Thursday, March 30, 2006
Welcome to Pittsburgh Mr. Roosevelt
On March 29 the teachers and so-called professional workers of the Pittsburgh School District sent the new superintendent a “welcome to the City” card by rejecting a negotiated contract that had the support of the District and the union’s new president.
Notwithstanding a looming deficit of $47 million in a budget that has operating expenditures of over $17,000 per student, the arguments that the District needs help from its employees to rein in its extravagant spending fell on deaf ears.
As we have noted in earlier writings, the real power in school districts lies with the unions. Unfortunately, unions represent the interests of the teachers and other employees, not the interests of the children or the taxpayers who pay their salaries.
Unless the Board capitulates and comes up with a better contract offer, the union will rattle the strike sword, their ultimate weapon and source of power.
Superintendents come and superintendents go. The unions and their lackeys in the education establishment are forever. Don’t look for support from the rank and file voters in Pittsburgh to support the superintendent. They have long since sided with the unions and are unlikely to change their minds. People who care about their kids’ education and others concerned about the high taxes they have to pay to fund education will continue to move away.
The school system offers an important but unfortunate lesson. When employers cannot run their own enterprise but must instead give control to the employees, the outcome is almost always a fiasco. Welcome to Pittsburgh Mr. Roosevelt.
Notwithstanding a looming deficit of $47 million in a budget that has operating expenditures of over $17,000 per student, the arguments that the District needs help from its employees to rein in its extravagant spending fell on deaf ears.
As we have noted in earlier writings, the real power in school districts lies with the unions. Unfortunately, unions represent the interests of the teachers and other employees, not the interests of the children or the taxpayers who pay their salaries.
Unless the Board capitulates and comes up with a better contract offer, the union will rattle the strike sword, their ultimate weapon and source of power.
Superintendents come and superintendents go. The unions and their lackeys in the education establishment are forever. Don’t look for support from the rank and file voters in Pittsburgh to support the superintendent. They have long since sided with the unions and are unlikely to change their minds. People who care about their kids’ education and others concerned about the high taxes they have to pay to fund education will continue to move away.
The school system offers an important but unfortunate lesson. When employers cannot run their own enterprise but must instead give control to the employees, the outcome is almost always a fiasco. Welcome to Pittsburgh Mr. Roosevelt.
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Wal-Mart in Union Cross-Hairs
It did not take long. Hard on the heels of a successful legislative triumph in Maryland, unions and their pals in the General Assembly want to require firms with more than 10,000 employees in Pennsylvania to spend at least 9 percent of their state payroll on health insurance. One can only hope that the Republican led legislature in Harrisburg will show this legislation to the waste can where it deserves to be.
If the AFL-CIO and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union really want to do something to boost the earnings and benefits of America’s low skill and entry level workers they should be staunchly and vociferously supporting legislation to close the U.S.A’s southern border to illegal aliens. Can it be that they believe all the incoming illegals represent new union members and Democratic voters?
But until that happens, the unions are resorting to their old habits, which includes having the legislature pass more laws to help them when they cannot get what they want under current laws. If some people lose their jobs, well that is just too bad. The greater good, that is, the union’s view of what is good, must be served.
In Pennsylvania of all places, it should be clear by now just how anti-business and anti-competitive market the state’s business climate is because of all the pro-union laws already on the books. This latest union proposal will tie another anchor around the state’s ability to grow its private sector.
If the AFL-CIO and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union really want to do something to boost the earnings and benefits of America’s low skill and entry level workers they should be staunchly and vociferously supporting legislation to close the U.S.A’s southern border to illegal aliens. Can it be that they believe all the incoming illegals represent new union members and Democratic voters?
But until that happens, the unions are resorting to their old habits, which includes having the legislature pass more laws to help them when they cannot get what they want under current laws. If some people lose their jobs, well that is just too bad. The greater good, that is, the union’s view of what is good, must be served.
In Pennsylvania of all places, it should be clear by now just how anti-business and anti-competitive market the state’s business climate is because of all the pro-union laws already on the books. This latest union proposal will tie another anchor around the state’s ability to grow its private sector.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Economics 101 for Teachers
We hear it time and time again—teachers aren’t paid enough. The more romantic say you can’t pay them enough. We’re regaled with anecdotal evidence of how a teacher’s pay comes up short, especially from teachers unions such as with the recent Penn Trafford, North Hills, and the Pittsburgh City School contract negotiations. However, light has been shed on the generosity of teacher pay in Pennsylvania.
The American Federation of Teachers ranks Pennsylvania ninth in average teacher salary across the nation ($52,460). This fact has not been lost on candidates for positions in our schools. A recent newspaper report noted that one school district had over 2,000 applications for 83 vacancies; another reported that for every one vacancy, they can expect to receive 200 resumes. One superintendent, commenting on applications, “(w)e are getting them in droves…whether there are openings or not.”
Economists will say that when price is too high, the quantity supplied will be greater than the quantity demanded. This is the situation with teachers in Pennsylvania: the high level of salaries has given us a condition where the quantity supplied (teachers) is exceeding the quantity demanded (teaching jobs). In a market that is free to correct these imbalances, prices would begin to fall to reduce the quantity supplied and increase the quantity demanded. However, given the strong handed nature of the teachers’ union in Pennsylvania, this is not allowed to happen.
How many other occupations can boast of such a surplus? How many other occupations have a following that urges employers to give them what they want? Those who advocate that teachers are underpaid often think with their hearts and not their heads. To which we say a little economics lesson can provide a lot of illumination.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/westmoreland/s_437165.html
The American Federation of Teachers ranks Pennsylvania ninth in average teacher salary across the nation ($52,460). This fact has not been lost on candidates for positions in our schools. A recent newspaper report noted that one school district had over 2,000 applications for 83 vacancies; another reported that for every one vacancy, they can expect to receive 200 resumes. One superintendent, commenting on applications, “(w)e are getting them in droves…whether there are openings or not.”
Economists will say that when price is too high, the quantity supplied will be greater than the quantity demanded. This is the situation with teachers in Pennsylvania: the high level of salaries has given us a condition where the quantity supplied (teachers) is exceeding the quantity demanded (teaching jobs). In a market that is free to correct these imbalances, prices would begin to fall to reduce the quantity supplied and increase the quantity demanded. However, given the strong handed nature of the teachers’ union in Pennsylvania, this is not allowed to happen.
How many other occupations can boast of such a surplus? How many other occupations have a following that urges employers to give them what they want? Those who advocate that teachers are underpaid often think with their hearts and not their heads. To which we say a little economics lesson can provide a lot of illumination.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/westmoreland/s_437165.html
Monday, March 27, 2006
Oratory on the Arena
“…I can’t think of any more important public purpose that this kind of activity could be used for than an arena.”
Wait, he didn’t say that, did he? The quote is attributed to Pennsylvania’s junior U.S. Senator and the subject he is opining on is the use of slot proceeds to build an arena for the Penguins. Besides the fact that since he is a Federal official and the creation and regulation of gaming as well as the funding of an arena will be a state and local issue, the Senator’s statement once again reveal the problems with simply setting the application fee at $50 million instead of auctioning them off to the highest bidder.
First, who’s to say that an arena is the most important public purpose? One would think that reducing the City of Pittsburgh’s debt load so that it could cut taxes is far more important than an arena, especially since a new arena wouldn’t do much for the City’s finances above what the current one is doing now. Let’s face it: two new stadiums did nothing to prevent the City’s slide to insolvency. That goes without mentioning other purposes: infrastructure, condos, gambling prevention—any and all of these could be considered as “more important public purposes” than another sports venue.
Second, look how far away we’ve gotten from targeting gambling proceeds for property tax relief. Thanks to politicians viewing slots as a way to fund airports, hotels, arenas, and other economic development goodies, the state simply has another tool at its disposal to fund questionable projects. Here’s the predictable result: in future years, more and more of the gambling dollars will be used to pay off the debt from the assorted boondoggles dropped across the Commonwealth.
The Gaming Board must do its job without interference from elected officials lobbying for their favorite alternative. This whole gambling fiasco has been far too politicized already.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06083/675969-61.stm
Wait, he didn’t say that, did he? The quote is attributed to Pennsylvania’s junior U.S. Senator and the subject he is opining on is the use of slot proceeds to build an arena for the Penguins. Besides the fact that since he is a Federal official and the creation and regulation of gaming as well as the funding of an arena will be a state and local issue, the Senator’s statement once again reveal the problems with simply setting the application fee at $50 million instead of auctioning them off to the highest bidder.
First, who’s to say that an arena is the most important public purpose? One would think that reducing the City of Pittsburgh’s debt load so that it could cut taxes is far more important than an arena, especially since a new arena wouldn’t do much for the City’s finances above what the current one is doing now. Let’s face it: two new stadiums did nothing to prevent the City’s slide to insolvency. That goes without mentioning other purposes: infrastructure, condos, gambling prevention—any and all of these could be considered as “more important public purposes” than another sports venue.
Second, look how far away we’ve gotten from targeting gambling proceeds for property tax relief. Thanks to politicians viewing slots as a way to fund airports, hotels, arenas, and other economic development goodies, the state simply has another tool at its disposal to fund questionable projects. Here’s the predictable result: in future years, more and more of the gambling dollars will be used to pay off the debt from the assorted boondoggles dropped across the Commonwealth.
The Gaming Board must do its job without interference from elected officials lobbying for their favorite alternative. This whole gambling fiasco has been far too politicized already.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06083/675969-61.stm
Friday, March 24, 2006
School Board Tantrum
The Pittsburgh City School Board voted to revoke charter of the Northside Urban Pathways Charter School by a 6-2 margin. This despite the advice of their solicitor who said they had no reason under the charter law to do so. Board members claimed they were sending a message to the state citing frustration with the charter school law.
Their frustration has more to do with losing control of their dictatorship of the education system than with the performance of Northside. The Board cited the poor performance of this Charter school and noted “they were tired of spending taxpayer money on schools that haven’t lived up to promises of educational excellence and operate, as they see it, without adequate government control.” If they were to start closing schools that haven’t lived up to “promises of educational excellence”, the entire Pittsburgh Public School system—which continues to lag the state and county averages on reading and math proficiencies—might be closed.
It is also interesting to note that the Board cited two schools as underperforming: Northside and the Urban League of Pittsburgh Charter School—yet only voted to revoke one charter. Is Northside that much worse than others? Northside, with grades 6 through 12, is comprised entirely of minority students of which 93 percent are black. Northside’s eighth and eleventh graders’ proficiencies in math and reading are comparable to like students in the Pittsburgh Public School District. Charter schools are still in their infancy—what excuse does the District have?
Again, this is more about losing control than being concerned for the students. Pittsburgh Public Schools have seen their enrollments decline over the past few years—reduced by 10 percent from 2001-2004. Meanwhile the Northside Charter School has seen enrollment increase by 71 percent over the same time period. It’s obvious that parents in the Pittsburgh Public School system want a better system and are choosing Charter schools.
This trend not only irks the School Board, but also rankles the teachers’ union. The Board complained that charter schools can hire teachers that aren’t certified and “have lower per-pupil costs because their employees often aren’t unionized”. This is a statement straight from the union’s playbook. However, more than 84 percent of Northside’s teachers are rated as “highly qualified”. While Pittsburgh’s rating may be higher (98 percent) the results are not demonstrably different.
The Board has not shown much concern over high per-pupil costs before. This was evident as they fought the new superintendent’s cost cutting plan to close schools. Will it be worried when its own unions start to renegotiate? Will it bring forward any privatizing initiatives for transportation, maintenance, or food service? Highly unlikely.
What concerns the Board is the loss of control. They are concerned that parents are choosing alternatives to public education like charter schools. Instead of improving their product in the face of competition, they throw a tantrum and revoke a charter. What a sad moment for the Board.
Their frustration has more to do with losing control of their dictatorship of the education system than with the performance of Northside. The Board cited the poor performance of this Charter school and noted “they were tired of spending taxpayer money on schools that haven’t lived up to promises of educational excellence and operate, as they see it, without adequate government control.” If they were to start closing schools that haven’t lived up to “promises of educational excellence”, the entire Pittsburgh Public School system—which continues to lag the state and county averages on reading and math proficiencies—might be closed.
It is also interesting to note that the Board cited two schools as underperforming: Northside and the Urban League of Pittsburgh Charter School—yet only voted to revoke one charter. Is Northside that much worse than others? Northside, with grades 6 through 12, is comprised entirely of minority students of which 93 percent are black. Northside’s eighth and eleventh graders’ proficiencies in math and reading are comparable to like students in the Pittsburgh Public School District. Charter schools are still in their infancy—what excuse does the District have?
Again, this is more about losing control than being concerned for the students. Pittsburgh Public Schools have seen their enrollments decline over the past few years—reduced by 10 percent from 2001-2004. Meanwhile the Northside Charter School has seen enrollment increase by 71 percent over the same time period. It’s obvious that parents in the Pittsburgh Public School system want a better system and are choosing Charter schools.
This trend not only irks the School Board, but also rankles the teachers’ union. The Board complained that charter schools can hire teachers that aren’t certified and “have lower per-pupil costs because their employees often aren’t unionized”. This is a statement straight from the union’s playbook. However, more than 84 percent of Northside’s teachers are rated as “highly qualified”. While Pittsburgh’s rating may be higher (98 percent) the results are not demonstrably different.
The Board has not shown much concern over high per-pupil costs before. This was evident as they fought the new superintendent’s cost cutting plan to close schools. Will it be worried when its own unions start to renegotiate? Will it bring forward any privatizing initiatives for transportation, maintenance, or food service? Highly unlikely.
What concerns the Board is the loss of control. They are concerned that parents are choosing alternatives to public education like charter schools. Instead of improving their product in the face of competition, they throw a tantrum and revoke a charter. What a sad moment for the Board.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Garbage Savings Trashed?
Part of the Act 47 recovery plan called for the City to explore using private haulers to collect garbage in the southern neighborhoods. There are a lot of places—from big cities to small towns—who routinely use a private company to collect garbage. Not surprisingly, this idea has long been met with resistance from the City workforce.
But what has transpired with what the Act 47 plan intended and what the City’s Request for Proposals carried out shows the lengths the City will go to protect its union members’ monopoly in garbage collection.
There can be no other explanation than wanting to keep garbage collection a City enterprise. The Act 47 plan envisioned two separate bidding stages: the first would be for 10 percent of the City’s households and was to be open to private bidders only “in order to provide an opportunity to evaluate contracted services”. In the subsequent phase, an area encompassing one-third of the households was to be bid, with the City allowed to propose a plan to compete against the private sector.
That’s not how it turned out. Instead of two subsequent phases, the City RFP instructed bidders to bid simultaneously for both options, even though only one option would be awarded. And who did the judging?: an evaluation committee appointed by the City, and City Council held the ultimate position of awarding the contract. Talk about a case of the fox in charge of the henhouse.
So the City workers did win the contract, presumably, in part, because they were able to use the City’s fleet of trucks whereas others had to provide their own equipment. That, along with an attitude on the part of the City that a switch to a private hauler would be considered “a major disruption” certainly put private players on the defensive from the start.
Predictably, the refuse handling union wants to use its “efficiency” to bankroll a wage increase for its members. More moves like this will ensure oversight for the City for a long time, and delay permanently any real financial recovery.
But what has transpired with what the Act 47 plan intended and what the City’s Request for Proposals carried out shows the lengths the City will go to protect its union members’ monopoly in garbage collection.
There can be no other explanation than wanting to keep garbage collection a City enterprise. The Act 47 plan envisioned two separate bidding stages: the first would be for 10 percent of the City’s households and was to be open to private bidders only “in order to provide an opportunity to evaluate contracted services”. In the subsequent phase, an area encompassing one-third of the households was to be bid, with the City allowed to propose a plan to compete against the private sector.
That’s not how it turned out. Instead of two subsequent phases, the City RFP instructed bidders to bid simultaneously for both options, even though only one option would be awarded. And who did the judging?: an evaluation committee appointed by the City, and City Council held the ultimate position of awarding the contract. Talk about a case of the fox in charge of the henhouse.
So the City workers did win the contract, presumably, in part, because they were able to use the City’s fleet of trucks whereas others had to provide their own equipment. That, along with an attitude on the part of the City that a switch to a private hauler would be considered “a major disruption” certainly put private players on the defensive from the start.
Predictably, the refuse handling union wants to use its “efficiency” to bankroll a wage increase for its members. More moves like this will ensure oversight for the City for a long time, and delay permanently any real financial recovery.
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Rendell’s Education Hypocrisy
The omnipresent Governor of Pennsylvania has found time to stick his nose into a purely local school matter. He is proposing to fork over tax dollars from some discretionary fund he obviously controls to pay the cost of the International Baccalaureate program at Upper St. Clair schools.
Last time we checked, curriculum and budget decisions were the province of the local school board. If they want to shift to the Advanced Placement system for students seeking more rigor in their education or create their own rigorous program, how is it that the Governor seizes the opportunity to jump in and offer money to pay for the just abandoned program? Seems a little odd unless one looks for a possible political angle. Could it be pressure from the teachers’ union to save the program? Or is it simply a hope that maybe some disgruntled parents will vote for him this fall? Of course, it could all be for naught. In all likelihood many of the parents using the IB program were going to vote for him anyway.
But the stunning hypocrisy this gambit represents is the real story. Here is a Governor who staunchly opposes meaningful education choices through a voucher system offering money to a school district to provide choices to some parents. Why not go all the way and offer vouchers to all parents who can then send their children to schools that offer the educational programs best suited to their needs?
If the IB program were a conservative, free market, small government oriented program would he have proposed to fund it?
Last time we checked, curriculum and budget decisions were the province of the local school board. If they want to shift to the Advanced Placement system for students seeking more rigor in their education or create their own rigorous program, how is it that the Governor seizes the opportunity to jump in and offer money to pay for the just abandoned program? Seems a little odd unless one looks for a possible political angle. Could it be pressure from the teachers’ union to save the program? Or is it simply a hope that maybe some disgruntled parents will vote for him this fall? Of course, it could all be for naught. In all likelihood many of the parents using the IB program were going to vote for him anyway.
But the stunning hypocrisy this gambit represents is the real story. Here is a Governor who staunchly opposes meaningful education choices through a voucher system offering money to a school district to provide choices to some parents. Why not go all the way and offer vouchers to all parents who can then send their children to schools that offer the educational programs best suited to their needs?
If the IB program were a conservative, free market, small government oriented program would he have proposed to fund it?
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Consolidation? How About Privatization?
The County Executive plans to appoint a panel to study mass transit in Allegheny County—a Transportation Action Team. He wants some hard-hitting recommendations on getting transit to the airport, Oakland, and opening up the use of PAT’s busways and park-and-ride facilities in order to enhance revenues.
One recommendation that he wants to have in place by fall is to create a larger transportation authority in the counties of Southwestern Pennsylvania. It will likely turn out to be modeled on SEPTA, hardly an endorsement of its merits. The panel should take a look at our study from last summer since it examined PAT and the smaller carriers in the region. There were no surprises on wages and salaries (PAT’s average driver wage was double that of the other carriers) or performance indicators (PAT’s vehicle miles and passenger trips were well in excess of those carriers).
It was surprising to find that there is significant experience with private operators driving the buses of the smaller authorities. The Westmoreland Transit Authority never directly operated its own buses, while the Beaver County Transit Authority was a non-operating entity for many years.
The results of creating a larger transit authority are predictable: costs will grow, not fall, as there is no way PAT drivers will take a pay cut to get to the level of non-PAT operators. Of course, taxpayers will foot the bill and the riding public will once again suffer subsequent rounds of service cuts or fare hikes, or both.
Here’s the solution: if the Executive wants the coordinated planning that comes with a regional authority, then work on making the board of directors regional and leave the operations to the private sector. The board can make decisions and negotiate the contracts, while the private operators concentrate on what they do best at a low cost to taxpayers.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06075/671120.stm
One recommendation that he wants to have in place by fall is to create a larger transportation authority in the counties of Southwestern Pennsylvania. It will likely turn out to be modeled on SEPTA, hardly an endorsement of its merits. The panel should take a look at our study from last summer since it examined PAT and the smaller carriers in the region. There were no surprises on wages and salaries (PAT’s average driver wage was double that of the other carriers) or performance indicators (PAT’s vehicle miles and passenger trips were well in excess of those carriers).
It was surprising to find that there is significant experience with private operators driving the buses of the smaller authorities. The Westmoreland Transit Authority never directly operated its own buses, while the Beaver County Transit Authority was a non-operating entity for many years.
The results of creating a larger transit authority are predictable: costs will grow, not fall, as there is no way PAT drivers will take a pay cut to get to the level of non-PAT operators. Of course, taxpayers will foot the bill and the riding public will once again suffer subsequent rounds of service cuts or fare hikes, or both.
Here’s the solution: if the Executive wants the coordinated planning that comes with a regional authority, then work on making the board of directors regional and leave the operations to the private sector. The board can make decisions and negotiate the contracts, while the private operators concentrate on what they do best at a low cost to taxpayers.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06075/671120.stm
Monday, March 20, 2006
Playoff Economic Impact Hype
Remember all the breathless TV reporting about the large uptick in economic activity associated with the Steelers January playoff run to the Super Bowl? Beer and snack sales way up. Steeler paraphernalia sales off the charts. This was mostly anecdotal of course with no attempt to look at the businesses that might have been losing sales because normal shoppers were home watching football and partying. Nor was there any recognition of the huge amounts of dollars being spent by locals in their travels to see games in Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Denver.
Well, the real numbers are in and they are not pretty. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue retail sales tax collections in Allegheny County for the month of January 2006 were down nearly three percent from January 2005. That means taxable sales in the County were also down by the same percentage. Meanwhile, retail sales nationally rose an astounding 9.3 percent from January 2005 to January 2006.
Obviously, a lot of factors were involved in the retail sales numbers for Allegheny County besides the Steeler playoff run. But to listen to the reporters and their attempts to find a positive spin on the Steeler games, one would have thought the County was undergoing an economic boom.
Unfortunately, the opposite was true and it would have been fairly easy for journalists to try to add balance. The really awful part is that Allegheny County performed so poorly compared to the nation. There is the real story.
Is it too much to ask for reporters and news editors to set aside the desire to hype the economic impact of sports and present balanced reporting? Studies from around the country by many, many analysts have shown sports to be virtually insignificant economically. Yet, the boosters in the civic community and the news rooms never seem to get it or even want to get it.
Well, the real numbers are in and they are not pretty. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue retail sales tax collections in Allegheny County for the month of January 2006 were down nearly three percent from January 2005. That means taxable sales in the County were also down by the same percentage. Meanwhile, retail sales nationally rose an astounding 9.3 percent from January 2005 to January 2006.
Obviously, a lot of factors were involved in the retail sales numbers for Allegheny County besides the Steeler playoff run. But to listen to the reporters and their attempts to find a positive spin on the Steeler games, one would have thought the County was undergoing an economic boom.
Unfortunately, the opposite was true and it would have been fairly easy for journalists to try to add balance. The really awful part is that Allegheny County performed so poorly compared to the nation. There is the real story.
Is it too much to ask for reporters and news editors to set aside the desire to hype the economic impact of sports and present balanced reporting? Studies from around the country by many, many analysts have shown sports to be virtually insignificant economically. Yet, the boosters in the civic community and the news rooms never seem to get it or even want to get it.
Friday, March 17, 2006
PAT Digs for More Money
The Port Authority plans to ask the Federal government for more money to bail out the proposed North Shore Connector. Those who are close to the project say that this may be the Connector’s last chance. That’s one chance too many. This project, with it inflated ridership projections and exorbitant costs, must be stopped once and for all.
Current estimates have County and state taxpayers responsible for $13 million and $65 million respectively—the rest ($317 million) coming from federal grants. The County Executive has said that the County will not pay more than its pledge. If the Port Authority (PAT) is successful in obtaining a $20 to $25 million grant from the Federal government, the County and the state would be on the hook to provide matching funds. Where will this money come from? Also, no mention has been given to who will pay for the eventual cost overruns. It is unlikely that the Federal government will do so. Chances are that burden will also fall on the County.
This boondoggle will be a permanent drain on County taxpayers. In addition to the capital costs that keep mounting, they will be responsible for the ongoing maintenance and operations costs. The Port Authority cannot balance its current budget and will undoubtedly be under more strain once the Connector is running.
Thanks to the Governor’s shifting of road and bridge money to PAT, they have been able to maintain status quo. But how much longer can this last? PAT is projecting a shortfall of $45 million for the upcoming fiscal year. Bridges are crumbling from neglect. When the Governor can no longer shift road money, County taxpayers will have to pick up the tab—a tab that continues to grow with wasteful projects like the Connector, the Wabash Tunnel HOV, and the Brookline light rail extension.
The County Executive needs to come forward to stop the Port Authority’s plans to ask for more Federal money. The County does not have the matching funds. Despite cut backs to the scope of the project, costs continue to outpace projections. Cost overruns have not been addressed. This boondoggle can be a potential quagmire for state and County taxpayers. The time to kill the Connector is now.
Current estimates have County and state taxpayers responsible for $13 million and $65 million respectively—the rest ($317 million) coming from federal grants. The County Executive has said that the County will not pay more than its pledge. If the Port Authority (PAT) is successful in obtaining a $20 to $25 million grant from the Federal government, the County and the state would be on the hook to provide matching funds. Where will this money come from? Also, no mention has been given to who will pay for the eventual cost overruns. It is unlikely that the Federal government will do so. Chances are that burden will also fall on the County.
This boondoggle will be a permanent drain on County taxpayers. In addition to the capital costs that keep mounting, they will be responsible for the ongoing maintenance and operations costs. The Port Authority cannot balance its current budget and will undoubtedly be under more strain once the Connector is running.
Thanks to the Governor’s shifting of road and bridge money to PAT, they have been able to maintain status quo. But how much longer can this last? PAT is projecting a shortfall of $45 million for the upcoming fiscal year. Bridges are crumbling from neglect. When the Governor can no longer shift road money, County taxpayers will have to pick up the tab—a tab that continues to grow with wasteful projects like the Connector, the Wabash Tunnel HOV, and the Brookline light rail extension.
The County Executive needs to come forward to stop the Port Authority’s plans to ask for more Federal money. The County does not have the matching funds. Despite cut backs to the scope of the project, costs continue to outpace projections. Cost overruns have not been addressed. This boondoggle can be a potential quagmire for state and County taxpayers. The time to kill the Connector is now.
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Let the Wailing Over Assessments Begin
While the Chief Executive is busy lauding Common Pleas Judge Wettick’s decision to allow the 2002 assessments to stand as Allegheny County’s new “base year” valuation, the decision leaves a lot of problems in its wake.
The most notable is that all properties valued in 2002 were done by comparative sales method, and the Executive spent a great deal of time proclaiming their inaccuracies. Now, they will form the basis of assessed values for what could be years to come. That’s quite a reversal of positions for the Executive.
2002 assessments values on properties existing at that time were done on comparable sales (sales of similar properties used to derive the value for others). Now take a property built in the County in future years: how will it be assessed? The Executive has said that it would be done on a construction cost approach with materials and labor adjusted to the 2002 base year. See the problem? None of the nearly 500,000 existing properties were assessed on the construction cost basis, and they won’t be adjusted to that basis for purposes of the base year. We have not yet heard or seen how the adjustment model will be built to achieve such comparisons.
That’s why the judge should have required that a base year be a future year when the difficulties associated with new properties could be adequately addressed and the existing properties values could be set using the same methodology.
Moreover, there is no clear process on how appeals will be done. This will be especially problematic in Downtown where, as we pointed out last year, several large properties were to have seen their assessments fall when the County was doing reassessments for 2006 prior to abandoning those plans. They can’t appeal on the basis of sales, which affects numerous property owners that saw their structures sell for well less than their 2002 value.
The decision does nothing to address the sky-high millage rates that keep climbing as a result of out-of-control school and local government spending. When the original 2006 assessments came out in February of 2005, the administration did not like them because they felt taxing bodies would not adjust their millage rates downward. Well, they now have the reverse problem: assessments will be fixed, so the millage rates will simply climb to account for the missing growth in the assessed values as should have occurred. Failure to address municipal and school spending growth will continue to drive the high property taxes upward, one way or the other.
In fact, those whose properties are overassessed and are now destined to stay that way will have to pay their high millages right along with those whose properties are underassessed. The inequities will surely get worse over time in this ill-designed base year system.
Still, the County “did” its job, which is providing the assessments for its tax purposes and the other local entities. Those assessments are supposed to be as accurate and fair as humanly possible. Of course, that has not happened. Now comes the anger from those who should have gotten a break from an accurate re-assessment.
The most notable is that all properties valued in 2002 were done by comparative sales method, and the Executive spent a great deal of time proclaiming their inaccuracies. Now, they will form the basis of assessed values for what could be years to come. That’s quite a reversal of positions for the Executive.
2002 assessments values on properties existing at that time were done on comparable sales (sales of similar properties used to derive the value for others). Now take a property built in the County in future years: how will it be assessed? The Executive has said that it would be done on a construction cost approach with materials and labor adjusted to the 2002 base year. See the problem? None of the nearly 500,000 existing properties were assessed on the construction cost basis, and they won’t be adjusted to that basis for purposes of the base year. We have not yet heard or seen how the adjustment model will be built to achieve such comparisons.
That’s why the judge should have required that a base year be a future year when the difficulties associated with new properties could be adequately addressed and the existing properties values could be set using the same methodology.
Moreover, there is no clear process on how appeals will be done. This will be especially problematic in Downtown where, as we pointed out last year, several large properties were to have seen their assessments fall when the County was doing reassessments for 2006 prior to abandoning those plans. They can’t appeal on the basis of sales, which affects numerous property owners that saw their structures sell for well less than their 2002 value.
The decision does nothing to address the sky-high millage rates that keep climbing as a result of out-of-control school and local government spending. When the original 2006 assessments came out in February of 2005, the administration did not like them because they felt taxing bodies would not adjust their millage rates downward. Well, they now have the reverse problem: assessments will be fixed, so the millage rates will simply climb to account for the missing growth in the assessed values as should have occurred. Failure to address municipal and school spending growth will continue to drive the high property taxes upward, one way or the other.
In fact, those whose properties are overassessed and are now destined to stay that way will have to pay their high millages right along with those whose properties are underassessed. The inequities will surely get worse over time in this ill-designed base year system.
Still, the County “did” its job, which is providing the assessments for its tax purposes and the other local entities. Those assessments are supposed to be as accurate and fair as humanly possible. Of course, that has not happened. Now comes the anger from those who should have gotten a break from an accurate re-assessment.
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Gambling Impact Studies Look Like a Crap Shoot
The constant theme running through the state’s foray into gaming is that the applicants will promise the world in order to get one of the lucrative licenses. Factions are now lining up behind the proposal that gives them the benefits they desire. We have clearly seen this in Pittsburgh: hockey fans have written letters, made phone calls, and have held public gatherings to urge the gaming board to award the license to Isle of Capri so that an arena can be built. That’s what they feel is the best for the City. But who’s to say that an arena would be “better” than 1,200 taxable condos in Station Square? Or locating a casino on the North Shore?
That’s what the board must decide. Fueling their decision will be the impact studies prepared by the applicants. Note that the studies are not called “economic impact” studies, though they do address economic development. But since applicants could decide what to put into the report, the gaming board will have to wrestle with yet another round of policy questions of what is best for Pittsburgh. And it is easy to predict that the next layer of factions will include the public sector.
For instance, the Isle of Capri’s application notes that their parlor would increase bus and light rail ridership, a boon for the Port Authority. But if that is true, it is even more true of Forest City’s/Harrah’s plan because of the Station Square location. PITG Gaming’s proposal for the North Shore is “not expected to impose any increased burdens on local public safety departments”, something the City police and firefighters will like to hear. But how could they be sure that criminal activity will be no greater than at other casino sites?
The board clearly stumbled in setting out criteria for applicants. By not requiring a simple, formulaic method for all applicants to address key issues and how they would be affected under the applicants’ plan, they are left to compare items that might not be addressed comprehensively by all.
An auction would have made the process more transparent and above board and certainly not drag out the promised property tax relief that was the impetus for gaming in the first place.
www.post-gazette.com/pg/06067/666766.stm
That’s what the board must decide. Fueling their decision will be the impact studies prepared by the applicants. Note that the studies are not called “economic impact” studies, though they do address economic development. But since applicants could decide what to put into the report, the gaming board will have to wrestle with yet another round of policy questions of what is best for Pittsburgh. And it is easy to predict that the next layer of factions will include the public sector.
For instance, the Isle of Capri’s application notes that their parlor would increase bus and light rail ridership, a boon for the Port Authority. But if that is true, it is even more true of Forest City’s/Harrah’s plan because of the Station Square location. PITG Gaming’s proposal for the North Shore is “not expected to impose any increased burdens on local public safety departments”, something the City police and firefighters will like to hear. But how could they be sure that criminal activity will be no greater than at other casino sites?
The board clearly stumbled in setting out criteria for applicants. By not requiring a simple, formulaic method for all applicants to address key issues and how they would be affected under the applicants’ plan, they are left to compare items that might not be addressed comprehensively by all.
An auction would have made the process more transparent and above board and certainly not drag out the promised property tax relief that was the impetus for gaming in the first place.
www.post-gazette.com/pg/06067/666766.stm
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Penn Trafford Averts Strike
Learning from Kids about Teacher Strikes
Teachers insist that they need the right to strike. They claim that only through the right to strike can they have bargaining leverage with the school district. We counter that the ability to strike causes havoc among parents, children, and the community. This was recently evidenced in the Penn-Trafford school year where the union struck once in October and threatened to walk again until a new settlement was reached at the eleventh hour.
However, the damage has been done. One student, the student representative to the board, expressed her frustration when she said: “This year has been ruined for us, so thanks board and thanks PTEA" (teachers’ union). Despite claims that they only do what’s best for the students, teachers disrupted students’ year by refusing to write letters of recommendation for college admissions as well as refusing to sponsor clubs and extracurricular activities which are an essential part of student life. Teachers let the impasse with the district spill over into their classrooms and showed disdain for the students they claim to care for. Did this childish behavior cost a student admission to the college of their choice or deny students the opportunity to hone skills developed through extracurricular activities? Is this the type of professionalism espoused by teacher unions?
The impact this dispute has had on the students may run deeper than missed activities. It could have taught them that bullying and holding a community hostage is the only way to get what you want in life. Instead the student representative also noted that “we have been given a lesson on how we absolutely will not act when we are put into a position as role models”. Obviously she learned on how not to act in a dispute. It is only hoped that other students have learned the same lesson.
Most students and parents were relieved that their summer vacation has been spared—a strike could have extended the school year to June 30th. The first strike wiped out their Christmas break. In addition to lost vacation plans, another strike would have sent parents scrambling to find adequate child care.
The details of this agreement have not been finalized, so taxpayers in these communities do not know how much it will cost. However, the costs to the students have already been tabulated. Their losses cannot be replaced. Yet they underscore the importance of eliminating teachers’ right to strike.
Teachers insist that they need the right to strike. They claim that only through the right to strike can they have bargaining leverage with the school district. We counter that the ability to strike causes havoc among parents, children, and the community. This was recently evidenced in the Penn-Trafford school year where the union struck once in October and threatened to walk again until a new settlement was reached at the eleventh hour.
However, the damage has been done. One student, the student representative to the board, expressed her frustration when she said: “This year has been ruined for us, so thanks board and thanks PTEA" (teachers’ union). Despite claims that they only do what’s best for the students, teachers disrupted students’ year by refusing to write letters of recommendation for college admissions as well as refusing to sponsor clubs and extracurricular activities which are an essential part of student life. Teachers let the impasse with the district spill over into their classrooms and showed disdain for the students they claim to care for. Did this childish behavior cost a student admission to the college of their choice or deny students the opportunity to hone skills developed through extracurricular activities? Is this the type of professionalism espoused by teacher unions?
The impact this dispute has had on the students may run deeper than missed activities. It could have taught them that bullying and holding a community hostage is the only way to get what you want in life. Instead the student representative also noted that “we have been given a lesson on how we absolutely will not act when we are put into a position as role models”. Obviously she learned on how not to act in a dispute. It is only hoped that other students have learned the same lesson.
Most students and parents were relieved that their summer vacation has been spared—a strike could have extended the school year to June 30th. The first strike wiped out their Christmas break. In addition to lost vacation plans, another strike would have sent parents scrambling to find adequate child care.
The details of this agreement have not been finalized, so taxpayers in these communities do not know how much it will cost. However, the costs to the students have already been tabulated. Their losses cannot be replaced. Yet they underscore the importance of eliminating teachers’ right to strike.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Former Mayor Murphy’s Dream Goes South
Tampa’s Bizarre Sense of Humor
This is no joke. Urban Planners in Tampa have invited Pittsburgh previous Mayor to offer advice on revitalizing Tampa’s urban core. But here is the punch line. According to the president of the Tampa Downtown Partnership, “We want to hear about profiles in courage and the kind of impact creative thinking can have in a downtown.”
Courage? It does not take courage to spend tax dollars, especially those paid mostly by non-residents, such as the RAD tax. It takes chutzpah, but courage? Not as courage is commonly understood. Displaying courage would have required standing up to unions, especially firefighters. It would have meant pushing cost saving through outsourcing many City functions to the private sector. It would have meant working hard to cut spending and taxes and preventing the City’s slide into distressed status.
Courage was not required to pursue a strategy to spend large amounts of tax dollars on stadiums, a convention center and two failed department stores.
As for creative thinking, efforts that fail miserably to accomplish the stated goals can hardly be called creative solutions. Pie in the sky is a better description of plans that deliberately eschew the rigorous analysis and empirical research necessary before plunging ahead. Indeed, deliberately ignoring any of the common sense arguments against wasting tax dollars can never qualify as creative. A better description is obstinate blindness.
Poor Tampa. If they are smart, they will learn from the mayor’s mistakes and not listen to his advice.
This is no joke. Urban Planners in Tampa have invited Pittsburgh previous Mayor to offer advice on revitalizing Tampa’s urban core. But here is the punch line. According to the president of the Tampa Downtown Partnership, “We want to hear about profiles in courage and the kind of impact creative thinking can have in a downtown.”
Courage? It does not take courage to spend tax dollars, especially those paid mostly by non-residents, such as the RAD tax. It takes chutzpah, but courage? Not as courage is commonly understood. Displaying courage would have required standing up to unions, especially firefighters. It would have meant pushing cost saving through outsourcing many City functions to the private sector. It would have meant working hard to cut spending and taxes and preventing the City’s slide into distressed status.
Courage was not required to pursue a strategy to spend large amounts of tax dollars on stadiums, a convention center and two failed department stores.
As for creative thinking, efforts that fail miserably to accomplish the stated goals can hardly be called creative solutions. Pie in the sky is a better description of plans that deliberately eschew the rigorous analysis and empirical research necessary before plunging ahead. Indeed, deliberately ignoring any of the common sense arguments against wasting tax dollars can never qualify as creative. A better description is obstinate blindness.
Poor Tampa. If they are smart, they will learn from the mayor’s mistakes and not listen to his advice.
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
County Council Amends Resign-to-Run Rule
County Council’s Shameless Disregard for the Law
“ A County Council Member shall not be a candidate for nomination or election to any political office other than that of County Council without having first resigned from County Council”. So saith Article I, section 6-paragraph b of the Allegheny County Home Rule Charter.
Clear, precise language right? Apparently not to the members of Council who voted 13 to zero to amend the language of the administrative code to allow council members to remain on council while seeking a nomination to other elective office. What arrogant disregard for the Charter they are honor and duty bound to uphold.
They rely on attorneys for legal advice. And of course, one can always find an attorney who will tell you what you want to hear, especially if he or she is an employee. The argument that the Charter provision could be unconstitutional in Pennsylvania is no excuse for violating the Charter as it is written. If the Council believes the provision is unconstitutional they should file a suit to have the Courts decide the constitutionality. They should not decide to ignore the Charter because they believe they might win a court challenge. First things first.
The behavior of the Council is every bit as egregious as that of the state legislature when they voted themselves “unvouchered expenses” and claimed it was not an illegal pay raise. Arrogance born of a shared commitment to self-aggrandizement that causes legislators to break the law as well as their trust with the electorate is destroying the very fabric of our representative democracy. Failure of elected officials to follow the law is an invitation to the populace to believe that is what you can get away with that is important.
Can we not find people who will uphold their oath of office and their obligation to live within the law? Is self-serving by elected officials so commonplace that we no longer have the ability to become outraged?
“ A County Council Member shall not be a candidate for nomination or election to any political office other than that of County Council without having first resigned from County Council”. So saith Article I, section 6-paragraph b of the Allegheny County Home Rule Charter.
Clear, precise language right? Apparently not to the members of Council who voted 13 to zero to amend the language of the administrative code to allow council members to remain on council while seeking a nomination to other elective office. What arrogant disregard for the Charter they are honor and duty bound to uphold.
They rely on attorneys for legal advice. And of course, one can always find an attorney who will tell you what you want to hear, especially if he or she is an employee. The argument that the Charter provision could be unconstitutional in Pennsylvania is no excuse for violating the Charter as it is written. If the Council believes the provision is unconstitutional they should file a suit to have the Courts decide the constitutionality. They should not decide to ignore the Charter because they believe they might win a court challenge. First things first.
The behavior of the Council is every bit as egregious as that of the state legislature when they voted themselves “unvouchered expenses” and claimed it was not an illegal pay raise. Arrogance born of a shared commitment to self-aggrandizement that causes legislators to break the law as well as their trust with the electorate is destroying the very fabric of our representative democracy. Failure of elected officials to follow the law is an invitation to the populace to believe that is what you can get away with that is important.
Can we not find people who will uphold their oath of office and their obligation to live within the law? Is self-serving by elected officials so commonplace that we no longer have the ability to become outraged?
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Rail Stop Project Gets Amber Light
Just Another Day in TIFland
Now the County wants to use a $5.2 million TIF to build a parking deck over existing parking spaces at the Castle Shannon light rail stop. The parking deck will be needed to replace the spaces lost as a developer builds retail space and apartments on a large section of the Port Authority’s existing parking lot. The deck is slated to add 150 net new spaces to the 500 spaces in the PAT lot.
A few questions jump out immediately. Has this land ever been declared blighted? If not, what will be the grounds for seeking a blighted designation? The lot is very well used on weekdays. Indeed, it is often full by 8:00 AM. There is of, course, the old standby criteria of socially or economically undesirable use but that seems a stretch since it is currently being put to very good social and economic use. All the supporters of public transit would argue that is just what is needed to get cars off the street and out of downtown Pittsburgh. Thus, it will be interesting to see what kind of mind-messing arguments the County comes up with.
The developer is planning 50,000 square feet of retail with 110 to 136 apartments above the retail space. Assuming that renters own an average of one vehicle per apartment and that the retail employees and customers will need a couple hundred parking spaces, it would appear that PAT riders will have substantially fewer spaces available for park and ride.
Then too, the increased traffic in the area, which is already congested at peak times of the day, will undoubtedly require the construction of a new entry and exit into the development. The new intersection will in all likelihood have to be accompanied by its own traffic signals. Travelers through the area will be further inconvenienced.
But worse, the retailers in the area who are not benefiting from the TIF will face increased competition from subsidized businesses.
Maybe the Port Authority could interest the developer in a piece of the vastly underutilized garage in Bethel Park. No TIF needed.
Now the County wants to use a $5.2 million TIF to build a parking deck over existing parking spaces at the Castle Shannon light rail stop. The parking deck will be needed to replace the spaces lost as a developer builds retail space and apartments on a large section of the Port Authority’s existing parking lot. The deck is slated to add 150 net new spaces to the 500 spaces in the PAT lot.
A few questions jump out immediately. Has this land ever been declared blighted? If not, what will be the grounds for seeking a blighted designation? The lot is very well used on weekdays. Indeed, it is often full by 8:00 AM. There is of, course, the old standby criteria of socially or economically undesirable use but that seems a stretch since it is currently being put to very good social and economic use. All the supporters of public transit would argue that is just what is needed to get cars off the street and out of downtown Pittsburgh. Thus, it will be interesting to see what kind of mind-messing arguments the County comes up with.
The developer is planning 50,000 square feet of retail with 110 to 136 apartments above the retail space. Assuming that renters own an average of one vehicle per apartment and that the retail employees and customers will need a couple hundred parking spaces, it would appear that PAT riders will have substantially fewer spaces available for park and ride.
Then too, the increased traffic in the area, which is already congested at peak times of the day, will undoubtedly require the construction of a new entry and exit into the development. The new intersection will in all likelihood have to be accompanied by its own traffic signals. Travelers through the area will be further inconvenienced.
But worse, the retailers in the area who are not benefiting from the TIF will face increased competition from subsidized businesses.
Maybe the Port Authority could interest the developer in a piece of the vastly underutilized garage in Bethel Park. No TIF needed.
Monday, March 06, 2006
Union Heresy in Pittsburgh
A City employee has just committed the unpardonable sin of publicly raising the prospect of possible dissension among Pittsburgh’s unions. After all, solidarity is the single most important factor in the ability to extort above competitive market wages from employers.
The offender?-- a candidate for City Council who happens to work in the Department of Public Works. The gentleman is quoted as saying, “ The only union that would benefit from lifting Act 47 would be the fire [fighters] “ and further “If you pay [them] more, it’s got to come from somewhere, and its going to be the other unions.”
This statement is a public disclosure of what has undoubtedly been festering for some time. The level of wages, benefits and special treatment the firefighters have been able to extract from the City because of Act 111 along with their political clout and acumen have certainly outstripped the compensation of union workers in other departments and forced the City to balance its budgets over the years largely at their expense.
Obviously, the answer is not to extend Act 111 to all public sector unions. The answer is to make serious changes in Act 111 to bring some semblance of balance to the bargaining power of public safety unions and municipalities.
We can hope that private sector union members will begin to publicly voice similar dissatisfaction over the unconscionable imbalance of bargaining power between Pennsylvania’s teachers and school boards. As taxpayers they must be feeling the pinch of the outrageous school property taxes they must pay, especially in Allegheny County.
Union solidarity between public and private sector unions is only working to further destroy the private sector and jobs in Pennsylvania by forcing ever-higher tax burdens on citizens and businesses.
A City employee has just committed the unpardonable sin of publicly raising the prospect of possible dissension among Pittsburgh’s unions. After all, solidarity is the single most important factor in the ability to extort above competitive market wages from employers.
The offender?-- a candidate for City Council who happens to work in the Department of Public Works. The gentleman is quoted as saying, “ The only union that would benefit from lifting Act 47 would be the fire [fighters] “ and further “If you pay [them] more, it’s got to come from somewhere, and its going to be the other unions.”
This statement is a public disclosure of what has undoubtedly been festering for some time. The level of wages, benefits and special treatment the firefighters have been able to extract from the City because of Act 111 along with their political clout and acumen have certainly outstripped the compensation of union workers in other departments and forced the City to balance its budgets over the years largely at their expense.
Obviously, the answer is not to extend Act 111 to all public sector unions. The answer is to make serious changes in Act 111 to bring some semblance of balance to the bargaining power of public safety unions and municipalities.
We can hope that private sector union members will begin to publicly voice similar dissatisfaction over the unconscionable imbalance of bargaining power between Pennsylvania’s teachers and school boards. As taxpayers they must be feeling the pinch of the outrageous school property taxes they must pay, especially in Allegheny County.
Union solidarity between public and private sector unions is only working to further destroy the private sector and jobs in Pennsylvania by forcing ever-higher tax burdens on citizens and businesses.
Friday, March 03, 2006
More Bad Education News
Proficient or not proficient, that is the question. The Education Trust has just compared the percentages of students scoring at the proficient or higher level on state assessment tests with the percentages of students scoring at the proficient level on the national assessment test. The news is not good for most states including Pennsylvania.
For example, Pennsylvania test results show that for 2005, 69 percent of elementary school test takers scored at the proficient or higher level in Math. However, on the national test, only 41 percent of fourth graders achieved proficiency. On the state’s reading assessment, 64 percent of Pennsylvania elementary students scored at the proficient level while on the national test the percent proficient was only 36.
To be sure, there will be some quibbling about which set of results is the better measure. But, there is no arguing that with the national test that we are comparing apples to oranges, as is the case when we compare results state to state.
If there is any welcome news in the report, it is that Pennsylvania’s scores on the national tests, while not tops in the nation, compare relatively favorably with other states. The down side is that the nation as a whole has far to go to be where it should be with student achievement.
Proficient or not proficient, that is the question. The Education Trust has just compared the percentages of students scoring at the proficient or higher level on state assessment tests with the percentages of students scoring at the proficient level on the national assessment test. The news is not good for most states including Pennsylvania.
For example, Pennsylvania test results show that for 2005, 69 percent of elementary school test takers scored at the proficient or higher level in Math. However, on the national test, only 41 percent of fourth graders achieved proficiency. On the state’s reading assessment, 64 percent of Pennsylvania elementary students scored at the proficient level while on the national test the percent proficient was only 36.
To be sure, there will be some quibbling about which set of results is the better measure. But, there is no arguing that with the national test that we are comparing apples to oranges, as is the case when we compare results state to state.
If there is any welcome news in the report, it is that Pennsylvania’s scores on the national tests, while not tops in the nation, compare relatively favorably with other states. The down side is that the nation as a whole has far to go to be where it should be with student achievement.
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Gubernatorial Bungling Reaches New Highs
Because the Governor and the Legislature completely dropped the ball on the process for awarding slots licenses, Pittsburgh and Allegheny County are embroiled in a public policy debacle. Rather than auctioning the licenses to the highest bidders, thereby walking away from a couple of billion dollars that could have been used for immediate tax reductions at the state and local level, we are now witnessing an incredibly complex dance over which slots applicant will produce the most benefits for Pittsburgh.
Now comes the last minute conversion of the Chief Executive to the view that the Penguins must be kept here at all costs following years of failing to put together a plan to have a new arena built privately. He now says the other applicants must alter their proposals to put money into an arena. What a fiasco. It is little wonder that Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania lag in economic growth.
Gambling has been sold as the great solution to so many problems when in fact it will almost certainly create enormous social and economic difficulties for problem gamblers. The Penguins have virtually no impact on the economy but keeping them here is more important than the real tax reductions the City could get if one of the applicants for a license had promised to give $300 million for debt reduction in Pittsburgh as its contribution for community development.
This is what happens when good solutions and good policies are constantly foregone in favor of political expedience. The Governor, throwing propriety to the wind, is now saying he would like to see all the applicants pledge money for a new arena. What a tangled mess that could easily have been avoided if the licenses had been auctioned and the proceeds used to help places like Pittsburgh with their debt and tax problems.
Because the Governor and the Legislature completely dropped the ball on the process for awarding slots licenses, Pittsburgh and Allegheny County are embroiled in a public policy debacle. Rather than auctioning the licenses to the highest bidders, thereby walking away from a couple of billion dollars that could have been used for immediate tax reductions at the state and local level, we are now witnessing an incredibly complex dance over which slots applicant will produce the most benefits for Pittsburgh.
Now comes the last minute conversion of the Chief Executive to the view that the Penguins must be kept here at all costs following years of failing to put together a plan to have a new arena built privately. He now says the other applicants must alter their proposals to put money into an arena. What a fiasco. It is little wonder that Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania lag in economic growth.
Gambling has been sold as the great solution to so many problems when in fact it will almost certainly create enormous social and economic difficulties for problem gamblers. The Penguins have virtually no impact on the economy but keeping them here is more important than the real tax reductions the City could get if one of the applicants for a license had promised to give $300 million for debt reduction in Pittsburgh as its contribution for community development.
This is what happens when good solutions and good policies are constantly foregone in favor of political expedience. The Governor, throwing propriety to the wind, is now saying he would like to see all the applicants pledge money for a new arena. What a tangled mess that could easily have been avoided if the licenses had been auctioned and the proceeds used to help places like Pittsburgh with their debt and tax problems.
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
‘Right Size’ Done Deal
One Half Cheer for The Pittsburgh School Board
Pardon us if we do not get all gushy about the school-closing plan approved by the Pittsburgh School Board. Purportedly, it will save $10 million a year to shut down 10,000 unused seats. A good start, but still a mere drop in the bucket of the savings needed in the district’s bloated $550 million operating budget.
But more importantly, closing of schools is far from the kind of reforms needed to address the poor achievement levels of far too many Pittsburgh students. There is no talk of vouchers, “no-excuses” schools, or independent charter schools that could actually make a difference in student achievement. And, little wonder. The education cartel will simply outlast the attempts of the latest reform minded superintendent.
This cartel as described by Joe Williams in “Wisconsin Interest”, Winter 2006 edition, is a coalition of school administrators, school activists, and union leaders who maintain effective control of policies to promote their own interests. Many are the examples across the nation of the supposedly great, nontraditional, non-educator superintendents who were brought into effect major changes only to discover that the internal power system will use every means possible to insure that their cozy little mutual protection and aggrandizement arrangements are not disturbed. Improving educational achievement is never going to be a priority with cartel members. Self-interest backed by the power of state- sanctioned and even mandated union controls is an insurmountable obstacle.
While we wish Mr. Roosevelt well, he must understand that union leaders with their Byzantine contracts and educrats who view the public schools as their experimental playgrounds will fight him at every turn if he proposes reforms that threaten their power. Unless or until there is real parental choice about schools and the system moves to a point where administrators and teachers can actually be dismissed for poor performance, don’t expect any significant improvement in student achievement. Indeed, it will probably get worse before it ever gets better.
Pardon us if we do not get all gushy about the school-closing plan approved by the Pittsburgh School Board. Purportedly, it will save $10 million a year to shut down 10,000 unused seats. A good start, but still a mere drop in the bucket of the savings needed in the district’s bloated $550 million operating budget.
But more importantly, closing of schools is far from the kind of reforms needed to address the poor achievement levels of far too many Pittsburgh students. There is no talk of vouchers, “no-excuses” schools, or independent charter schools that could actually make a difference in student achievement. And, little wonder. The education cartel will simply outlast the attempts of the latest reform minded superintendent.
This cartel as described by Joe Williams in “Wisconsin Interest”, Winter 2006 edition, is a coalition of school administrators, school activists, and union leaders who maintain effective control of policies to promote their own interests. Many are the examples across the nation of the supposedly great, nontraditional, non-educator superintendents who were brought into effect major changes only to discover that the internal power system will use every means possible to insure that their cozy little mutual protection and aggrandizement arrangements are not disturbed. Improving educational achievement is never going to be a priority with cartel members. Self-interest backed by the power of state- sanctioned and even mandated union controls is an insurmountable obstacle.
While we wish Mr. Roosevelt well, he must understand that union leaders with their Byzantine contracts and educrats who view the public schools as their experimental playgrounds will fight him at every turn if he proposes reforms that threaten their power. Unless or until there is real parental choice about schools and the system moves to a point where administrators and teachers can actually be dismissed for poor performance, don’t expect any significant improvement in student achievement. Indeed, it will probably get worse before it ever gets better.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]