For the sake of discussion and a theoretical wishlist of sorts...
What would you want your State Legislature/Government to do for CAP?
I've heard people mention all sorts of things such as to use CAP to a greater extent in Emergency Services (SAR/DR, etc), additional tax breaks, educational benefits, State-level Civic Leadership Academy programs for Cadets, and a variety of other thoughts and ideas.
Feel free to discuss any of those ideas mentioned above or to post any ideas, suggestions, or thoughts that you may have. Considering some of the comments I've heard from local members lately, and the vast CAP involvement of many CAPTalk members, I figured this discussion might produce some interesting results and a nice flow of ideas.
Grant free and easier access to Guard facilities and bases for use as meeting areas (some state have their Guard bases charge CAP for use), and / or assist in providing meeting space and related resources to units.
Funding!
I would think the following for funding and/or "in kind" support:
*Portable VHF NFM/25 Digital Radios
*Misc radio support equipment, e.g. batteries, base antennas.
*Allow Use of National Guard Armories for CAP meetings & other training activities without charge.
With the economy as it is now, this really is a "wish" list since state government has had to reduce services, close facilities, and eliminate some jobs (including prison guards).
RM
More Volunteer Responder Job Protection Acts.
Inclusion at the table. Office and storage space otherwise un-used or underused at Guard bases and state office buildings. A bit of funding for training and cadet activities at the level below Wing HQ. But mostly, inclusion at the table.
More use!
800 Mhz radios for interoperability (NV state police, municipal police most EMS systems, most FD's are on the 800 system).
inclusion in drills.
green tinted pictures of deceased presidents
Quote from: flyerthom on August 30, 2009, 06:43:18 AM
800 Mhz radios for interoperability (NV state police, municipal police most EMS systems, most FD's are on the 800 system).
Many states and large public safety agencies spent a lot of HLS money back in the day on interoperability. Chances are they've got the latest and greatest Raytheon gear and if you were to arrange a MOU that allowed them to program in CAP frequencies into one of their radios (or provide them with a CAP radio), you could have a CAP frequency patched into whatever the public safety IC deemed necessary.
I'm also aware of a couple of agencies throughout the country that maintain a "disaster cache" of radios that are available to be issued during critical incidents. Get one issued to your comm guys when the command posts start arriving and they can pass traffic as needed. Just be sure to turn it in afterwards, you don't want the state police showing up at your door.
Both require bureaucratic permissions that will not be entirely painless (in fact, I suspect blood will be involved), however if the NV agencies you deal with are like anything like the agencies I've experienced, these two options have a better chance of being implemented than being given permission to program radios that will allow you to talk on police/fire/EMS channels or talkgroups.
Quote from: arajca on August 30, 2009, 01:51:52 AM
More Volunteer Responder Job Protection Acts.
If you don't mind, could you explain a bit more as to what this sort of protection would provide?
Quote from: Pylon on August 30, 2009, 01:57:47 AM
Inclusion at the table. Office and storage space otherwise un-used or underused at Guard bases and state office buildings. But mostly, inclusion at the table.
This is not something KY Wing has to "wish" for. We have an excellent relationship with the Guard. All of our radios have the NG repeater freqs. in them. We coordinate our CD program with them. They took the land my squadron building was on, demolished the building and then gave us our own office space in their Readiness Center with use of the whole facility. We are having our Dining-Out in the new Readiness Center, even though it's not even open yet.
I don't see any reason why other Wings can't have the same relationship with the Guard. I would say it starts with your Wing Staff and it flows down from there.
Quote from: Fubar on August 30, 2009, 08:15:35 AM
Quote from: arajca on August 30, 2009, 01:51:52 AM
More Volunteer Responder Job Protection Acts.
If you don't mind, could you explain a bit more as to what this sort of protection would provide?
My understanding is that it would "force" your employer to give you off (without pay) so many days per year to participate in CAP missions (whether real or simulated).
In my opinon, these types of laws "forcing" employers to do this is bad for the membership. When you get a job there's an expectation from your employer that you will show up every day and perform your work. Now IF you are established in your job and can "sell" you CAP involvement as community service etc and your employer agrees to let you particpate in "unscheduled" ES missions (or it might be only scheduled type training missions, depending upon your job) that is fine.
RM
Quote from: brasda91 on August 30, 2009, 11:25:41 AM
Quote from: Pylon on August 30, 2009, 01:57:47 AM
Inclusion at the table. Office and storage space otherwise un-used or underused at Guard bases and state office buildings. But mostly, inclusion at the table.
This is not something KY Wing has to "wish" for. We have an excellent relationship with the Guard. I don't see any reason why other Wings can't have the same relationship with the Guard. I would say it starts with your Wing Staff and it flows down from there.
Depends upon how the state government is organized. If there's a separate State Emergency Management Agency and the Guard is not under them, than generally CAP is going to be working with that state EM agency.
HOWEVER, I do agree with you that EVERY wing should be working with the state guard for some assistance.
As far as at the table -- One of the challenges of dealing with most government agencies is that all of their meetings are held during normal business hours (and not evenings or weekends) so the member, unless retired, self employed, or having very flexible hours, is going to have to take time off from work.
RM
The primary thing that CAP needs from the states is a willingness to use us as much as possible. Money, equipment, space would be great, but that won't happen unless we are continually demonstrating how much good we are doing for the state.
That being said, this is more of a local than a state issue since local agencies control most SAR/DR activities in most cases. They are the ones that we need to be spending a lot of time working with so that they call us a lot. If the state sees what we're doing for them, the money and equipment may follow.
From what has been discussed here and locally, it seems that most of what members want from the State are:
- More involvement, to include greater use for things such as Disaster Relief and other areas where CAP can participate as a professional and cost-effective member of the state emergency management team. Also, as a 'team member', the opportunity to be at the discussion table when various ideas and decisions are being considered.
- A better relationship with the State and its Department of Military Affairs/National Guard to have greater access (without cost) to buildings, armories, bases, etc.
- Educational benefits/tuition assistance such as a partial waiver towards tuition at state colleges/universities as a result of Emergency Services involvement or perhaps Cadet Program achievement.
- Greater tax breaks for those involved with Emergency Services so as to reward members and help defray the often-substantial personal expense, beyond the usual tax deductions.
- Civic Leadership Academies and other opportunities for Cadets to experience and learn about government at the State level.
Actual purchasing of equipment or general funding (ie not in return for something) might be difficult in these tight budget times, but many of the other things may indeed be possible as they don't require an actual outlay of money, but rather (in some cases) slightly less revenue which would be offset by the contribution made to the State by volunteer professionals, such as CAP members.
Any further ideas or thoughts on what has been mentioned?
The ability to obtain equipment from the military at no cost.
Quote from: DBlair on September 05, 2009, 04:03:29 AM
From what has been discussed here and locally, it seems that most of what members want from the State are:
- More involvement, to include greater use for things such as Disaster Relief and other areas where CAP can participate as a professional and cost-effective member of the state emergency management team. Also, as a 'team member', the opportunity to be at the discussion table when various ideas and decisions are being considered.
- A better relationship with the State and its Department of Military Affairs/National Guard to have greater access (without cost) to buildings, armories, bases, etc.
- Educational benefits/tuition assistance such as a partial waiver towards tuition at state colleges/universities as a result of Emergency Services involvement or perhaps Cadet Program achievement.
- Greater tax breaks for those involved with Emergency Services so as to reward members and help defray the often-substantial personal expense, beyond the usual tax deductions.
- Civic Leadership Academies and other opportunities for Cadets to experience and learn about government at the State level.
Actual purchasing of equipment or general funding (ie not in return for something) might be difficult in these tight budget times, but many of the other things may indeed be possible as they don't require an actual outlay of money, but rather (in some cases) slightly less revenue which would be offset by the contribution made to the State by volunteer professionals, such as CAP members.
Any further ideas or thoughts on what has been mentioned?
These are all great. My question would be are the members willing to "lengthen their stride" for these benifits? In politics there's always a quid pro quo.
Quote from: Fubar on August 30, 2009, 08:15:35 AM
Quote from: arajca on August 30, 2009, 01:51:52 AM
More Volunteer Responder Job Protection Acts.
If you don't mind, could you explain a bit more as to what this sort of protection would provide?
It provides similar protection to the National Guard, though typically only for a certain number of days per year (CO is 15). It may not force your employer to let you go, but it does prevent them from taking adverse action if you do. Most of these laws allow exceptions for personnel in critical jobs (an accountant is a critical job at certain times of the year). It is also expected that the volunteer communicates with their employer ahead of time.
Facilities for CAP meetings and operations, either at State facilities or a great of funding to have a facility at which to meet.
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on August 30, 2009, 01:33:44 PM
Quote from: Fubar on August 30, 2009, 08:15:35 AM
Quote from: arajca on August 30, 2009, 01:51:52 AM
More Volunteer Responder Job Protection Acts.
If you don't mind, could you explain a bit more as to what this sort of protection would provide?
My understanding is that it would "force" your employer to give you off (without pay) so many days per year to participate in CAP missions (whether real or simulated).
Job protection that allows a worker to take unpaid leave to serve his country and community is "bad"?
I agree this all needs to be discussed during the interview, so all parties understand the ground rules. If you are a "during the week responder" it should be on your resume. But beyond that no CAP member is ever required to respond to a disaster, so anyone who doesn't use common sense in utilizing these protection acts gets what they deserve if they decide to go throw sand bags during the busy season, however there are cases where employers are belligerent to their employees, union situations where bosses don't know or care about them, and the like.
In those cases, state law is the only way anything happens.
Further to this, many employers and managers utilize these acts to persuade the company to provide the same benefits in terms of paid leave, etc., that are afforded to employees in the military, because it elevates CAP from "some volunteer thing" to a service recognized and protected by the state legislature.
How is any of this a "bad thing" in a world where FMLA and other employee benefit programs allow a lot more time off for other personal things. I'd be willing to bet that most CAP members who would utilize the protections of these state laws are also better employees by design, not only for the extra training, etc., that CAP affords and requires, but also for the community spirit CAP engenders and attracts.
These are the kinds of traits employers seek out.
ND Wing was able to partner with the NG to pass a state employment and reemployment rights law this past session. It was HB 1181 and you shold be able to find it at www.legis.nd.gov under the 2009 session.
The bill was passed with an emergency clause, which meant it became law with the Governors signature vs waiting til 01 Jul (when our biennium takes effect).
To those who say such a thing is bad, I can tell you this is not the case. This law was immediately needed by CAP members and Guardsmen alike during our major flood event (the guard did not have protection previously for state emergencies... Only when federalized). This law eased a lot of tension out there and helped keep some key folks working where they were truly needed
Quote from: Gunner C on September 05, 2009, 09:05:22 AM
Quote from: DBlair on September 05, 2009, 04:03:29 AM
From what has been discussed here and locally, it seems that most of what members want from the State are:
- More involvement, to include greater use for things such as Disaster Relief and other areas where CAP can participate as a professional and cost-effective member of the state emergency management team. Also, as a 'team member', the opportunity to be at the discussion table when various ideas and decisions are being considered.
- A better relationship with the State and its Department of Military Affairs/National Guard to have greater access (without cost) to buildings, armories, bases, etc.
- Educational benefits/tuition assistance such as a partial waiver towards tuition at state colleges/universities as a result of Emergency Services involvement or perhaps Cadet Program achievement.
- Greater tax breaks for those involved with Emergency Services so as to reward members and help defray the often-substantial personal expense, beyond the usual tax deductions.
- Civic Leadership Academies and other opportunities for Cadets to experience and learn about government at the State level.
Actual purchasing of equipment or general funding (ie not in return for something) might be difficult in these tight budget times, but many of the other things may indeed be possible as they don't require an actual outlay of money, but rather (in some cases) slightly less revenue which would be offset by the contribution made to the State by volunteer professionals, such as CAP members.
Any further ideas or thoughts on what has been mentioned?
These are all great. My question would be are the members willing to "lengthen their stride" for these benifits? In politics there's always a quid pro quo.
If by "lengthen their stride" you mean (please correct me if I am misunderstanding) be willing to get more involved with things like ES (Disaster Relief, etc.) in order to reap some of the benefits mentioned above, I think it will be a mixed bag. For some, it would probably come down to if they saw value in that specific benefit.
For example, if someone isn't planning on attending a State college or university or has already finished their education and has no desire to continue, then that member may not see the value in a partial tuition waiver in return for a certain level of involvement. Others may see it as a huge benefit if they are seeking options for how to afford a college education.
Likewise would be the issue with greater tax breaks in exchange for a certain level of involvement. If they don't see the value/benefit in it, then they might not be enticed by such an initiative. At least part of the interest will be derived from whether a member sees interest in it. For example, a Mitchell Award yields E-3 in the AF, but if a Cadet doesn't have any desire to enlist, then its somewhat of a moot point.
That being said, these could be nice recruiting tools, or encouragement for members to get more involved, or even a method to encourage further education within our membership.
Any thoughts?