Tell AICP To Charge Fair Fees For Continuing Education Providers

Signatures 734 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ... 15 › »

1. 151
   Name: Jason Haremza on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments: I find it to be one of life's great ironies that APA, the professional organization for planners, who are trained to be open, transparent, and inclusive in their life's work, operates in such a closed and "top down" manner. Are the people at APA not PLANNERS!! Do they not remember the need to gather citizen (i.e. member) input in a MEANINGFUL way and address the concerns The management of APA are planners in the way that Robert Moses was a planner.

   Flag
2. 152
   Name: Michelle Johnson on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments: The CM program has killed our local Florida Planning and Zoning Association. Attendance to our functions has been zero for the last two months, where prior it was typically 30-50. The process as set up does not promote quality educational opportunities, but a means for fulfilling yet another meaningless requirement.

   Flag
3. 153
   Name: Deborah L. Brett on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments: The current system is unfair. It's a way for national APA/AICP to generate revenues at the expense of non-profit content providers and those of us who teach these classes. There is little money to attract quality instructors for anything other than short conference sessions if the providers have to pay so much to AICP to have the course approved.

   Flag
4. 154
   Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
5. 155
   Name: Dennis J. Enslinger, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 156
   Name: TONY PALERMO on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments: OR ELIMINATE CM ALTOGETHER BECAUSE IT WAS A BAD IDEA IN THE FIRST PLACE.

   Flag
7. 157
   Name: Michael Crane on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 158
   Name: Sam Casella on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 159
   Name: Lilith Yanagimachi on Mar 7, 2008

   Comments: I agree that the CM program could use review and revision. I hope these issued can be addressed soon as I would like to advance my planning career/knowledge/ability through the AICP program.

   Flag
10. 160
    Name: James Burnett on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: Plus, with poor economy and cities and counties unwilling to send planners to out-of-state planning conferences and the like, many planners will unlikely be able to amass the required credits over a 2-year period.

    Flag
11. 161
    Name: Margo M Thibeault on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
12. 162
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: I think it's an example of professional hubris that APA/AICP staff believes they are more qualified to judge the value of continuing education than the professional educators at accredited planning schools. So far, the sessions offered by APA for CM credits seem to be geared toward those who know little or nothing about the subject matter, so would not be helpful for maintenance in any event.

    Flag
13. 163
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
14. 164
    Name: Byron Johnson on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: Reciprocity with other professions should be added.

    Flag
15. 165
    Name: Jason Burton, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: While it was necessary to have CM in order to get rid of the Engineers that aren't really planners entering the AICP pool, it's apparent that the ocean of education out there is getting burnt. Further, professional time spent for EIT's and the like should not be also allocated toward AICP time to qualify to sit for the exam. These and other issues are other systemtic things that need to be fixed rather than the CM program.

    Flag
16. 166
    Name: Randall Rutsch on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: I strongly support a program of continued professional education but the clear bias against universities in the current fee structure needs to be fixed. Academic researchers provide some of the most creative ideas to the field and we should make it easier for them to share these with working professionals, not harder.

    Flag
17. 167
    Name: David W. Depew, PhD, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: The currently administered program is exclusionary in nature, unworkable in its implementation, and discriminiatory in its application. While CM is important for the profession, this program does not benefit either the existing AICP members or potential new members. The intent of hte CM program should be to spread the benefits of continuing education, not increase attendance at the national and chapter conferences. The implementation parameters of the current program are starkly in contrast to the aspirational goals found in the new ethics principles.

    Flag
18. 168
    Name: Tomasz S. Bielecki PP, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
19. 169
    Name: Alyce Decker, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: Amazing how the once reasonable goal has been lost in the now obvious managing!

    Flag
20. 170
    Name: William C. Mann, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: One example in the articlecited under the 'predatory' discussion talks about the costs for to certify a second party (non-APA) two-day, 14 hr session. By far the most enriching and valuable planning-related education I have been exposed to in my 24 years of practiceis the annual ESRI International GIS USer conference in San Diego. The cost to certify the many planning-related courses and sessions for AICP credit would be astounding. Interestingly, the head of ESRI, Jack Dangermond is a key speaker at this year's national conference in Vegas. Maybe there will be some sort of meeting of the minds between ESRI and APA afterwards.

    Flag
21. 171
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: The new AICP Certificate of Maintenance dissuaded me from obtaining the AICP certification. The annual dues to National APA, Local APA Chapter, AICP and the new AICP Certificate of Maintenance are too costly to join. I urge you to revise the Certificate of Maintenance structure and make it fair for planners who are currently certified and those who wish to become certified. Thanks,

    Flag
22. 172
    Name: Tracy D. Kulikowski, JD, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 173
    Name: Susan Stoddard on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: Planners deserve access the best professional development resources possible. I believe the current approach will reduce rather than enhance education options and work against the very goal of an informed and up-to-date profession. I urge AICP to consider the changes recommended here, in the spirit of continuous improvement of this new and, to date, flawed program of certification.

    Flag
24. 174
    Name: Wendy Johnston on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: Please make the CM credits affordable for providers and AICP members otherwise too many planners will be forced to drop their certification.

    Flag
25. 175
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
26. 176
    Name: Christopher M. Gratz, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
27. 177
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 178
    Name: P. Danielle Easter on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
29. 179
    Name: Patricia A. Tobin on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
30. 180
    Name: Tracey M. Clothier on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 181
    Name: James M. Martin, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: I could not agree more with article. The American Planning association is way off base with Certification maintenance program under its current configuration. The current configuration is not supported by the value of planning in the market place.

    Flag
32. 182
    Name: Tracy Miller, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 183
    Name: Connery Cepeda on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 184
    Name: Chris Fales on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: The CM program should be run for the purpose of continuing education, not as a profit center.

    Flag
35. 185
    Name: J. Michael Lane on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 186
    Name: Michael Stumpf on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: The certification maintenance program is fundementally flawed and a disservice to members of AICP. While some form of certification maintenance is desirable, the existing system does nothing but raise the costs of professional involvement for AICP members.

    Flag
37. 187
    Name: Barry C. Wolfe on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: Agree completely with article

    Flag
38. 188
    Name: Gregg Woodruff on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: The CM program is a great concept and should be part of AICP certification. However, it does seem that the fee structure could limit members educational opportunities in the future if programs are priced out of the market. Does the CM program really cost that much to administer that the fees need to be so large If so, maybe a small increase in membership fees could help cover that cost.

    Flag
39. 189
    Name: Timothy J. Thompson, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
40. 190
    Name: Lawrence M Conrad AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: I think that the CM program was a mistake from the beginning. -- I am seriously considering giving up my AICP certification as a result the problems associated with the CM program

    Flag
41. 191
    Name: Jodie Clark, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: It is difficult to find CM classes, given UC Davis is not participating. It is also disappointing the CEQA classes do not qualifiy, given this is my main specialty of work.

    Flag
42. 192
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: I am begining to wonder why I need the AICP. Besides this issue, AICP administration is slow in responding to requests for help and information and are mostly inaccessible in my experience.

    Flag
43. 193
    Name: Nicole Crutchfield on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
44. 194
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: I am begining to wonder why I need the AICP. Besides this issue, AICP administration is slow in responding to requests for help and information and are mostly inaccessible in my experience.

    Flag
45. 195
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: As someone who is taking this exam this fall and going back to school to earn an MLA, I am very concerned how I can keep my certification for three years when I am studying landscape architecture. This system is flawed and needs to be fixed.

    Flag
46. 196
    Name: Dean Grandin on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
47. 197
    Name: Laura Fink AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: We need to make this program affordable and time-efficient for City Workers, who do not get reimbursed for our time or expenses!

    Flag
48. 198
    Name: Lani Ravin, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: I just recently received AICP certification. I would look forward to CM classes but it looks like this system will make the classes I'm eyeing not able to offer CM credits. This makes little sense. Why reinvent the wheel Better to copy a system that has been working for years, and then tweak it as necessary (incremental planning...)

    Flag
49. 199
    Name: Karen Countryman on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 200
    Name: Chris Zahas, AICP on Mar 7, 2008

    Comments: APA must find a way to allow ULI events to qualify - they are by far the most valuable conferences I go to.

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ... 15 › »