Thanks Charles. It was your personal outreach that prompted me to keep an open mind. Instead of just butting heads as we had in the past, you took the first step and showed positive effort.

That kind of effort means a lot to me; & most of AGA’s members and leadership.

Each organization has their own niches. Ours is not as broad as AIs. Though we’ve had certain success in a variety of areas.

I’d welcome possible future attendance on issues of mutual concern.

Mike – Also would like to add that I personally appreciate the effort you and the AGA have made in the defense of several appraisers at the BREA. You’ve gone above and beyond. Thank you.

As an aside, we enjoyed your contributions at the Sept 2019 GRC meeting and hope you’ll accept a future invitation.

I compared the last two pages of this “anonymous” release with the actual PDF copies of the 990’s and there’s just so much missing information. When Mr. Amorin was President he was earning about $98 per hour and had to essentially put his private practice on hold. Also missing (or ignored) is the fact that Fred Grubbe was CEO from ’07 to ’17 drawing a salary in the mid to high $200k range.

As usual, Mr. Miller is quick to the keyboard but slow to exercise a modicum of due diligence.

Any views or comments I may have are irrelevant to members of the AI. Except possibly as a mirror to how they are perceived outside of AI by some non member appraisers.

In September (2019?) I was invited to attend an AI Regional Governmental Affairs Committee meeting in Southern, CA.

It was a cordial and productive meeting for me. I was able to share certain information I don’t believe they (AI Leadership) were aware of. I also gained a better understanding of their collective thought processes and lobbying efforts. There is no question that they are oriented toward very high income earner C&I appraisers. I don’t believe (personally) that will ever change…though they could become more inclusive to a certain degree.

I believed they were making an effort to reach out to their own SRA Members as well as residential affiliates. Keep in mind, this is just one chapter, and it may or may not be representative.

There is much AI does that I don’t agree with. An example is their apparent pandering to the meme of systemic racism being a real thing. I also understand why they feel they had to get on board that particular band wagon.

AI is a HUGE money making machine for many of its members. As such its focus is not the same as my own, or The Guild I’m privileged to represent. Nor SHOULD it be.

AGA exists to serve the needs of ALL of its members. We are a non profit. None of the executive officers of AGA collect salaries or stipends. The concept of Members helping other Members without ulterior or pecuniary motivation is important to us.

It is the single biggest counter to accusations “you guys just want to live high on the hog off members dues.”

The ONLY designation we offer is that of Member-AGA itself. It is not higher or lower based on license levels. It is primarily an ethics focused designation that also recognizes & incorporates the federal and state licensing and certification educational requirements as indicators of competency.

We believe the number one requirement of any appraiser to be professional integrity. Period.

In any case, I read the article and response(s) with interest. I don’t see that the graphs are especially of interest. Perhaps because I don’t know what else went into them besides a lot of effort.

IF membership dues revenue declines, then it stands to reason that any fixed or static expense WOULD naturally represent a higher percentage of that reduced revenue.

I won’t pretend to have done more than a cursory scan of the other charts. Not to offend or be disrespectful to anyone, I’m just not that interested.

Seriously. Did I mention I’m not a member?

If I have ANY suggestion (as a non member) it would be to make online CE courses from AI much more affordable. Maybe on a selective basis. Such as fundamental courses and report writing. Courses ALL of ‘us’ could benefit from.

The other is to urge greater outreach effort by AI on issues of interest to all appraisers. Neither ASA, AGA nor the State Coalitions are their enemy.

There’s a lot of common ground.

For my part I may or may not continue my “love-hate” very distant & unofficial ‘relationship’ with AI. Many MAIs and SRAs are personal friends.

1. AI has good educational offerings
2. AI has mentorship available
3. AI continues to be a major force in the profession. Even with declining membership numbers which may reflect the overall decline in “our” licensing numbers nationally.
4. AI Members can be a bit arrogant at times…even when its not justified. They are generally fun to oppose in litigation cases. Especially when they rely on the imprimatur of designation in lieu of credible work. Not often, but it happens. Hence the ‘love-hate’.

I have been very appreciative of Mr. Millers comments. His commentary has helped to shine a light on this organization’s self-dealing and inability to support their designated members. The organization is truly struggling. I am married to a designated member. I would have joined AI as well if I saw the value in membership. I will add, our local chapter has always been well run and supportive of membership.