Praying for the End of Daze

The NCARB elite have determined that continuing education cannot be carried over after a year. Let me say that again: Continuing education cannot be carried over after a YEAR. By consensus, they have decreed that all acceptable learning can only be done incrementally, 12 hours per year, forever. Otherwise, architects are not competent. Sound logic indeed.

College, it appears, is still safe. University degrees are allowed to carry over - so far. If NCARB was in charge, each junior would lose credit for their freshman year, each senior would lose credit for their sophomore year, and so on, until college degrees would no longer be able to be attained. What a joke.

Less is Less

This has been a very disappointing year with the AIA. The architects on the AIA/SC Board were able to send out a mass mailing weakening the enforcement of the building code, went to a national convention to debate whether non-architects could be regional directors of the American Institute of Architects, refused to publish news about the LLR failure to include construction observation as a basic architectural service, and generally went belly up understanding the role of our professional organization. It has become more of a boy scout camp where they earn leadership merit badges but the real professionals are not playing. What a waste of time.

The LLR made more great strides by finally approving electronic seals on drawings, something most firms have been doing for twenty-five years. They also changed license renewal to every two years and decided that we are allowed to carry over our learning for two years, although they still don't know what learning they are allowing to be carried over.

I renewed my license in Alabama and noticed that they now have a form that you must fill out in case you are not performing CA services. The Board gets the form and sends a letter to the owner stating why CA by architects is important. There is no point to it and they admit that there is no penalty for not sending in the form and that they will never find out what is going on anyway. The Executive Director said that she didn't think their program was working. Brilliant.

Alabama also said that continuing education could "not include day-to-day activities," a strangely nationwide decision to make learning unobtainable at work. I have found no architects or board members that think you can learn at work. I must be going mad. I keep learning things every day in spite of myself. But I always remember not to remember it after the board sanctioned time limit. What was I saying? I forgot.

I can only hope that doctors are not as stupid as architects seem to be. When I check in a hospital, I don't want to find a doctor who forgot what he learned two years ago. God help us all.

Can you hear me now?

More of the same from the LLR and AIA. After a statewide email to the AIA/SC Board Members, the response from our AIA/SC president was prompt, courteous and useless. My request, in a nutshell, was for communication between the LLR and the state's architects to be 2-way instead of the "I'll tell you what we are doing" method. Her answer? I'll tell you what Dennis Ward said in our next newsletter. Not "Good idea, I'll give you a call to see what we can put together." But the same old - don't call us, we'll call you.

As the board members polish off their resumes with respectable positions in our state and professional groups, they thrive on meaningless issues while the architectural profession slowly becomes irrelevant. They are content wondering about recycled materials and alternative energy and have let basic public safety become compromised.

So far this year, AIA/SC claimed statewide support from architects for a "tort reform" measure to make ignoring the building code acceptable. No vote was ever taken. The president then flew to Florida to the National AIA convention to discuss why non-architects should not be Regional Directors of the AIA. Why this was ever considered, I'll never know.

The LLR punished more architects with thousands of dollars in fines for not recording continuing education activities. Meanwhile they imposed no fines on people practicing architecture without a license. The LLR continues to send Jan Simpson (not an architect) to represent our profession at national meetings. We can't find one architect to represent architects in our state?

As I've mentioned before, Jan stated the the LLR Board is definitely not "pro architect". When I last presented my request for better communications to the LLR Board, Jan said that the architects in Virginia were kicking and screaming when they passed the mandatory continuing education law. What Jan saw as "kicking and screaming" were actually legitimate comments from the architects in that state. Since Jan thinks that architects' comments are not worth anything, better communication with the LLR may be impossible. If she was a practicing architect, maybe she would understand what I was talking about. I cannot support sending this woman to represent me at national meetings. No architect can.

I'm going to try again and get this ball rolling. The state cannot continue to make laws that affect us without some sort of dialogue and accountability. The AIA cannot sleepily go along with everything. Oh, and congratulations LLR, for finally allowing electronic seals on drawings instead of rubber stamps. I've been putting electronic seals on drawings since 1985. You're 25 years late.

See Jane Run

Our current AIA South Carolina president, Jane Fredrick, is missing in action. The last two emails I sent to her were never answered. She must be gone. Or maybe something else has happened. Or she's hiding from something.

I asked her why the AIA South Carolina letter endorsing mandatory CA by architects disappeared from the records. I asked her why the news about CA was never mentioned in the newsletters. Her response - nothing. What is going on?

I think the AIA is scared of contractors and construction managers. I think she is running like a girl.

Global Conflict

The NCARB consists of non-elected board members from all over the country. Once a proud group that established minimum standards for architectural practice, they now see themselves as the new universities, deciding how, what and when architects may learn. They are on the brink of establishing a nationwide system of "continuing education" that will permanently end the idea that architects can learn on their own. Welcome to the latest conflict of interest. The group will require continuing education that they approve and sell the books and tests you will have to take to meet the requirements. Hello monopoly. Hello dictatorship.

OK guys. You can't make the rules and sell the books. It is a conflict of interest. I fully expect the NCARB library to blossom very soon to take care of this "increased demand." We need to take a long hard look at any group that determines your learning may not be "carried over" (how about college?) and that you can't learn through architectural practice. These folks are a few continuing education books short of common sense learning. No seminar for that I guess.

The Plot Thickens

I just had the misfortune to read the November '09 meeting minutes of the LLR Board of Architectural Examiners. They're at it again, chasing those evil architects that are missing seminars. Two architects mentioned in the text were fined $2,000 for not keeping continuing education up to date. But a new twist has occurred. Instead of revoking their license, they get to keep it going until a grace period for compliance elapses. What? Have they changed their ways? The threats about libel may have struck a chord with the board attorney. And a more sinister addition to the disciplinary actions gives me chills. They now make the victim sign away any legal recourse or judicial review of their actions - just in case Clay was right. They may still get in trouble for this.

They are circling the wagons a little at the time. Is this an admittance that revoking the license was a bad thing to do? Is this a small victory? I'm sure they will never admit it. It is curious though...

Name Calling

I'm still amazed by the name "Board of Architectural Examiners." They don't really examine anyone, they just keep a list of names of people trying to take the national test. Even if they did, what would qualify them as architectural? Are they columns or architraves? Nope, they only take fees and chase people that don't take seminars they approve of. Pretty meaningless really. So what's a better name for the group? Board of Architects sounds regal but not all of them are architects. Wouldn't want to confuse the public. Board of Architecture is also out. They don't have anything to do with that, thank God. Broad of Architecture might be a good name for Jan, but she ain't an architect. Sorry Jan. No, can't think of anything good to call them. Nothing good at all.