I can haz revolooshun now?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

and as an example of how private regulation might pan out.  around here pe's sign on with a company agree to not freelance on their own time. they have to keep their stamp locked up in company safe

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

No, see what the government flunky is mad about is that someone isn't "respectin' his authoritay!!!!"  How DARE the CITIZEN'S disagree with his decree from on high, and then actually DARE to prove him WRONG?  What he's terrified of, is that someone just threatened his position in government.  They not only proved he was wrong, but they did it without a 17 month multi-million dollar study.

Uh, no, they didn't prove anything of the sort.  At most, all they proved was that the city engineer can distinguish real engineering work from fakery, and that he takes his job seriously enough not to tolerate the latter when it comes to public safety.

I'm not surprised that the city engineer would want to know who produced the report he was asked to rely on.  By all accounts, it had the quality of college-level engineering work.  That means it was either really crummy work done by an actual engineer, or a really good amateur effort by non-engineers.  

The state licensing board will try to find out who wrote the fake report, then send a letter asking him/her not to do it again.  That'll be the end of it.  

[French G.]

All I know is that in several towns I lived in a retarded 3rd grader could have done a better job timing the traffic lights than the engineers that did it. And that would just be on the kid's window licking breaks.

[White Horseradish]

This thread got me interested enough to check the requirements for a PI license in MN. All I can say is, holy crap...

$1000 license fee. 3 years experience in LE, PI company, or equivalent. $10000 surety bond. 12 hours initial and 6 hours continuing training. If you choose to be armed, initial armed training to include first aid and CPR and 6 hours of armed training a year on top of the other training. Training to be approved by the state.

Looks like the PI industry in our state is an ex-cop club slightly diluted by relatively large corporations. Not cheap, either.

[wuluf]

I hold several pest control licenses in California, including termite inspector.  The over-all licensing authority is the Consumer Protection Agency, due to the many years of fraud in this industry.  It is not difficult work, some of it a monkey can do. (and does, just call Terminix)  But consumers need a place to go with ethics complaints. The threat of losing your license to perform your job keeps at least some people in line. 

[geronimotwo]

i am a contractor.  my county does not license contractors. period.  some out of town banks insist that a contractor have a license, or they will not fund a project.    i try to explain that i have all the proper business certificates, but they have their policies.  if the owner would like their loan, they need to hire from outside the county.

[RaspberrySurprise]

Uh, no, they didn't prove anything of the sort.  At most, all they proved was that the city engineer can distinguish real engineering work from fakery, and that he takes his job seriously enough not to tolerate the latter when it comes to public safety.

I'm not surprised that the city engineer would want to know who produced the report he was asked to rely on.  By all accounts, it had the quality of college-level engineering work.  That means it was either really crummy work done by an actual engineer, or a really good amateur effort by non-engineers. 

The state licensing board will try to find out who wrote the fake report, then send a letter asking him/her not to do it again.  That'll be the end of it. 

The report was written to help support their petition to the local government, you know that whole petitioning for redress of grievances thing, not to sell anything nor were they in any way representing themselves as actual engineers.

Darn pesky First Amendment

[RocketMan]

Uh, no, they didn't prove anything of the sort.  At most, all they proved was that the city engineer can distinguish real engineering work from fakery, and that he takes his job seriously enough not to tolerate the latter when it comes to public safety.

I'm not surprised that the city engineer would want to know who produced the report he was asked to rely on.  By all accounts, it had the quality of college-level engineering work.  That means it was either really crummy work done by an actual engineer, or a really good amateur effort by non-engineers. 

The state licensing board will try to find out who wrote the fake report, then send a letter asking him/her not to do it again.  That'll be the end of it. 

Why should this get the .gov panties in a wad?  I can understand it getting the city traffic engineer's nickers all bunched as it has the potential to make him look bad, but the state DOT?  Yes, this does have all the hallmarks of, "You must respect my authoritay!"
From the article, the city engineer was not asked to rely on the amateur report.  It was submitted voluntarily by the citizen activist as his take on the subject. 
The analysis done by the amateur is not an official document, it was not submitted as such, and cannot be used in any official way by the state DOT.  Therefore, it cannot be a "fake" document as you put it.
And if that state's DOT practices allow or require a non-internal analysis to supercede their own work, they ought to have their arses hung out to dry.
The amateur report is just a "redress of grievances" presented in a very clear, well researched fashion.  The city traffic engineer and state DOT are doing their best to deny the local group's ability to do what is a fundamental right of any citizen.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Y'all are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, here.

The state DOT is involved because it's a major thoroughfare.  DOTs tend to be involved in that sorta thing.

There's no potential to make the local engineer look bad.  All indications are that he was doing his job the right way.  Kudos to him.

The local residents had a chance to do this the right way, but they chose not to.  The city engineer even told them how to do it, and was willing to work with them if they did.  This definitely isn't a "respect mah authority" kind of situation.

Nobody had their 1A rights violated.  Residents are always allowed to make requests on road projects like this one, and this time was no different.  These particular residents had plenty of opportunity to comment on the project, and despite their idiotic claims, nobody is trying to shut them up.  If it turns out that the residents wrote their own report, then absolutely nothing will come of it.

The reason it was reported to the licensing board is because there was speculation that this particular "petition" was produced behind the scenes for the residents by an apparently unqualified engineer.  If that's the case, it's a serious no-no within the profession and would be taken seriously.  Real deal civil engineers tend to be uptight about this sorta thing, they don't like bridges that fall down and highways that cause wrecks.

If it helps you understand it better, think of it like a doctor stumbling across a patient who was chopped up by some back ally surgeon.  Most conscientious doctors would report it to the medical examiners board, right?

There's really no reason for anyone to get indignant, here.  So far as I can tell this event is playing out exactly as it should.  

[KD5NRH]

Don't forget Private Investigators....who mostly do records searches on the Internet nowadays.... 

Pest control, in any form; if you want to be a handyman and put grates over dryer vents to keep rats out, you'll need to convince a pest control company to hire you so you can spend a minimum of two years working in the field to get licensed to go it on your own.

[RocketMan]

The reason it was reported to the licensing board is because there was speculation that this particular "petition" was produced behind the scenes for the residents by an apparently unqualified engineer.  If that's the case, it's a serious no-no within the profession and would be taken seriously.  Real deal civil engineers tend to be uptight about this sorta thing, they don't like bridges that fall down and highways that cause wrecks.

You completely missed the point, HTG.  This "report" was never, and can never, be an official document that will be acted on or used by the state DOT. It matters not a whit who researched, compiled and wrote it.  Reporting it to the licensing board was simply uncalled for.  It was meant to intimidate the citizen(s).
And yes, reporting it to the licensing board does make it an infringement on the citizen's rights, because there was absolutely no reason for doing so, logically or legally.

[Boomhauer]

Rigorous testing and verification of apprenticeship or mentoring relationships

*Snort* In my area, unless you are a member of the Good Ol' Boy network and know people, certifications are really given out for bribes, not actual skill/experience in a field...if you don't have either cash or connections, you aren't getting certified and you aren't getting hired, because there are plenty of people other than you who do have the cash or connections.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

lots of "professions" get real touchy about amateurs. they want/need folk to believe their trade is much harder than it is to justify rates.  you should see how lawyers get when they see a document done by a non lawyer.  or a doc when you do your own stitches.  i prepared some stuff in the late 70's that really ruffled some landsharks.  it was easy  i just found a previous successful case and copied the documents, changing names and dates.  which is exactly what most of them do.  or they have one of their staff do it for them.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

You completely missed the point, HTG.  This "report" was never, and can never, be an official document that will be acted on or used by the state DOT. It matters not a whit who researched, compiled and wrote it.  Reporting it to the licensing board was simply uncalled for.  It was meant to intimidate the citizen(s).
And yes, reporting it to the licensing board does make it an infringement on the citizen's rights, because there was absolutely no reason for doing so, logically or legally.

Actually, I think you've missed the point.  It doesn't matter what the intended purpose of the document was, or how "official" its use.  It appeared to be an example of a hack civil engineer practicing illegally, so it was treated accordingly.  That sorta thing tends to get peoples attention no matter where it turns up.  If that document had been presented to a private engineering firm it still likely would have been reported, and it wouldn't have been an attempt to silence or intimidate anyone then, either.

There is absolutely nothing sinister about what happened, here.

[Azrael256]

HTG, worst example ever.

But I do get the point, and it makes sense.  The presumption on the part of the engineer seems a bit offensive, but I'm not in the room, so there's a lot I'm missing.

I think everybody ought to re-read the part in HTG's post about the suspicion that it wasn't the residents petitoning the government, but was instead an unqualified ringer that they brought in.

[KD5NRH]

Actually, I think you've missed the point.  It doesn't matter what the intended purpose of the document was, or how "official" its use.  It appeared to be an example of a hack civil engineer practicing illegally, so it was treated accordingly.

"Practicing illegally" in what way?  Even if they do have a black market street corner engineer on loan from the Transportation Design Mafia, unless he's trying to present false credentials, there's no "practice" going on here.

For that matter, they may even have a real engineer with his state permission slip to think, who doesn't want his name attached to their results for whatever reason.  That's no more "practicing illegally" than if I have my doctor proofread a letter to the editor for medical mistakes without him accepting credit.

[KD5NRH]

It is not difficult work, some of it a monkey can do. (and does, just call Terminix)

Hey!  I resembled that remark until I burned my apprentice card and told them what they could do with their "ethics."

But consumers need a place to go with ethics complaints. The threat of losing your license to perform your job keeps at least some people in line.

That can be done without making the licensing requirements a significant bar to entry or (due to the requirement to find someone to employ you in the field and sponsor you for the tests) a means of allowing current licensees to restrict competition.  For example, last I checked, I could simply go get some training, take the tests, put in the flight hours, and become licensed as a commercial pilot, without ever having been employed as such.  Mandatory apprenticeship (regardless of the specific term used - WH's example of 3 years' experience in LE or PI work is effectively an apprenticeship) just lets the ones already in the business prevent new competition from coming into existence.

[Boomhauer]

For example, last I checked, I could simply go get some training, take the tests, put in the flight hours, and become licensed as a commercial pilot, without ever having been employed as such.

This is the case. Now, if it works well for an rather complex field, then why can't it work for something a lot more pedestrian?

[RocketMan]

It appeared to be an example of a hack civil engineer practicing illegally, so it was treated accordingly.  That sorta thing tends to get peoples attention no matter where it turns up.

Again, there is no "practice" here.  It is not an official document, it holds no official, sanctioned status.  Unless the state DOT, or anyone doing work for them, is accepting outside unsanctioned work, the report is meaningless except as a citizen's take on a traffic situation.
And if the DOT or their contractors are accepting such work, then they need to have their collective fannies handed to them.

[tokugawa]

This guy Lacy must be Nifongs brother in law . WTF is it about NC anyway?

[roo_ster]

This guy Lacy must be Nifongs brother in law . WTF is it about NC anyway?

Sawed off tyrants and their enablers?

[makattak]

The local residents had a chance to do this the right way, but they chose not to.  The city engineer even told them how to do it, and was willing to work with them if they did.  This definitely isn't a "respect mah authority" kind of situation.

Nobody had their 1A rights violated.  Residents are always allowed to make requests on road projects like this one, and this time was no different.  These particular residents had plenty of opportunity to comment on the project, and despite their idiotic claims, nobody is trying to shut them up.  If it turns out that the residents wrote their own report, then absolutely nothing will come of it.

The reason it was reported to the licensing board is because there was speculation that this particular "petition" was produced behind the scenes for the residents by an apparently unqualified engineer.  If that's the case, it's a serious no-no within the profession and would be taken seriously.  Real deal civil engineers tend to be uptight about this sorta thing, they don't like bridges that fall down and highways that cause wrecks.

If it helps you understand it better, think of it like a doctor stumbling across a patient who was chopped up by some back ally surgeon.  Most conscientious doctors would report it to the medical examiners board, right?

There's really no reason for anyone to get indignant, here.  So far as I can tell this event is playing out exactly as it should. 

Umm... yes, they had their rights violated.

They were just told they had no right to make any analysis on this situation unless they pony up the cash to someone granted part of the oligopoly by the state.

They were told they can't exercise their rights to petition the government without paying very large fees. That is a violation of their rights. The rest of this is the government angry that someone ignored their requirements for tribute to the correct guild. This credentialist crap has gone too far.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Umm... yes, they had their rights violated.

They were just told they had no right to make any analysis on this situation unless they pony up the cash to someone granted part of the oligopoly by the state.

They were told they can't exercise their rights to petition the government without paying very large fees. That is a violation of their rights. The rest of this is the government angry that someone ignored their requirements for tribute to the correct guild. This credentialist crap has gone too far.

Not exactly.  Nobody told them they couldn't bring their data before the city for review.  They are not being punished or targeted for bringing their data before the city.

The issue was always that there seemed a possibility someone was violating the codes of professional conduct that's expected of legitimate civil engineers.  That's what is being investigated, and there's nothing wrong with that.

It is right and proper that matters of public safety be handled by qualified, competent professionals.  You can argue that it needn't be the government that decides who is and isn't qualified, and you may have a point there.  But there does need to be some entity that guarantees competence when it comes to these sorts of jobs, and I think those standards ought be backed by force of law at some point.

This guy Lacy must be Nifongs brother in law . WTF is it about NC anyway?

I'm from Indiana originally, and I dealt with a lot of this stuff while I was working in commercial real estate up there.  I can tell you from experience that this story would have played out exactly the same way up there.  

The only thing unique about this situation here and now is that people are being foolish and getting their panties all in a bunch over stuff they don't understand.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I'm digging for an answer on this, and not finding anything, but I wonder if the city engineer isn't required by professional codes to report hack engineering work like this.  I can't seem to find the specif requirements here, but I've seen similar situations where someone in his position could be at jeopardy of losing his own qualifications if he ignores something like this.

As I said before, professions like this one tend to take this stuff seriously.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

professions like this one tend to take this stuff themselves too  seriously.