School Construction Stimulus
I got a request in a thread a few days ago asking if I was still dating Sara Mead. Indeed I am. But even if I wasn’t, I would still recommend her piece on why school construction should be part of a recovery package:
New investments in school construction and modernization are a natural fit for the stimulus package. Unlike education programs, which need ongoing funding in order to keep operating, a two-year investment in school construction would produce thousands of school buildings that could be used for decades to come, with no need for continued federal funding. Similarly, investments in “greening” existing school facilities to reduce their energy consumption will produce substantial, ongoing savings that school districts can use to fund pre-k, increased teacher compensation, and other educational programs.
Many states and school districts have construction projects that were already in the works but have been put on hold due to the economic downturn. Federal school construction aid would allow work to resume on those projects, moving cash into the economy quickly. School construction would also create new jobs for construction workers hard-hit by the housing downturn. Because the construction sector is slow right now, schools and districts are likely to secure better deals on projects now than they would if they waited until the economy picks up.
It’s worth noting that, in general, we tend to undertake our public sector construction projects in a perverse way. During boomtimes, there’s lots of revenue sloshing around to be spent, so projects get funded. During downturns, state and local governments are hurting for revenue, so we cut back. It would make a lot more sense to actually separate this kind of spending from the regular budget, establish targets, and encourage projects to be undertaken during downturns when it’s cheaper and easier to get things done.
35 Responses to “School Construction Stimulus”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
January 29th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Haha
January 29th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
And now we usher in the beginnings of the new blogger-elite superclass with their blogger kids and aristocratic blogger schools, and in 20 years they’ll get jobs at CAP or the Atlantic because papa used to work there. Awesome.
January 29th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
What’s the ROI of a shiny new school building with the same dull students being taught by the same unionized teachers? Not much, I’m guessing.
We need to start making more shit that we can sell to foreigners. We’d be better off building sweatshops than schools.
January 29th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Matt,
I’m all for construction, but have you ever noticed that architectural standards for school buildings are…odd. Here in FL, they seem to require that schools be built on big tracts and being no more than two-stories tall, plus large expanses of athletic fields.
What about high-rise schools and district-wide athletic facilities?
-g
January 29th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Duh! Building and rebuilding schools are only to be celebrated when they’re in Iraq!!!!
January 29th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Matt,
You might want to look at whats happening to all of the shiny new schools that were built by overly opptomistic districts during the housing boom. There are a ton sitting empty or at 10% capacity. Maybe we should start tearing down old schools and recycling old cars…
January 29th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
If new schools are to be built I’d like to see lots of smaller shools built within walking or biking distance of students and facaulty (whenever possible), rather than mega-schools that require busing or driving. We desperately need to transform away from our automobile dependant society.
January 29th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
I kind of wish you’d keep extraneous content like who you’re dating and basketball out of your blog. I know you pride yourself on your connection to your readers, but don’t you realize that most people only have 5 or 10 minutes to look at your blog everyday? The less judicious your posts are the more likely I am to remove you from my RSS reader. And I really don’t want to do that. Please.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
I like the extraneous content. Keep it coming. People who don’t want to read about the Wizards can identify and skip over those posts in two seconds.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
The Los Angeles Unified School District has spent something like $24 billion dollars on school construction in recent years. How’s that working out in terms of tangible outcomes?
For example, the shiny new East Valley High School in LA is, after several years of operation, still far below its planned-for enrollment because local parents lie about their address to get their kids into older schools instead of East Valley. How come? Because East Valley HS, despite its high tech gleam, is full of gangs.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
you start building schools and the various ethnic groups get surly: drill holes in each other’s heads, overturn trash cans, stop taking care of children, pets, potted plants
January 29th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
This post’s collection of comments is like a museum gallery of nuttiness. I love it.
Anway… Wouldn’t statewide school districts alleviate some of the problems current school districts have with either a shortage of classrooms (in newish suburbs) or a surplus (central cities, older suburbs)?
January 29th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
I kind of wish you’d keep extraneous content like who you’re dating and basketball out of your blog.
Kind of a strange place to bring up a complaint like this. It was pretty clear that Matt mentioned who he was dating as a disclaimer when recommending her article.
I’d be much more annoyed, in this case, if he didn’t mention it.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
The colossal LAUSD school construction jag was a reaction to the Baby Boom in California set off by the 1986 amnesty of illegal immigrants.
Demographers Laura E. Hill and Hans P. Johnson of the Public Policy Institute of California wrote:
“Between 1987 and 1991, total fertility rates for foreign-born Hispanics [in California] increased from 3.2 to 4.4 [expected babies per woman over her lifetime]. This dramatic rise was the primary force behind the overall increase in the state’s total fertility rate during this period. Were it not for the large increase in fertility among Hispanic immigrants, fertility rates in California would have increased very little between 1987 and 1991.
“Why did total fertility rates increase so dramatically for Hispanic immigrants? First, the composition of the Hispanic immigrant population in California changed as a result of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986. In California alone, 1.6 million unauthorized immigrants applied for amnesty (legal immigrant status) under this act. The vast majority were young men, and many were agricultural workers who settled permanently in the United States. Previous research indicates that many of those granted amnesty were joined later by spouses and relatives in the United States… As a result, many young adult Hispanic women came to California during the late 1980s. We also know that unauthorized immigrants tend to have less education than other immigrants and that they are more likely to come from rural areas. Both characteristics are associated with high levels of fertility. As a result, changes in the composition of the Hispanic immigration population probably increased fertility rates.
“Another possible reason for the sudden increase in fertility rates for Hispanic immigrants is also related to IRCA. Because many of those granted amnesty and their spouses had been apart for some time, their reunion in California prompted a “catch-up” effect in the timing of births…”
January 29th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
“Even if I weren’t” not “even if I wasn’t” — subjunctive.
We, your commenting public, have made huge strides in improving your spelling. Perhaps we need to move on to grammar.
January 29th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Yes because the parents who moved to the newish suburbs so their children would not go to inner city schools would:
A) Love it if the children had to go to school in central cities that they just left.
AND
B) Have to endure long bus rides (on inefficient buses) of maybe an hour each way.
Yup, that would be dandy!
January 29th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Here in FL, they seem to require that schools be built on big tracts and being no more than two-stories tall, plus large expanses of athletic fields.
Schools rarely have more than two floors, so they don’t need elevators –very expensive — to meet code, and rarely have only one floor, because that’s wasteful of space — it’s cheaper to, say, stack two bathrooms over each other than to have them on opposite ends of one long floor.
They have the athletic fields because the local taxpayers usually consider football and soccer the school’s core mission, and if anyone gets educated, hey, that’s lagniappe
January 29th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
As a kid who grew up in California, the idea of multi-story (even 2-story) schools — with indoor hallways! — always strikes me as completely foreign.
January 29th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Yeah, it’s called a capital budget and state and local governments already have that. Most school construction is funded by selling bonds, not by revenue that is just sloshing around. A little tutorial on state and local government finances might be of value.
January 30th, 2009 at 12:40 am
What bosco said.
Also
This also assumes that new buildings cost nothing in upkeep & operating costs. Getting rid of a really old building may be cost effective in terms of obsolete HVAC systems, but for less old ones, or ones in a more moderate climate, in general new ‘high tech’ capital expenditures require marginally more to keep them running right. It’s exactly the same process where we spend billions a year in new highways but have a crumbling infrastructure. Or why Metro cries it’s in financial distress despite record ridership.
January 30th, 2009 at 12:44 am
Schools rarely have more than two floors, so they don’t need elevators –very expensive — to meet code,
They do to meet ADA requirements. And 3 of the 4 schools I went to from K-12 had two floors and an elevator even before ADA. And one of those lifts attached the the stairs for the split levels.
Plus most commercial buildings of two floors have an elevator even without ADA just to be able to move furniture and stuff.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Maybe not. But a leaking ceiling getting fixed, so the school day isn’t interrupted? Much bigger ROI. An extra gym being built so kids don’t have to spend long hours at the school waiting for practice, or getting up early in the morning? An improvement in grades because they’ll be better-rested. A more energy efficient building? Huge savings in heating and/or cooling costs.
Kolohe, who lives in a moderate climate these days?
January 30th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
I asked this the last time one of these “stimulus through aid-to-states” ideas came came up. But here goes again: If you make it known that the federal government is going to step in and build schools that local governments can no longer afford to build, isn’t it obvious that every single school district in the process of building a school is going to, you know, say they ran out of money? Why wouldn’t they?
Again, I know that you can’t keep people from gaming the system. But I think that before you do this you have to have some mechanism in place to choose between projects. And I think it is clear that such a mechanism would be a highly political maneuver, and would therefore take months if not years to put in place. By which time we will all be saved or screwed anyways.
Seriously. I drink a lot of beer. If the feds were to come out with a stimulus plan that would pick up there ber tab for people who could no longer afford it, I would immediately say I can no longer afford beer. To get free beer. Right?
February 6th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Building and renovating schools is a very important way to invest in our future. Job creation is crucial right now, and providing better, greener learning environments for our nation’s students will help that investment pay off. My client, the American Institute of Architects, has taken a stance on this issue and supports the greening of America’s schools. Learn more at the AIA’s blog, the Angle (http://blog.aia.org/angle/).
February 24th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
http://planeta.rambler.ru/users/merscar/
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:29 am
levitraIf you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 11th, 2009 at 4:13 am
Incredible site!
March 14th, 2009 at 4:56 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
xanax
March 17th, 2009 at 2:19 am
Great site. Good info
tramadol
March 17th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Many people bidding for some of these government funded construction projects will be left out in the cold if they do not have their OSHA training. Several states (NY, CT, MA, RI, NH, and MO) have laws requiring workers on publically-funded jobsites to take the OSHA 10 hour construction training class, like the ones available at http://www.osha10hourtraining.com . Without the OSHA card, they cannot get on the site. Many general contractors also have the same requirement for minimum OSHA training. So be prepared, do not wait until the last minute or you may be disqualified from getting onto the jobsite.
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:20 am
viagra
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:53 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:59 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 4:43 am
Thanks for the review! viagra
April 19th, 2009 at 8:58 am
UcAQk3 vkczojhlgpdb, [url=http://kpzxhglgawdx.com/]kpzxhglgawdx[/url], [link=http://qyxyjrdylayj.com/]qyxyjrdylayj[/link], http://ikmnetdrkpui.com/