>>>>http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/03/964781/citizen-activist-grates-on-state.html
>>>
>>>practiced engineering without a license
>>>
>>>sheesh
>>>
>>>I hope this makes all the local news media and the national news media. Let's punish folks for being intelligent and taking the initiative. Either they got engineering acquaintances to do some of the computations and didn't get charged for it (but the work would probably have been signed in that case), or they did on their own (kudos to them). I guess they should have made the report look "sloppy" but then it would probably have been ignored entirely.
>>>
>>>Why doesn't the DOT have the engineers they hired review it? What on earth do they normally do when citizens submit their own reports that aren't as proficient? Just totally disregard them?
>>
>>The way I read it:
>>
>>- anyone, not just engineers, can petition your DoT
>>- there is no limitation on the quality of petitions submitted. One would think, the higher, the better
>>- the work was never claimed to be that of a professional engineer
>>
>>Lacy's complaint does not address the content of the petition at all. It's a direct attack on Cox - ad hominem - despite his protestations to the contrary:
>>
>>"Lacy said his complaint "was not an accusation" against Cox. "I'm not trying to hush him up," Lacy said."
>>
>>Fool.
>>
>>IMO the group that has to be *really* careful here is the state engineers licensing board. If they uphold the complaint I believe they will be in direct violation of the US federal First Amendment - freedom of speech.
>
>I think you misunderstood my message. I didn't do a very good job again. I meant that I wonder if they are normally dismissing anything submitted by the public since it is not done by engineers but cannot dismiss this one because it appears to be professionally done so they took the personal attack route instead. I'd have to do some research, but I do not recall any stories where the citizens won unless there was a large group of businessmen complaining about something they planned to do.

As an engineer, this story bothers me so I got a bit wound up and didn't address your latter points at all. I think your conjecture is possible but I hope it's not so. The vast majority of engineers are good guys/gals and will take any well-reasoned arguments into consideration, not just those of other engineers.

If that particular office *has* been politicized to the point where they won't consider work not done by engineers, then their only criterion will be work presented as such i.e. sealed. If it hasn't been sealed they would just toss it like any other non-engineering petition. It wouldn't matter what it "appears" like, just whether it's been sealed.

Of course, if they won't consider non-engineering work at all that's potentially scandalous. I'd think they'd need a reinforced mandate to deal directly with the public (which as a gov't agency they should have already), and maybe some training. In large organizations engineers sometimes get locked into their own corners and may not get a lot of interaction with the real world.

In most jurisdictions engineers have a monopoly on certain types of technical work, usually where it has direct impact on public safety. The enforcement of that monopoly has to be narrowly and judiciously applied. Based on what I've seen I don't think Cox's actions merit any action from the licensing board.