Tell AICP To Charge Fair Fees For Continuing Education Providers

Signatures 733 total

Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, ... 15 › »

1. 1
   Name: Anonymous on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
2. 2
   Name: Stuart Meck on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments: AICP must open itself up, and post minutes and all reports that support its agendas in advance of meetings. It also must provide open forums where Commissioners meet with Certified Planners on all issues affecting the organization. It must cease being a secretive and insular organization.

   Flag
3. 3
   Name: Robert Torzynski, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments: I have taken two multi-day courses formerly certified for AICP "continuing professional education" that were advertised as such - offered by Virginia Tech and by the National Transit Institute. Both courses were taken AFTER the AICP Board adopted its ill-conceived regime. In spite of the efforts of both providers to obtain grandfathered credit for the courses, AICP has stonewalled. This is an unconscionable RIP-OFF of the AICP membership and extremely high quality providers! So far I have spent more than $1,000 for courses that would have been provided SUBSTANTIAL (probably over 20 units total) credits under the Continuing Professional Development Program. But under the new regime, NEITHER one was provided SQUAT due to AICP's self-serving posture.

   Flag
4. 4
   Name: Lee Senior on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
5. 5
   Name: Richard Rojas on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 6
   Name: David A. Nicholson on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments: I have worked with the Michigan Association of Planning educational program for many years. We strive to provide educational opportunities for citizens and professionals. It is unreasonable to expect MAP, a chapter of APA, to obtain certification for each of our educational programs. Education - not APA/AICP revenue generation - should be the goal of certification maintenance.

   Flag
7. 7
   Name: Matt Bennett on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments: This states with fact what I had been wondering about - APA/AICP should make a change.

   Flag
8. 8
   Name: Sam Trebilcock on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments: Not only is it unfair to providers, but it is unfair by geography also. Rural planners will have much difficulty in finding certified CM courses with all this red-tape

   Flag
9. 9
   Name: Kevin Kennedy, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

   Comments: This system has to chage... Our profession has been built on equal access, open input and responce to current and future market demands.

   Flag
10. 10
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I would really like to see this issue resolved. I do not feel good about being a part of such unfair practices and find myself unable to support such a system.

    Flag
11. 11
    Name: Leonardo Vazquez on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
12. 12
    Name: Marc Bierdzinski, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I will not support any APA/AICP member up for election that does not pledge to change this unfair CM system that has been established.

    Flag
13. 13
    Name: Jung Ho Shin on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: The very core values of planning process are transparency and participation. If we cannot resolve our own matters, what does it convey to the general public Also credit requirement needs to be graduated, so that 20+ year AICPs can be exempted from credit maintenance. After all, these people are giving lectures and it does not make sense to have same requirements as 1st year people.

    Flag
14. 14
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: Yes definitely! I am trying to provide CM credits for a conference and it is way too expensive.

    Flag
15. 15
    Name: Michael Rumer on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
16. 16
    Name: Christopher Brown AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I agree with the entier petition. the CM program is unfair and expensive. Much of the coursewrok I have seen is irrelevent to my profession (Env/Natural Resource planning) as well. The whole system is designed to force you to attend the conferences.

    Flag
17. 17
    Name: Christopher Brown AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I agree with the entier petition. the CM program is unfair and expensive. Much of the coursewrok I have seen is irrelevent to my profession (Env/Natural Resource planning) as well. The whole system is designed to force you to attend the conferences.

    Flag
18. 18
    Name: Jennifer Cowley on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
19. 19
    Name: Richard M. Gilmour on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: Please make it easier for busy planners like myself to maintain our AICP certification. The Annual Conference is not available for me unless I present or my firm is a sponsor. Both of these are not likely to occur.

    Flag
20. 20
    Name: Christina Michaelian on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
21. 21
    Name: Jeffrey P. Damon, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I agree with the statements of this Petition and encourage APA/AICP to modify the existing program to better serve all members of the profession.

    Flag
22. 22
    Name: Stuart G. Baker on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 23
    Name: Meghan Shepard on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
24. 24
    Name: Susan Winchell on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: The Inland Empire Section of APA WA Chapter serves planners in more remote jurisdictions that need to rely on on-line resources. Planetizen and Ohio State have provided excellent courses to our members and we need more opportunities to learn.

    Flag
25. 25
    Name: Jessica Frost on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I'm signing this as an AICP members and Vice President on the NM Chapter of APA.

    Flag
26. 26
    Name: Susan Winchell on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: The Inland Empire Section of APA WA Chapter serves planners in more remote jurisdictions that need to rely on on-line resources. Planetizen and Ohio State have provided excellent courses to our members and we need more opportunities to learn.

    Flag
27. 27
    Name: Forest K. Bates, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 28
    Name: G. Sasha Forbes on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: Continuing education is valuable...however it must be required by the APA/AICP within just and equitable reasoning.

    Flag
29. 29
    Name: Leslie Kane, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: In recent discussions with our local chapter, as a result of the CM inflexibility and bizarre requirements that not only hurt educational providers but also their own members, I have notified them I have no intention of maintaining educational points and will not be remaining a certified planner. Its ridiculous. A program doomed to failure as it stands, which is unfortunate because continuing education is critical to a profession.

    Flag
30. 30
    Name: Thomas R. Wilson III, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 31
    Name: Michele Mellgren, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: Continuing education is valuable, but the program established is punative. Employers, whether public or private, are not going to bear the time and expense to ensure that all AICP staff maintain their certification. If APA and the Institute truly feel that continuing education is valuable, these educational opportunities should be made widely available and little or no cost.

    Flag
32. 32
    Name: James Lenner on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 33
    Name: Stephen Burstein on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: The certification program is off to a very bad start, and needs to be immediately addressed. It needs to be fair and low cost for planners as well as the offerers of continuing education.

    Flag
34. 34
    Name: Paul Zucker on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: Every other year I offer a two day Complete Management Course for Planners in eleven cities. I have tried to keep my registrations costs as well as hotel costs as low as possible knowing that most students are government employees with difficult government budgets. I am a strong supporter of mandatory continuing education but the way the costs are currently is not workable.

    Flag
35. 35
    Name: Darrin Brightman on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I was planning to sit for the AICP exam later this year. Instead, as it is not required for my current position, I believe I will wait until APA revises this program to encourage the best-quality continuing education for AICP members.

    Flag
36. 36
    Name: James Shoemaker, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I agree one-hundred percent.

    Flag
37. 37
    Name: Charles Y. Deknatel on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
38. 38
    Name: Froda Greenberg on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: The design and implementation of the CM program has been disgraceful and an embarrassment to the profession. If APA/AICP can't do something as simple as this well, how can we help communities plan for their future

    Flag
39. 39
    Name: Stephen Rynas on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: The current registration practice essentially precludes continuing education credits for for courses being conducted by Federal/State/local agencies where the participants may only include one planner and would involve the agency conducting the course to pay a registration fee for a non-employee.

    Flag
40. 40
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: I know people who are going to let their certification expire as it is too difficult for them to get their credits in this geographic area.

    Flag
41. 41
    Name: Eric R Stoller, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
42. 42
    Name: Eric R Stoller, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
43. 43
    Name: Nancy Welch on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
44. 44
    Name: Scott F. Ramage on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: The issues raised in the petition are valid, and have been raised throughout our department's planning staff. We have also found that many excellent courses are not being certified for CM credits because the course providers cannot afford the CM registration fees.

    Flag
45. 45
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 46
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
47. 47
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: My signature here indicates that I support the idea of mandatory certification maintenance that is fair, affordable, accessible and generally non-competitive in nature. I do not support money-making schemes that operate under the guise of certification maintenance.

    Flag
48. 48
    Name: Sharon Maclean, AICP on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
49. 49
    Name: Angie Gidley on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: Additionally, APA's courses should be evaluated by an outside/3rd party source. Approving one's own courses is a conflict of interest.

    Flag
50. 50
    Name: David Bergman on Mar 6, 2008

    Comments: Its a transparent money grab by APA. Nothing more nothing less.

    Flag

Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, ... 15 › »