Public Architects Committee

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

  • 1.  Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-25-2024 05:42 PM
    Edited by Lisa Berretta 06-26-2024 05:13 PM

    I found it very interesting that at the AIA & Mayor's meeting recently held that AIA's EVP/CEO Lakisha Ann Woods, CAE, and AIA President Kimberly Dowdell, AIA, NOMAC, led a delegation to the 92nd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) June 20-23 in Kansas City, Mo., delivering the message that architects and mayors should be partners for progress. 

    From a recent AIA article about this, the AIA was told by mayors they would like an architects' database to use for recruiting architects to sit on board and commissions and to help with major projects. Mayors shared that their biggest challenge in collaborating with architects is funding. AIA leaders met individually with more than 15 U.S. mayors and connected with hundreds of other municipal leaders to listen and learn of their challenges and offering solutions from the architect's perspective.

    I recommend that the AIA leadership create a Public Architects membership rate specifically for those architects that work in a public agency.  Many, if not most agencies, especially at the city and county level do not pay the high annual dues.

    I have been advocating for this for almost 20 years since I was involved with the older Public Architects "PIA."  The committee at that time was able to get leadership to bring it to the board in an agenda item. It died there. Seems the practitioners that make up a majority do not care so much to create a special dues structure for licensed, public architects.

    I hope the current leadership takes action and follow's up to that conversation at a mayor's conference.

    Link to Article:  Mayors, architects unite at U.S. Conference of Mayors | The American Institute of Architects (aia.org)



    ------------------------------
    Michael Katzin, AIA
    Johns Creek, GA
    Member - Johns Creek Planning Commission
    ------------------------------



  • 2.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-26-2024 05:27 PM

    Michael,

    This proposal has been the perennial white whale PAKC has been chasing for years.  The rationale that was received as to why not was that if AIA National gave a dues break for public architects, then every other interest group within AIA would be asking for the same break. One way to parse it might be if they get a dues break, membership would increase and make their goal of 100,000 members (though the current total includes Emeritus, Assoc AIA, Hon AIA, etc.).  With increased emphasis on city architects, this proposal could be a stimulus towards achieving that corporate goal.



    ------------------------------
    Edmond Gauvreau, FAIA, F.SAME
    Washington, DC
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 05:40 PM
    It is good to hear from my friend and colleague Ed Gauvreau.  Since you are more in touch with this area today than me, you can speak to this better than I can  My question to you, my friend, is have we reached the point where a reduced rate will not suspend us in some junior status between an associate member and a "real" AIA member?  That was a significant concern all those years ago.  

    I would want to raise up our public architects, not diminish them.

    JIM





  • 4.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 06:39 PM
    Jim:
    Always great to hear from you.  

    Even with the current AIA President being a proponent of having City Architects, I don't believe there is traction to pursue a reduced membership cost for public architects without being denigrated for being less than a "real" architect, even with the changing of the guard and a new generation of architects practicing in new and unique ways.

    Despite having a current President who has practiced in both public and private sectors, and an incoming President who has built a career around almost everything except design, it will once again come back to giving a "privilege" that isn't available to the rest of the AIA membership.  Given that all the proposals for changes in membership were all soundly defeated at this year's Business Meeting, AIA has much to do to develop sound membership categories that will add value and by that fact will increase membership.  

    My solution - elect a public architect as AIA President. They would have two years to possess the bully pulpit to swing opinion (and votes) for a new category, emphasizing both the value of public practice and the potential for increasing membership.

    Me - willing to help but not to lead.  Have many other things on my plate.







  • 5.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 08:36 PM
    In the string of comments about this topic there have been comments about creating a  public architect membership group as being "privileged." Thinking it's a "privilege" is AIA old school thinking. It's not a privilege - it's good business, it will create better licensed architects working in the public sector, it will create better architects that do continuing education, it will result in better public architecture and it will enhance the value of architects in the elected official world. Just saying......
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    Michael L. Katzin, AIA | Architect

    | 425 Leasingham Way | Johns Creek, GA 30097 

    | 470.469.5586 
    Member | City of Johns Creek Planning Commission

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------






  • 6.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 09:08 PM
    Michael,
    It's the perception by others that by creating a reduced dues structure for public architects makes them appear privileged.  Certainly sole practitioners would love lower dues - check the EntreArchitect FB site and message board for some of the conversations about dues vs value.  As I said earlier, past initiatives for a lower dues structure met with the "what about" every other constituency within AIA.

    Would I welcome lower dues for being in public service - yes.  Will I see it in my career?  Probably not, especially since I am 3 years away from Emeritus status.





  • 7.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-26-2024 06:02 PM
    Michael,
    Thank you for your insightful comments.  As a past public architect and building official, I support AIA exploring the potential of a Public Architects' fee rate.  As seen at the General Meeting earlier this month, the membership is open to being more inclusive by broadening its membership umbrella, however, AIA must do its utmost due diligence to determine exactly what and how new membership categories (student, academics, etc.) are implemented to the best advance of the Institute, its members and the profession; meaning clear definitions and protocols.  The problem with what happened at the General Meeting was that proposing additional membership categories was just not enough.  

    I am happy to offer my time to work with AIA staff to make this happen.
     
    Mary Follenweider FAIA LEED AP
    2023-24 California Architectural Foundation President
    2022-24 AIA Ventura County President
    2021-23 AIA Strategic Council
    2017-18 AIA CA VP: Government Relations
    telephone: 720-839-4532






  • 8.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-26-2024 10:25 PM
    I certainly empathize with your concern about dues.  I can tell you that this was a discussion we were having more than 30 years ago.  I was the chair of the Public Architects Committee in 1993.  I had the privilege of serving under the first woman to be an AIA president.

    I will not oppose your efforts to get a special dues structure for AIA members who chose to dedicate their career to work in the public sector.  I will not support it either.

    I am retired, and no longer working in the public sector.  I worked as an owner's architect first in tthe public sector then in the private sector.  I never had my employers pay for my dues except when I was working for a traditional design firm.  

    Those of us who work as the owner's architect play a critical role in the built environment.  In fact, I will say that there is no one who has more influence over the process.  

    When we discussed it in the '90s, we determined that we would like to have a lower dues, but the price we would have to pay would make it a hollow victory.  The main concern we would have is that other members would consider us to be less than full members.  We did not want to be thought of as charity cases.  Another concern was that we wanted to take our place as full members.  

    At the time I served as chair, in the budget process, the staff tried to downgrade our committee.   They did not seem to understand that we and corporate architects are the only clients in the AIA, and they still don't seem to understand that today.  They wanted to combine Public and Corporate Architects into one committee, cut our staff support, and reduce our members who would be funded to events.  What the staff failed to realize is that public architects are extraordinarily versed in politics.  We had three former chairs sitting on the Board.  When it was all said and done, our funding remained the same.  I received a call from the staff asking, "Can we stop the phone calls now?"  Can you imagine what might have happened if we were not paying full dues at that time?  That ended any discussion of a new dues structure for many years.

    Because I am neither a public architect nor on the committee, I don't think I can speak to the issues you may be facing today.  I can, however, advise you on the history that you may not have available to you.  Please consider that before you take any action on this.  

    JIM GALLAGHER, AIA
    Former Chair, Public Architects Committee.  







  • 9.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 11:56 AM
      |   view attached

    Thanks Jim, I understand your neutral position. I was also a Public Architects Committee member and PIA chair when I was a public architect in a county government.  When I was a public architect, in architecture practice and now in retirement. I still carry the passion and torch for this issue when and where I can.  It is because I believe AIA member public architects can significantly improve public sector development by being inside a public client's organization and being able to impact and lead capital program decisions and capital projects.

    In respect to history, I attached a PDF to share some history from almost 25 years ago.  I hope anyone who reads this takes a look. It is a briefing to the AIA execs in 2001 during a Grass Roots to John Anderson who was President at the time. These issues are still applicable. The question is if AIA wants to solve this and if they do, when and how AIA initiates a process that solves the concerns expressed then and now.

    So, if not now - when? The mayor's connection can be the spark. This issue merits AIA national leadership consideration and action to follow-up with actionable effort with the city mayors and I would add county commissioners as well. The Public Architect's and interested members should back check in the near future how AIA's EVP/CEO Lakisha Ann Woods, and AIA President Kimberly Dowd really do reach out and start a collaborate with the mayors.

    Just sharing my passion for this topic,

    Michael



    ------------------------------
    Michael Katzin, AIA
    Michael Katzin Project Services, LLC
    Johns Creek, GA
    Member - Johns Creek Planning Commission
    ------------------------------

    Attachment(s)



  • 10.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 04:26 PM
    I think I sent this to Michael personally when I really meant to send it to all.

    Thank you for your insightful comments.  As a past public architect and building official, I support AIA exploring the potential of a Public Architects' fee rate.  As seen at the General Meeting earlier this month, the membership is open to being more inclusive by broadening its membership umbrella, however, AIA must do its utmost due diligence to determine exactly what and how new membership categories (student, academics, etc.) are implemented to the best advantage of the Institute, its members and the profession; meaning clear definitions and protocols.  The problem with what happened at the General Meeting was that just proposing additional membership categories was just not enough.  

    I am happy to offer my time to work with AIA staff to make this happen.

    Mary Follenweider FAIA LEED AP
    2023-24 California Architectural Foundation PresidentMichael,
    2022-24 AIA Ventura County President
    2021-23 AIA Strategic Council
    2017-18 AIA CA VP: Government Relations
    telephone: 720-839-4532







  • 11.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 09:59 PM

    Good discussion and I have to agree in a number of ways. I spent nearly all of my career working in-house for public sector. It was a fight every year to justify not only the membership cost, but the fact of being a member of AIA at all.

    1. While I'd love to see a discounted rate for public architects, we already are seen as second-class architects by many of those in traditional practice and somewhat by AIA itself. We need to raise the value of public architects both to our owners, AIA, and those that work for us/with us in our public roles, not continue to offer avenues to keep us seen as "less-thans."
    2. We always kept an eye on the membership cost of other professionals and what their dues were in our institutions. What were the CPA/accountant asking to have paid? Attorneys? Media and marketing folks? Memberships in your local civic organizations? We didn't try to get our institution to pay for everything, showing that we were willing to share the burden. I'd pay for local conferences myself, or always look for free opportunities. In the broad, large budgets of our institutions, the delta often wasn't much difference, if any.
    3. We had to find value to the institution in our AIA membership. We had access to AIA Contract Documents and forms at a discounted rate.  Yes, even if your institution was using custom drafted agreements, there were many other forms that we could use on smaller, or internal projects. AIA provided us access to many other architects in our community that were the firms that we selected for our projects and built a relationship with before selections.  How much did we save by not having claims and lawsuits, by better performance, by being seen as a desirable client? Hard to tell, but it didn't take much to offset any dues differential. (our long term and immediate goal was to move our institution to using AIA standard agreements, even if heavily edited, for all of our own projects because they offered a complete range of documents and agreements for our projects, were court tested, etc.). AIA required continuing education which we could claim enhanced our professional staff knowledge, kept it current, etc.  
    4. As a longer view, all of us participate in rewriting our job descriptions or annual reviews sooner or later. When we had that opportunity, we'd sure try to insert requirements for continuing professional education, developing and maintaining connections with local architects and the industry, etc. HR liked this because it showed "professionalism" for their in-house staffs. If you are a registrant working in-house and your state requires continuing education, does your institution have to pay for your continuing ed? We can find a lot of continuing ed for no cost. Once those kinds of requirements appear in job reviews and/or job descriptions, it's easier to justify the membership cost as a cost of meeting my annual performance goals. 
    5. If we all public sector architects want to help each other, it may be better that rather than trying to figure out how to get a discounted membership rate that we collectively develop a series of supporting talking points, the cost-benefit analysis that we can use and share with our institutions to support our memberships.


    ------------------------------
    Arlen Solochek, FAIA
    Owner/Principal/Founder
    Arlen Solochek FAIA, Consulting Architect
    Phoenix, AZ
    ArlenSolochek@gmail.com
    ------------------------------



  • 12.  RE: Public Architects Working for Agencies & Annual Dues

    Posted 06-27-2024 10:01 AM

    Having served in federal service with the US General Services Administration for 40 plus years, I can relate to Mr. Katzin's frustrations on the institute's failure to acknowledge the potential to gain thousands of new members who are currently working as public architects in government agencies whether they be federal, state or local.  In my former agency, dues for architects' professional organizations are forbidden to be paid with taxpayer dollars expect for rare occasions or key individuals.  Thus, public architects are forced to pay the high individual membership fees but do not benefit from the services that AIA offers that are catered more toward private sector business and professional concerns.  Many other professional organizations offer limited group memberships or reduced cost memberships for their government professional members.  Why not AIA?     

    I strongly support National President Kimberly Dowdell's efforts to get mayors to engage and understand the benefits of having professional architects as advisors on their staffs.  It would be a shame if those same architects cannot take full advantage of AIA membership. 



    ------------------------------
    Robert Theel FAIA
    EXP US Services
    Chicago IL
    (Former Regional Chief Architect, GSA)
    ------------------------------