Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

ChrisGraley (29.78)

$1.2 Billion spent to build exactly 3 schools

Recs

28

August 23, 2010 – Comments (19)

in a bankrupt state and in a district that laid off 3000 teachers in the last 2 years.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/22/amid-ongoing-budget-woes-la-unveils-nations-expensive-school-m-price-tag/?test=latestnews

I'm just speechless.

Hopefully they can improve on their 50% drop-out rate.

19 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On August 23, 2010 at 11:25 AM, miteycasey (31.36) wrote:

I read this earlier and my jaw hit the ground.

Report this comment
#2) On August 23, 2010 at 11:29 AM, chk999 (99.97) wrote:

And people wonder why the California budgets are in the toilet.

Report this comment
#3) On August 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM, brickcityman (< 20) wrote:

Thats what happens when you have a law (NCLB) that encourages throwing away "bad" schools in favor of chasing the shiny new things that have yet to be marked as "failing to make adequate progress".

Report this comment
#4) On August 23, 2010 at 11:55 AM, edwjm (99.87) wrote:

@Chris:

I am 71 yrs old and I wouldn't trade the public school education I got in the 40's and 50's for what is going on in public education today for anything.  The learning/$ ratio has dropped precipitously!  "Educate every child to his full potential" has deteriated to "no child left behind'' which is equivalent to "no child gets ahead" and "gear everything to the lowest achieving pupil in the class passing the required standardized tests."  I even learned one more planet than kids today!

Report this comment
#5) On August 23, 2010 at 12:01 PM, ChrisGraley (29.78) wrote:

@#3 I don't think a new building gives them the right to erase their drop-out rate no matter what they spend on it.

@#4 Parents took more of an active role in their kids education back then as well. It's pretty sad the way things have declined.

Report this comment
#6) On August 23, 2010 at 12:55 PM, brickcityman (< 20) wrote:

Re #5;  True and I'm sure they could have found a more cost effective way to go about these shenanigans.  But that's another similar problem, why would they? 

 

What incentive does a school administrator have to expand frugally?  New schools are typically funded via channels that run parallel to the rest of the operating budget.  It's somewhat akin to having someone use a credit card to make purchases instead of their main checking account, but only worse.  There is a temptation to overspend when its a "different pot of money". 

 

Add to this the sort of predatory approach that many large building contractors take when dealing with beaurocratic entities and its easy to see how the costs associated with something like this will sky-rocket.  I've seen L.A. area contractors charge $3K for simple mods to an existing building that would cost an average homeowner an hour of time and a 50$ trip to Lowes.

Report this comment
#7) On August 23, 2010 at 1:02 PM, ChrisGraley (29.78) wrote:

Agreed Brickcity. I wish someone would think about the kids at least once and stop all these government shenanigans.

Report this comment
#8) On August 23, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Acesnyper (< 20) wrote:

I want to laugh, but it's too upsetting.

Report this comment
#9) On August 23, 2010 at 1:44 PM, QualityPicks (64.92) wrote:

I keep saying that people don't get what the government does. Every freaking time its budget time and cuts need to be made, it is teachers and police and fireman that need to be "cut". That way people will oppose the cuts or will accept higher taxes so these essential jobs aren't cut. Then billions of dollars are spent on things that are not needed, whether it is billions in subsidies to housing, unneeded bridges or roads, etc.

Report this comment
#10) On August 23, 2010 at 1:52 PM, dbjella (< 20) wrote:

You all don't understand.  This is stimulus!  I mean somebody had to design and build the schools didn't they?

Hopefully, these schools will last a thousand years and enrollment will not drop off.  Then, we can see a payback :) 

 

Report this comment
#11) On August 23, 2010 at 2:05 PM, SweetMircha (92.50) wrote:

Isn't the overall population age median aging towards retirement, the same way it is in Canada?

That means declining enrollment over the next 10 or so years.

I can understand replacing 2 or 3 schools that have reached their life's usability, with 1 new school but not at the price that the govt is giving away to build 3 of them.

That's an absolute waste of govt and mainly taxpayer\s money. Afterall, the money is really coming out of taxes paid by civilians isn't it?

Mary, I'm glad I'm Canadian.

Report this comment
#12) On August 23, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Option1307 (29.73) wrote:

Complete bullshit!

This is a prime example why I left that craptastic state, they simply have no freaking clue what they are doing.

Some experts say it's not all flourish and that children learn better in more pleasant surroundings.

OK fine, add a few flowers around the campus and have a window or two in every classroom but this is way way over the top.

In Los Angeles, officials say the new schools were planned long before the economic pinch

Who cares, even if the state was rolling in money (ha ha ha don't hold your breath!), shouldn't they be spending this money on othermore important things, i.e. teachers etc.

and are funded by $20 billion in voter-approved bonds that do not affect the educational budget.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that California voters did not know that this bond would be wasted on such extravagance.

Good job LA, A+ for stupidity and I personally think you should be nominated for Zloj's blog series "Idiot of the Week"

 

Report this comment
#13) On August 23, 2010 at 7:18 PM, MegaEurope (21.52) wrote:

"Architects and builders love this stuff, but there's a little bit of a lack of discipline here," said Mary Filardo, executive director of 21st Century School Fund in Washington, D.C., which promotes urban school construction.

Speaking as an architect, this is false.  Most of us don't like excessively expensive public projects that make our profession look bad.

Report this comment
#14) On August 23, 2010 at 8:57 PM, FleaBagger (29.73) wrote:

Yes, hopefully they can bring their drop-out rate up to 67%.

Report this comment
#15) On August 23, 2010 at 10:58 PM, whereaminow (20.42) wrote:

Home schooling costs the taxpayers exactly $0.  And since the Left wants to subjectively juice the numbers with externalities, let me point out that home schooled children consistently crush public school counterpoints across the board.

Btw, when I look for places to live and retire, progressive Germany gets crossed off the list.  Home schooling is illegal there.  It's also banned in Sweden, Greece, the Netherlands, Spain, Turkey, and the Ukraine.  Check those off the list.

It's an abomination to discourage or otherwise hamper home schooling.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#16) On August 24, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Mstinterestinman (< 20) wrote:

I am pretty much speechless if they continue to make ignorant decisions with our money Canada wont sound so bad..lol

Report this comment
#17) On August 24, 2010 at 9:26 AM, miteycasey (31.36) wrote:

tie a child's grades to their parents welfare check and see how things change.

Report this comment
#18) On August 24, 2010 at 1:18 PM, brickcityman (< 20) wrote:

@ whereaminow

 

I'm personally very doubtful about home-schooling.  At least doubtful about its scalability.

 

I tend to think that the current generation of homeschooled kids, would also do quite well in a public school as well, and its unfair to compare the results of two very different data samples.

 

You are bound to have a demonstrably higher degree of parental engagement for home schooled kids.  They are also probably skewed in terms of socio-economic status and parental education level.  Plainly put, not all (or even most) parents are qualified to serve as educators across 13 years of subject matter.

 

This is not to say that home-schooling should not be an option... Only that it's not, in my eyes, a solution.  To me the real answer is to avoid anything that promises to be a one-size fits all solution.  

 

primary schooling need to be structured as a'la carte services (more akin to colleges/universities) if we really ever expect to see improvement.   

Report this comment
#19) On August 24, 2010 at 1:35 PM, brickcityman (< 20) wrote:

A little extra salt for this wound.  Apparently "new school smell" was not high on the list of criteria.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement