This month’s editor’s letter starts with a confession. It took multiple attempts to land on how to present the idea of encouraging discussion on a matter that affects the asphalt industry at large.
I want to encourage members of our asphalt industry to ask questions, make suggestions and be engaged when it comes to the potential formation of a relationship among four associations in the larger construction industry of which we are a part. Let me introduce the idea and suggest what I hope can come from the proposed collaborative relationship.
Anyone who’s followed my career knows I’m a proponent of collaboration and not afraid of change, but I recognized familiar concerns creeping up on me while reading an email that went out to the National Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA) membership June 12.
The letter was co-signed by chairmen of the four trade associations that would participate in the idea being brought forth. While I’m not personally familiar with the current chairmen of the National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA), the American Cement Association (ACA), or the National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (NSSGA), I do know and have a great deal of respect for current NAPA Chairman Patrick Nelson, Lehman-Roberts, A Granite Company.
I acknowledge Nelson’s company, along with many others in the asphalt industry, conducts business in both asphalt and concrete spheres. I trust Nelson to be able to separate those interests when representing our asphalt industry at events or during lobbying efforts where asphalt pavement methods might be in competition with others. My hope is any collaboration among aggregate, asphalt and concrete associations would ensure the asphalt contingent gets its proper seat at any table, and I’m sure there are excellent ways members of the industry can ensure that.
Staff at the associations are exploring ways they can work together to “increase our collective impact.” The letter I received states they’ve hired McKinley Advisors to identify opportunities where the four can “collaborate more closely and deliver greater value to our members.” This sounds like a laudable and exemplary goal for any group of associations who have a subset of overlapping interests.
Personally, I want identified opportunities to include ways to lobby together for construction interests in Washington, D.C. I want it to mean the four entities can combine forces to prevent any reversal of common-sense stormwater regulations. I’d like to see the combined construction industry work together on common-sense silica dust mitigation across all sectors. And so on.
What opportunities do you see for a collaboration among these four associations? What questions or suggestions would you have for the staff at these associations to ensure your dues-paying interests are represented well? I’m interested in a healthy conversation that stems from considering collaborative efforts, but, as I did when a similar collaborative-association topic came up eight or 10 years ago, I encourage focusing on topics that concern and affect our industry. You’re welcome to reach out to me.
Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender