Chevy Impala SS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 268 Posts

Discussion Starter · #1 ·
If ISSCA is "by the members / for the members" why has an ISSCA BOD members been " secretly voted off" and another resigned from the Board of directors.
I am forwarding these emails that have been on other list for your viewing.
Subject: [Fwd: resignation]

From: dana miller
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected],
[email protected],
> [email protected]
> Gentlemen:
> When I was asked to join the ISSCA BoD I was
> under the impression that I was joining a group of
> enthusiasts who were working together for the
> of all club members. I was proud and happy to be a
> member of ISSCA and certainly honored to be asked
> help guide the club on to bigger and better things
> through the BoD.
> Why in the world would a group such as this use
> meeting such as the one in San Antonio this last
> end to secretly vote off a long standing member of
> BoD as well as his general membership in the club,
> when he has served so long and had the interests of
> the members foremost in concern? Was it because he
> frequently ruffled the feathers of the "power
> on the BoD? Was it because he didn't go along with
> the idea of not adhering to the bylaws originally
> conceived by and put into place by this Bod? Was it
> because certain people on the BoD of ISSCA got tired
> of him stopping them from doing just what ever they
> felt like doing irrespective of the mandates of the
> bylaws. I don't know, because I was not able to be
> this meeting due to prior commitments. But I do
> one thing.........his position as a director as well
> as his membership, and the deciding of whether or
> he was going to continue to be "allowed" to remain a
> director/member was certainly NOT on any agenda of
> items to be addressed during this meeting that I was
> given. I wonder exactly why that was.
> Not only did this "honorable" group of
> slip this action into the agenda when the "victim"
> wasn't looking, but they decided his fate by vote
> he wasn't there to defend himself, or given the
> opportunity to make his own case. He was tried,
> judged guilty and summarily eliminated all without
> knowledge. He was then mailed a letter informing
> of this decision without anyone on the "honorable"
> having the decency to face him. Is this any way to
> treat any member of a club that claims to have the
> member's best interests at heart, let alone a
> distinguished founding board member?
> It seems to me that if this BoD undertakes to
> operate in this "cloak and dagger" manner towards
> of it's own, what would it deem appropriate
> of a "lowly" member-at-large? Seems to be a
> worthy of consideration by all you
> think???
> Based on the deplorable actions of this BoD,
> my inability to fathom any justification for this
> behavior by the BoD, I hereby give notice of my
> resignation not only from the ISSCA BoD, but also my
> membership in ISSCA. I will not be assiciated with
> any club that acts this way toward any member.
> Dana Miller
> ISSCA #0256

Discussion Starter · #2 ·
From: "4ee your mind"
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 00:08:01 -0500
Subject: Re: [Fwd: resignation]

Chuck, Dana, Is this about Harvey?... I am speechless about this situation.
Dana this is the first time I have seen you express your feelings so
strongly. ... Keep in touch
Dana...and Thanks

Discussion Starter · #3 ·
From: "Spera, Charles"
To: [email protected]
CC: "NE Impalaleaders" <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Missl_List] [Fwd: resignation]


The "long standing member of the BoD" who was expelled
from the ISSCA
Board of Directors AND ISSCA that Dana refers to is

As you know, I am one of the Founding Directors of
ISSCA and maintain
the strongest burning desire to see the club succeed.
I really believe
in the motto "For the Members, By the Members." You
have been witness
to my efforts on behalf of MISSL; this same dedication
is what I brought
to ISSCA. Unfortunately, the power brokers now
running ISSCA don't seem
to appreciate this sort of thing.

I was unable to attend the quarterly meeting of the
ISSCA Board of
Directors (BoD) which was held in San Antonio, TX this
past Saturday.
Dana Miller, as a newly appointed/elected member of
this BoD, also had a
conflict and could not attend. We both granted
proxies to other members
of the BoD to vote on our behalf. To the extent of
the agenda that was
published just before the meeting, our proxy holders
were instructed as
to how we wished our votes to be cast. I believe
those instructions
were carried out.

For some reason, the agenda must have been changed and
a discussion of
my popularity was inserted. Of course, I had no
notice that this
discussion was to be held. In rapid succession a
motion was made to
expel me from ISSCA (and thus the BoD), seconded and
passed by a
majority vote.

So far I have not been informed as to what exact
matter I have been
expelled for, why I was not informed of this potential
action nor why
the presiding officer allowed this conversation or
vote at all.
Yesterday I received a short statement in the form of
a letter from
Harvey Clark informing me of my expulsion. If you
would like a copy of
that letter faxed to you, just give me a number to fax
it to you.

Be assured, as an outspoken critic of the methods used
by the
administration of ISSCA, I have been extremely
concerned that the BoD
has lost track of the notion that we/they are in
office to
provide services and programs for the members. We
have seen the
benefits of membership dwindle, we have seen programs
such as the
National Championships totally forgotten. (Go to the
website and see if
you can find anything about it.) We have all noticed
that the magazine
has now become a virtual "no show". The list goes on
and on. Someday
you and I ought to have a longer chat about this.

My method was to work consistently to influence change
for the
betterment of the membership and to try to get the BoD
to act
responsibly. Obviously, this diligence was viewed by
some on the BoD as irritating and a nuisance to say
the least.

I am appalled to find that the influential faction of
individuals on the
BoD handles those who disagree with them by severing
their membership;
not only from the BoD but from the club as well. I am
afraid that this
kind of tactic does not bode well for ISSCA. I wonder
what kind of
message this sends to all members of the club, some of
which may even
have had thoughts of serving on the BoD.

Understand, I think that the members of ISSCA are the
greatest. We
have both seen that this club is not so much about the
cars as it is
about the people. To me, the greatest group of people
I have ever been
associated with are those I have met through my B-Body
experience. I
just happen to think they deserve better.

Well, enough for now. Thanks for your concern. Let's
just go on from
here and hope someone else will take up the cause for
the members. Who
knows, maybe the members will speak up and have their


Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Mendaza you forgot my post to MISSL and this really steams my A$$!!!

To do this to someone who has put forth so much is just plan wrong.

Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Well it's a good thing that we've got Harvey here in this group so that
we can hear an explanation .

I'll be honest, I think this is a big concern for almost any reason. The
bylaws require that a 3/4 majority of the serving directors vote to
remove a director for cause, and the word "cause" is undefined.
Revocation of membership is even more nebulous and can be done by a
simple majority for reasons as flimsy as "disturbing the order" in the
subjective opinion of the board. Revocation is "final and conclusive"
meaning there is no appeals process.

Perhaps this would not seem so much like underhanded politics if it were
done in plain sight instead of as a unscheduled discussion (hopefully
there was a discussion) and vote when neither director from that Region
was present to defend their positions or dispute any claims made against
them. This advances the possibilty that by adopting a point of view
contrary to the popular one can leave you finally and conclusively on
the outside looking in. That in my opinion portrays the club in a very
bad light and to use the words of the bylaws "impairs the good name,
popularity, good will, or prosperity of the organization", itself a
cause for revocation of membership.

Further, in the absense of any hard facts beyond what Chuck has posted,
I would theorize that the revocation of Chuck's membership may have been
done to circumvent Section 4a. of the bylaws that requires a 3/4
majority to remove a director because by revoking his membership, with a
simple majority he would no longer be eligible to serve on the board.
That may or may not be the way it went down but boy if it is that just

So whether this happened with a 3/4 majority of the directors or just a
simple majority, it amazes me that nobody has yet stepped forward to
paint a smiley face on this turd.


Discussion Starter · #7 ·
"Who knows, maybe the members will speak up and have their day."

I wouldn't count on it. There are only a handful of members that will speak up when the club "By the members" goes into a bizarre direction, or does something that may raise questions, in fear of getting flamed here, or getting e-mailed by a high ranking member of ISSCA, trying to snuff out a public discussion. A public discussion on this forum regarding ISSCA's direction, policy, or actions is only allowed/favored when they initiate it.

I see a whole seperate forum has been added just to accomidate this thread...

So, as asked earlier, what's the deal????? :confused:

Discussion Starter · #9 ·

Sorry to hear about all this going on. Sounds like a load of BS to me, I wish someone who was there at the meeting would step up and enlighten everyone (especially Chuck) as to the "what and why" of the last BOD vote.

This is the first post on this part of the Forum. I never even looked here before since the forum has always shown 0 topics under the heading of 'ISSCA Concerns'. When I just clicked on this topic, the forum shows recent visitors to that topic. I saw Purpala listed next to my user name. Clicking on Purpala, I confirm that it was indeed Harvey Clark checking this post at 10:46 ...about 25 minutes ago.

As a matter of fact, we (on the North East Leader Forum) haven't heard much/anything recently from Harvey regarding the planning of next year's Nat's.

Gary Meier

Discussion Starter · #10 ·
If what I've heard is true, the vote was 10 to 9. So, yes Chuck's membership was removed.

According to the by-laws as posted at in Article IV, Section 4, a it would have taken a three-fourths (3/4) majority vote of the serving directors, to remove Chuck as a director. To make the rules work the way Harvey wanted them to they revoked Chuck membership.


Discussion Starter · #11 ·
are the Bod meeting minutes public info?
If a transcript was published possibly this might cast some light on the matter.
could it be that the location and the timing of the 2005 nationals has something to do with this?
Chuck spera definitely deserves plenty of credit and kudos when it comes to the subject of promoting ISSCA.

Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Originally posted by DCM 9C1:
As a matter of fact, we (on the North East Leader Forum) haven't heard much/anything recently from Harvey regarding the planning of next year's Nat's.
Maybe, that's because Harvey doesn't want to goto Englishtown. A little bird has told me they are trying to move the NATs to Pocono Raceway.


Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Originally posted by Mendoza:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sniper:
Mendoza you forgot my post to MISSL and this really steams my A$$!!!

To do this to someone who has put forth so much is just plan wrong.
Boomer, as you seen on the list there has been many, many, many responds to this situtation and I posted just the first few. I'm waiting for "flames" to posts how ALL members that responded feel about this. And since the list are public accessible, I will post them here if need be!!!


Discussion Starter · #14 ·

There is Definately SOMETHING going on here.....It Damn Sure doesn't look good...


I am witholding judgement until I can see both sides of what is going on..

But if what has been posted about the BOD Meeting is factual then...

Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Hmmm, the last ISSCA BoD meeting minutes posted on the ISSCA website are from Jan 24, 04.

Why aren't the latest minutes on the website for us to read? If Chuck's behavior was so disgraceful/intolerable that he needed to be removed, then the current minutes regarding the situation should be aired for all to see why he was ousted from ISSCA. Where are all of the facts?

Discussion Starter · #16 ·
"Why aren't the lastest minutes on the website for us to read? If Chuck's behavior was so disgraceful/intolerable that he needed to be removed, then the current minutes regarding the situation should be aired for all to see why he was ousted from ISSCA. Where are all of the facts?"

You know, that was the same exact question I had...

EDIT: this wouldn't be any kind of a "mystery" if there was CURRENT information regarding the BOD minutes on the ISSCA site.

Discussion Starter · #18 ·
What makes an ISSCA National an ISSCA National?

Its the combination of five events 1) Car Show 2) Drag Race 3) Auto Cross 4) Road Course and 5) Sound Off plus a bonus event Push Drags, take any one event away and you don’t have a National. The BoD is charged by the by – laws Article XI Section 1 sub a sub 1: "Provide an event location with appropriate show and racing venues", since the precedent has been set these past two years leaving out any of the five events would require that the event is NOT an ISSCA National but an ISSCA Sanctioned event. The folks who suggested E- Town knew there was no Road Course at the time of their proposal they had been lead to believe however the Road Course was going to be finished. It turns out that by the time the BoD had traveled to E-Town to check out the facilities the Road Course folks were less than encouraging about finishing the track in time. Scratch one event. Second concern is the Drag Races at all previous ISSCA events we have had full complete use of the Drag Race strip we didn’t have to share it with any other events or car clubs, the E- Town event requires ISSCA to share the track. Scratch a second event. So you see the E-Town proposal won’t suffice for an ISSCA NATIONAL event. Can you imagine the folks traveling from say Oklahoma or Texas or Utah to E-Town to find out that the National wasn’t a National (that is it was missing a Road Course and they had to share the Drag Strip), talk about pissing some people off, that would be a greater disaster than realizing [even at this late date] that the event might need to be moved.
Thus the BoD is doing there very best to find an alternative that will meet the established criteria for an ISSCA NATIONAL and with the help of the folks up in the area I’m confident they will do just that. After all that is the job of the Board of Directors of ISSCA (see Article XI of the ISSCA By-Laws).

Rick “Highway” Matthews

Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Chuck Spera brought ISSCA to Upstate New York.
Drove in from Michigan on February 2002 to be with UNYISSO and explain what ISSCA is all about.

Chuck at Key Motors talking with few UNYISSO members.

Back then, Chuck was the VP of ISSCA.

Before Chuck arrived to Albany and Saratoga County.
UNYISSO only had the 1st issue of the ISSCA Magazine to know about this National Club.
Distributed thru our founding member Alex Ernst.

It would be nice to know what's going on so the ISSCA members can understand.

Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Highway SS<

I don't believe this thread is about the 05 Nationals. This thread is about the expulsion of a member of ISSCA, A former Officer of ISSCA and one of the people who helped form ISSCA.

This thread is about wether or not those that are currently running ISSCA have lost the vision of why myself and a group of Club leaders and interested parties met at the I2K event and decided that there needed to be a national Impala club.

My personal belief is that yes, the current leadership has issues which must be addressed.
I have been vocal in my displeasure of the way things have been done and that is why I had decided that it was time I put up or shut up and ran for a directors position. Which I was elected to.

I don't know all the facts in Chucks expulsion but I am waiting to hear the rest of the story before I form an opinion of what happened. This does not mean I approve of, or disapprove of what happened, it means I want to make an informed opinion.

If the expulsion was done "correctly" according to ISSCA bylaws and has the necessary supporting hard evidence then while being an upsetting and humiliating experience to Chuck, then so be it.

HOWEVER, if done incorrectly with no supporting evidence and for nothing more than Chuck being and obstacle to someones vision of what ISSCA should be, then THAT PERSON/PERSONS is guilty of far worse offenses than Chuck ever has and has done more damage to ISSCA Chuck ever could.
It is that person/persons whose expulsion should be mandated and demanded by the members, if the action against Chuck was purely Impalatics.

I'm going to await ISSCA's "OFFICIAL" statement on this matter.

I'm going to urge every member of ISSCA to get in contact with your Regional Director and ask them what is going on and inform them of how you feel and what you want out of ISSCA.
1 - 20 of 268 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.