| # | Name | Comments |
|---|
| 101 | Jason Burke | I am currently planning to take the AICP test. However, the CM requirements are really an onerous component of this certification, and I am really questioning if it is worth it. The current budget of the City I work for is 'under strain' and not only are the costs of membership much higher than similar professional organizations (AIA, P.E), but also nowhere near as prestigious. Creating these CM requirements won't address the prestige of the AICP, but will only make it more expensive and unattractive to younger members of the field. Last weekend I meet with my AICP test study group, and half of the time we spent discussing the CM requirements and the cost implications (both in time and money). This is not a good program and I can report that many of us question the cost/benefit of this certification, considering the onerous CM requirements. Please make the necessary changes so that the AICP remains available to all those who qualify, not just those who work for agencies or firms with big budgets. |
| 102 | Hugh Taylor | As a AICP member, I have had difficulty in finding a variety of cost effective continuing ed options for cetificate maintenance. The modifications suggested in the petition would appear to improve this situation by removing barriers to provider participation. |
| 103 | Charles Connerly | |
| 104 | Brian Peters | |
| 105 | Kristen Crossney | |
| 106 | Anonymous | |
| 107 | Eugene Dashiell | Hello all,
In addition to the charges levied in the "planetizen" piece I add the following:
ESRI has stated to me that they have no intent of "paying" to have their courses listed with AICP. What, GIS is not a necessary part of the planning profession?
Aloha,
Gene |
| 108 | Stephanie Robinson | |
| 109 | Keith Hall | |
| 110 | Sarah L. Coffin, Ph.D. | |
| 111 | Haan-Fawn Chau | I must say that APA's unfair pricing structure for planning education makes me think twice about the true reasons for the organization's existence. I proudly joined APA because I thought its core mission was to push for a higher standard in the planning profession. However, it looks like the CM fees work against this essential goal. Why is it that the architects of AIA are outshining planners once again? |
| 112 | James A. Mathien | I agree. Some potential providersdo not charge fees to public agency employees., for example, the National Trasit Institute. So, how can they pay the high fes AICP requires when they do not receive any fuds from the erson nrolled in the training? The fee structure AICP hs established is excessive. IT appears that the CM program is more about "the money" than providig professional development. |
| 113 | Sung Kwon | As most agencies and planning consulting firms do not require AICP, it make those who have AICP to pay for CM credits out of pocket. The CM credits create a penalty for being certified. |
| 114 | Steven Fort | I generally agree. Program providers that are most convenient to me aren't even registering. The only way I will meet the requirements is to attend the state conference and horde all the credits I can. Not to mention the fact that the regulations under which I became a certified planner were changed out from under me. This whole program, while a good idea, is ill-conceived and not ready to be implemented. |
| 115 | Claudia Bitran | |
| 116 | Tracy Sato, AICP | I entirely agree. And, I feel that APA/AICP needs to better align their credits with what they really are for. If you attend a planning and LAW conference that has CM credits - it should count towards the 1.5 credits for planning law. These courses are, after all, also certified for the lawyers continuing eductation credits as well. |
| 117 | Anonymous | I am concerned about the availability and cost of training. The current program is too restrictive in that everything has to be from APA/AICP or other providers that have to be allowed by APa/AICP to pay APA/AICP. I have engineers working for me as well as planners, and requirements that registered professional engineers (that get a lot more money for their P.E.) are less onerous. |
| 118 | Lucy Galbraith | |
| 119 | Stacey Barron, AICP | |
| 120 | Thomas W. Burke, AICP | The AICP CM credit program needs to be restructured, particularly its fee structure. Lower, more fair and equitable fees are needed, in addition to fee waivers for non-profit, government agencies (such as the Florida Department of Transporation, here in FL). There currently are not enough transportation planning-focused opportunities for continuing education. |
| 121 | Anonymous | This article is spot on. The quality of the training from APA's Audio Seminar that I have received have been thus far "dumbed-down."
The added cost of training also will not be covered by my employer. They will pay for the certification (ie my dues), but not the CM. Meaning it comes out of my bottom-line.
Until this program becomes fair and equitable. It is not going to work.
I have even considered just letting the certification drop. You will see more planners making this choice. Many already feel that AICP brings little to them and the top-down, heavy-handedness of the way it was implemented has offended many who already fell that APA brings little to the planning profession as it is. |
| 122 | Pam Holocher AICP, Deputy Director Planning and Policy | Thanks for taking the time to challenge he new CM program and recommend sensible changes to the policy. |
| 123 | Jason S. Gaines, AICP | |
| 124 | Jason S. Gaines, AICP | |
| 125 | Elizabeth Hendley | As an AICP member whose employer does not cover my dues, least yet my continuing education expenses, it will be difficult for me to pay for ever-increasing course expenses on top of dues and subscription fees to keep current on the latest trends in the field. National conferences, with their inherant travel expenses, are also currently out of my reach financially. So my alternative is to take online classes and if APA continues to charge exhorbitant fees to providers that make classes financially out of my reach, I will most likely be unable to afford to keep my AICP certification. |
| 126 | Elizabeth Hendley | As an AICP member whose employer does not cover my dues, least yet my continuing education expenses, it will be difficult for me to pay for ever-increasing course expenses on top of dues and subscription fees to keep current on the latest trends in the field. National conferences, with their inherant travel expenses, are also currently out of my reach financially. So my alternative is to take online classes and if APA continues to charge exhorbitant fees to providers that make classes financially out of my reach, I will most likely be unable to afford to keep my AICP certification. |
| 127 | Elizabeth Hendley | As an AICP member whose employer does not cover my dues, least yet my continuing education expenses, it will be difficult for me to pay for ever-increasing course expenses on top of dues and subscription fees to keep current on the latest trends in the field. National conferences, with their inherant travel expenses, are also currently out of my reach financially. So my alternative is to take online classes and if APA continues to charge exhorbitant fees to providers that make classes financially out of my reach, I will most likely be unable to afford to keep my AICP certification. |
| 128 | Raymond Hess | |
| 129 | Melanie Mullens | I will be eligable to take the AICP exam this year, but I don't have the funds to keep up with the certification requirements as they are now. |
| 130 | Tracie Bunce | I have stopped paying my APA/AICP dues until the cost of obtaining our "education" decreases to a level I can comfortably afford as a part-time planner. |
| 131 | Justin Dula, AICP | |
| 132 | Anonymous | |
| 133 | John | |
| 134 | Kevin Geiger, AICP | Planners should seek to be continuously educated. There are many worthy avenues to do this within state, and these should be just as easy to qualify as APA's own programs (which, at the APA conference, are generally not as rigorous as workshops our staff puts on.) |
| 135 | Diane V. Carlton | APA is using CM as a self-serving, money makign scheme that will only allow well endowed, private sector planners to maintian their AICP status. That, in and of itself, goes against their equity rules, but then APA is "do as I say, not as I do" in so much of how it operates. Apparently, it only wants to deal with wealthy, private sector, urban planners and to heck with the rest of us. This petition is a step in the right direction, but in my opinion, the whole APA Board and structure needs an over haul. They have shown with this program how out of touch and condescending they are to those of us that make under 50K a year and work in areas of less than 50,000 population. |
| 136 | Anonymous | |
| 137 | Harriet Jane Brattain | |
| 138 | Lawrence T. Ward Jr. AICP | I agree with the article, I support the Petition, and am calling on APA /AICP to have a proper discussion and meaningful debate on this issue. For an organization that supposedly prides itself on dialogue, meaningful input, and fairness of decisions to pull a stunt like AICP has is disgraceful and I submit that it violates at the very least the spirit of the AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, Item A. 4) (a planner must strive to give citizens an opportunity for meaningful impact on the development of plans and programs). The Code's preamble states "The Code's standards of behavior provide a basis for adjudicating any charge that a member has acted unethically. However, the Code also provides more than the minimum threshold of enforceable acceptability. It sets aspriational standards that require conscious striving to attain."
I've been involved with APA for more than 20 years. I am Secretary of Wisconsin Chapter of APA. I am very seriously considering dropping my APA national membership and AICP and simply maintaining my Chapter membership. I am shocked and saddened by the "if you don't like it, get lost" elitist attitude of our supposedly enlightened AICP leaders. |
| 139 | Rex Curry | I will continue to advocate in favor of institutions that have the foresight to establish non-regressive membership retention and development policies and against those who disregard the principles of fairness. |
| 140 | Charles Jones | AICP #017904 |
| 141 | Melanie A. Jewett, AICP | Had I known that the CM process would be so onerous and expensive, I would not have bothered to take the exam. |
| 142 | Aaron Reisner | The AIA model makes much more sense. Charging alternative providers by the course restricts a large number of quality courses from providing CM credits. |
| 143 | Sarah Raposa | As a student planner transitioning to municipal planning, the thought of asking my financially strapped employer to cover the exorbitant cost of conference and CE registrations, materials, and travel expenses FRIGHTENS me! We’re doing community service as it is! |
| 144 | Thomas E. Deller | Please be advised that after more then 20 years I am most likely going to drop my AICP membership and no longer require AICP membership for employment in our Planning Department because of a badly implemented conitinuing education requirement; a requirement that I had supported. |
| 145 | Albert V. Ranaldi, Jr. | I offered my suggestions during the public comment portion of the CM program creation. All of my opinion came from the point of view of a small town planner. It appeared that the CM program was going to develop a program that would accommendate this planner. When the program was adopted, the opposite was true. It is VERY disappointing that an organization that was formed to help all segments of the population, have developed a program that would elimiate the less fortunate planners. |
| 146 | Keelia Wright | |
| 147 | Patricia A. Nickles AICP | |
| 148 | Rebecca Retzlaff | |
| 149 | Rocco Ferraro | Though I support the CM requirement conceptually and in practice, the fee structure and process established by APA is unacceptable and needs to be revised. |
| 150 | Roberta Cameron | I feel these changes are the least that are needed to fix this program. There are many serious problems with it. |