Editorial—Wanted: Association Politicians

Turmoil at both the American Library Association (ALA) and Special Libraries Association (SLA), coupled with the extremely important agendas of both, has me geared up for the annual conferences of these dominant library organizations. Given the groups' recent histories, however, I am deeply concerned that too few members will be heard in association debates at either get-together. That's why I urge the members of our two largest library associations, their state and regional chapters, and other affiliates to attend the annual conferences and get more involved. We need association politicians now more than ever.

ALA is about to embark on an experiment. An Allied Professional Association (APA) is being created, tied to ALA but with separate rules of governance despite shared governing officials. It is primarily a way around federal tax law, which doesn't allow organizations with ALA's tax-exempt status to push for direct benefits to their members, such as better salaries, or to peddle such things as certificates for completing continuing education programs. The new APA will be created under Chapter 501(c)6 of the Internal Revenue Code, to allow more lobbying, more direct work for member benefits, and more selling of such certificates.

Opponents and supporters of the APA are already organized. Some worry that, even though it will be governed by ALA's Council and Board, the APA may not be directly or sufficiently accountable to the working librarian members of ALA, those for whom it is being created. ALA members must press hard for accountability, as ALA and APA move together into these uncharted waters. At the very least, ALA's open meeting policies must apply to APA, and member access to policymaking machinery must be equal to what it is with ALA. An APA membership component is a must.

A new ALA executive director has just been appointed after an expensive search by a headhunter and a 12-member search committee. Though the winning candidate, Keith Fiels, is widely respected, the search itself got decidedly mixed reviews. That's because Fiels, one of two finalists, had been a finalist in two previous ALA searches; the other finalist sits on the ALA Executive Board. The honeymoon during ALA's transition to Fiels must not be allowed to obscure close member scrutiny of and action on the new APA structures and rules.

SLA is in another kind of turmoil (see News, p. 16ff.; SLA Preview, p. 58–59). A proposal from the SLA board to allow it to select the SLA president from among its members was angrily rejected by members. An SLA old guard protecting what democracy is left in SLA is pitted against the "reformers." A movement to give SLA a new "brand" that might remove "libraries" from its name also ran aground, but it remains under study. A purge of key people on SLA's Washington staff caused more alarm. The brand new executive director, Roberta Shaffer, resigned after citing the split between old guard and reformers. The search for her replacement is on hold while SLA leaders attempt to repair the damage. Clearly, it is time for members to get involved!

America's two largest library associations are in turmoil and transition. SLA's annual conference is in Los Angeles, June 8–13, and ALA's annual conference is in Atlanta, June 13–19. The outcomes are much too important to be left to their entrenched leadership. Intense member participation is needed. If you care what happens with library salaries, the certification of librarians, and the future of those who work in the public, school, academic, and specialized libraries of America, you should participate in these debates.

Comment on this editorial