Daily Archives: November 16, 2006

Public Services - General, Social Justice

Should government get out of the education business?

5 Comments

Here’s an article sure to get you thinking. It’s called “Enterprising Education: Doing Away with the Public School System” (PDF file), by Andrew Young and Walter Block. Here’s their summary of their argument:

We critically examine the accepted notion that primary education is a legitimate and necessary function of the state. The notion is based upon three tenets: 1) public education is a necessary condition for democracy, 2) the market will not provide equal access and quality of education to all, and 3) education represents an external economy. Each tenet is addressed and evaluated according to its merits. In doing so, we also contrast the fulfillment of the ends implicit in the tenets under state and market provisions. We conclude that the state provision of primary education cannot be justified by these goals, and that market provision is a preferable alternative.

That’s right. They argue that government should get completely out of the schooling business. They don’t consider half-measures like District 150’s contract with Edison Schools a truly free-market solution. In their opinion, all government involvement in education should be completely eliminated and free market allowed to reign supreme.

Shocking? Brilliant? Absurd? I would encourage you to read the whole article before passing judgment on it. I will say that I think they make some excellent points, even if I don’t agree with their ultimate conclusion. But before positing details of my own opinion, I’d like to hear what my readers think of Young & Block’s article.

I love articles like this that challenge fundamental assumptions. Be honest; have you ever heard anyone seriously argue against public education? I hadn’t. I think that going back to square one, so to speak, can help us clarify our thinking about public education and maybe even lead to some novel solutions to its challenges.

Kellar Branch, Peoria Park District

Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation lobbies STB to save Kellar Branch

In a recent filing (large PDF file) with the Surface Transportation Board (STB), which has yet to rule on the fate of the Kellar Branch rail line, the Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation (IPRRF) claims the right-of-way can be shared by the rail line and the proposed Rock Island Trail extension:

We have done extensive investigation into the situation and do believe and can support the fact that the trail and rail line can share a joint right-of-way. Very little of the trail would have to be moved over a block or two along the way to accommodate it. The actual length of the rail line is 8.29 miles and the trail advocates want less than four miles of that.

Peoria Park District officials claim that running the trail next to the rail is too expensive because the right-of-way is too narrow. They say the trail has to be built to AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) standards, which require a 14-foot-wide paved trail, plus five feet of setback from the rail line. They further claim that avoiding narrow portions of the right-of-way by moving the trail to the street would make them ineligible for their grant money. The Illinois Bicycle Path Grant Program requires “land acquisition or trail development [be] along a single trail corridor” (emphasis in original) to be eligible for funding.

The IPRRF also says that plans are in the works to provide passenger service along the line:

We are also working with a number of groups in the area to use the Kellar Branch for a park-n-ride trolley for use as a tourist draw and also to provide commuter rail service if deemed feasible by the community. Along with its continuing use for rail freight service, the Kellar Branch right-of-way would provide three different functions.

This would be beneficial for all of Peoria and not just for a select few. It will increase economic development in the area and also assist in increasing the local tax base.

IPRRF’s filing reviews the other reasons for retaining service on the Kellar, including continued support of Carver Lumber, the ability to attract more business to Pioneer Park and Growth Cell Two, and the presence of a willing carrier and buyer/lessee (Pioneer Railcorp).

My take: If the trail is too expensive to build next to the rail line then it shouldn’t be built at all. IPRRF and others have made a compelling case for keeping rail service along the line. Greater economic benefit can come from running freight over the right-of-way and attracting new business with good-paying jobs than making it a running/biking path that would very likely cost 50 jobs.

Conventional wisdom propounded by the newspaper is that we need this linear park because the gap in the Toulon-to-Morton trail is “embarrassing.” But that supposed “need” is completely contrived. The Peoria Park District currently holds approximately 9,000 acreas of parkland — that’s more land the entire Heart of Peoria area! They also have no shortage of fitness facilities (anyone remember the RiverPlex?). They either need to figure out a different way to connect the Rock Island and Pimiteoui trails or give it up. We’ve wasted too much time and opporunity for growth already.

Public Building Commission, State Legislation

Our legislators get their facts wrong again

2 Comments

Last time Rep. Schock spoke on SB2477 on the House floor, he said the City Council supported the legislation, which was not true. Yesterday, Sen. Shadid took to the Senate floor to argue for overturning the Governor’s veto (which is surprisingly easy in Illinois, needing only a 3/5 majority instead of the 2/3 required at the federal level). He pointed out that the District 150 board passed a levy cap of .60% at a recent board meeting, which is true. But then he went on to state that the current levy is .62%, so the levy would go down for Peorians. That’s false. As I reported in a previous post:

First, the school district capped the tax rate at .60%. And, as you can see from Part 1 of this post, the current rate is .5578%. So, even by their own definition it will be a tax increase — an increase of .0422%. And, of course, since this supposed “cap” is only set by the school board and not state law, it could easily be repealed at any time.

Where did I get my information? From the Peoria County Clerk’s office — the ones who actually figure our tax bills. The levy figure came from the 2005 Tax Computation Report (there is no 2006 report yet). So, once again, lawmakers are making decisions based on faulty information provided by those who are supposed to be representing our interests.

But instead of representing the people, Shadid has chosen instead of represent the school board. Let’s hope Koehler doesn’t follow in his footsteps.

WiFi

WiFi is coming to Springfield

3 Comments

About 95% of Springfield is getting WiFi, courtesy of AT&T:

[Mayoral spokesman Ernie Slottag] said the agreement with AT&T, which would need the council’s approval, would be similar to existing access agreements with companies such as Cingular Wireless, Verizon and Insight Communications.

“Basically, we have to determine how much we will charge per pole. It could be 300 to 400 poles citywide,” Slottag said, adding that telecommunications companies typically pay an annual fee for use of the utility polls. The city’s cost initially was expected to be about $8,000 per year to power the nodes.

My take: This is the way to do city-wide WiFi. A private company provides the equipment, pays the city for use of their utility poles, and determines a cost structure that will allow them to be competitive in the marketplace yet still profitable. AT&T is being treated just like a cable company with a franchise agreement, and that’s how it should be. If a company wanted to provide such a system here in Peoria, I would be in favor of it.