Main Menu

Meter Reading?

Started by JBurke, February 10, 2010, 09:44:10 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JBurke

Here's an interesting story.  An Alabama town is contracting with a private firm to manage its water district...after contracting with the Civil Air Patrol to read meters from the air???  If even technically feasible, I'd assume that they are using RF meter readers...but how is this even legal?
http://bit.ly/9y5hDP

As a side note, I looked up the local squadron...the commander just happens to be on the city council...hmmm
http://bit.ly/998dpQ

Only in Alabama...??




JoeTomasone

Holy (potential) Conflict of Interest, Batman!

Is it just me, or does that have the potential to backfire badly?


Eclipse

That's clearly a typo or a misunderstanding, CAP planes are not for hire, nor can CAP personnel be used for any commercial endeavors,
even for a municipality.

If its really true, be prepared for follow-up stories that involve the removal of anyone in the command chain who approved of this.

"That Others May Zoom"

Al Sayre

As a government entity, the city can enter an MOU or contract with CAP to perform a service.  Just like in MS, where we have contracts with Dept of Marine Resources and two Counties to perform the Sundown Patrol, and various other coastal operations.  In this case, the service happens to be airborne data collection.  What's the difference between that and counting wolves, moose, reindeer, migratory birds or any other of the myriad things we help state and local governments do.  I suspect that CAP was doing it for a lot less than what it is going to cost to put in the new meters and boxes etc. that they talked about in the article.  It seems to be a clever way to expand our services to the community and increase flight time.
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

jeders

Unless these meters are the size of buses, how is that even possible. Definitely has to be a typo, or someone just doesn't know what they're talking about.
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse

Al Sayre

The days of a guy walking through your back yards reading meters have been gone for several years.  Many areas have installed RF meters that can be read by a vehicle (or aircraft ) driving nearby. 

A few links:
http://tdworld.com/customer_service/pge_selects_acla_smartmeter/
http://mastermeter.com/pdfs/mm_casestudy_ivan.pdf
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6351223/claims.html

Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

JBurke

If it's legal, it's definitely technically feasible.  Modern water meters are "read" by remote RF receivers.  I don't know what the range is...cities that use them often just have a vehicle drive through the neighborhoods pinging the units one by one down the street.

Eclipse

Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2010, 10:08:36 PM
Unless these meters are the size of buses, how is that even possible. Definitely has to be a typo, or someone just doesn't know what they're talking about.

A lot of villages have RF-based devices that transmit to vehicles as they drive down the street, this is pretty common, and I would imagine those same devices have an "up" range as well.

It never occurred to me that those wings doing bird migration, or whatever, were getting paid to do that.  I simply assumed it was being done as a community service on a "once-in-a-while" basis.

"That Others May Zoom"

Al Sayre

No, see CAPR 173-3 Sect 1.b
Quoteb. Reimbursement from other agencies will be in accordance with the current memorandum of understanding (MOU) or letter of agreement (LOA) with that agency.
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

JBurke

...and to Al, thanks for the info. 

I had no idea that CAP provided those kinds of services (data logging and wildlife, etc.).  I just knew that the planes are not to be used "for hire".  But I can see how other governmental entities could be a different story.  I'd be interested in hearing about other applications like this, as it seems like a good way to provide additional community services in rural areas.

Eclipse

Quote from: Al Sayre on February 10, 2010, 10:22:18 PM
No, see CAPR 173-3 Sect 1.b
Quoteb. Reimbursement from other agencies will be in accordance with the current memorandum of understanding (MOU) or letter of agreement (LOA) with that agency.

This may be legal, but does it fall into the intent of the use of CAP planes and people?

Its one thing for the town to pay for mission resources, a whole different deal to take money off the table that would go to some other business.

Who pays for the additional maintenance needed?  What about if someone is hurt doing it?  This is obviously not an AFAM.

This strikes me as another VSAF situation where CAP members' hyper-benevolence is being exploited to save someone from spending money.

"That Others May Zoom"

RiverAux

Everything we do could potentially be done by private business for a fee. 

Eclipse

Quote from: RiverAux on February 10, 2010, 10:33:23 PM
Everything we do could potentially be done by private business for a fee.

Agreed, but not generally at our rates, which are only made possible because of federal subsidies, and no labor costs.

On one hand that you could make the argument that .gov is .gov, and its all the same money pool, but on the other hand, that's not the way it really works.

"That Others May Zoom"

Pylon

Quote from: Eclipse on February 10, 2010, 10:31:18 PM
Its one thing for the town to pay for mission resources, a whole different deal to take money off the table that would go to some other business.

That money might not be going to another business.  The town might have diverted someone from other duties to drive/fly around to read meters.

Quote from: Eclipse on February 10, 2010, 10:31:18 PMWho pays for the additional maintenance needed?

CAP figures maintenance costs into our rates. 

Quote from: Eclipse on February 10, 2010, 10:31:18 PMWhat about if someone is hurt doing it?  This is obviously not an AFAM.

A.  That's what MOUs are for. 
B.  Our members are covered under separate CAP corporate insurance when doing corporate-assigned missions.  It's not just AFAMs that cover members "on the job".

Quote from: Eclipse on February 10, 2010, 10:31:18 PMThis strikes me as another VSAF situation where CAP members' hyper-benevolence is being exploited to save someone from spending money.

It actually strikes me more along the lines of Civil Air Patrol not having a focused mission and so in our desperation to stay relevant (and justify our continued expense and existence to the powers-that-be), we're (as an organization) willing to take on pretty much any paying job that the regs allow for. 
Michael F. Kieloch, Maj, CAP

lordmonar

The intent of CAP aircraft is to fulfill the USAF missions assigned to us........but when not doing AFAM we can do just about anything else we want to (posse comutadas not withstanding).

I don't see any conflict of intrest at all.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

heliodoc

Sounds like a desperation mission to me

AF running this mission?  That is debatable...but then I don't click every link on CAPTalk

".......we can do just about anything else we want to..??"

Really...the we ought to the biz I talked about last night

Getting all the laid off pilots currency or re currency or something  similar... 

Alot more along our lines that reading water meters...NOW that is a lame mission for CAP to claim its relevancy

lordmonar

Did not say it was a good mission....but if someone is paying for the gas and maintenance.....are you going to pass up the chance to get free flying?
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

heliodoc

^^^^
NAWW

that's for the 30 yr GOB's that did not get their freebie ride at the last SAREX for their "A" flights

Guys like me would still wind up paying for it......WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA >:D >:D ::) ::) ::)

Spike

Quote from: JBurke on February 10, 2010, 09:44:10 PM
As a side note, I looked up the local squadron...the commander just happens to be on the city council...hmmm
http://bit.ly/998dpQ

That is called corruption.  This should be looked into and see if the member may be gaining from this action.

lordmonar

Quote from: Spike on February 10, 2010, 11:55:47 PM
Quote from: JBurke on February 10, 2010, 09:44:10 PM
As a side note, I looked up the local squadron...the commander just happens to be on the city council...hmmm
http://bit.ly/998dpQ

That is called corruption.  This should be looked into and see if the member may be gaining from this action.
Not really corruption.  Assume (Yes I know what that spells  :)) for a second that the CAP commander/City councilman suggested CAP for this job and then recluse himself from the debate/decision.

That is not corruption...that is called networking.

The Surrogate Predator Program was started the same way.  A USAF member on the A staff at ACC was tasked with filling an USAF training need that the current contractor could not fill.  He was also a CAP member and started the ball rolling for us to get this new mission.  Is that also corruption or good stewardship of TAXPAYERS' money?
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

heliodoc

Is it really a wise use of resources??  Stewardship of taxpayers money?

Networking may just get by...but really meter reading?  There are more practical projects...Next thing you know CAP will start flyin ARCHER and GA8 to near earth orbit saying we are better than any satellite around.  Cheaper than a satellite, maybe.  Surely not the mission

Next thing you CAP ers will be building airplanes in Wichita and Independence, KS thinkin' we can do it cheaper

Maybe even test fly every Cessna, Beech, and Boeing product out there saying we could do it better and cheaper than someone already employed in KS

WOOOW  If this thing is true... CAP thinking this is a wise use of resources?  Leaves alot of room for CAPerTalk dabate...Is it ethical, Is it OPSEC'd properly...was it properly CAP OPSEC'd >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D

Some people REALLY need to get a hold of themselves

lordmonar

Okay....let's do an analysis.

Let's say the City of Littletown need to read the meters.  Company X....can do it via truck with 10 employee, for five 8 hour days, once a month. This gives you a base line at about $20/hour for pay, gas, maintenance and all the doo-dads that come with the operation. $ 8000/month

Let's say Company Y can do it via Airplane in a single 8 hour day one per month at about $400/hour for pay, gas, maintenace and the doo-dads. $3200

CAP can charge the going rate for a 182 (around $90/hour).  $720.

From the city's point of view this is an excellant use of tax payers money.  From a CAP stand point....we get 8 hours a month to keep out pilot's proficiant in an easy mission profile (one large grid squar over the city!)...for FREE!

From a USAF's point of view....again they get proficiant pilots....little or no loss of mission (assuming the MOU was written correctly that AFAMs and CAP Training missions come first).

I see this as a possible win-win.

The only loosers are the other companies that were competeing with us.

The squadron CC/councilmen does not get any personal benifit from it (except maybe 8 hours of free flying  :)) so there is no conflict of intrest, no personal financial gain.  And once again assuming that he abstained from voting there is no possiblity of any wrong doing.

Again....is this a cool mission?  Nope.   But if it is not taking away from more important missions then I got no problem with it.

I remember a few years ago we had a similar discussion about CAP flying wild life tracking missions.  There were a lot of people who thought that was a waste of time and resouces.

If the government (City, County, State, Federal) is going to pay for a service.....they may as well pay CAP for it!
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

davidsinn

Excellent breakdown although I'm sure you way undershot what the guys in trucks cost  ;)
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

JoeTomasone

#23
Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?


Eclipse

Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:32:45 AM
Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?

No, and its an incredibly slippery slope.

We (CAP) are not in the business of replacing businesses with federally subsidized free labor.  The fact that these situations
happen to be aviation related, or are even "win-wins" doesn't change that.  This is a sweetheart deal brokered by someone
who likely benefits personally through the free flying.

Considering where I am from, these things are easy to spot.

In cases like these you could understand why the USAF wants their name off the aircraft and vehicles.

Here's a question I would ask as part of the approval process on this.  Is CAP an equal partner in this town's DR and ES response and this is just a small part of CAP's overall involvement, or is this the only time CAP uniforms are seen and the town found a quick way to help balance the budget?

I'd be much more inclined to go along with this if its one part of a larger involvement and CAP is just doing the town a favor in tough times.

"That Others May Zoom"

JoeTomasone

Quote from: Eclipse on February 11, 2010, 04:38:48 AM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:32:45 AM
Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?

No, and its an incredibly slippery slope.

We (CAP) are not in the business of replacing businesses with federally subsidized free labor.  The fact that these situations
happen to be aviation related, or are even "win-wins" doesn't change that.  This is a sweetheart deal brokered by someone
who likely benefits personally through the free flying.

Considering where I am from, these things are easy to spot.

In cases like these you could understand why the USAF wants their name off the aircraft and vehicles.


Exactly.   As I read this thread, I keep coming back to:

"On July 1, 1946, President Truman established CAP as a federally chartered benevolent civilian corporation, and Congress passed Public Law 557 on May 26, 1948, which made CAP the auxiliary of the new US Air Force. CAP was charged with three primary missions: Aerospace Education, Cadet Programs and Emergency Services."


..And I don't see meter reading fitting into that.

Let's say there was a crash during "Operation Meter Read".   Do you think that the CAP insurance company would have a solid case if they denied the claim?

If so, it should give one pause.

 


lordmonar

Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:32:45 AM
Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?

Under the current rules all law enforcment activites must be okayed by the USAF....and they have posse commutades issues.

But beyond that.....no I don't have any issue with any job CAP could be given that is clearly in support of communits, state and nation. 

PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Pylon

Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:45:41 AM
Let's say there was a crash during "Operation Meter Read".   Do you think that the CAP insurance company would have a solid case if they denied the claim?

For the sake of argument: no, the rules are set and very clear - corporate missions approved by NHQ are covered; but, in reality, isn't CAP self-insured for corporate liability? 
Michael F. Kieloch, Maj, CAP

lordmonar

Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:45:41 AM
Exactly.   As I read this thread, I keep coming back to:

"On July 1, 1946, President Truman established CAP as a federally chartered benevolent civilian corporation, and Congress passed Public Law 557 on May 26, 1948, which made CAP the auxiliary of the new US Air Force. CAP was charged with three primary missions: Aerospace Education, Cadet Programs and Emergency Services."


..And I don't see meter reading fitting into that.

Let's say there was a crash during "Operation Meter Read".   Do you think that the CAP insurance company would have a solid case if they denied the claim?

If so, it should give one pause.

Well lots of things have changed since 1948.  As for the insurance company......CAP is self insured.....so yes CAP would pay.

Two things I have to say here.....

First....I am not a fan of the meter reading.....but as a Devil Advocate, I see no problem with it....just not something I would take off work to do.

Second....one of the reasons why we have local squadrons is so that they can establish these sort of local ties.  No one is saying everyone has to do Operation Meter Reading......just as no one has to do CD, ES, AE, CP or any other alphabet of our missions.  But if the Littleton Comp Squadron is filling a need for their community...where exactly is the problem with that?

PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

Eclipse

Quote from: lordmonar on February 11, 2010, 04:52:15 AM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:32:45 AM
Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?

Under the current rules all law enforcment activites must be okayed by the USAF....and they have posse commutades issues.

Assuming I read it right, traffic reports aren't law enforcement - that'd be like Shadow Traffic Service, right?

I'd have no issue at all doing occasional disaster-related traffic evaluation for evacs and people stuck in the snow, etc.  Telling
people their commute times is a different story, but neither is an LE function as I see it.

The customer in either case would be the DOT, state or fed.

"That Others May Zoom"

JoeTomasone

Quote from: Eclipse on February 11, 2010, 05:07:21 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on February 11, 2010, 04:52:15 AM
Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:32:45 AM
Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?

Under the current rules all law enforcment activites must be okayed by the USAF....and they have posse commutades issues.

Assuming I read it right, traffic reports aren't law enforcement - that'd be like Shadow Traffic Service, right?

I'd have no issue at all doing occasional disaster-related traffic evaluation for evacs and people stuck in the snow, etc.  Telling
people their commute times is a different story, but neither is an LE function as I see it.

The customer in either case would be the DOT, state or fed.

Yep, DOT-contracted Shadow Traffic type service is what I was getting at.    Eventually it has to come to a point where you conclude that "it's not our mission".   I am positing that meter reading may have crossed that line. 


Al Sayre

#31
 We "rent"our aircraft to CAP pilots for C17 proficiency at the standard maintenance rate + fuel, for a C-172 in my are that comes out to about $85/ hour vs. the local FBO at $100/hr.  I can take the FBO's plane anywhere I want, it is ~6 miles from the house and the nearest CAP plane is ~ 50 miles from the house.  What do I save by "renting" the CAP plane?  Cheap flying isn't cheap.

So for all those who are against this mission, I have to ask: What type of non-emergency missions should we accept? Understanding that we have to put around 10 non-AFAM hours/month on the aircraft to justify them, keep proficient pilots, and that with the cost of fuel & maintenance, even our "cheap flying" is beyond the pockets of many pilots?  Or do we just park them except for AFAMs & Member proficiency?
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

heliodoc

Sorry Al,

If CAP is "lookin" to put 10 hr non AFAM traffic for justification

Maybe CAP has to reconfigure its mission matrix to keep em flying and that would REQUIRE some WORK from CAP to WORK with PAPA1 AF, now wouldn't it?  CAP has a real weak presence in MANY arenas and the way some CAPer walk and talk around FBO's, some times cast a doubt by the general public..remember the ol "Airport WEatch" program 10 years ago??

I know emergency managers that talk to ME about CAP... its mission, its aircraft availability, etc  I give em the Wing phone numbers.  Some of em never heard or realized CAP was even doinf flood missions,,,sounds like CAP PIO/ PAO problem(s) doesn't it.

All those wildlife surveys CAP talks about...how about more of them?  I sure KNOW CAP is NOT beating down every research college door looking for aerial photo missions and there are many out there.

BUT CAP lookin for work when their are many other PAID pilots in layoff status........if you were one of those pilots and I KNOW plenty of em...10 are in Afghanistan flyin helos and King Airs, you think they'd look at CAP as "viable" option??

MAYBE CAP ought to do a little suffering like the rest of us who are either serving away from our families or laid off...

Meter reading?  How many meter readers are laid off due to some action of CAP "doing a mission cheaper than anyone else."

CAP might do well to IMPROVE all facets of its own flying program first and then worry about how we are going to do other jobs "cheaper."

If someone was paying me 12.00 flight hour ( which I received while flying skydivers) which ALOT of pilots get startin out and CAP come "struttin" its "stuff"  What kind of atmosphere would that create?


What do you and CAPers really think now?  Those pilots getting rich while CAP worries about its "utilization rates?"


I think there are plenty o CAP pilots who are PAID pilots MAY seem to agree with me


Al Sayre

#33
Do you honestly believe that the few non-AFAM missions CAP does is causing pilot layoffs?  How much effect on the local economy can 1 aircraft flying maybe 5-10 hours a month on an MOU "C" mission have?   According to the articles most RF meters are used in rural areas where it isn't cost efficient to send out a guy in a truck that can read maybe a dozen meters a day. An aircraft can collect the data on those same meters in a few minutes. This isn't about ego's and atmosphere, if you have some CAP pilots that you have an ego issue with, take it up with them or their commander.  This is about doing something for the community - saving the city money that can be spent on other services.  The benefit for CAP is aircraft utilization.  Of the 550 or so aircraft CAP has I'd guess that less than 10% are doing non-AFAM missions on a real regular basis.  Mostly things like Sundown patrol that generate less than 30 hours a month- 1 or 2 aircraft x 2 hrs x 8 weekend days/month.    Your argument that this is putting someone out of a job doesn't fly either, If the city saves money on this service, they will spend it somewhere else instead.  So maybe they hire an additional Police or Fireman instead of the meter reader because the money is now available in the budget.
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

Eclipse

#34
Quote from: Al Sayre on February 11, 2010, 01:08:09 PM
We "rent"our aircraft to CAP pilots for C17 proficiency at the standard maintenance rate + fuel, for a C-172 in my are that comes out to about $85/ hour vs. the local FBO at $100/hr.  I can take the FBO's plane anywhere I want, it is ~6 miles from the house and the nearest CAP plane is ~ 50 miles from the house.  What do I save by "renting" the CAP plane?  Cheap flying isn't cheap.

Where you live is not necessarily where a given CAP plane is (others who live near a plane would feel opposite).

Quote from: Al Sayre on February 11, 2010, 01:08:09 PM
So for all those who are against this mission, I have to ask: What type of non-emergency missions should we accept? Understanding that we have to put around 10 non-AFAM hours/month on the aircraft to justify them, keep proficient pilots, and that with the cost of fuel & maintenance, even our "cheap flying" is beyond the pockets of many pilots?  Or do we just park them except for AFAMs & Member proficiency?

I'm not sure of your point - there are plenty of ES assets all over the country that sit idle waiting for the call - fire trucks, police cars, mobile command trucks, not to mention all the military hardware that's on 24x7 standby and never used.

Most wings have little trouble putting hours on their aircraft, and many are getting additional because of all the flying they do.    While I agree that this isn't putting too many commercial pilots out of work, along the same plane (pun intended), if you have to justify keeping a
plane by delivering newspapers with it, you don't need it.

"That Others May Zoom"

jeders

Quote from: Eclipse on February 10, 2010, 10:18:16 PM
Quote from: jeders on February 10, 2010, 10:08:36 PM
Unless these meters are the size of buses, how is that even possible. Definitely has to be a typo, or someone just doesn't know what they're talking about.

A lot of villages have RF-based devices that transmit to vehicles as they drive down the street, this is pretty common, and I would imagine those same devices have an "up" range as well.

Well, I guess I learned something new. Out here in West Texas we still have guys driving around physically reading the meters.

As far as corruption, meh. It's a job that pays us to fly without using Air Force funds, I'm all for it.
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse

heliodoc

Whatever.....

I did NOT say CAP was putting anyone out of work

More clearly......there are pilots out of work and to suggest CAP does better than hiring pilots or meter readers...that is what  I did say

Again somebody has to be paying for something and they are still paying the aircraft rate

Maybe we ought to put UDF teams and CAP GT's out there doing the meter reading 

Cheaper than any airplane and maybe all you'd have to feed them is MRE's McyyD's or some other pogey bait

So saying airplanes are cheaper than ground folks going door ...NOW the  argument about aircraft use doesn't hold water, you got "FREE" ground troops doing a paid meter readers job and the cadets could get outside and away from their computers and get their chubby little bodies back in shape...that goes for those fat and fuzzies that CAPers love to yap about

There would be an excellent program to get those SM out there doing their bit to reduce costs to the medical insurance industry...CAP could be helpin that cause,eh?

Glad I  could derail this thread for you CAPers who think we can do anything....yes WE CAN  .... ::) ::) ::) So easy a caveman could do it ::) ::) ::) ::) >:D >:D >:D >:D



RiverAux

Quote from: JoeTomasone on February 11, 2010, 04:45:41 AM
Exactly.   As I read this thread, I keep coming back to:

"On July 1, 1946, President Truman established CAP as a federally chartered benevolent civilian corporation, and Congress passed Public Law 557 on May 26, 1948, which made CAP the auxiliary of the new US Air Force. CAP was charged with three primary missions: Aerospace Education, Cadet Programs and Emergency Services."

It might help if you looked at what Congress ACTUALLY chartered us to do.  From federal law regarding the purposes of CAP:
Quote.  Encourage and aid citizens of the United States in contributing their efforts, services, and resources in developing aviation and in maintaining air supremacy.
2.  Encourage and develop by example the voluntary contribution of private citizens to the public welfare.
3.  To provide aviation education and training especially to its senior and cadet members.
4.  To encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities.
5.  To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in meeting local and national emergencies.
6.  To assist the Department of the Air Force in fulfilling its non-combat programs and missions.
Assisting cities in this manner is quite obviously a way private citizens (us) can contribute to the public welfare. 

By the way, why is this in "Tall Tales"?

Spike

^ # 6 above seems to be lacking big time these days.  Spoke to an "old timer" and he stated that back in the 1950's his unit flew Air Force personell around, delivered correspondence, ran communications and helped air force recruiting. 

I think we lost a great deal when the AF stopped running daily operations of the CAP. 

Eclipse

Quote from: RiverAux on February 11, 2010, 11:24:40 PM
Assisting cities in this manner is quite obviously a way private citizens (us) can contribute to the public welfare. 

What's next?  Garbage collection?  Building code enforcement?  How about parking enforcement?

No payroll, no benefits, there's literally no end to the ways we can exploit our members to help balance city budgets!

"That Others May Zoom"

RiverAux

No one is forcing them or anyone to do anything.  Don't want to fly around reading meters, you don't have to.  Thats why we're called volunteers.

lordmonar

Quote from: Eclipse on February 12, 2010, 02:16:42 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on February 11, 2010, 11:24:40 PM
Assisting cities in this manner is quite obviously a way private citizens (us) can contribute to the public welfare. 

What's next?  Garbage collection?  Building code enforcement?  How about parking enforcement?

No payroll, no benefits, there's literally no end to the ways we can exploit our members to help balance city budgets!
What is the fundemental difference between that and the stuff we do now?

SAR/DR/Cadet Programs/CD.....we do all these things to help the government blanance their budgets.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

JoeTomasone

Quote from: lordmonar on February 12, 2010, 03:42:38 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on February 12, 2010, 02:16:42 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on February 11, 2010, 11:24:40 PM
Assisting cities in this manner is quite obviously a way private citizens (us) can contribute to the public welfare. 

What's next?  Garbage collection?  Building code enforcement?  How about parking enforcement?

No payroll, no benefits, there's literally no end to the ways we can exploit our members to help balance city budgets!
What is the fundemental difference between that and the stuff we do now?

SAR/DR/Cadet Programs/CD.....we do all these things to help the government blanance their budgets.


Those are common municipal functions.  The things we do are not.

Civil Air Patrol... Performing Missions Meter Reading For America...

Yeah, I wouldn't join either.



lordmonar

Okay....I'm out.

I sometime can't stand the negitive attitudes.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

heliodoc

No negative attitudes there, lordmonar

Just go ahead and push that in front of your city council and mayor next time...you just might get a bite

Or laughter from the Public works and water department

Can stand negative attitudes...just push this idea in front the paid workers next time ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) You might  see a negative 'tude or two!!

Work side by side with the community and count in kind payment  ( what a volunteer is worth on independentsector.org.)

Just remember to keep you in kind labor rates on proper documentation, then the city council and mayor may look more favorably upon it BECAUSE you are documenting in kind labor.  I personally oversaw grants for the Forest Service in fuels reduction using the above methods and NO way replace anyone doing major operations

We had CAP and others VOLUNTEER their  time to work side by side with Public Works while the PAID workers got PAID and volunteers volunteered...No one volunteer even suggested we replace workers during these logging operations.  The mayors and city councils I worked with thought that was the best way to do things.  No one CLAIMED, in any of the volunteer groups, that they would "replace" paid workers

So when CAP wants a project...just be RDH that the community even recognized CAP as my operations did.  CAP replaced no one.  They worked along side the REAL WORKIN PRO's Public Works and loggers.  I'm sure there are CAPers out there that could replace loggers, right

RIIIGHT I am sure CAP could...NOT!!

ammotrucker

This is nothing different then a squadron in may Group that did a photo mission of the entire county for GIS purposes.  I see nothing wrong with the project other then it may seem odd.  I do believe that with this type of mission you do need a Commerial pilot rating as you as a pilot profits by not having to pay, which is the way my Squadron in the end had to do it.
RG Little, Capt