ICCSD: School Boundaries Simple Three-Step

April 25, 2014, 8:15 a.m.

Note and Summary: This blog essay was first posted two years ago. As Iowa City School District school boundary lines are once again in the news (e.g., Holly Hines, "Parents Want Kids Walking to School; Concerned Proposed Longfellow Boundaries Would Limit That Option," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 25, 2014, p. A1), it seemed worthwhile to post it again. In brief, it's a suggestion that (1) to ease stakeholders' buy-in to any proposal the changes' effective date might better be six to seven years in the future, and (2) rather than regularly returning to these divisive and disruptive boundary issues when changes are needed, the School Board might be well advised to adopt a flexible boundary policy (with two, rather than one, boundary lines for each school), giving the Board, and its superintendent, the ability to respond to modest changes in population over time that only affect parents and children who are new to the District.

School Board Alternatives to Procrastination and Frustration
Who goes to which K-12 schools and why?

There are 15,000 school districts and school boards across the country confronting those questions.

[Photo of prior, not current, ICCSD Board. Photo credit: Nicholas Johnson.]

Apparently the Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD) school board is now doing so again.

Here's a three-step process for easing everyone's pain.

Step One. Decide to do it. You. The Board members. Not a community committee or a consultant or the Superintendent. Not a series of open forums prayerfully in search of what one board member called "a solution that satisfies the whole community." Alesha L. Crews, School board members talk about next steps; Say portable buildings a short-term solution, should not be permanent," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 17, 2012, p. A3.

You are the buffer among the District's stakeholders -- students, parents, administrators, teachers, staff, property tax payers, and citizens. Face it, you'll never satisfy them all.

Only you can create "fairness" for the poor and working poor and lower middle class District parents, when the contests arise in which their interests are pitted against those of our most economically and political powerful families.

Remember, this is a public school system. No one but you has a right to dictate policy. Dissatisfied students and parents who want more absolute control over the details have options, from private schools, to other school districts, to home schooling.

Consider their wishes? Of course. But to think, as one board member put it, that it is "absolutely critical that we don’t ignore anyone’s needs," is a classic example of the triumph of hope over experience. It will inevitably produce the K-12 equivalent of the line that "a camel is a horse built by committee."

Nothing against camels mind you, but only the Board can create a rational, efficient, school system in which all the pieces fit, work together, and optimize the desired output -- increased numbers of students graduating closer to their academic potential.

As Nike says, "Just do it."

Step Two. Think specifically about District goals, not generally about drawing lines.

This is where "if you don't know where you want to go, the odds are very high that you'll never get there" comes into play.

Here are some of the destinations you might want to think about:

(a) Are you willing to take your time, or do you have to do it right now? You could announce a new approach to redistricting that will take effect six or seven years from now. That would eliminate most of the emotional opposition from students and parents affected by a shorter time in which to accommodate change. Most of those who will be affected by a future plan don't yet have kids in school -- or haven't even yet moved to Iowa City.

(b) How much flexibility, or rigidity, do you want? Flexibility is a variable that can be turned up or down, like a rheostat controlling the lighting in a dining room. Do you want fixed, immovable lines -- until the next time you have a redistricting crisis? Or would you like to give the Superintendent, and yourselves, some flexibility?

For example, you could provide (and, if (a) is adopted, not until, say, seven years from now) that (1) once assigned to an elementary school a student could finish at that school, but that (2) there would be two, not just one, geographical areas feeding that school. [i] One would be immediately contiguous to the school, a small enough area that virtually no projection of increased population would result in more students living there than the school could properly hold. The children of families living in, or moving into, that area would be assigned to that school. [ii] The other, larger area, would give the Board and Superintendent the flexibility to assign students living there to any one of three or four closest schools. (Of course, once assigned, under principle (a) the student could finish there.) Thus, as new families moved into that larger area they might know the probabilities of where their children would be assigned, but they would not have a firm commitment of a school from the District. (For more discussion and detail, see, e.g., "Disparity in Class Sizes: Simple Solution Rejected," October 13, 2010.)

(c) Settle upon your position with regard to the demographic balance represented in the assignment of "free and reduced lunch" students to the schools. You may want greater disparity than we now have, less, about the same, or have no position, leaving the outcome to chance -- the latter in all probability a policy that will produce an increase in the disparity. Just make up your minds; hopefully with specific numbers.

(d) There are many other variables you can think about, resolve, and announce. Do I have personal preferences on some of these District goals? Of course. But that's irrelevant. These are the Board's decisions to make. My focus at the moment is not on what you decide but what it is you decide about.

By laying out your own very specific metrics for where you say the District is headed, and providing that they will have little to no impact on today's students and parents, because they won't take effect immediately, you provide stability for the future, and virtually eliminate the emotional opposition.

Step Three. Evolve toward your goals. With a little advance individual reading and thinking, Steps One and Two should be capable of resolution with one or two weekends of Board-member-only workshops. Remember, it's your decisions we're talking about, not those of some consultant. Once you announce the outcome, where the District is headed, it will be possible -- without forcing decisions, but as needs for tweaking arise (like now!) -- to make those decisions consistent with your longer range plan (without imposing it wholesale ahead of schedule).

When I confront computer frustration, which seems to happen with some regularity, my computer consultant son, Gregory (http://ResourcesForLife.com) usually advises, "Well, Dad, there are three steps," following which he puts in simple, three-step language what it is that his cyberlaw professor father should do to get on with his personal life in our digital world.

I thought this "Three Simple Steps to School Redistricting" might be helpful for our local School Board as well. We'll see.
# # #

A TIF Discussion

June 9, 2013, 10:15 a.m.

Evolution of A Family's TIF Policy Position

A TIF, or "Tax Incremental Financing," is a technique utilized by local governmental units to, among many other things, provide taxpayer money to for-profit, private businesses, such as high-rise, multi-use buildings containing condo housing, office space, and shops.

There is a good deal of debate among and between economists, public officials, anti-tax groups, editorial writers, and the for-profit beneficiaries regarding the wisdom and equity of this approach, as well as other systems of taxpayer funding for private projects.

Sometimes the different approaches pop up in family discussions. So it has been with my son, Gregory Johnson, ResourcesForLife.com, and myself.

A recent exchange, involving an article he wrote and posted on his Web site that triggered an ongoing exchange on Facebook, I thought worth preserving on this blog for what it might contribute to the evolving thinking of others who are trying to formulate their own opinions on this significant public policy issue.

From my perspective, although Gregory challenges this, as you'll see below, he began his approach to TIF policy some months ago with an effort to justify the use of TIFs from Iowa City taxpayers for the downtown, highrise projects of Marc Moen, an innovative developer and friend of Gregory's. (In his article, below, some of this continues, as he notes, following his listing of standards for awarding TIFs, "The Moen Group would be one example of a developer that would pass the above requirements." And again, "Interestingly, the developer being awarded the experimental TIF money (MoenGroup.com) would actually pass the above 7-question qualification assessment test.")

I also like Marc Moen, though I'm relatively confident given my positions he would not consider me a "friend," and I have a similar (though not identical) approach to his with regard to what Iowa City's downtown (laid out in 1839), needs in the 21st Century. My objections, such as they are, primarily address the propriety of using taxpayers' money to fund his projects -- not him, or the design of his buildings.

Whether that was in fact Gregory's starting point or not, Gregory is now making a real effort to come up with a sensible, balanced approach to cities' use of TIFs, recognizing both their inherent disadvantages and the likelihood they are going to continue to be used whether we like it or not. As he puts it (in the very last lines reproduced in this blog essay): "The reasons for not using TIFs to fund private enterprise are well founded and seem to outweigh the benefits. However, it seems that municipalities across the nation don't care (including ours). That being the case, if we are going to have inappropriate uses of TIFs, should there be a decision process? That's what I'm exploring."

Here, then, are yesterday's exchanges, starting with the major portion of his opening article, and then progressing to the exchanges within a Facebook discussion.

Guidelines for Selecting TIF-Based Funding of Urban Development Projects
Gregory Johnson
http://www.resourcesforlife.com/docs/item6947

Traditional TIF Use. The use of TIF-Based funding is traditionally limited to restoring areas of urban blight. The rationale for this is that poverty is too expensive. That is to say that illiteracy, homelessness, unemployment, substance abuse, crime, incarceration, and other social problems caused by poverty cost society much more than simply eradicating poverty. Some would call this socialism. Others would describe it as simply being fiscally responsible with capital by seeking the maximum return on investment. This, of course, isn’t a practice that all people condone, but it’s embraced by a majority of people, so municipalities are not required to have a vote for using tax revenue in this way. Wikipedia describes the founding principles of TIF usage:

“TIF was designed to channel funding toward improvements in distressed, underdeveloped, or underutilized parts of a jurisdiction where development might otherwise not occur. ” [Source: Wikipedia]

Experimental TIF Use. In recent years, municipalities have implemented experimental uses of TIF-Based funding to include urban development projects that are private business ventures. Without taxpayer consent, city council members are taking tax revenue and giving it to private business owners. This has resulted in public protests from groups that, given the chance, would otherwise vote down such initiatives were they bonds to raise funds for public projects. In theory, the rationale for giving tax revenue to private enterprise is that the initial loan will be repaid in substantially higher property taxes. Once repaid, the ongoing tax revenue will be a benefit to the city.

The goal of experimental TIFs is a long-term increase in property tax income that should recuperate the original investment. Additional financial support allows developers to build beyond what they might have otherwise been able to. This may include aspects of sustainability, urban beautification, and mixed use space that might typically not be considered. Developers seeking maximum profits may create single-use ugly buildings with little consideration of sustainability. Developers given additional financial support may create multi-use attractive buildings with a greater investment in architectural design and sustainable practices.

Usually the only developers who get selected for such experimental projects are those who have a past record of success in the community, and a base of community support for their projects. Communities should be leery of special financial incentives extended to unknown out-of-town developers who have not demonstrated any commitment to the local community and may skip town when the going gets tough.

For communities considering experimental uses of TIFs as an investment, it is advisable to use a dollar cost averaging approach to their implementation, particularly when their use involves giving tax payer money to private enterprise. Because this use may be a risky investment, and because they typically involve tax-free contracts that extend decades, a city can quickly get overextended if the city government becomes “TIF-happy” and erodes the public tax base.

TIF Qualification Assessment Checklist. In general, people are either in favor of experimental TIF use or against it. I would propose that people should be neither “For” or “Against” the use of TIF-Based funding. Instead, communities should utilize a checklist to determine when a TIF should or shouldn’t be used. Below are some questions that should be asked which should rule out about 99.9% of all requests for TIF-Based funding of private projects.

(1) Previous Interest. Has the developer previously shown an interest in the community, or is the TIF a bribe to get an otherwise uninterested and uncommitted developer to build in your community? If the developer has previously shown an interest in the community, without any special favors, then continue to question #2, otherwise TIF should not be used.

(2) Mixed Use. For the other projects the developer has in the community, are those utilizing best practices of mixed use spaces that will enrich an area by having retail space, office space, and residential living? If YES, then continue to question #3, otherwise TIF should not be used.

(3) Past Success. Have the other projects of the developer been successful? If yes, continue to question #4, otherwise TIF should not be used because that would not be a TIF it would be simply TF (tax funding) without a guarantee of an ‘increment’ in tax revenue if the project fails.

(4) Architecture Evaluation. Certainly there are many genres of architecture, and just as many opinions about what is attractive. For the style of architecture being proposed, is the building considered to be attractive by those who appreciate that style of architecture? For example, if the proposed development uses modern design, do people find it to be an innovative and attractive example of modern architecture? If yes, continue to question #5, otherwise TIF should not be used.

(5) Beautification. Businesses and investors generally look at the bottom line and profits when planning a project. An ugly poured cement building or unimaginative brick facade would be popular choices. Similar to question #4, does the proposed development project place value on the aesthetic appearance of the building in a way that demonstrates the developer’s passion to look beyond profits to envision ways that architecture can be a form of habitable art and community beautification? If yes, continue to question #6, otherwise TIF should not be used.

(6) Property Management. Is the developer simply looking to turn a quick profit by constructing a cheaply-made building and then selling it without making any long-term commitment to ensure the property is cared for and the businesses within it are profitable, or, instead, is the developer taking a personal interest in the long-term management and oversight of the property? If the developer is taking an interest in the long-term care of the property, then continue to question #7, otherwise TIF should not be used.

(7) Commitment. If the developer thinks their project is so wonderful, ask them this simple final question: “Would you be willing to actually live in the buildings you are constructing and reside in the neighborhood where you develop?” Most developers will say no, and you can tell them to seek private funding. However, if you have a developer who has answered yes to all of the above questions, then such a developer should probably be retained and well supported by the city because developers like this would be very hard to come by and can be a huge asset to any community.

The above list of requirements may seem like an impossible set of requirements for any developer to meet. However, there are developers that meet such requirements. The Moen Group would be one example of a developer that would pass the above requirements.

There is a commentary and response to the above found at the bottom of this page. In summary, those opposed to giving public tax revenue to private developers would conclude that no decision tree will change the fact that taxes aren’t meant to support private business.

Case Study – Iowa City. In Iowa City, we’ve had several experimental uses of TIF-funded development projects that fall outside their traditional use and best practices. This has raised a significant amount of public outcry, partly because tax payers did not vote on or approve this private enterprise business use of their tax dollars. Interestingly, the developer being awarded the experimental TIF money (MoenGroup.com) would actually pass the above 7-question qualification assessment test.

Dollar Cost Averaging. Because TIF funded private projects represent some risk, the principle of dollar cost averaging should be used. By waiting 7 to 10 years between TIF funded projects, there is enough time to reassess their success, and spread out risk, and spread out the depletion of the municipal tax base revenue.

TIF Concerns. The remainder of this document will explore TIF concerns and potential problems with TIFs. As mentioned above, in recent years, TIFs have been used as a mechanism for taking tax payer money and handing it over to wealthy developers and private business. These are some additional concerns about TIFs that makes their use for private enterprise prohibitive in any circumstances. I believe these are valid concerns that may take precedence over any possible benefit of experimental TIF use.

Infrastructure Needs Come First. Roads, schools, libraries and other shared community infrastructure are traditional government undertakings. Funding private enterprise with tax payer dollars is not.

Public Input is Essential. Although voter approval is not required, citizen participation is essential and any city government that does not seek citizen input does so to the detriment of the entire community. TIF funding is similar to public bonds and should be treated the same way.

Enhancing or Expanding Wealthy Developments Isn’t Essential. When TIFs are used to make posh and upscale living even more decadent, they run the risk of broadening the gap between the working poor and wealthy in a community. Initially TIFs were intended for urban renewal and low-income housing. The intention was to give the underprivileged a leg up. Giving the wealthy a financial boost at the expense and sacrifice of the poor seems backwards.

Free Marketplace. Most of us believe in the power and effectiveness of the free marketplace to produce equitable and responsible outcomes. Businesses answer to consumer needs and wishes, or they feel the results in their bottom line. Providing tax payer funding reduces or eliminates these marketplace checks and balances. Additionally, TIFs create an imbalance in the marketplace giving some businesses an immense advantage over others.

Disparity of Profits and Losses. A TIF funded project distributes risks of loss and opportunities for profit inequitably because profits are guaranteed to be received by the developer, but if there are losses (if a business folds) the taxpayers will bear the brunt of that outcome.

Business and State Partnership. TIFs intertwine government and business in something that’s neither socialism or capitalism. TIFs represent an erosion of the democratic process whereby the tax payers are stripped of their autonomy, self governance, and money for the benefit of private enterprise. When officials give millions in taxpayers’ money to private, for-profit businesses, the temptations for good-old-boy corruption are great — and virtually impossible to uncover.

Business Incentives and Accommodations. It’s not necessary to give handouts to businesses to gain their approval. Changes in zoning regulations and building codes (for example) can help give businesses a boost without using taxpayer money. Municipalities compelled to bribe business as a means for pleading to win developers is a losing downward spiral that only ends after the last parcel of land is TIFed away. TIFs can devastate a government’s credit rating, thereby increasing the cost of future legitimate projects. Instead, municipalities should be firm and financially conservative when approving what businesses they allow to develop in a given area. Rather than asking, “What can we pay to convince you to develop in our community?” municipalities should be posing the question, “What will you give our community for the privilege of having a business here?”

Impact on Public Funds. Money shifted over to TIF use is pulled from the same collective pot that would otherwise fund schools, programs, and other government units. In the short-term, this creates a deficiency, and in the long-term, if profits are not as expected, there may be a permanent negative impact on other community funding needs.

Difficult to Determine Needs. In some situations, a city will be told by a potential developer that they can’t proceed with a project unless they receive a certain amount of funding from the city. It is difficult for a city to determine the actual needs of that developer, so the city will end up trusting the foxes to guard the henhouse as the money is trustingly handed over.

Higher Risk. Much of the ‘risk’ in business outcome success has to do with those governing and guiding a business. In a traditional business model, all those involved are equally committed to ensuring success. With TIF funded projects, public officials may lack the business experience required to ensure success, and having no personal financial money tied up in a project, there is little incentive to oversee and ensure the success of a project.

Payoffs to Win Business. Sometimes municipalities get into a bidding war trying to win over a certain business or developer. If a developer isn’t adequately committed to your community, and requires that you bribe them to come to your community, that’s not a good place to start a relationship. Choose only businesses and developers who are sufficiently ‘invested’ in your community that you need not bribe them to come. Businesses pick cities for reasons other than TIFs: workforce, local economy, schools, transportation, communication, quality of life. Focus on investing in those assets instead. Otherwise, the money you give to business will be diverted away from the infrastructure that would otherwise attract more business. Indeed, it’s in the best interest of many businesses to depress the local economy and reduce the quality of life in order to attract people who might fill low-wage jobs. So, businesses aren’t always the best friend of a local community or economy.

Risk of Corruption. When officials give millions in taxpayers’ money to private, for-profit businesses, the temptations for good-old-boy corruption are great — and virtually impossible to uncover.

More information about TIFs can be found online on the FromDC2Iowa blog where the inspiration for much of the above content is available.

_______________
And now, the Facebook exchanges:

Nicholas Johnson "Tough TIF Talk," http://fromdc2iowa.blogspot.com/2013/02/tough-tif-talk.html

In his latest effort to justify the use of taxpayer money (TIFs) for Marc Moen's buildings, Gregory Johnson offers, "Guidelines for Selecting TIF-Based Funding of Urban Development Projects," http://www.resourcesforlife.com/docs/item6947.

His "Guidelines" are a constructive step forward; I especially like the decision-tree approach.

However, with respect, I think they still fail to address the elephant in the living room.

So far as I know, none of the economists who oppose crony capitalism argue that there are NO benefits to taxpayer-funded pro football stadiums, for example, or TIFs -- such as short term jobs for construction workers, and a somewhat useful new facility.

But by that standard, there are also benefits from a teenage gang drug distribution organization -- jobs for otherwise unemployed teens, business training, a development of their math skills, sense of responsibility, and ability to work with others.

In short, the issue is NOT whether there are ANY benefits from a Moen project; of course there are, and he lists some of them. The issue is whether those benefits are enough to warrant taking money from the county and schools, subsidizing one housing/office building owner while forcing all others to compete with him without the benefit of taxpayer financing, undercutting banks and other potential investors with cheap taxpayer money when private funding might have been available for the same or a slightly modified project, the risk of corruption when officials are picking winners and losers, and on and on with the list of 20 problems with TIFs I have repeatedly referred to. See "Tough TIF Talk," http://fromdc2iowa.blogspot.com/2013/02/tough-tif-talk.html

In short, the issue is NOT whether Moen does, or does not, make any contribution to downtown Iowa City with his buildings.

The issues are: (1) Does he really NEED this taxpayer money to do what he does (perhaps in a slightly scaled down version)? And (2) Even if there ARE benefits to his projects, zero risks to taxpayers, and he is sufficiently impoverished that he could do nothing at all without taxpayer funding, do those benefits warrant the TIFs, given all the (a) other-than-financial adverse consequences as well as (b) taxpayer costs, and (c) opportunity costs (things the City doesn't/can't fund as a result of what it's given him)?

THAT'S the question that has still not been addressed by anyone to my knowledge, let alone answered to my satisfaction.

_______________
Gregory Paul Johnson These are all very good points and useful suggestions for expanding on the decision tree, if there is to be one. I recognize that some people feel any use of taxpayer money for private business is an inappropriate use.

_______________
Nicholas Johnson Permit me to offer an alternative response/argument you could make that I think would be more to the point and effective.

To say that "some people feel any use of taxpayer money for private business is an inappropriate use" is like saying (to use my example of the teenage drug gang) "some people oppose all teenage gangs."

It's true that some conservative capitalists would oppose TIFs as a form of corporatism or crony capitalism, a bastardization of pure capitalism, on ideological grounds. Capitalism includes the possibility of devastating financial losses as well as the possibility of enormous profits; they are offended by a "heads (i.e., profits) I win (i.e., keep the profits" and "tails (i.e., losses) you lose (i.e., taxpayers cover them)" system.

There are others who believe the only legitimate, constitutional use of taxpayers' money is for military expenditures.

Neither is what's involved here.

There are actual, very real harms (not to mention risks), produced by TIFs, some of which I've itemized in the Facebook entry, and linked blog essay. These are not observations derived from a belief that "any use of taxpayer money for private business is inappropriate," or some other ideological or political philosophy.

As such, they are analogous to the observations that drug dealing often leads to addiction, other health problems (and in the case of drive-by shootings, death), and is associated with other criminal behavior -- which are also not based on an ideological, or political, opposition to all teenage gangs.

It seems to me, therefore, that you have three possible arguments [with regard to any of the 20 categories of objections to TIFs]: (1) denial (e.g., "there is no data or other reason to believe that when the government underwrites a for-profit venture with taxpayers' money it creates an unfair advantage, tips an otherwise level playing field, or otherwise harms the non-publicly-funded competitors"), (2) trivialization (e.g., "yeah, there are a number of taxpayer-funded private profit efforts that are never completed or go belly up, but not many of them, and those that are successful can be very successful"), or (3) to borrow from Lilly Tomlin, "we don't care, we don't have to, we're the telephone company," or, as in this case, the City Council (e.g., "corruption is part of government; always has been, always will be; there are a thousand ways a beneficiary can reward a public official, you can't possibly track, let alone prevent, all of them; so there's some possibility with TIFs, too; so what?").

But I don't think you are persuasive in disposing of the real and serious adverse effects of TIFs when you fail to address them, and rely on the dismissive "some people" don't like any TIFs.

_______________
Gregory Paul Johnson Just to clarify, you mentioned that my article is my "latest effort to justify the use of taxpayer money (TIFs) for Marc Moen's buildings." It's not written with that myopic intent, but genuinely an effort to think broadly about whether TIFs should be used at all beyond their original intent. If so, then how would one make a decision. At present, there seems to be no rational decision tree being applied.

_______________
Gregory Paul Johnson I think any balanced presentation about TIF use should include mention of the 'very real harms and risks' associated with their use for funding private enterprise. That's why I included a summary of those dangers/concerns in my original article and also linked to your comprehensive article on the topic. There's a serious problem of tax payers not being included in the decision process of how their money is spent. I mentioned this in my article as well.

I've now revised my article to reflect the points/comments you made above. In case it wasn't clear, I changed the wording to state, "I believe these are valid concerns that may take precedence over any possible benefit of experimental TIF use." I plan to make further modifications as more comments come in.

I don't think that there are three possible arguments (1) denial, (2) trivialization, (3) not caring.

The reasons for not using TIFs to fund private enterprise are well founded and seem to outweigh the benefits. However, it seems that municipalities across the nation don't care (including ours). That being the case, if we are going to have inappropriate uses of TIFs, should there be a decision process? That's what I'm exploring.

# # #

Finding Your Different Drummer

June 5, 2013, 2:15 p.m.

An Alternative to the Corporate, Televised Test Pattern

Test Pattern for Living is back.

Originally published as an original Bantam paperback in 1972, the book was reissued in a Lulu paperback edition last week. It should be available through Amazon sometime in mid- to late July. Meanwhile, the publisher is the only source. (There may be a book signing in a couple weeks at Uptown Bill's, at which 20% of the heavily discounted price will be a contribution to Uptown Bill's.)

Meanwhile, the book celebrated its Iowa City debut last evening at "Slices: Performance and Pie" (an event presented the first Tuesday of every month at 7:00 p.m. at Uptown Bill's in Iowa City, Iowa, in cooperation with Combined Efforts Theatre).

"Slices" offers participants an opportunity to present brief (10-minute maximum) readings from favorite or original literature. One of Slices' unique features is that participants must use a total of no less than two persons for the presentation.

I was fortunate enough to have the assistance of two professional actors for this event -- Rachael Lindhart and Jason Grubbe (both Actors Equity members) -- and my son, Gregory Johnson. Any additional background on what we did and why is contained in the script used on that occasion.

An Excerpt from Nicholas Johnson’s Test Pattern for Living
Uptown Bill’s
Iowa City, Iowa, June 4, 2013
Nicholas Johnson (NJ): Test Pattern for Living. 1972.

The women’s movement was just getting started. Women as well as men were still referred to as “he.” But it was also a time of great creativity in everything from politics to the arts. So the Foreword to Test Pattern for Living was sheet music by Mason Williams, the composer of “Classical Gas” and the “Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour” head writer. And instead of text throughout, the text I wrote was on the right hand pages, and the left hand pages had quotes from others that were supportive of that text.

I was still an FCC commissioner, and was trying to bring attention to the impact of television, and its corporate sponsors, on Americans’ lives. The phrase “test pattern” was a reference to the test patterns on the television screens at that time. The book was designed to offer readers a path to thinking through their own individual standards, a way to break out of the corporate interlock.

The pressures on individuals today are similar to those 40 years ago. America is again at war. A collapsing economy is now the reason individuals are rethinking their own set of values. That’s why the book was reissued just last week.

For our excerpt at this evening's "Slices," I’ll be reading my text from the right-hand pages of Test Pattern for Living. My "Greek chorus," Rachael Lindhart and Jason Grubbe,will speak the quotes from others from the left-hand pages. The book also reproduces the text of actual TV commercials. One of them, plus Mason Williams' all-purpose commercial, will be read by my son, Gregory Johnson, who starts us off.

# # #

Gregory Johnson (GJ):

Mason Williams.
At last
New from us
This amazing dramatic proof
There.
See?
You can.
It's easy!
You mean America's favorite modern families?
Yes! . . .
Because they used that other stuff in tests
But without the special ingredient of a magic formula
Now available in two sizes
Fresh and moist
And especially made so effectively light and lovely
That the leading new word for all you ladies
Combined with their report
Is a timely message of less than a minute
And quick to fix from now on . . . .
So why not try big, tough, super
Flakes of special interest for all you guys
With twice the power and vitamins necessary
For a high rate of saturated “duh”
That is free for an unlimited time only
with every Hey!

NJ: The difficulty in America today is that we have turned it all over to the big corporations. Time owns Life. Our colleges, churches, foundations, and public broadcasting stations tend to be presided over by the same guys who decide what automobiles we'll buy and breakfast cereals we'll eat. They publish our children's school books; they own most of the nation's artistic talent—and they have little hesitation in censoring the copy of both.

Jason Grubbe (JG): Mason Williams.
The censor sits
Somewhere between
The scenes to be seen
And the television sets
With his scissor purpose poised
Watching the human stuff
That will sizzle through
The magic wires
And light up
Like welding shops
The ho—hum rooms of America
And with a kindergarten
Arts and crafts concept
Of moral responsibility
Snips out
The rough talk
The unpopular opinion
Or anything with teeth
And renders
A pattern of ideas
Full of holes
A doily
For your mind

NJ: Understanding this concept of "corporate interlock" is really essential to an understanding of this book. In general, people either understand the concept right away or not at all—in which case spelling it out is a waste of time. But I'm going to try.

Rachael Lindhart (RL): Philip Slater. “One cannot successfully alter one facet of a social system if everything else is left the same, for the patterns are interdependent and reinforce one another.”

NJ: Let me begin with an anecdote. One evening Mason Williams and I were debating whether to go out for dinner or cook something at his house. We finally decided we'd stay home—principally because we didn't want to bother to change clothes. This prompted Mason to start speculating—as do a great many of life's quirks. "Nick, I've finally figured out why you have to dress up to go out to dinner."

"Why's that, Mason?" I asked.

"Because the same people who own the restaurants own the clothing stores."

His years of working for television have forced Mason to think in one-liners. (That's all you ever have time for.) And, like many of his one-liners, this one is both inaccurate in its particulars (so far as I know clothing stores are not owned by restaurateurs) and profound in its more general wisdom. "Living" ought to be individual, spontaneous, extemporaneous; a personal quest, evolution, and growth; an experience in uniqueness. But living your life according to the corporate plan involves no more of a creative "centering," or flowering soul, than painting in numbered spaces with the indicated colors is "art." It's like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. You are living out somebody's else's plan—not yours—paying them handsomely for the privilege of doing their work for them.

JG: Timothy J. Cooney and James Haughton write, “In America one of the basic rules many people live by is that one must keep up with the Joneses. By your own example you must turn this rule upside down. If you absolutely need a car, let it be the oldest on the block. . . .

At first, such "odd ball" behavior will cause some embarrassment and you will hardly be popular with your neighbors. . . .

Half the worry of . . . people in this country is how to pay for all the brand-new and superfluous junk they have signed up for, at just "pennies a day." By your example you will be offering an escape from this endless worry . . ..”

NJ: The psychology of acquisitiveness is to know, at every stage, what pieces you must next acquire, and in what order—house, car, sailboat.

GJ: Once upon a time there was a girl who dreamed of a doll that had everything. And then came Dawn, the doll that comes with these beautiful things. Like a car with Dawn actually at the wheel! Just look at Dawn go! There's a Music Box with Dawn on top, and the fabulous Dawn Fashion Show—the only one in the world with a revolving stage like this. Dawn comes with it—watch her walk and model, all by herself. And start collecting all these accessories: a handbag, elegant furniture with a phone that really works, a beauty parlor set. You can display Dawn, her friends, her fabulous clothes, right in your own home. Make your dream come true with Dawn, the doll that has so many beautiful things. Dawn's clothes are so beautiful, so stunning, so elegant, you'll want to collect more than one doll just to show them off! And it's so much fun to put two Dawns here, three Dawns there, call it "Midnight Magic." Then change their clothes, set them up, and call it "Sweet Dreams." Use your imagination! Dawn. Fun to play with, fun to collect.

NJ: "House" takes on an externally imposed meaning: suburbs, air conditioning, grass, wall-to-wall carpeting—just as surely as "Dawn" would be incomplete without her "car," "fabulous clothes," "elegant furniture,” and "beauty parlor." Sound familiar? Could it be you are now living in the doll house you used to play in? Is that an accident? Is it really what you want?

The corporate interlock of jobs, products, and life style means that once you come into the circle at any point you find yourself surrounded by all of it. And once you're in it's very difficult to get a little bit out.

The choices remaining to you are relatively meaningless—such as which color and extras you want with your Chevrolet, whether you'll drink scotch or bourbon, how "mod" your ties will be, and which toothpaste you'll use.

JG: William F. Fore. “Free selection of a wide range of goods and services does not signify genuine freedom, particularly if the desire for these goods and services tends merely to foster more frantic work, more compulsive buying, more fear and self-doubt. In this context, free selection tends to create and sustain alienation.”

NJ: It all fits: corporate white-collar job, suburban home, commuting by automobile, eating in restaurants, and the clothes. There is the canned entertainment of radio and television for the boredom, the bottled alcohol and aspirin for the pain, and the aerosol cans of deodorant and room freshener to maintain the antiseptic cleanliness of it all.

JG: Mason Williams. “We're like a race horse shot full of speed to make us run harder than is good for us, to win for the owners and lose for ourselves, to win the race for only the price of the chance to run.”

NJ: You wear your office, your home, and your car as much as your clothes and deodorant. And from the corporate layers of externals comes your very identity—and the smothering of your soul.

RL: Suzannah Lessard. “A young person gets a big bang out of taking a well-paying white-collar job with a large and important company, thinks to himself "I'm making it," and sees . . . himself in the saddle. It's only later, much later, when the exits have all been quietly sealed off, that it becomes apparent that the saddle is really a harness . . ..”

NJ: Let me try another example. Once you have accepted a job in a professional or managerial capacity with one of the nation's top two hundred corporations, you will be led inevitably to the purchase of a special automatic dish-washing detergent. Here's how it happens:

You are probably working in a large, fairly new office building in a major city, and living in the suburbs. You not only feel under pressure to get a house about the same size and cost as your neighbors, but such a house is, in fact, the only kind available.

JG: Paul Swatek. “Social custom teaches us to strive for a privately owned, single-family home in the suburbs, possessing a garage of at least two-car capacity, and filled with "conveniences" that assure us of more "leisure" time. Advertising urges us to consume and dispose. Is this really what you want? The decision is yours and you are free to say no.”

NJ: The kitchen is really quite large. It has lots of cupboard space. You may have moved a lot of kitchen stuff with you; or maybe you bought it because you never envisioned any other way to live, or because you're expected to entertain in a particular style.

In any event, even though you find a camp cook set more than enough in the way of kitchenware when you're camping, you don't want all those empty kitchen cupboard shelves.

Once they are filled, you feel a compulsion to use the stuff. Instead of washing a pot after it has been used, you put it aside and dirty another one. Silverware, glasses and cups, bowls and plates are likewise dirtied in great number, even during the course of a family meal, let alone when you are entertaining.

Having dirtied so many pots and dishes, it really is a drag to have to wash them all by hand. So you get an automatic dishwasher. Maybe it was already in the house. Maybe you were partly influenced to buy it because the neighbors have dishwashers. But mostly you get it because you have all those dirty dishes.

And once you get it, you find it's designed so that you have to use the special dishwasher detergent or the soap will suds out all over the floor.

And that's why, once you accept the job, you have to buy the special dish washing detergent.

# # #

Three Simple Steps to School Redistricting

May 17, 2012, 9:00 a.m.

School Board Alternatives to Procrastination and Frustration
Who goes to which K-12 schools and why?

There are 15,000 school districts and school boards across the country confronting those questions.

[Photo of prior ICCSD Board.]

Apparently the Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD) school board is now doing so again.

Here's a three-step process for easing everyone's pain.

Step One. Decide to do it. You. The Board members. Not a community committee or a consultant or the Superintendent. Not a series of open forums prayerfully in search of what one board member called "a solution that satisfies the whole community." Alesha L. Crews, School board members talk about next steps; Say portable buildings a short-term solution, should not be permanent," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 17, 2012, p. A3.

You are the buffer among the District's stakeholders -- students, parents, administrators, teachers, staff, property tax payers, and citizens. Face it, you'll never satisfy them all.

Only you can create "fairness" for the poor and working poor and lower middle class District parents, when the contests arise in which their interests are pitted against those of our most economically and political powerful families.

Remember, this is a public school system. No one but you has a right to dictate policy. Dissatisfied students and parents who want more absolute control over the details have options, from private schools, to other school districts, to home schooling.

Consider their wishes? Of course. But to think, as one board member put it, that it is "absolutely critical that we don’t ignore anyone’s needs," is a classic example of the triumph of hope over experience. It will inevitably produce the K-12 equivalent of the line that "a camel is a horse built by committee."

Nothing against camels mind you, but only the Board can create a rational, efficient, school system in which all the pieces fit, work together, and optimize the desired output -- increased numbers of students graduating closer to their academic potential.

As Nike says, "Just do it."

Step Two. Think specifically about District goals, not generally about drawing lines.

This is where "if you don't know where you want to go, the odds are very high that you'll never get there" comes into play.

Here are some of the destinations you might want to think about:

(a) Are you willing to take your time, or do you have to do it right now? You could announce a new approach to redistricting that will take effect six or seven years from now. That would eliminate most of the emotional opposition from students and parents affected by a shorter time in which to accommodate change. Most of those who will be affected by a future plan don't yet have kids in school -- or haven't even yet moved to Iowa City.

(b) How much flexibility, or rigidity, do you want? Flexibility is a variable that can be turned up or down, like a rheostat controlling the lighting in a dining room. Do you want fixed, immovable lines -- until the next time you have a redistricting crisis? Or would you like to give the Superintendent, and yourselves, some flexibility?

For example, you could provide (and, if (a) is adopted, not until, say, seven years from now) that (1) once assigned to an elementary school a student could finish at that school, but that (2) there would be two, not just one, geographical areas feeding that school. [i] One would be immediately contiguous to the school, a small enough area that virtually no projection of increased population would result in more students living there than the school could properly hold. The children of families living in, or moving into, that area would be assigned to that school. [ii] The other, larger area, would give the Board and Superintendent the flexibility to assign students living there to any one of three or four closest schools. (Of course, once assigned, under principle (a) the student could finish there.) Thus, as new families moved into that larger area they might know the probabilities of where their children would be assigned, but they would not have a firm commitment of a school from the District. (For more discussion and detail, see, e.g., "Disparity in Class Sizes: Simple Solution Rejected," October 13, 2010.)

(c) Settle upon your position with regard to the demographic balance represented in the assignment of "free and reduced lunch" students to the schools. You may want greater disparity than we now have, less, about the same, or have no position, leaving the outcome to chance -- the latter in all probability a policy that will produce an increase in the disparity. Just make up your minds; hopefully with specific numbers.

(d) There are many other variables you can think about, resolve, and announce. Do I have personal preferences on some of these District goals? Of course. But that's irrelevant. These are the Board's decisions to make. My focus at the moment is not on what you decide but what it is you decide about.

By laying out your own very specific metrics for where you say the District is headed, and providing that they will have little to no impact on today's students and parents, because they won't take effect immediately, you provide stability for the future, and virtually eliminate the emotional opposition.

Step Three. Evolve toward your goals. With a little advance individual reading and thinking, Steps One and Two should be capable of resolution with one or two weekends of Board-member-only workshops. Remember, it's your decisions we're talking about, not those of some consultant. Once you announce the outcome, where the District is headed, it will be possible -- without forcing decisions, but as needs for tweaking arise (like now!) -- to make those decisions consistent with your longer range plan (without imposing it wholesale ahead of schedule).

When I confront computer frustration, which seems to happen with some regularity, my computer consultant son, Gregory (http://ResourcesForLife.com) usually advises, "Well, Dad, there are three steps," following which he puts in simple, three-step language what it is that his cyberlaw professor father should do to get on with his personal life in our digital world.

I thought this "Three Simple Steps to School Redistricting" might be helpful for our local School Board as well. We'll see.
# # #

Biking's Many Benefits

For the Week of May 10, 2009; posted May 9, 2009, 5:30 p.m.; May 11, 2009, 6:45 a.m.; May 13, 2009, 7:30 a.m.; May 14, 2009, 5:00 p.m.

Bike for Life
Bike to Work Week
(brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
It's "Bike to Work Week," Rob Daniel, "Organizers Push Bike to Work Week," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 9, 2009, p. 3, and time for me to pedal my annual spiel for the wheel.

[And see also, Rachel Gallegos, "Bicyclists Take It to the Streets," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 11, 2009, p. 3A; Mike Kilen, "7 tips for enjoyable biking to work," Des Moines Register, May 11, 2009; and "Why I Ride My Bicycle," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 11, 2009, p. 7A ("Seven Iowa City area women write about why they ride their bikes to work and their riding experiences as we kick off Bike to Work Week." Those seven biking authors are: Susan Beckett, Wendy Brown, Erin Fleck, Diana Harris, Karen Kubby, Feather Lacy and Mary Lohse Shepherd); Rob Daniel, "Biker Beats Car, Bus in Annual Bike to Work Race," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 12, 2009; Editorial, "Working Toward a Bike-Friendly Community," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 13, 2009, p. A13 ("One step in the right direction is the Metro Bicycle Master Plan recently produced by the JCCOG Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee"); ; Brian Loring, "The Advantages of Biking," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 13, 2009, p. A18 ("With so many bicycle owners but so little bike riding in the United States, there is great potential to increase the role that bicycles play in daily commutes and other frequent trips"); Editorial, "Public Bike System Would Unclutter Downtown and be Eco-Friendly," The Daily Iowan, May 14, 2009, p. A6; Rob Daniel, "Biking, Walking to School Nets Rewards," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 14, 2009, p. A3.]

[And here are a couple additional links (among potentially hundreds) to biking resources: Bike Iowa (with links to many resources, including 68 Iowa bike clubs); Bike Cult; and for a couple places to get started in Iowa City, the 30th Century Bicycle; the Iowa City Bike Library; and World of Bikes.]

Think you can't do it? Click here to see why I answer your concerns with "Oh yes you can!"

Thirty-seven years ago I published a book titled, Test Pattern for Living. (Although long since out of print, it is still available for free downloading, and has maintained its own devoted cult following over the years.) The benefits of biking received an entire chapter in that book, and I have been extolling them ever since.

You see, the point is not that there is a single benefit from biking, but a lot of that benefit. The point is that there are so many multiple benefits from biking, each of which provides a lot of that benefit. They are spelled out in this blog entry, so I won't repeat them all here. But examples would include the sheer joy that comes from more oxygen in the brain, the beneficial reduction of obesity and heart attack risks, the greater speed of commuting and ease of parking, and the virtual elimination of expense (compared to operating a car) -- a not insignificant benefit at any time but especially during the current global economic collapse.

As a young boy, I started using a bike to deliver the Des Moines Register to my neighbors (a bike the Register enabled me to buy at a discount with my paper route money). Later, in the 1970s, I rode across the state in the RAGBRAI event with Donald Kaul for a number of years, reporting on it for National Public Radio. That three-speed RAGBRAI bike, with its rod brakes, still hangs in the garage these days. (I was told this museum piece was of a design originally created for the bicycles of postal delivery persons in India, and later for the bicycles that became the backbone of the Viet Cong's very effective transportation system during the war. "U.S. Army Transportation Museum," Wikipedia ("The museum has an extensive Vietnam War exhibit, including . . . bicycles used by the Viet Cong").)

Today my somewhat more modern (but still inexpensive) bicycle is mostly used for daily commuting, as well as exercise and recreation along some local trails. (For years I jogged almost every day as well -- in Washington, through the woods of Glover Park, just outside my door. The toll it took on my knees has eliminated that exercise option in recent years, but for some reason my knees seem to still like biking.)

As life has a way of coming full circle, this past year marked the publication of my son Gregory Johnson's book, Put Your Life on a Diet -- already in its second printing. Although it is compatible in theme with Test Pattern for Living, and also has a chapter on transportation advocating bicycles, it is otherwise unique, very much up-to-date, and grows out of his leadership with the "small house" movement -- as suggested by the book's sub-title: "Lessons Learned Living in 140 Square Feet." And see "Life Mobility Transportation Group - Bicycles, Electric Cars, and Greener Alternative Fuel Modes of Travel," on his ResourcesForLife.com Web site.

I've made no effort to update the bicycling chapter from my book, reproduced below.

The late 1960s and early 1970s were a different time from today. So you'll need to update the statistics if you want to use them. And the sentiments are very much 1970s' -- though the conclusions, social and ecological conditions haven't changed all that much.

It was a time of political and economic change, and one of my goals was to see if I could help contribute to a year in America in which there would be more bicycles sold than automobiles. (That goal was accomplished, as you'll see from a quote in what follows.)

In the 1970s there was also a good deal of artistic as well as other creative experimentation. It was represented in this book with the fact that the Foreword was sheet music (written by Mason Williams) and the chapters consisted of quotes on the even numbered (left hand) pages, and my text on the odd numbered (right hand) pages. As I described that feature in the Introduction,

[A]ny honest author will admit he has drawn heavily from the writings of others. I have emphasized this fact by the use of quotations from diverse sources . . . [One] reason I have emphasized the quotes is that my search involves the discovery of common themes . . .. When different people start saying the same thing -- when a blue-collar worker expresses frustrations similar to those of college students, when the teachings of Buddha are consistent with the insights of psychiatrists, or when ecologists echo the sentiments of poets -- I feel excitement. If you want, you can just read the quotes, and skip my text entirely -- or read it later.

In today's reproduction of the chapter the quotes are indented and blocked and my text goes to the margin. Page numbers are indicated as, e.g., # p. 110 #.

Antidote to Automobiles
[Test Pattern for Living, Chapter 7]
# p. 110 #

We might have to slow down a little or perhaps even sit quiet occasionally to develop better taste. One can't think very deeply at 70 miles an hour.
-C. E. Warne


My new pattern requires renting new cars at the airports as needed. I am progressively ceasing to own things, not on a political-schism basis, as for instance Henry George's ideology, but simply on a practical basis. Possession is becoming progressively burdensome and wasteful and therefore obsolete.
-R. Buckminster Fuller


When you drive a car, you drive a reflection of your self. And, in the case of the 1971 MGB, it's a reflection of someone very special.
-MG advertisement in Time

# p. 111 #

So far, we have approached alternate life styles almost in terms of hedonism: What feels best for you? What will remove the pain of living in a corporate state -- other than the drug life (whether alcohol, tranquilizers, or others) that only brings more ultimate pain? But what we so often discover is that the very products, activities, and attitudes that make you feel better also have significant social advantages: They use less of our nation's precious natural resources, they pollute less, they make less noise, they add to the pleasure of others, they enable each of us to live in a society in which we can grow in individual worth and fulfillment, they are more aesthetically pleasing, they make for better citizenship, and they are even more economical. Take bicycles, for example.

I ride a bicycle -- not because I hate General Motors but haven't the courage to bomb an auto plant. I don't do it as a gesture of great stoicism and personal sacrifice. I am not even engaged, necessarily, in an act of political protest over that company's responsibility for most of the air pollution by tonnage in the United States. It's like finally giving up cigarettes. You just wake up one morning and realize you don't want to start the day with another automobile. Cigarette smoking is not a pleasure, it's a business. In the same way, you finally come to realize that you don't need General Motors, they need you. They need you to drive their cars for them. You are driving for Detroit and paying them to do it. Automobiles are just a part of your life that's over, that's all. No hard feelings. You've just moved on to something else. From now on you just use their buses, taxis, and rental cars when they suit your

# p. 112 #

The most natural form of locomotion, walking has been In use since before the Invention of the wheel and the discovery of fire. Reliable and totally non-polluting, it offers convenience -- no parking, no cost. Invigorating, it promotes health and gives you the chance to think.
-Paul Swatek


Automobiles insulate man not only from the environment but from human contact as well. They permit only most limited types of interaction, usually competitive, aggressive, and destructive. If people are to be brought together again, given a chance to get acquainted with each other and involved in nature, some fundamental solutions must be found to the problems posed by the automobile.
-Edward T. Hall

ANNOUNCER: Sidney spent Sundays shelling at the seashore. Then Sidney started digging the Mustang -- the great original . . .. Now Sidney's making waves all over. Last week he saved three bathing beauties. (And they all could swim better than Sidney!) Only Mustang makes it happen!
-a television commercial

# p. 113 #

convenience. You don't keep one for them that you have to house, feed and water, insure, and care for.

You ride a bicycle because it feels good. The air feels good on your body; even the rain feels good. The blood starts moving around your body, and pretty soon it gets to your head, and, glory be, your head feels good. You start noticing things. You look until you really see. You hear things, and smell smells, you never knew were there. You start whistling nice little original tunes to suit the moment. Words start getting caught in the web of poetry in your mind. And there's a nice feeling, too, in knowing you're doing a fundamental life thing for yourself: transportation. You got a little bit of your life back! And the thing you use is simple, functional, and relatively cheap. You want one that fits you and rides smoothly, but with proper care and a few parts it should last almost forever. Your satisfaction comes from within you, not from the envy or jealousy of others. (Although you are entitled to feel a little smug during rush hours, knowing you are also making better time than most of the people in cars.)

On those occasions when I am not able to cycle through the parks or along the canal -- because the paths are rough with ice or muddy from rain or melting snow -- bicycling enables me to keep closer to the street people: folks waiting for buses or to cross streets, street sweepers, policemen, school "patrols," men unloading trucks. Needless to say, you cannot claim any depth of understanding as a result of such momentary and chance encounters, but by the time I get to the office I do somehow have the sense that I have a much better feeling for the mood of the city that day than if I had come to my office in a chauffeur-driven government limou-

# p. 114 #

On a different speed scale, bicycles could move 2.8 times as many people per amount of space. If a bicycler can make 10 miles an hour, the car would have to exceed 28 mph to rack up more passenger miles on the same system of streets. But the New York City average speed for cars during rush hour is only 8.5 mph, 13 mph on the feeder roads. It's a fact that today in many cities you can make better time aboard a bicycle than in a car.
-Paul Swatek


Make your second car a bicycle.

Consider the advantages that the bicycle has to offer -- low cost, no pollution, and convenient to park.

For under $50 you can get a bicycle fitted with enough trimmings to make it practical for going shopping and carrying a small child. The cheapest car costs about thirty times that.

A bicycle is also inexpensive to operate, maintain, and insure.

Bicycles are quieter than any form of motorized transportation, produce no pollution, and use up no fuel.

A bicycle takes up about 1/30th the parking space of a car.

In city traffic today, the bicycle is often faster than the car or bus.

Bicycles give the rider the sort of healthy exercise that many Americans usually do not get.

Riding a bicycle makes it possible to get a better appreciation of a beautiful day, or a pleasant ride through the park.

. . . The New York Times quoted a 32-year-old millionaire who pedals up Fifth Avenue to social engagements in a dinner jacket as explaining, "It's much easier than fussing with a chauffeur."
-Paul Swatek

# p. 115 #

sine. Although I am willing to brave the traffic and exhaust, I am aware it is dangerous. I think bicycles ought to be accorded a preferred position in the city's transportation system. At the very least, they deserve an even break.

Notice that bicycle riding also has some significant social advantages over the automobile. Cars unnecessarily kill sixty thousand people every year, permanently maim another one hundred and seventy thousand, and injure three and a half million more. The automobile accounts for at least 60 percent of the total air pollution in the United States by tonnage -- as high as 85 percent in some urban areas -- and 91 percent of all carbon-monoxide pollution; it creates about nine hundred pounds of pollution for every person every year. One million acres of land are paved each year; there is now a mile of road for each square mile of land. The concrete used in our Interstate Highway System would build six sidewalks to the moon. Even so, everyone is familiar with the clogged streets and parking problems -- not to mention the unconscionable rates charged by the parking garages. Automobile transportation is the largest single consumer of the resources used in our nation's total annual output of energy. It is an economic drain on consumers -- in no way aided by auto companies that deliberately build bumpers weaker than they were fifty years ago in order to contribute to an unnecessary bumper-repair bill in excess of one billion dollars annually.

The bicycle is a model citizen, by comparison.

The bicycle does not kill or maim; it does not pollute; it does not deplete natural resources; it makes no noise; it takes a great deal less space; and it is very much cheaper. (You can buy a brand new bicycle for

# p. 116 #

Commuting by bicycle? Is this some kind of put-on? It may sound like a joke to motor-minded America, but in the rest of the world nobody is laughing. In countries that are willing to take it seriously, the bicycle [is] transportation. Switzerland, for example, which traditionally places a high value on peace of mind and purity of air, has more bicycles than automobiles. In Amsterdam -- a national capital with roughly the same population and climatic conditions as Washington, D.C. -- 150,000 people ride bikes to work every day. Hundreds of thousands more commute by bicycle in other European cities. The same is true in much of Africa and Asia.
-Thomas R. Reid, III


This year an estimated 10 million bicycles will be sold, compared to a projected 8.6 million new cars.
-Friends of the Earth

# p. 117 #

little more than what it costs to operate an automobile for two weeks.) Although the bicycle makes a direct assault on four great problems that plague the modern city -- traffic, noise, parking, and pollution -- urban planners have overlooked it in their search for solutions to the urban transportation crisis.

It is more than ironic that America can invest so much stock faith and rhetoric in the competitive marketplace of commerce and yet ignore the "marketplace of ideas" (to use a phrase by Mr. Justice Holmes) by tolerating the television monopoly that is used to merchandise Detroit's peculiar dreams of the appropriate automotive life style -- with all that life style's attendant social ills. My own commission, the Federal Communications Commission, has been instrumental in encouraging broadcasters' censoring off the airwaves the messages from ecology groups (like Friends of the Earth) that would cry out against the urban devastation being wrought by Detroit's automobiles. (The FCC decision, fortunately, has been substantially reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals.) In perhaps one of the greatest advertising overkills of all time, we Americans are being grossly oversold an automotive product and life style (bigger, faster, sexier cars) that we neither need nor may really want, and that will surely eventually kill us with its exhaust by-products and lethargy-induced heart attacks, if it does not get us first in a crash. This may serve the corporate profits of the automotive, oil, steel, cement, and road-building industries, but it is shortchanging the American people.

There are other ways to get around.

# # #
You, too, can have a happy Bike to Work Week -- 52 weeks every year! Try it.

Think you can't do it? Here are some suggestions/answers/arguments that say, "Yes You Can!"

1. I'm just not in shape. Bikers come in all shapes and sizes -- physically and in terms of fitness. You can join them. Haven't biked during the last 20 years -- or ever? Start slowly. Don't go out and buy the most expensive one in the shop (even though a perfectly good new bike will only cost you roughly 1% of what a new car would cost). Rent, or borrow, a bike and take a ride around one city block in your neighborhood. Gradually extend your distance -- a half-mile, a mile (10 to 12 blocks), five miles -- over the course of a month. Doesn't it make you feel better? Isn't it kind of fun? Buy a used bike. Make sure it's properly adjusted to your size, and the tires are kept properly inflated -- and that you wear a helmet and follow some simple safety rules (see 6, below). Don't worry about the hills; they will seem to be much less steep with time. Until those leg muscles develop just get off the bike and walk it up the hills that are a little too difficult, even when you've geared down. And remember, there's no shame in walking; every biker has done it on some occasion; and besides they'll just think you had to get off because you have a flat tire.

2. It's too far to my job. What do you mean by "too far"? That it will take longer than you'd like? (It may actually save you time; see 4, below.) That you have to dress up for work and might dirty your clothes? (There are answers for that, too, in 5, below.) That you'd have to bike on unsafe streets? Yup, once again, see 6, below. Bear in mind, I'm talking about biking to work in Iowa-sized towns (up to and including Des Moines); I'm not advocating biking along Los Angeles' freeways from Pasadena to Santa Monica every morning.

3. There are a lot of things for which I need a car. (a) I'm not suggesting you not have access to a car when you truly need one, only that you probably truly need one less often than you think. (b) If you and your partner have more than one car you might be able to share one, and cut your costs in half. Or maybe rent one over occasional weekends for heavy shopping, or trips out of town. (c) The average person expends 1500 hours a year for their car: [1] the hours you must work to earn the money for car payments, repairs, insurance, licensing and fees, gas and oil, [2] driving to, waiting for, going back to pick up your car, and other time consuming efforts associated with those tasks, and [3] the hours you spend actually driving the car for your own purposes. The average distance driven is 7500 miles per year. At 1500 hundred hours, and 7500 miles, that's an average of 5 miles per hour -- a good brisk walking speed, and much, much slower than what you can do on a bike. (d) Many of those "needs" you fulfill with your car may not really be "needs." (e) You'd be amazed how much you can carry with a bike. [1] Small and medium-size objects can be put in a jacket pocket; or, if they won't fit there, in one of the various-sized baskets available for bicycles. [2] Regularly have larger loads? Groceries? Laundry to the laundromat? There are reasonably priced bicycle trailers that are lightweight and easy to pull that quickly snap into and out of their connectors.

4. I don't have the time. Put aside the fact that you're only getting 5 mph out of your car (see 3(c), above). Assume that wasn't true and that the only time required by your car was the time spent getting from one place to another. Traveling by bike is, worst case, not significantly slower than a car, and often actually faster. [See, Rob Daniel, "Biker Beats Car, Bus in Annual Bike to Work Race," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 12, 2009.] Why is that? Bikes' advantages, among others, include the combination of (a) being able jump on your bike and go (without opening the garage, warming up the car, backing out of the drive, getting into traffic), (b) bike trails (with no stop lights), sidewalks and bike lanes (faster than sitting in rush hour traffic), and (c) being able to pull up and park right outside the door of your destination (rather than having to look for a parking place or drive round and round in a parking garage).

5. I need to dress for work. (a) Do you really? Midwestern workplaces are much more casual than those on the East or West Coast -- and more casual than any were in the 1950s. (b) I knew a multi-millionaire in Manhattan who used to bike, in black tie, to formal events. I see men in suits biking in Iowa City. Clearly it is possible to do. (c) There are alternatives. Combine your biking with a stop off at a gym; shower, and keep your good clothes, there. I've often found myself working in buildings that have showers in the restrooms. Many people who walk to work wear one pair of walking shoes while walking and carry (or keep at the office) another pair they wear at work; you might be able to carry, or keep at the office, the clothes you need there.

6. I just wouldn't feel safe. You're less likely to be seriously hurt moving around town on a bike than in a car. OK, I know the data can be debated for hours without reaching agreement. The point is that, with some minimal precautions -- just as with driving, walking, boating, or any other activity -- you're safe on a bike. "Car emissions kill 30,000 people and car collisions kill 46,000 each year in the U.S. . . . 725, 629, 665, 732, and 693 cyclists died per year in 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, and 2000 respectively." Bicycle Almanac. Those are pretty good comparative odds. Actually, most bike accidents are the result of ignoring some of those simple safety practices: biking against, instead of with, traffic; running red lights; biking without a helmet; riding too fast, or going in and out of traffic; biking at night without a headlight and flashing rear red light -- and, of course, OWI. If you're going to ride on sidewalks a bell is a courtesy as much as a safety device.

7. What would I do on days that aren't perfect biking weather? What if it's a bitter cold winter day? Or a real summer scorcher? Or it's raining? Hey, nobody's taking attendance; you want to skip a day, skip a day. But once it becomes a habit you may end up doing what a lot of bikers do: ride your bike every day -- unless it's a safety issue. I never bike in tornadoes; if you wouldn't be safe in a car you probably aren't safe on a bike. It's conceivable fog or rain would be so thick as to impair vision. And when roads are so icy that cars can't stay on them bikes probably can't either. As for cold, the folks who are really cold in winter are the ones standing and shivering at a bus stop, or scraping the ice off their windshield. Biking helps keep you warm. Besides, cold weather is easy to deal with; we midwesterners call it "layering" -- the colder it gets the more layers of clothing you put on (paying special attention to feet, hands, head and face). I once walked across Iowa City in 100 below wind chill weather just to see what it would feel like; it was as comfortable as any other temperature for which I've been adequately dressed. Heat's another matter. There's no limit to how much additional clothes you can put on in the winter, but there are limits to how much you can take off in the summer (though you wouldn't know it to see some summertime bikers). So why do 7000-10,000 bicyclists from Iowa and around the world take a week out of their lives, and pay the costs, to ride across the entire state of Iowa during the peak of summer heat in July? Because it's just that much fun to do. And the heat? If you're moving along at 15 mph or so, and sweating, you have the equivalent of the comfort of a fan blowing on you and evaporating that moisture. You'll be a lot more comfortable that the folks sitting in their lawn chairs along the route. (But you do have to remember to keep taking liquids and electrolites.) Rain? You're not going to carry an umbrella while biking, but there are lots of rain gear outfits to choose from that will keep you warm and dry. (Just remember to keep your bike chain oiled to avoid rust.)

Any other reasons why you say "I can't" to which I can respond, "Oh, yes you can"? Just put a comment on this blog entry and I'll try to give you an answer.
_______________

* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source -- even if I have to embed it myself. -- Nicholas Johnson

# # #

Bike for Life

May 13, 2008,9:05 a.m.

Bike for Life
Bike to Work Week
Thirty-six years ago I published a book titled, Test Pattern for Living. (Although long since out of print, it is still available for free downloading, and has maintained its own devoted cult following over the years.)

Bicycling has remained a major part of my life ever since, as a young boy, I started using a bike to deliver the Des Moines Register to my neighbors (a bike the Register enabled me to buy at a discount with my paper route money). Later, in the 1970s, I rode across the state in the RAGBRAI event with Donald Kaul for a number of years, reporting on it for National Public Radio. Today my bicycle is mostly used for commuting and some local trails for exercise and recreation.

So it was natural that any book called Test Pattern for Living would have a chapter on bicycling. And, this being "Bike to Work Week" and all, it seemed appropriate to dust it off and run it in the blog this week.

As life has a way of coming full circle, next month we will be celebrating the publication of my son Gregory Johnson's book, Put Your Life on a Diet -- already in its second printing. Although it is compatible in theme, and also has a chapter on transportation advocating bicycles, it is otherwise unique, very much up-to-date, and grows out of his leadership with the "small house" movement -- as suggested by the book's sub-title: "Lessons Learned Living in 140 Square Feet."

I've made no effort to update the chapter from my book, reproduced below. The late 1960s and early 1970s were a different time from today. So you'll need to update the statistics if you want to use them. And the sentiments are very much 1970s' -- though the conclusions, social and ecological conditions haven't changed all that much. It was a time of political and economic change, and one of my goals was to see if I could help contribute to a year in America in which there would be more bicycles sold than automobiles. (We did it, as you'll see from a quote in what follows.) In the 1970s there was also a good deal of artistic (as well as other) experimentation. It was represented in this book with the fact that the Foreword was sheet music (by Mason Williams) and the chapters consisted of quotes on the even numbered (left hand) pages, and my text on the odd numbered (right hand) pages. As I described that feature in the Introduction,

[A]ny honest author will admit he has drawn heavily from the writings of others. I have emphasized this fact by the use of quotations from diverse sources . . . [One] reason I have emphasized the quotes is that my search involves the discovery of common themes . . .. When different people start saying the same thing -- when a blue-collar worker expresses frustrations similar to those of college students, when the teachings of Buddha are consistent with the insights of psychiatrists, or when ecologists echo the sentiments of poets -- I feel excitement. If you want, you can just read the quotes, and skip my text entirely -- or read it later.

In today's reproduction of the chapter the quotes are indented and blocked and my text goes to the margin. Page numbers are indicated as, e.g., # p. 110 #.

Antidote to Automobiles [Chapter 7]
# p. 110 #

We might have to slow down a little or perhaps even sit quiet occasionally to develop better taste. One can't think very deeply at 70 miles an hour.
-C. E. Warne


My new pattern requires renting new cars at the airports as needed. I am progressively ceasing to own things, not on a political-schism basis, as for instance Henry George's ideology, but simply on a practical basis. Possession is becoming progressively burdensome and wasteful and therefore obsolete.
-R. Buckminster Fuller


When you drive a car, you drive a reflection of your self. And, in the case of the 1971 MGB, it's a reflection of someone very special.
-MG advertisement in Time

# p. 111 #

So far, we have approached alternate life styles almost in terms of hedonism: What feels best for you? What will remove the pain of living in a corporate state -- other than the drug life (whether alcohol, tranquilizers, or others) that only brings more ultimate pain? But what we so often discover is that the very products, activities, and attitudes that make you feel better also have significant social advantages: They use less of our nation's precious natural resources, they pollute less, they make less noise, they add to the pleasure of others, they enable each of us to live in a society in which we can grow in individual worth and fulfillment, they are more aesthetically pleasing, they make for better citizenship, and they are even more economical. Take bicycles, for example.

I ride a bicycle -- not because I hate General Motors but haven't the courage to bomb an auto plant. I don't do it as a gesture of great stoicism and personal sacrifice. I am not even engaged, necessarily, in an act of political protest over that company's responsibility for most of the air pollution by tonnage in the United States. It's like finally giving up cigarettes. You just wake up one morning and realize you don't want to start the day with another automobile. Cigarette smoking is not a pleasure, it's a business. In the same way, you finally come to realize that you don't need General Motors, they need you. They need you to drive their cars for them. You are driving for Detroit and paying them to do it. Automobiles are just a part of your life that's over, that's all. No hard feelings. You've just moved on to something else. From now on you just use their buses, taxis, and rental cars when they suit your

# p. 112 #

The most natural form of locomotion, walking has been In use since before the Invention of the wheel and the discovery of fire. Reliable and totally non-polluting, it offers convenience -- no parking, no cost. Invigorating, it promotes health and gives you the chance to think.
-Paul Swatek


Automobiles insulate man not only from the environment but from human contact as well. They permit only most limited types of interaction, usually competitive, aggressive, and destructive. If people are to be brought together again, given a chance to get acquainted with each other and involved in nature, some fundamental solutions must be found to the problems posed by the automobile.
-Edward T. Hall

ANNOUNCER: Sidney spent Sundays shelling at the seashore. Then Sidney started digging the Mustang -- the great original . . .. Now Sidney's making waves all over. Last week he saved three bathing beauties. (And they all could swim better than Sidney!) Only Mustang makes it happen!
-a television commercial

# p. 113 #

convenience. You don't keep one for them that you have to house, feed and water, insure, and care for.

You ride a bicycle because it feels good. The air feels good on your body; even the rain feels good. The blood starts moving around your body, and pretty soon it gets to your head, and, glory be, your head feels good. You start noticing things. You look until you really see. You hear things, and smell smells, you never knew were there. You start whistling nice little original tunes to suit the moment. Words start getting caught in the web of poetry in your mind. And there's a nice feeling, too, in knowing you're doing a fundamental life thing for yourself: transportation. You got a little bit of your life back! And the thing you use is simple, functional, and relatively cheap. You want one that fits you and rides smoothly, but with proper care and a few parts it should last almost forever. Your satisfaction comes from within you, not from the envy or jealousy of others. (Although you are entitled to feel a little smug during rush hours, knowing you are also making better time than most of the people in cars.)

On those occasions when I am not able to cycle through the parks or along the canal -- because the paths are rough with ice or muddy from rain or melting snow -- bicycling enables me to keep closer to the street people: folks waiting for buses or to cross streets, street sweepers, policemen, school "patrols," men unloading trucks. Needless to say, you cannot claim any depth of understanding as a result of such momentary and chance encounters, but by the time I get to the office I do somehow have the sense that I have a much better feeling for the mood of the city that day than if I had come to my office in a chauffeur-driven government limou-

# p. 114 #

On a different speed scale, bicycles could move 2.8 times as many people per amount of space. If a bicycler can make 10 miles an hour, the car would have to exceed 28 mph to rack up more passenger miles on the same system of streets. But the New York City average speed for cars during rush hour is only 8.5 mph, 13 mph on the feeder roads. It's a fact that today in many cities you can make better time aboard a bicycle than in a car.
-Paul Swatek


Make your second car a bicycle.

Consider the advantages that the bicycle has to offer -- low cost, no pollution, and convenient to park.

For under $50 you can get a bicycle fitted with enough trimmings to make it practical for going shopping and carrying a small child. The cheapest car costs about thirty times that.

A bicycle is also inexpensive to operate, maintain, and insure.

Bicycles are quieter than any form of motorized transportation, produce no pollution, and use up no fuel.

A bicycle takes up about 1/30th the parking space of a car.

In city traffic today, the bicycle is often faster than the car or bus.

Bicycles give the rider the sort of healthy exercise that many Americans usually do not get.

Riding a bicycle makes it possible to get a better appreciation of a beautiful day, or a pleasant ride through the park.

. . . The New York Times quoted a 32-year-old millionaire who pedals up Fifth Avenue to social engagements in a dinner jacket as explaining, "It's much easier than fussing with a chauffeur."
-Paul Swatek

# p. 115 #

sine. Although I am willing to brave the traffic and exhaust, I am aware it is dangerous. I think bicycles ought to be accorded a preferred position in the city's transportation system. At the very least, they deserve an even break.

Notice that bicycle riding also has some significant social advantages over the automobile. Cars unnecessarily kill sixty thousand people every year, permanently maim another one hundred and seventy thousand, and injure three and a half million more. The automobile accounts for at least 60 percent of the total air pollution in the United States by tonnage -- as high as 85 percent in some urban areas -- and 91 percent of all carbon-monoxide pollution; it creates about nine hundred pounds of pollution for every person every year. One million acres of land are paved each year; there is now a mile of road for each square mile of land. The concrete used in our Interstate Highway System would build six sidewalks to the moon. Even so, everyone is familiar with the clogged streets and parking problems -- not to mention the unconscionable rates charged by the parking garages. Automobile transportation is the largest single consumer of the resources used in our nation's total annual output of energy. It is an economic drain on consumers -- in no way aided by auto companies that deliberately build bumpers weaker than they were fifty years ago in order to contribute to an unnecessary bumper-repair bill in excess of one billion dollars annually.

The bicycle is a model citizen, by comparison.

The bicycle does not kill or maim; it does not pollute; it does not deplete natural resources; it makes no noise; it takes a great deal less space; and it is very much cheaper. (You can buy a brand new bicycle for

# p. 116 #

Commuting by bicycle? Is this some kind of put-on? It may sound like a joke to motor-minded America, but in the rest of the world nobody is laughing. In countries that are willing to take it seriously, the bicycle [is] transportation. Switzerland, for example, which traditionally places a high value on peace of mind and purity of air, has more bicycles than automobiles. In Amsterdam -- a national capital with roughly the same population and climatic conditions as Washington, D.C. -- 150,000 people ride bikes to work every day. Hundreds of thousands more commute by bicycle in other European cities. The same is true in much of Africa and Asia.
-Thomas R. Reid, III


This year an estimated 10 million bicycles will be sold, compared to a projected 8.6 million new cars.
-Friends of the Earth

# p. 117 #

little more than what it costs to operate an automobile for two weeks.) Although the bicycle makes a direct assault on four great problems that plague the modern city -- traffic, noise, parking, and pollution -- urban planners have overlooked it in their search for solutions to the urban transportation crisis.

It is more than ironic that America can invest so much stock faith and rhetoric in the competitive marketplace of commerce and yet ignore the "marketplace of ideas" (to use a phrase by Mr. Justice Holmes) by tolerating the television monopoly that is used to merchandise Detroit's peculiar dreams of the appropriate automotive life style -- with all that life style's attendant social ills. My own commission, the Federal Communications Commission, has been instrumental in encouraging broadcasters' censoring off the airwaves the messages from ecology groups (like Friends of the Earth) that would cry out against the urban devastation being wrought by Detroit's automobiles. (The FCC decision, fortunately, has been substantially reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals.) In perhaps one of the greatest advertising overkills of all time, we Americans are being grossly oversold an automotive product and life style (bigger, faster, sexier cars) that we neither need nor may really want, and that will surely eventually kill us with its exhaust by-products and lethargy-induced heart attacks, if it does not get us first in a crash. This may serve the corporate profits of the automotive, oil, steel, cement, and road-building industries, but it is shortchanging the American people.

There are other ways to get around.

# # #

You, too, can have a happy Bike to Work Week -- 52 weeks every year! Try it.