused. There are those that feel disenfranchised / disillusioned from and with the ICC. I would much rather see issues resolved and perceived problems fixed than a split happen and another code officials organization formed. Please believe me that the formation of another organization to compete with the ICC and a substantial split is a very real concern. What say you? JP
From ICC: I will see what can be arranged. The last thing we want is members who feel disenfranchised, although we all, staff included, have at various times shared those feelings as ICC has struggled to evolve from the unique cultures of each of the legacy organizations. Although ICC has been great to me personally, so was ICBO, and I still miss many aspects of the great ICBO culture. Many carryovers from BOCA and SBCCI I’m sure feel the same way. Getting bigger doesn’t always mean getting better—that’s something we all have to work at to make happen.
If you feel comfortable doing so, would you mind giving me a short list of some of your major concerns with ICC as we currently know it? I promise to keep your name out of it if you so desire. However, in suggesting that some kind of meeting or forum is needed, I am sure I will be asked why and what the issues are—better possibility of getting something going if I have some kind of answer to give. There are so many friction points we deal with almost daily that I would hesitate to pick a winner here—large vs. small jurisdiction needs, big states vs. small states in voting power, Federal vs. local focus, fire vs. building on residential sprinkler provisions, quality and direction of our educational programs, access to top leadership, chapter benefits, remote voting, product and service pricing—the list can go on and on.
From JP: I can certainly appreciate you situation. I would (with your permission) like to post this on the BB we have all moved to so I can get a consensus list of topics. I will delete all names, phone numbers, etc... Please feel free to release my personal information to any ICC staff. I really think a forum would be a step in a good direction. I even have a title for it: "Put on your big girl panties and Cowboy-Up"! Just kidding. Will this work for you? thanks, JP
From ICC: Sure—whatever it takes to find what the issues are. Please don’t promise on the alternative site (and we all know which one we are talking about) that some type of forum is going to definitely take place at ABM, as that is going to take some work to see if it is possible on short notice. One way or the other, we will find a way to open dialogue and address the issues. Since these are member issues with ICC, the Board has to decide how they want to approach this, and as staff I can’t presume to speak for your Board, other than to say I think the individual Board members, each perhaps in their own way, are sincere in their desire to serve the membership and make ICC a strong and long-term viable organization that effectively fulfills its mission. I do like your title for it, by the way—pretty much says it all. Maybe expand it a little—“If you’ve got a hitch in your giddy-up, put on your big girl panties and Cowboy-up”.
Post Script: The only editing that was done contained personal information. JP
From ICC
A copy of your email to President Zubia and Vice President Lynn was forwarded to me, as I am responsible for oversight of the new Communities of Interest. We appreciate your feedback, and I think I can allay at least one, but certainly not all of your concerns.
The bulletin board archives have not been lost, and we are working on a link to make all the previous bulletin board threads available, as many members have noted that there is a good deal of valuable information in some of the threads, something none of us want to lose.
The decision to move away from the bulletin board was not an arbitrary one, and caused us many concerns. The fundamental issue was that the our old website was based on very old technology that left us incapable of modernizing and expanding the site’s capacity and capabilities. Moving to where we need to be in state-of-the-art web technology to support a badly needed and long overdue new website had the effect of eliminating our ability to continue the old bulletin board due to irresolvable incompatibility between the two technologies. Communities of Interest have become popular in many other associations, and appear to be a good fit with ICC due to the wide diversity of professional backgrounds, issues, and interests of our members in both the public and private sectors. What you see now is the basic skeletons of each Community—enough to get them up and active on the new site. The Communities going forward are largely member driven, and we anticipate each Community will develop its own outlook and style based on the needs and interests of those who join and participate.
Thank you for your openness in putting forward your concerns over this transition. I can only assure you that it is a work in progress and, like most new ventures, will require continuing evolution and work to get it completely right. Now that you have raised it, the whole issue of anonymity of postings is one I will carry back to those engaged in our new website design. I don’t know what the answer is at this point, but I understand the concern you raise, and believe this is an area we need to evaluate further.
From JP: Thanks for the reply. I think the ICC has made a mistake here and some sort of split may be in the wind. Darn shame. I will be in Baltimore on the 30th through Nov 6th. I would love to discuss this along with other topics that I believe could cause major problems for the ICC. Thanks again for the response.
From ICC: I appreciate the professionalism of your reply (trust me, not everyone is being so kind). With this new website, we are still feeling our way, and I am sure we will stick our foot in it more than once before we get it completely right. As a membership organization, but one whose mission is public safety, some of the decisions regarding enhancing the value of membership vs. trying to be everything to everybody do keep us up at night. Both sides make some good points, and there are individual parties on both sides that exhibit some very self-serving behavior as well. I trust this will all work out as cooler heads prevail and the ultimate right decision becomes clearer.
From JP: Thanks. I'm afraid I'm not quite the professional I should be. I was the one who posted "I'd like to kick old Aldof in the nads"! LOL. I have my moments like everybody. Please tell Mr. Zubia if you see him no offence intended. I hope to relay that sediment in person in Baltimore. I would like to propose something for Baltimore. An open and frank discussion with those of us who have issues to discuss? I'm not talking about a "bitch session". It absolutely must have a skilled moderator / facilitator to stay on track and focused. There are those that feel disenfranchised / disillusioned from and with the ICC. I would much rather see issues resolved and perceived problems fixed than a split happen and another code officials organization formed. Please believe me that the formation of another organization to compete with the ICC and a substantial split is a very real concern. What say you? JP
From ICC: I will see what can be arranged. The last thing we want is members who feel disenfranchised, although we all, staff included, have at various times shared those feelings as ICC has struggled to evolve from the unique cultures of each of the legacy organizations. Although ICC has been great to me personally, so was ICBO, and I still miss many aspects of the great ICBO culture. Many carryovers from BOCA and SBCCI I’m sure feel the same way. Getting bigger doesn’t always mean getting better—that’s something we all have to work at to make happen.
If you feel comfortable doing so, would you mind giving me a short list of some of your major concerns with ICC as we currently know it? I promise to keep your name out of it if you so desire. However, in suggesting that some kind of meeting or forum is needed, I am sure I will be asked why and what the issues are—better possibility of getting something going if I have some kind of answer to give. There are so many friction points we deal with almost daily that I would hesitate to pick a winner here—large vs. small jurisdiction needs, big states vs. small states in voting power, Federal vs. local focus, fire vs. building on residential sprinkler provisions, quality and direction of our educational programs, access to top leadership, chapter benefits, remote voting, product and service pricing—the list can go on and on.
From JP: I can certainly appreciate you situation. I would (with your permission) like to post this on the BB we have all moved to so I can get a consensus list of topics. I will delete all names, phone numbers, etc... Please feel free to release my personal information to any ICC staff. I really think a forum would be a step in a good direction. I even have a title for it: "Put on your big girl panties and Cowboy-Up"! Just kidding. Will this work for you? thanks, JP
From ICC: Sure—whatever it takes to find what the issues are. Please don’t promise on the alternative site (and we all know which one we are talking about) that some type of forum is going to definitely take place at ABM, as that is going to take some work to see if it is possible on short notice. One way or the other, we will find a way to open dialogue and address the issues. Since these are member issues with ICC, the Board has to decide how they want to approach this, and as staff I can’t presume to speak for your Board, other than to say I think the individual Board members, each perhaps in their own way, are sincere in their desire to serve the membership and make ICC a strong and long-term viable organization that effectively fulfills its mission. I do like your title for it, by the way—pretty much says it all. Maybe expand it a little—“If you’ve got a hitch in your giddy-up, put on your big girl panties and Cowboy-up”.
