Archive for April, 2007
The Globe Magazine has a fascinating piece on the extended school day experiment being conducted at 10 schools around the state. It seems like such a common-sense good idea that we can only assume it will be discarded very soon.
The most gripping piece of information, to this reader, was an accompanying graphic (that unhelpfully does not show up on-line) that details the change in the average school day.
Before, students started the day 7:25 AM, ate lunch at 10:16 AM, and were dismissed at 1:30 PM. Plus, the sample schedule displayed allows for daily math, science, and english classes, but little else.
The new schedule has the same start time and lunch time (which is still ridiculous), but adds a snack in the afternoon and a new dismissal time of 4:30 PM. Most importantly, it also adds 12 additional classroom periods throughout the week, allowing for instruction in computers, and social studies.
The article goes on to point out some of the unforseen results of the experiment: the need for better winter lighting, the difficulty of the evening commute for students, and the necessity of lunch (as opposed to waiting for 1:30 dismissal to eat).
April 30th, 2007
Today’s Globe has two interesting articles (one unintentionally so) on our state college system. A front page article talks about growing demand from the UMASS-Boston Student Senate to build dorms, and a Derrick Jackson op-ed is a predictable call for more funding.
But at the very, very end of the op-ed, a lengthy quote from a student highlights one of our major problems as a system (and one of the reasons that funding is such an issue):
It feels like the flagships like Amherst are treating students more and more as consumers, trying harder to attract wealthier out-of-state students with sushi nights, lobster nights, and flat-screened TVs in lounges than figuring out how to help students who are the most likely to stay here after graduation, public high school graduates.
She’s put her finger right on one of the major problems — the belief of certain schools that they need to ‘compete’ with certain private and out-of-state schools by adding amenities, not focusing on the educational needs of Massachusetts residents. We have a public higher education system operating as a series of fiefdoms with no centralized plan or strategy. We have community colleges looking to build dormitories. Commuter schools like UMASS-Boston looking to build their ‘prestige’ by adding dorms. And the entire system adding on expensive amenities like sushi nights and fitness centers in an attempt to compete for out of state students.
What you end up with is a lot of duplicative and competing campuses across the system all expanding across multiple dimensions, maximizing costs in the long run. What Massachusetts needs is to refocus on its core customers and encourage specialization in the system within the context of a broader strategic plan.
April 28th, 2007
Good news, everyone. According to today’s Boston Globe, Massachusetts’ economy is growing again - and at almost 4 times the rate as that of the national economy.
But, a note of caution. Massachusetts’ economic growth is imperiled by - surprise, surprise - the state’s high cost of housing. As tech companies expand, they require young, highly educated workers, precisely the demographic that has shown an aversion in recent years to settling down in old, cold and expensive Massachusetts.
In a macro sense, the solution to Massachusetts’ high housing costs is a fairly straightforward one: increase the supply of housing to meet demand. The question is: does the political will exist in Massachusetts to overcome the entirely rational, though somewhat shortsighted interest those who already own their homes have in seeing home prices appreciate as demand outstrips supply? If it doesn’t, Massachusetts’ renewed economic growth will be short-lived indeed.
April 28th, 2007
This morning’s Globe raises some interesting questions about the recent dismissal of a legislative aide. The individual in question was fired 11 days after she had reached her twentieth year of service. The key verb is ‘fired’ (as opposed to ‘quit’). By being fired after reaching the magic 20 years of service, Section 10 of Chapter 32 is triggered, allowing employees to begin collecting their full pension before the age of 55.
And curiously enough, a large percentage of those unlucky enough to be fired in this manner get fired almost immediately after reaching the 20 year mark. According to Commonwealth Magazine,
one-third of the 1,100 ‘Section 10’ pensions granted since 1990 were
to employees who had passed the 20 years of service minimum requirement by less than a year, and a remarkable 10 percent were granted to employees who had passed the milestone by less than a month.
For Pioneer’s own take on this loophole and the many other in the state pension system, come take a look at our compilation of an estimated $3 billion worth of ‘em.
April 26th, 2007
Or maybe not so wacky.
The estimable adamg over at Universal Hub points out this interesting nugget in today’s Herald:
A veteran Boston police officer is expected to resign from the force after pleading guilty yesterday to charges he shot a fellow cop during an off-duty argument about whether he was too drunk to drive…he also indicated in court that he would turn in his badge after 27 years of service…entitling him to a city pension. [emphasis added]
Pensions have been on our mind for the past year. We’ve taken a long hard look at the cost of various loopholes and the expense of underperformance at many local pension funds. We have not, however, done anything to close the loophole allowing employees who shoot another employee to collect their full pension.
April 24th, 2007
First, Speaker DiMasi went to a Greater Boston Chamber breakfast and poured cold water on Governor Patrick’s ‘loophole closure/business tax hike‘, choosing the very venue where Patrick made one of the initial announcements about the plan.
Next, the House budget amendments came out. Legislators found time to suggest the frivolous (like the much beloved Winter Moth study amendment) and the serious (eliminating the EQA by reinserting similar language from the Governor’s budget). However, precisely none of the Representatives attempted to reinsert the ‘loophole closure/business tax hikes’.
A commission is being appointed to review the tax code (with an eye on business taxation), consisting of appointees of the Governor, Senate President, and House Speaker? Speaker DiMasi’s apppointees? Associated Industries of Massachusetts vice president Eileen McAnneny; Mass. Taxpayers Foundation President Michael Widmer; House Revenue Committee chairman John Binienda (D-Worcester); House Minority Leader Bradley Jones (R-North Reading), and Kevin Long, a tax attorney and accountant from Sudbury. (via State House News, subscription required)
April 24th, 2007
I think we have heard that one before.
So now we are going to build a $1.4 billion commuter line to New Bedford, even though the T can’t afford it, even though that will add to the ongoing costs of the T to maintain the line, and even though expected ridership is dismally low so it won’t even pay for a tiny fraction of the ongoing costs. Okay, what else is new? Perhaps we can build a convention center at the end of the line to soak up all the excess demand for conventions in Massachusetts.
Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District (SRPEDD) and I did an op-ed on this months ago for the New Bedford Standard Times, calling for a clear understanding of the project’s economic impact, potential environmental consequences, and a comparison with other projects. But what did we know anyway - we (and everybody else at the time) estimated the project cost at between $600 and $900 million.
The only way we will ever do these sorts of comparisons is if we create a real Secretary of Transportation, with control over more of the state’s transportation assets. Currently air is fragmented from light and heavy rail, which does not talk to highways, and then the regional players don’t have any real venue for coming together to develop a statewide strategy.
So what you are left with is pure politics. And, leaving aside the merits of the project, the decision to build the New Bedford line is all about politics.
Reality is the project could be a good one. But it would take some action upfront from the Commonwealth. That is, the Commonwealth would need to put forward a single set of selection criteria for all transportation/transit projects. If one of the principal goals is smart growth, then make one of the major criteria in the selection process housing growth. This way, if politicians want to build the New Bedford line or any project, they will have to line up the support from communities up and down the line, so that the communities will change their zoning and allow that sort of growth to happen.
Doing it after the fact will not work. The zoning laws just won’t allow for dense commercial and residential uses. And with the issue (and fear) of school costs driving local decisions on development, don’t expect even a train to change that.
April 22nd, 2007
The Herald’s has done a fine job pointing out one of the dumb things we do as a state — provide massive subsidies for little-used local airports that have no relevance to the transportation needs of the state. Check out pg. 17 of this chart just to see how little usage many of these airports get.
Many of these airports are home to a handful of privately-owned planes and certainly provide a service for those people, but the Herald correctly asks why the vast majority of commercial air travelers should be taxed to pay for it.
The Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission is the state agency charged with the task of maintaining these smaller airports. And they have no compunction about these subsidies. Bravely noting on their website that have leveraged almost $160 million in federal funds with only $76 million in state funds because, of course, federal money is free.
There are a number of major regional airports that play an important role in the state, Barnstable and Nantucket come to mind. But these airports have the capacity (and market demand) to support themselves through user fees. As for the rest of them, having your own plane sounds like a fun hobby but I shouldn’t have to pay for it.
April 22nd, 2007
Sometimes smart people cannot learn. We are smart people in Massachusetts. We all know that.
Jim Rooney, executive director of the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority, is a smart and also capable guy. And he’s done a great job with the bad hand he was dealt. We have two convention centers and the market isn’t big enough to fill them. Jim R’s worked hard to fill the convention centers with events, any events, including meetings of law firms and boat and flower shows. There are some big shows, but still far too many events where people drive in and out of town, leaving in their wake not enough spending and too much traffic.
Room nights is the coin of the realm for understanding whether these behemoths are generating better value for the economy than alternative uses (housing, retail or commercial space, etc.). And a brief look at the MCCA’s 2006 annual report will tell you that the number of room nights associated with South Boston facility events (202,000) is a small fraction of the project’s original projections.
But the MCCA has been pushing the view in the media that the convention centers are a success. That push has been for a reason, as Bruce Mohl’s article in the Globe on Saturday made clear. The MCCA has been prepping the ground for approval of a proposal to spend $18 million on an upgrade to the Hynes.
Mohl highlights the $8 million to add retail space (restaurants), but there are the dreaded drapes:
“The renovation, expected to cost $10 million, will replace the building’s carpeting and drapes and update the existing public safety, energy, and technology systems.”
Though Jim R calls this “noncontroversial,” there are several problems with all of this.
First, the idea of expanding the Hynes’ space stems from the recommendations in the December 2006 special state commission report? Well, okay. But all anyone ever saw of the report was the recommendations. Uh, guys, where’s the report? What’s the methodology? Hate to ask Pioneer kinds of questions, but..
Second, while improving access to the new proposed restaurant spaces is great, essentially Jim R is looking to get people who are shopping and eating in the area to come into the convention space to spend their money. Great thought, but the Hynes’ whole justification is that it should generate new business and get people to stay over night and spend their money in surrounding businesses.
This may help the MCCA stop losing money on the Hynes ($2.5 million a year), but it misses the point that much more imaginative things could be done with the Hynes.
Finally, there’s the question of upgrading the cell phones and installing some restaurants. I mean, I like restaurants and I like cell phones. I just don’t like them together.
Maybe we should just put more Boylston Street bars in there. Here’s to hoping that the construction dust doesn’t ruin the drapes!
April 21st, 2007
Previous Posts
