How to Eliminate Police Shootings

How to Eliminate Police Shootings

Nicholas Johnson
Iowa City Press-Citizen (online), July 4, 2020, p. A6
In 2010, I suggested a way to eliminate the cost of college. In 2013, it was "How to Totally Eliminate Flood Damage." Earlier this year, it was "How to Eliminate COVID-19."

Today, it's "How to Eliminate Police Shootings."

Iceland is the world’s 15th most armed country per capita. Yet a police shooting in 2013 was that nation’s first.

There were 461 "justifiable homicides" by U.S. police in 2013, but not one in the United Kingdom.

Data from Ireland, New Zealand and 12 Pacific island nations is similar.

How can this be? What are they doing?

Their formula isn't complicated. It turns out that it is virtually impossible for a police officer without a gun to shoot people. (In rare situations, an officer may check out a gun for a given assignment, after which it’s returned.)

Just as a gun in the home is many times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder, arming police apparently creates more gun violence than it prevents.

Doesn't this impose greater risk on those officers? Apparently not. A 2004 survey revealed 82% of British police did not want to be armed, even though one-third had sometimes feared for their lives. Less than one-fourth of Irish police are even qualified to use a gun.

Maybe begin with a community policing trial. Maybe we’d first need to remove the causes of crime, poverty and systemic racism from the U.S. But, shucks, we ought to be doing that anyway.

— Nicholas Johnson, Iowa City

# # #

Rational Thought About Realistic Needs: Police & Fire

January 15, 2007, 1:30 p.m.

"How Many Police Officers and Fire Fighters Does It Take To . . ."
The Gazette reports this morning that the Iowa City Council is supporting an expansion of the local police and fire department staffing (and budgets). Gregg Hennigan, "I.C. council agrees to hire more city firefighters, police officers," The Gazette, January 15, 2008, p. A1. Little questioning, let alone opposition, was reported.

By contrast, in its editorial this morning [Jan. 15] regarding a legislative proposal to invest an additional $240 million of Iowa taxpayers' money in "new and bigger prisons" the Register concludes:

If Iowa has learned anything from this experience [with prisons] it should be that there are cheaper and more effective alternatives to confining criminal offenders in highly secure prisons. . . . Iowa lawmakers have a lot of questions to answer before going on a prison building boom. Here are two: Is this necessary? And, what else will they do to avoid another building boom down the road?

Editorial, "Does Iowa Really Need Prison Building Boom?" Des Moines Register, January 15, 2008.

It's an approach worth applying to any proposed public expenditure.

To avoid an imminent lynching, let me make a couple points clear at the outset.

I like the police and fire fighters. There were times in my life when I wanted to join the ranks of both.

The functions performed by both clearly lie at the top of the list of primary governmental responsibilities -- as virtually any day's news out of Baghdad makes clear.

I have no problem paying my share of however much is needed in increased taxes to cover the costs of the most appropriate number of both.

OK?

So all I am addressing is the analytical adequacy of whatever process the City Council went through in coming to these conclusions.

1. There is no "right" number, no precise and firm way of saying what we "need," and whether whatever that need may be the numbers being urged by the Chief, and considered by the Council, are too high or too low.

2. Whatever the answer may be, the question involves what system analysts call a "peak load problem" (decisions in business, for example, involving a balance between the excessive cost of always having enough on hand of, say, shopping carts in a supermarket (many of which will be unused for most of the 168 hours each week), on the one hand, and the prospect of lost business during those hours of peak shopping cart demand if the investment in the excess carts is not made). Whatever the number of police officers and fire fighters we have, during any given hour of the 8760 hours each year, we will almost always have either fewer than we need or more than we need. Moreover, (a) the times of peak load cannot be precisely predicted, and (b) presumably all would agree that we "cannot afford" to keep hundreds on the payroll at all times in order to be adequately staffed during some worst case scenario when they really all would be needed once every ten or fifty years.

3. A fully trained and outfitted police officer with a car to match is not cheap. Are there situations in which "less is more" -- for example, what we already do with police on foot or on bicycle? Are there functions he or she is performing that could be done more cheaply by others? Police officers used to be responsible for parking, tickets, and parking meter collections. Are we any less safe today since those functions have been handed off to others? Are there functions performed inside the station house that could be handled by other than police officers? We have 73 officers. If they work 2000 hours a year (50 weeks times 40 hours) that's 146,000 hours. How are those hours allocated among the tasks performed? How does that compare with other communities generally, or other college communities? If we had another, say, 10 officers (20,000 hours) what would the task and time implications of that be?

4. The problem of "overcrowded prisons" would be solved instantly if we'd treat alcohol and drug problems in "drug courts" instead of incarcerating drug users and if we'd stop throwing the mentally ill in prison instead of mental hospitals. Are there similar approaches to our police work that could radically reduce the necessary numbers of police officers (for example -- though I'm not in favor of it -- if we'd go all the way with our lack of concern about underage binge drinkers and leave it entirely, rather than just mostly, for bar owners to self-police)?

5. Whether or not we build more fire stations, what else can we do? As for fire department's "response time" I'm informed that little to no attention has been given to the problem of railroad trains blocking roads. It makes little difference how close the fire house is if your house is on the other side of a parked train from the fire truck. It wouldn't be that complicated to have an automated, computerized communication system from the railroads to a central fire department dispatching desk indicating which roads are blocked and which are open. So far as I know nothing has been done to create such a system (or a viable alternative accomplishing the same thing). There was once a community with a municipally owned cable TV system that attached smoke detectors in every home to the network (along with automatic water meter reading). As a result homeowners' fire insurance rates were cut in half -- along with a speed up, one would assume, in fire department response time. Are there other things besides additional fire stations that we might do to improve response time? And what is the "optimum (and affordable) response time" anyway?

6. The City Council is looking at comparative numbers on the number of police officers per 1000 population in various communities. That is certainly one useful relative benchmark. Is it the best? Might it be more relevant to consider communities with crime statistics more similar to ours? Or demographic makeup of the population? Or college towns about our size (Ames has fewer officers per 1000 population than Iowa City)?

I'm not looking for an impossible-to-achieve precision. What I would like to satisfy myself exists is an analysis of our needs that goes beyond "security is very important; the police chief says he needs more police officers; therefore, I think we should give him some" and "gee, we really need another fire station for northeast Iowa City in order to improve response time."

# # #

The Limits of Duct Tape

January 9, 2008, 5:30 p.m.; January 10, 2008, 7:00 a.m.

Volvos and Violence
For years -- and probably well over 100,000 miles -- I drove a 1963 Volvo that had nearly 200,000 miles on it when I bought it from a friend for $300 in the 1970s.

The engine was fine and would be running still, but for the rust that caused my mechanic to finally refuse to continue work on it out of concern for my safety.

I sanded. I painted. It never helped much, and any superficial improvements quickly vanished.

Because the rust was not on the surface. It was from within.

This experience occurred to me this morning as an apt analogy when reading Heiu Pham, "Schools Talk Next Steps for Safety," Iowa City Press-Citizen, January 9, 2007, p. A1.

Having served on the school board, I have sufficient confidence in the ICCSD administration and board to believe that they will acquire and apply, if not the most expensive, certainly an adequate variety of good quality duct tape and paint to the violence in our two conventional high schools, City and West: more and brighter lighting, video cameras, ID badges, and locks on the doors.

This is commendable. Besides they have to "do something" -- and what it looks like they are going to do is to take these conventional and widely advocated steps that are unlikely to generate much opposition, along with the possibility of armed guards, metal detectors, and locking up those students who misbehave.

But none of these approaches will do anything to even slow, let alone stop, the increasing internal "rust" in our conventional high schools that take the form of violence.

The fact is, we have deliberately created these rusting high schools. We knew what we were doing. We were told one of the consequences would be increased violence. Why did we do it anyway? For a lot of reasons -- including a desire to maintain a record of winning football teams.

And what is it I'm talking about?

I'm talking about the fact that, handed $40 million by taxpayers, the ICCSD Administration and Board decided to spend it to make our two conventional high schools even larger rather than build more, smaller high schools. The data is overwhelming that, as high schools increase in size above about 600 students there is a related increase not only in violence but in dropouts, absences, alcohol and drug abuse, bullying, graffiti, teen pregnancy, and other behavior we find disturbing -- not to mention, often, a decline in academic performance.

They are behaviors, not incidentally, involving and affecting all socio-economic classes.

It's not always true that "you get what you pay for" (as Consumer Reports has been pointing out for 70 years). But this is one instance in which it is. We paid $40 million, we increased the size of our high schools notwithstanding the warnings that we were buying increased levels of violence, and we got what we paid for.

Want more?

I've written about the subject more than once before, most recently in Nicholas Johnson, "What's the Answer to High School Violence?" in "Violence at City and West High," December 15, 2007, 7:00 p.m. I won't repeat it all again here today.

But I do wish the Board and Administration would give more attention to building schools that won't rust from the inside, and less to the duct tape and paint.
_______________
[Jan 10.] Interested in K-12 issues generally? Take a look at Editorial, "Look to Lauded Schools for Improvement Ideas," Des Moines Register, January 10, 2008; and the detailed professional evaluation of K-12 education state-by-state in Education Week, "Quality Counts 2008: Tapping Into Teaching/Unlocking the Key to Student Success/State Highlights Reports," Education Week, January 10, 2008.

# # #

Violence at City and West High

December 15, 2007, 7:00 p.m.

What's the Answer to High School Violence?
The Press-Citizen continues this morning (Dec. 15) its reporting of the story of concern over increased levels of violence in our high schools. Lee Hermiston, "Schools discuss how to deal with rising violence; Officials ask why students are fighting, bringing drugs to school," Iowa City Press-Citizen, December 15, 2007. Editorial, "Violence in Our Schools Needs to be Stopped," Iowa City Press-Citizen, December 13, 2007.

Iowa City's reactions so far are normal and conventional: "What we need are police in the high schools, "zero-tolerance" policies, maybe metal detectors and video cameras in the halls -- but definitely a get-tough attitude."

My view is that such proposals only address symptoms, not underlying causes.

I was going to write a lengthy blog entry on the causes and cures for school violence, and began the Internet research, only to discover from that research, as is occasionally the case, that I'd already written, not only a blog entry, but an earlier op ed column on the subject. Nicholas Johnson, "In School: There Are Alternatives to Calling the Police" in "K-12 Alternatives to Calling Police," July 2, 2007; and Nicholas Johnson, "Smaller Schools Are Better," Iowa City Press-Citizen, "Opinion," August 28, 2001, p. 9A (available online here).

So, rather than reconstruct what I've already written (and probably not as well), I'm simply reprinting that blog entry from July 2007 and column from August 2001.

But not before sharing a quote from, and link to, an excellent article my research also uncovered. It reviews the literature regarding the impact of school size upon a whole range of qualities of education (and comes complete with dozens of citations to research and data). This small excerpt from that paper addresses only the relationship of school size to levels of violence:

Vandalism and violence are additional elements of the processes of schools. The level of violence in our schools was a public concern long before the 1998 Columbine High School shootings. A recent report of the Departments of Education and Justice (Kaufman, Chen, Choy, Ruddy, Miller, Fleury, Chandler, Rand, Klaus, & Planty, 2000) portrays the degree to which one can expect to see higher incidences of violence against both students and teachers as school size increases. Michael Klonsky, of the Small Schools Workshop, commented on the findings (2000) on the Workshop'’s national listserve:

According to the study, incidents of violence and crime increase dramatically in schools with 1,000 or more students as compared with those of 300 or less. In urban schools with less than 300 students, for example, 3.9% of the schools reported serious violent incidents compared with 32.9% of schools over 1,000 students. In other words, if we keep building big schools, we are increasing the chance of a Littleton [Columbine’s city]-type incident by nearly 10 times.

Tom Gregory, "School Reform and the No-Man's-Land of High School Size," December 2000, p. 6.

In short, we (school boards in general and Iowa City's in particular) have deliberately chosen to build, and to expand in size, high schools that we knew, or should have known, would be more violent. Now we are beginning to pay the price for those choices.

This became an issue when I was serving as a member of the ICCSD School Board. The Board was proposing a $40 million bond issue (ultimately passed). I tried to impress on all who would but listen the kinds of research and data that Tom Gregory amasses in his paper.

As high schools increase in size, so do absences and numbers of drop outs; alcohol and other drug abuse; graffiti and property damage; bullying, fights and violence; sexual harassment and teen pregnancy. Most studies also support one's intuition that smaller schools produce smarter students -- greater interest in learning and academic achievement as well as higher percentages of students participating in extra-curricular activities.

(The related, so-called "schools within schools" approach, which we're trying at West, tends to be much less effective than separate small schools.)

To me, it was a no-brainer: You need room for more high school students? Don't expand the size of schools that are already too large. Put your money into more, smaller high schools.

But "local control of schools" means that no school district is compelled to apply "best practices" in its schools. And Iowa City followed the lead of the vast majority of the nation's school districts that have ignored the experts' advice regarding the benefits of smaller high schools. The nostalgia of sending one's children to the high school one attended, the self interest of administrators and teachers, coupled with the passion for winning football teams has been too much for most boards (including ours) to overcome.

And so we are left with the two large and conventional high schools we've paid millions to expand (plus our smaller, more successful (by these standards) alternative high school, Tate) -- and a growing concern about the increasing levels of violence that have resulted, though to the surprise of no one who's read the literature.

All that follows, then, is from my earlier blog entry (which included the op ed column on the subject):

# # #
In School: There Are Alternatives to Calling the Police
[July 2, 2007]

"The number of police calls to area schools has increased sharply in recent years, according to the Sixth Judicial District Juvenile Delinquency Annual Statistical Report.

The report, which includes Johnson County, shows that police responded to 563 complaints within the Iowa City School District."

Rob Daniel, "Police calls to schools on the rise; Report: 563 complaints in district," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 2, 2007

The column that follows was published in 2001. My commentary about today's school news, and why I thought of this old column in that connection, follows the column.

Smaller Schools Are Better
Nicholas Johnson
Iowa City Press-Citizen, "Opinion," August 28, 2001, p. 9A
(available online here)
What do these prestigious organizations have in common?

Annenberg Foundation, Carnegie Corporation, Center for Collaborative Education, Center for School Change, Gates Foundation, Harvard’s Change Leadership Group, Open Society Institute, Pew Charitable Trusts, and the U.S. Department of Education’s Smaller Learning Communities Program.

Give up?

Each believes smaller is better. Not smaller class sizes. Smaller high schools of 400 to 600 students each.

Many are willing to bet millions of dollars they’re right; $200 million from Gates alone. They have enough data to prove it that, says one, “it seems morally questionable not to act on it.”

In New York’s worst school district, an East Harlem secondary school is one of the city’s best. It graduates 90 percent. And it’s reduced violence without metal detectors. How?

Former Secretary of Education Richard Riley asked top security experts how to improve school safety. Question: Was their top recommendation metal detectors, more police in hallways, or video monitors? Answer: None of the above. It was smaller schools.

I graduated from University High School with 40 classmates in 1952. Then seven percent of high schools had over 1,000 students. Today two-thirds of all high school students attend such schools – including ours.

Smaller schools reduce students’ estrangement. They nurture a sense of belonging. And safety is only one of the benefits.

Smaller schools have better attendance rates, fewer dropouts, more academic achievement and extracurricular participation, more college-bound. Students feel closer bonds with teachers. Teachers with each other.

There are dozens of proposals for improving high schools. Even summaries require something closer to 650 volumes than 650 words. But smaller size is a good beginning.

John Carver says most school boards are incompetent groups of competent people along a continuum from micro-managing at one end to rubber-stamping at the other. All such boards can hope for is to do the wrong things better.

Competent and caring high school teachers confront a comparable dilemma. The system processes 150 students a day along a conveyor belt through their classrooms. They must function with a curriculum and classrooms designed to produce the assembly line workers of a bygone industrial age.

It is not teachers’ fault that, like board members, all they can hope for is to do the wrong things better.

They may be the best source of ideas on how to fix this system, but all the community’s stakeholders must have ownership. And decisions have to come from school boards and administrators.

Our superintendent, Lane Plugge, now chairs Iowa’s Urban Education Network. It’s just stepped up to the plate with a new book-length report titled Redefinition of High School – one of the 650 volumes anyone who cares about these issues ought to read.

The individual authors of its 12 chapters each focus on an issue. Waterloo’s superintendent, Arlis Swartzendruber, cites our school board’s contribution to concepts of board governance. Our own Pam Ehly and Bill Dutton propose “instructional strategies” that if read, understood and implemented would solve many high schools’ problems.

Many chapters note the value of smaller schools.

We’re not about to tear down City and West High and build eight new high schools of 400 each. So how can we gain similar benefits? It’s called “schools within schools.” Four teams of teachers in each. Four “schools” of students with their own portion of a building.

Athletic and music groups continue to draw from all four. Theaters and cafeterias are shared. It’s a best-of-all-possible-worlds win-win. Shared facilities and administration mean lower costs. Smaller schools produce better relationships and climate – and more learning.

Dr. Plugge has thrown an added starter into the board’s consideration of boundaries and educational opportunities: a redefinition, and possible physical redesign, of our high schools.

Architects need to know if clients want a cathedral or a tractor barn. So we’ve begun the process of redefinition.

Now every district stakeholder needs to participate in planning what will, hopefully, include the benefit of smaller schools.
_______________

Nicholas Johnson is an Iowa City School Board member. More information is available on his Web site www.nicholasjohnson.org.

# # #
The Answer is Blowing in the Cyberspace As the organizations cited in this column have concluded, the data is pretty convincing -- and support one's natural intuition -- that as high school size increases above an optimum (around 650 students) there is an increase in bullying, vandalism, teen pregnancy, graffiti, fights, alcohol and drug abuse, absenteeism and dropouts. It only makes sense.

Is manageable size a cure-all? Of course not. But it stands to reason that where a student is known by name by teachers and classmates alike, where adult mentoring becomes logistically possible, where everyone can participate in student activities (rather than just an athletically or musically gifted elite), that social constraints, rather than the presence of police officers, can be a major factor in controlling behavior.

As any regular reader of this blog knows, I'm a big fan of the Internet. It provides public access to orders of magnitude more material than most towns' public libraries can offer their patrons (in hard copy). It permits much more flexible and through searching than hard copy reference works. And it retrieves the material at orders of magnitude faster speeds.

Are there drawbacks? Of course. We don't do a very good job of training students (or ourselves) in effective Google searching techniques, so Internet research experiences are sometimes more frustrating and less fruitful than they could be. And just as everything in hard copy books needs to be verified and confirmed, so sorting through the Internet's content -- open as it is to submissions by anyone -- requires even greater sophistication by users.

During the three years I served on the local school board I wrote a column every two weeks for the Press-Citizen. The column above is one of them. (Links to the full collection can be found here.) Although I had first hand knowledge as a student in the University of Iowa's experimental schools (University Elementary and University High School in a building now called "North Hall") I never attended a College of Education. So I spent a lot of time surfing the Internet while looking for ideas for the columns.

And what I discovered was a variation on Ralph Nader's observation that, "This country has more problems than it deserves and more solutions than it applies." I finally concluded that, with 15,000 school districts in this country, it was likely that there was no problem confronting any given one of them that had not formerly been confronted by another school district (1) identified, (2) addressed, (3) resolved, and (4) written up and made available on the Internet.

When we were considering the $40 million bond issue I noted that the need for that money and additional buildings (at that time) could have been avoided by applying the concept of "cluster schools" for our elementary schools. (Such an approach would also have eliminated, or radically reduced, the problem of disparity in class size.) Had we followed the recommendations of the National Commission on the High School Senior Year for our high schools we could have instantaneously eliminated all of their "overcrowding" and any need for expansion. I noted at the same time the advantages, if additional high school space was to be created anyway, of building high schools for 650 rather than expanding the populations in the two conventional high schools we had. (Tate was deliberately designed for fewer students.)

[Alas, it appears that the National Commission's report is no longer available online. However, a preliminary report and summary is available: The Lost Opportunity of Senior Year: Finding a Better Way, January 2001.]

With "local control of schools" school administrators, parents and taxpayers have the legal and political right to ignore such advice. If they are willing to pay $40 million for the privilege -- and the result is not otherwise criminal or illegal -- they can do whatever they want with their money. And I support local control of schools -- even when it results in plans and policies more driven by their impact on our competitive athletic teams' records than the entire student body's academic records. That's the stakeholders' right.

But there are consequences to those decisions that go well beyond their financial costs.

And our district's school board and administration now confront many comparable decisions as they are coming into the millions of additional dollars to be provided by our local 20% hike in sales taxes.

Prevention is almost always cheaper and more satisfactory than treatment.

Call the cops if you must.

But it seems to me that once you've let things get to the point that you need an Iraq-like surge of additional police in your school it's already too late. You've already lost that battle.

# # #

Management by Disaster

October 4, 2007, 10:30 a.m.

Management by Disaster
Yesterday and the day before I was handing out awards for creative innovations in management. Nicholas Johnson, "Rational Economic Thought," October 2, 2007, 6:30, 10:00 a.m.; October 3, 2007, 7:15 a.m. (addition of Fire Chief Rocca's proposal).

Today's Gazette happens to contain four stories that illustrate the opposite. All share a common failing among administrators. It's what I call "management by disaster":

Cindy Hadish, "UI: Hospital Deficiencies Corrected," The Gazette, October 4, 2007, p. A1 (the original source was Clark Kauffman, "Violations found at U of I Hospitals; Inspectors: Errors imperiled patients; 9 deaths were not reported," Des Moines Register, October 3, 2007)

Erica Binegar, "Joensy's Owner Says Inspection Exaggerated; Solon Restaurant Ordered Closed by Health Department," The Gazette, October 4, 2007, p. B1

Rick Smith, "C.R. Police Morale 'Extremely Low,'" The Gazette, October 4, 2007, p. B1

"Airlines Mishandling Most Baggage in 20 Years," The Gazette, October 4, 2007, p. B9 (reprinted from the Washington Post; see Jonathan Mummolo and Del Quentin Wilber, "Now Arriving At Carousel 1, Far Fewer Of Your Bags," Washington Post, October 1, 2007, p. A1)

Now it is not my purpose to target any given individual for judgment with words or phrases such as incompetent, should be fired, ignorant, nobody cares, lazy, etc. To the extent possible I won't even mention anyone by name. Not only is it not very effective to engage in such criticism, but to draw such judgmental conclusions from the scattered information that can fit in a newspaper story is not likely to be well informed, fair or accurate.

Besides, it would run directly counter to the larger point I'm trying to make. I don't think the subjects dealt with in these stories are insignificant. But my focus is on the lessons they teach for everyone with administrative and managerial responsibilities, not the details of these four stories.

And those lessons are that "management by disaster" is (a) all too common, and (b) guaranteed to produce a continuing stream of disasters.

Management by disaster is waiting for 9/11 to occur before taking Ralph Nader's advice from decades earlier that airline cockpit doors should be strengthened.

Management by disaster is waiting to be overwhelmed with calls from angry parents about kids not being picked up by the school bus before putting procedures in place that require bus companies to demonstrate, before school opens, that they can run the routes in an accurate and timely fashion.

Management by disaster is responding -- after a Virginia Tech slaughter -- with improved communication on the nation's campuses. (And, at Iowa's universities, with the emotional enthusiasm for bringing more weapons onto campuses -- a "solution" at best totally irrelevant and at worst counter productive.)

Management by disaster is being more concerned about adverse public relations than what it is you're getting the adverse public relations about.

Do you remember the shocking revelations -- including pictures -- from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq? Here's what I wrote about it at the time:

Given that Red Cross spokesperson Antonella Notari has said, "The photos are certainly shocking, but our reports are worse," how can one account for the administration's failure to respond to those reports?

As Secretary Rumsfeld testified before the Senate, "It is the photographs, the people running around with digital cameras."

The problem, in short, was the public relations impact on American citizens (and possibly the president's re-election), and on Iraqis' "hearts and minds." The problem was not our pre-interrogation techniques, the problem was the pictures of those techniques. No cameras, no problem.

Before we get too shocked about this administrative response we need to reflect. Just how unusual is it?

Think back over publicized scandals involving deaths in hospitals, unsafe products, journalists' fraudulent stories, tobacco companies' lies, sexual abuse in the church, manufacturers' toxic dumps, or universities' athletic programs. How often have they involved facts well known to top administrators for some time? Or, if not known, facts that would have been known with even rudimentary monitoring and management information systems?

Nicholas Johnson, "Lessons from Abu Ghraib," The Daily Iowan, May 11, 2004.

One of this morning's stories, as it happens, does involve "deaths in hospitals."

Bear in mind, I'm not talking about disasters that would have taken the best-trained MBA by surprise. That can happen to anyone. I'm talking about pretty basic stuff that could have been, and should have been, anticipated.

Apparently the regulations involving the reporting of deaths of patients in restraints or in seclusion have been in place since January of 2007. (Does one really need a "regulation" before feeling a responsibility to report such a death?) Nine patients covered by this regulation have died; apparently none of the deaths were reported.

Somewhere between 25% and 40% of the patients in hospitals are suffering from what is called "iatrogenic" disease. And what is that? My dictionary says an iatrogenic disease is a disease "induced in a patient by a physician's activity, manner, or therapy. Used especially of an infection or other complication of treatment." In other words it's a condition caused by doctors and hospitals -- the roughly one-third of medical professionals who don't wash their hands thoroughly after using the restroom; prescribing or dispensing the wrong medicine, or quantity; rooms that haven't been adequately cleaned; amputating the wrong limb, or from the wrong patient. These causes are well known and have been for years. But so are the cures. This is not rocket science -- though it is medical science -- and dramatic improvements have been reported in hospitals that have taken the matter seriously -- before their negligence made the front pages of local papers.

Keeping track of everything going on in one of the nation's largest hospital complexes is one thing. (The UIHC represents a major share of the UI's 16.4 million square feet of building space.)

Keeping track of the sanitary conditions in one's modest-sized restaurant is another. Once again, the motivation ought not be concern about the adverse public relations -- not to mention loss of business as a result of being closed down by the Department of Public Health. A restaurant owner should want to maintain healthy conditions when handling and preparing food as a matter of quality control and avoidance of harm to customers -- as well as just having a more pleasant environment for owners and employees in which to work.

I don't have time, space or inclination to report everything a consultant uncovered and reported about the Cedar Rapids Police Department. Read the story. Once again, the point is that most of the problems that were uncovered could have been dealt with long before they were spread across the pages of the local paper.

And, not incidentally, the Iowa City City Council ought to want to review very carefully this experience and report from Cedar Rapids -- as well as the information about cities elsewhere that's available on the Internet -- before willy-nilly just increasing the number of Iowa City's police officers. There are loads of things that can and should be done first -- whether we add additional officers or not.

The airline baggage story is similar. In 2002 there were 3.84 reports of mishandled bags for every 1000 passengers. In July of 2007 there were twice that: 7.93 per 1000 passengers. This is another case in which management can't claim to be surprised. Lost luggage has been the subject of both furor and humor for years. And as the statistics indicate, things are apparently not getting better. Why would management want to wait for the embarrassment of the publicity surrounding this report from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics before taking action?

A CEO's participation in conferences, dinners, travel, speeches, and golf matches may or may not make a contribution to an institution's success. But they are not the CEO's primary responsibility.

There's a reason why CEOs are paid the big bucks -- some 450 times what they agree to pay their employees. They may believe in MBWA (management by walking around) or they may have MIS (management information reporting systems) in place -- or both. But whatever systems they employ they are responsible for being proactive, for anticipating problems (and opportunities), for putting procedures in place and then monitoring to make sure they're being followed.

You don't need an MBA and a multi-million-dollar salary to react to disasters on the fly, trying to make the best of a public relations black eye, and then locking all the doors on the barns that used to hold the horses.

Management by disaster may be widely practiced, but it's still "one hell of a way to run a railroad" -- a hospital, restaurant, police department, or airline.

# # #

Corporate Naming, Guns and Mason

August 10, 2007, 9:00, 11:50 a.m.

President Mason Foreshadows Positions on Guns, Naming
One week on the job and our new president -- who has elsewhere said she'll be listening for three to six months before weighing in on current issues -- is serving breakfast to the media at the president's residence and dropping clues as to her positions.

Guns. Although President Mason said, "I am not a fan of guns," here's what else Erin Jordan heard, and reported:

University of Iowa President Sally Mason seems to be leaning toward a recommendation that campus police officers be armed.

"I have not been on a campus before where officers aren't armed," said Mason, who was Purdue University provost before coming to the U of I. "Iowa has had shootings on this campus before, so clearly someone is armed."

. . . "Imagine what he (the shooter) [at Virginia Tech] would have done in the 30 minutes it would have taken them (officers) to go back and get their guns," Mason said.

I don't know how you read that, but it sounds to me like the UI campus police are going to get their wish.

Brian Morelli reported,

UI President Sally Mason said she found it "curious" that UI police don't carry guns. "I have not been on a campus where campus police had not been armed. That was curious to me," she said.

(President Mason's use of "curious" is somehow reminiscent of Regents President Michael Gartner's use of "interesting" -- a suggestion of disapproval buried in an opportunity for subsequent disavowal.)

There is, of course, another view. A Register letter writer draws upon his own experience at Iowa State in opposing armed campus police. Aaron Hurd, "Arming Campus Police Counterproductive," Des Moines Register, August 7, 2007 ("In fact, the absence of firearms on campus makes DPS more effective; it forces DPS and the students to become partners in keeping campus safe.").

And I've noted in other blog entries the Kent State massacre and Iowa City's Shaw shooting as examples involving armed police and national guard that are consistent with the statistics involving guns in the home. Apparently guns in the home are 16 times more likely to end up causing injury or death to family members than to hostile intruders. What are we to say regarding the deaths of innocent citizens, or students, shot by armed police? Are they, like the tens of thousands of innocent dead and injured civilians in Iraq, just the price we're willing to pay for our "safety and security"?

I've talked at length with police who have unanimously expressed a desire to be armed. Given their occasional need to deal with not very nice people who are (or who may be) armed (drunk and dangerous) the desire for as much security and protection as possible is easily understandable.

Just remember that the answer to this issue is not a slam dunk. There are few instances where having had armed police would have saved lives. (The fact that Virginia Tech's campus police were armed may make the campus community feel more secure, but it didn't make the victims any less dead.) President Mason is right, "Iowa has had shootings on this campus before, so clearly someone is armed." But my belief (I haven't checked the facts) is that had UI police been armed on that occasion it wouldn't have prevented those deaths, either.

Bottom line: (1) The occasions when having armed campus police could actually save lives during the kinds of shootings campuses and schools have witnessed are rare indeed. (2) There is a very real risk that arming campus police will actually increase the likelihood of campus gun deaths (e.g., deliberate and accidental shootings by the police; guns stolen from police during a scuffle and subsequently fired; an increased felt need by those with criminal intent to carry guns to protect themselves from the campus police). (My belief -- again not recently checked against the facts -- is that gun deaths in Great Britain actually increased after the formerly-unarmed police began carrying guns.)

Corporate naming. On the other hand, Brian Morelli reports President Mason sounded a little more open to those opposing the naming of colleges for corporations:

On the Wellmark controversy, Mason said UI should not be soliciting gifts where there is a quid pro quo arrangement and said the issue of corporate naming had not been sufficiently vetted before the issue surfaced.

"UI shouldn't be accepting gifts if there is something more expected other than to be good stewards of the gift," she said.

She said it would not be "a good thing" to establish a name that faculty don't like.

She said much of the fuss stems from the emotional attachment to the name "Wellmark" rather than the real issue -- corporate naming. She said those issues need to be separated and the naming policy should be fully discussed.

This sounds like she's open to a policy prohibiting the naming of colleges (and even buildings) for corporations. I have often argued here that we need to separate out the Wellmark controversy and first address the more general issues: university-corporate ties generally, including the naming of anything, from chairs to the university itself. To what extent are the UI's stakeholders willing to assume a role as a subsidiary corporation to the Fortune 500 -- either as a matter of principle ("it's perfectly OK, what we ought to be doing and want to be doing in this corporate, for-profit 21st Century"), or as a matter of "revenue is needed" and principle be damned.

The Register's report of the chronology regarding the Wellmark naming offers some new insights.

As reported last week, Public Health Dean Jim Merchant had praised the gift, and U of I officials had drafted a news release to announce the $15 million gift in June.

"I had to stop them because the foundation board hadn't taken any official action on the gift yet. Thus, you can see why the later outrage from the faculty and the dean ... let alone editorial writers and bloggers ... is really odd," [Wellmark Foundation Executive Director Cliff] Gold wrote.

"The faculty had actually met and approved the gift, was ready to issue a press release, and it had been blessed by the president's office and vetted with the leadership of the regents. Then ... boom!"

"The outrage or change of heart at the college seems to have been caused by the official action taken from the foundation board of directors, which asked that the name be the Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield College of Public Health 'or something similar' (that's what the actual motion that was approved said) while the dean preferred the Wellmark Foundation College of Public Health or just the Wellmark College of Public Health. The issue was never whether the Wellmark corporate name would be on the college."

Gold said foundation and university officials never had a chance to discuss the "or something similar" before the faculty protested.

David Elbert and Lynn Hicks, "Biz Buzz: Wellmark 'perplexed' by U of I name snafu," Des Moines Register, August 7, 2007.

Dean Merchant. Marvin Pomerantz has called for President Mason to fire College of Public Health Dean Jim Merchant. Morelli reports,

Mason said deans report to the provost, and she has no intention of firing Merchant. "It is not on my priority list," she said.

If I were Merchant I'd like the "no intention of firing" comment, but wonder about the "priority list." Was that a jocular, understated bit of humor? Hopefully; otherwise it comes across as, "I might get around to it at some point, but it is not one of the most important things I have to focus on right now" -- which doesn't ring with as much "You're doing a heck of a job, Brownie" as an official under siege might wish for from a university (or United States) president.

Hero Hogan's Replacement. Diane Heldt reports:

Mason . . . said she hopes to appoint an interim provost by Sept. 1. . . . A search committee will be appointed and Mason thinks a provost could be named by early spring. The search will be open and include campus involvement, she said."

UIHC Reorganization and the Athletic Program's Ties to Organized Gambling Industry. There may have been no questions about the UIHC reorganization and the UI partnership with the Riverside gambling casino. There may have been questions but no answers. There may have been questions, but with answers "off the record." Or there may have been answers that were simply not reported by the three papers covering the event. But as of this morning we know no more than we knew yesterday about her views on these equally controversial subjects.

Here are the links to the Jordan, Heldt and Morelli stories:

Erin Jordan, "U of I Leader May Support Arming Police," Des Moines Register, August 10, 2007

Brian Morelli, "Mason: Gunless police is 'curious'; Says she'll stay out of BTN/Mediacom dispute," Iowa City Press-Citizen, August 10, 2007, p. A3

Diane Heldt, "Calm discourse urged on corporate naming; New UI president says issue deserves thorough discussion," The Gazette, August 10, 2007, p. A1.

# # #

The Terrible TIFs

July 26, 2007, 6:30, 7:30, 8:15, 10:30 a.m.

They're Back: The Terrible TIFs
Hieu Pham, "Company seeks tax rebate for expansion; Alpla of Iowa Inc. would create 25 new jobs in return," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 26, 2007, p. A1

Nicholas Johnson, "Taxes: Categories of Inquiry" in "UI Held Hostage Day 490 - Search & Taxes," May 26, 2007 (including link to, excerpts from, and discussion of Peter S. Fisher, "No Tax Relief Until We See TIF Reform," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 26, 2008, p. A11)

Nicholas Johnson, "It's Not About 'Taxes,'" October 24, 2006

Nicholas Johnson, "More on Corporate Welfare from 'Hat's Off' Winner," October 22, 2006

Nicholas Johnson, "Call the Cops: $3.755 Million Robbery in Progress," October 18, 2006

Nicholas Johnson, "Understanding TIFs (Revised 10/6/06)," October 5, 2007

Nicholas Johnson, "Why Do They Hate America?" October 4, 2006

I've had it with the Iowa City City Council and TIFs. I'm going to do my best to see to it that anyone running for council who persists in continuing to take Iowa City taxpayers' money and give it to wealthy, supposedly "free private enterprise" for-profit corporations -- while denying it to their competitors, not to mention needed social programs -- is prevented from serving on the City Council.

As the links above indicate, I've been writing about the issues of corporate welfare in this blog for nearly a year.

I'm not going to repeat all the arguments from Iowa's best economists, along with my own. If you're interested, they're laid out clearly in those blog entries.

But I have yet to have any member of the City Council -- or anyone else for that matter -- respond to each of those arguments, rationally, with data, one at a time.

TIFs are worse than the proposed indoor Iowa rain forest project.

While I'm not going to repeat all the arguments and data that demolish the utility and propriety of TIFs -- indeed, I'm not even going to try to summarize them -- I will offer a sampling:

TIFs are not necessary for Iowa City and surrounding communities. We're not exactly going through a depression, with store fronts boarded up, unemployment around 40%, or other justifications for early New Deal-type programs.

Their "opportunity costs" are enormous for local property taxpayers and local governments. County Supervisor Rod Sullivan estimates they are currently taking some $700 million worth of business property off the tax rolls. That means both more taxes for the rest of us and cuts in needed programs.

TIFs tilt the playing field, are unfair to business, and cause imbalance in the free market. Why the business community doesn't rise up in righteous wrath over TIFs has always amazed me. It's tough enough out there in that free market jungle, what with competition from the likes of Wal-Mart and comparably advantaged businesses, government regulations that sometimes seem a wee bit irrational, and the unforeseeable challenges. It just seems so fundamentally unfair that, on top of all that, a business person should have to compete with someone who is handed the kind of competitive advantage represented by a TIF or other government subsidy. Talk about a "level playing field"! TIFs really upset a smoothly working free market -- and to no one's real advantage except for the lucky recipient of the taxpayers' largess.

There's no evidence that Iowa City's economy and development won't continue to expand at a satisfactory rate driven by nothing more than the forces of the marketplace -- entrepreneurs, investors, venture capitalists, banks and other loaning institutions.

TIFs (and other shifts of taxpayers' money to for-profit enterprises) don't work. Governor Vilsack offered Maytag $100 million in taxpayers' money not to leave Newton. It went to Michigan anyway. Should he have offered $200 million? I don't think so.

Business comes to an area for other reasons than TIFs: available skilled workforce, transportation, communications, and other infrastructure elements -- plus "quality of life" assets such as schools, parks, libraries, theaters, trails, entertainment venues, restaurants, and natural settings such as mountains, beaches, woods, rivers and lakes. (A business that came to an Iowa Mississippi River town recently explained that it didn't choose the location because of state subsidies, it chose the location because it needed access to barge transportation on the river.)

Transferring taxpayers' money to for-profit ventures in the name of "free private enterprise" carries so much hypocrisy that City Councilors who talk that way ought to hide in the shadows with their shame. Where's the ideological purity of these "greed is good," privatization, "let the marketplace do it all" pro-business advocates when they're holding out (or filling) a tin cup? Business proposals that make sense have no trouble getting funding; owners, investors, venture capitalists, and creditors are looking for places to put their money and will respond to well-crafted business plans. Free private enterprise ventures can make sense for a community. So can socialist ventures such as roads, schools, libraries and parks. However, the more they are kept distinct the better it is for both.

If free private enterprise can't fund a project with private sector money, that just might be a sign that it's not a very good place to be putting the public's money either.

How can one possibly judge with accuracy whether, if the TIF were not available, the project would not go ahead? When free public money is available to a for-profit venture the temptation to become a tough negotiator, and to just slightly misrepresent the facts, is overwhelming. And there's virtually no way to test the blackmail.

The TIF-granters' record ain't great. For the most part, the public officials handing out our tax dollars to the wealthy are more professionally skilled at keeping constituents (and campaign contributors) happy, getting re-elected, and moving up to higher office, than they are at evaluating business proposals. There is a long list of TIFed (or otherwise publicly subsidized) private projects that have gone belly up, or failed to meet their promised construction schedules, or goals for new employees at designated pay levels.

Will we lose some businesses if we don't offer TIFs? Maybe. Let other towns give away their taxpayers' money. We don't need to play their game. As one of the top-rated towns in the nation by any one of a number of measures we'll get our share of new businesses without offering TIFs. Have a little self-confidence. Vilsack's $100 million couldn't keep Maytag here. A firm that likes San Diego's climate, or port access to the Pacific Ocean, probably isn't going to come to Iowa City for a TIF. A firm that believes it needs a location giving it rapid access to the O'Hare airport in Chicago (whether for moving persons or cargo) probably can't be talked into using the Iowa City-Cedar Rapids "Eastern Iowa Airport" no matter how big the TIF.

Step up to the plate councilors and business community. If City Council members, or members of the business community, think we need more economic growth and development than the marketplace can provide on its own there's nothing to stop them taking up a collection or offering personal economic incentives to new businesses. Iowa City's banks could offer new businesses, or proposals for business expansion, reduced-rate loans. The business community could create its own venture capital fund to invest in, or loan to, business developments they thought worthy. And I'm sure they'd be more than happy to accept every dollar from a City councilor who would like to help out.

I don't hold out lots of hope for electing a taxpayer-friendly City Council. Not many eligible voters get involved in city council elections regardless of the issue. Of those who do, there's widespread apathy, or lack of focus regarding TIFs. Of those who've followed the issue, many have bought the sales pitch of the TIF beneficiaries and their benefactors.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

"Just Say No to TIFs!"

Campus Crowd Control? Hey, How About More Guns?

Editorial, "Armed Campus Cops Would Make UI Safer," The Daily Iowan, July 26, 2007.

The Daily Iowan is absolutely right that guns can help in controlling student "misbehavior" -- as it is viewed by the government, or university administrators. But it doesn't necessarily follow that more guns on campus would necessarily "Make UI Safer."

Read a little history:

The Kent State shootings, also known as the May 4 massacre or Kent State massacre, occurred at Kent State University in the city of Kent, Ohio, and involved the shooting of students by members of the Ohio National Guard on Monday, May 4, 1970. Four students were killed and nine others wounded, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.[1]

Some of the students who were shot were protesting the American invasion of Cambodia which President Richard Nixon announced in a television address on April 30. However, other students who were shot were merely walking nearby or observing the protest at a distance. [2][3]

There was a significant national response to the shootings: hundreds of universities, colleges, high schools, and even middle schools closed throughout the United States due to a student strike of eight million students, and the event further divided the country along political lines.

"Kent State Shootings," Wikipedia.

So you see, you're right: on that occasion the deaths did slow down "student misbehavior" on one campus for one day. You're right about that. And except for the students who were shot or rendered paralyzed the guns on campus did make the campus safer following the slaughter. But then the campus was pretty safe before the slaughter, too. And as it turned out, shooting students didn't really end up doing much to reduce the nation-wide protests of Nixon's war policies in the long run either -- it just increased them.

Maybe this is just another example of another line from that Southeast Asian war: "We had to burn down the village to save it." Maybe it will take a few dead students to "Make UI Safer." If that's the price we have to pay for safety I guess it's worth it.

UIHC Inspection

The Gazette broke this story yesterday; see prior day's blog entry. Stories today include:

Brian Morelli, "Discharge Flap Puts UIHC Under Scrutiny," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 26, 2007, p. A1

Clara Hogan, "UIHC Undergoes Inspection," The Daily Iowan, July 26, 2007

# # #

Wellmark Seeks Fraud Protection & Updates

July 25, 2007, 6:00, 7:00 a.m.

Wellmark Lobbies to Prevent Policy Holders' Protection from Fraud

The Register's four-day series on insurance abuses winds down today with another four stories and editorials -- one of which notes that, thanks to lobbying by Wellmark (along with others), Iowa remains the only state in the nation that forbids individual consumers to bring lawsuits under the Consumer Fraud Act. Check the Register's Online edition for all four.

Just in case you needed more persuasion than what's provided in the movie "Sicko" as to why America needs to get the overreaching, health-care-denying, profit-maximizing insurance industry out of health care so we can join the rest of the world with a universal, single-payer system -- well, here it is.

Johnson wouldn't think twice about taking on Zieser's case and others like it if Iowa had what's called a "private right of action."

Iowa doesn't.

It's the only state in the country that doesn't allow individual consumers to hire private attorneys and sue under the Consumer Fraud Act.

. . .

This anomaly in state law affects Iowans in a host of situations - if they believe they have been victimized by a door-to-door salesman, by a roofer who didn't complete the job, or, in the case of the Zieser family, by a long-term-care insurance company.

For seven years, the Iowa Attorney General's Office has proposed legislation to create a private right of action for certain consumer-fraud violations. Then Iowans would have the same legal recourse as residents in every other state. Last legislative session, Senate File 520 looked as if it might finally pass.

It didn't.

One only has to look at the "Lobbyist Declarations" on the legislation to see why. Powerful interests, including health insurer Wellmark Inc., Allied Insurance, Principal Financial Group and the Iowa Association of Business and Industry, registered "against."

Editorial, "Give wronged Iowans more legal punch; Every other state allows individuals to sue for consumer fraud," Des Moines Register, July 25, 2007.

These guys don't even want to take responsibility for the consequences of their own fraudulent practices! And they're willing to pay big money to legislators (not bribes, mind you, these are just "campaign contributions") and lobbyists to see to it that they don't have to. Never mind that in the process they make Iowans the shame, the laughing stock, and the least well protected consumers in the nation.

Hey, it's the great American way. Privatization, the marketplace, profit maximization -- "greed is good" is our mantra. So what's a little fraud along the way? Probably just a "bad apple" -- it's certainly not endemic to the system.

And if we can get our name associated with a prestigious College of Public Health, so much the better.

In other University-related news . . .

Cindy Hadish, "University Hospitals: Botched Discharge Probed; Patient Never Made it Back to Nursing Home," The Gazette, July 25, 2007, p. B1 ("State inspectors are reviewing procedures at University Hospitals . . .. [Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals] spokesperson David Werning said inspectors were asked to conduct the 'full-blown' survey at the request of the [federal] Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services . . .. A worst-case scenario, both Werning and hospital officials said, would be the hospital losing its Medicare certification.")

Although neither University administrators nor City Council members see enough wrong with the very profitable bar industry in Iowa City -- and its very impressive record of ever-increasing the community's national reputation for college students' binge drinking -- to actually do anything meaningful about it, a UI junior has just won an entrepreneural competition for a profit-making business plan to provide non-alcohol venues. Dave DeWitte, "Bar Alternatives Winner Seeks Financing," The Gazette, July 25, 2007, p. B8 ("I don't know how many times, sitting in a classroom, I've heard, 'If there was something else, I'd do it. But there's not, so I'm going to the bars.'")

Brian Stewart, "UI Police Gun Issue Comes to Fore Again," The Daily Iowan, July 25, 2007

"Regents Seek to Void Part of Union Contract; Board Claims Portion of Agreement Violates Federal Privacy Act," The Gazette, July 25, 2007, p. B3 (The union in question is an organization of graduate students, who work as teaching assistants and in other jobs at the University. For the union to function for a group that is so constantly changing in membership it obviously needs information that only the University has regarding graduate students' employment -- names and rates of pay. The union's contract provides that it's entitled to it. Now the Regents and University would like to renege on this provision. I know no more about this case than what's in the story, and I have not researched the law.)

Lisa Rossi, "Study questions universities' bid for 2-year grads; A sizable number of those with degrees from Iowa community colleges are heading out of state for their bachelor's degrees," Des Moines Register, July 25, 2007 ("Iowa community college enrollment has risen sharply in recent years. The Des Moines Register reported that a record 85,715 students were attending the state's 15 community colleges last fall, up 3 percent from the previous year and up 25 percent from five years ago." Bottom line: (1) Iowa's community colleges are a big, and usually under-reported, story -- 85,715 students! They represent a low cost alternative to providing freshman and sophomore education at high cost research universities. (2) A couple out-of-state schools are treating our community college transfers better than are our Regents' universities. For the system to work we have to get more competitive, integrated and accommodating.)

Brian Morelli, "Mason Following Naming Debate," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 24, 2007, p. A1 (Morelli quotes Mason as saying she wants "what's best for [the University], the College of Public Health and the donors who are so important to our continued success" (emphasis supplied).)

Bob Elliott, "A Black Eye for UI State of Iowa," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 24, 2007, p. A11 ("There are dangers attached to accepting enormous financial contributions from individuals such as Marvin Pomerantz, who may then believe they've earned the right to make suggestions as bizarre as firing a college dean because he embarrassed an insurance company").

Sam Osborne, "Naming Opportunities in the Private Sector," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 24, 2007, p. A11 (an exploration of the possibilities of selling off the surface of his grandfather's tombstone for advertising).

Don Van Hulzen, "Some Questions for the University," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 25, 2007, p. A11.

Huckabee Stories

Christopher Patton, "Huckabee Touts Health Plan; Former Republican Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee Describes His Idea on Preventive Health Care and Tax Reform at a North Liberty Event," The Daily Iowan, July 24, 2007, p. 1 (Patton quotes the Governor as saying, "You can have the best classrooms or teachers, but if kids are sitting there with stomach aches, headaches or toothaches, they can't learn").

Erin Jordan, "Don't mirror national polls, Huckabee urges; The Ames straw poll will lose its value if it becomes too predictable, he says," Des Moines Register, July 24, 2007 (Jordan quotes him as saying, "My time in the church world was the best preparation to later become a governor. There's not a social problem that exists in this country that doesn't have a name and a face").

James Q. Lynch, "Huckabee Encouraged by Commitment of Crowds," The Gazette, July 24, 2007, p. B2

# # #

Regents Confront Bully, Guns on Campus

July 20, 2007, 6:00, 7:40, 8:10 a.m.

Regents Address Bullies, Corporatization Policies, Guns on Campus;
Mason's Dilemma
The Campus Bully -- and Why Wellmark by Any Other Name Would Smell the Same

Brian Morelli, "Regent Accuses Donor of Bullying; Says It Was Improper for Pomerantz to Call for Firing," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 20, 2007, p. A1

Erin Jordan, "Fethke Key to Rebound of Wellmark Naming Idea," Des Moines Register, July 20, 2007

Clara Hogan, "Regent Eyes Naming Policy," The Daily Iowan, July 20, 2007

Editorial, "UI could avoid future Wellmark controversies by standardizing rules on corporate donations," The Daily Iowan, July 20, 2007

Yesterday I wrote ("And the beating goes on") regarding the impropriety, and self-defeating quality, of Pomerantz' call for Dean Merchant's resignation. Today Brian Morelli reports the comparable response of the Regents to Pomerantz' behavior:

President Pro Tem David Miles: "I really think it is an improper attempt to dictate internal personal [personnel?] decisions at the regents institutions. He is attempting to bully our incoming president by threatening the loss of significant financial support if his demands are not met quickly. I trust the board will reject this interference. President Mason has my full support in the independent exercise of her authority as a Board of Regents appointee to manage the university and lead it forward. I think it is perfectly appropriate for Pomerantz to disagree vigorously. I think it is inappropriate to step across the line and demand the president fire the dean. Indeed, by its letter, the current policy would allow naming of a college after a commercial product. However, at least from what I have been able to find, it appears that naming a college after a corporate donor would be a first in higher education."

Regent Bonnie Campbell: "Terminating someone's employment is a very serious matter, and I would approach that skeptically. [Pomerantz] can say whatever he wants; we have a First Amendment. Obviously, it's a strong sentiment, but I don't know on what basis [Merchant] would be terminated."

Regent Bob Downer: "I am not aware of any basis at this point for calling for Dean Merchant's resignation. [Pomerantz] has earned the right to make whatever comment he chooses to make. Marvin Pomerantz is a great Iowan. No one I know has done more for education at all levels than Marvin Pomerantz."

I've written at length in prior blog entries about my view of the naming issue, and won't repeat that here -- except to note that the primary problem lies in taking the money, whatever name is or is not adopted for the college or put on the building, when there are inherent conflicts between the source and the recipient. (Given the ongoing -- and largely adversarial -- business relationships between the University and Wellmark that raises some question as to the propriety of the University accepting substantial grants from Wellmark for any purpose.)

Now that the movie "Sicko" is dramatizing the question of the propriety of insurance company profiteering from the delivery -- or, rather, the withholding -- of health care there is a special irony, as well as an offensive conflict of interest, in a College of Public Health accepting money (let alone naming itself after) a health insurance company at the height of the national debate over the future of Americans' health care and the negative impact of so-called "health" insurance companies.

"Sicko" -- Today's the Day! Today's the Day!

And speaking of "Sicko," yes, today's the day it -- at long last -- finally opens in Iowa City at the Sycamore Mall theater. Rachel Gallegos, "Group to Greet 'Sicko' With Pledge," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 20, 2007, p. A1. If you go today, or this weekend, you'll have a lottery player's chance to win a visit -- at Michael Moore's expense -- to a country that provides free health care to all its citizens. The film also ties in with the SEIU's targeting of Iowa, and its presidential candidate visitors, for health care public policy. Representatives will be present at today's showings. Do see it if you haven't yet -- and then re-think the Wellmark naming issues.

Campus Police: "Believed to be Armed and Dangerous!"

Rod Boshart, "Campus Safety Changes Urged; Review Done in Wake of Virginia Tech Calls for Sirens, Cell Phone Messaging," The Gazette, July 20, 2007, p. A1.

Dan Piller, "Campus firearms issue goes to regents; Gov. Culver won't take a position on police having guns at universities," Des Moines Register, July 20, 2007.

No one wants to touch this one. The Governor says its for the Regents. The Regents say they'll respond to the universities presidents' recommendations.

Here are some preliminary thoughts:

(1) My memory is that the statistics indicate that those who keep a handgun in the house for "protection" are 16 times more likely to have it used in killing or wounding a member of the family or close friend than against a criminal. A similar phenomenon exists with armed campus police. They are much less likely to make tragic mistakes, much less likely to have their guns taken by criminals and then turned on them or other innocents, if they don't have weapons.

(2) Do we want University SWAT teams as well? Units of the National Guard housed on campus -- "just in case?" Hazmat crews? A university fire department? It's bad enough we have our own university bus system in a small community with some six or seven public transportation systems. My point? The Iowa City police headquarters is a couple blocks from the main campus along with one of the City's fire departments. The Johnson County Sheriff's headquarters a couple blocks in another direction. There are lots of resources to be coordinated and drawn upon -- including trained, armed police -- under a variety of foreseeable, and unforeseen, circumstances. We don't need to duplicate them all.

(3) A University loses something the more its campus communicates -- with metal detectors, video surveillance cameras, and armed police -- that everyone is so much at risk of physical harm that these 1984 measures are necessary. Are there risks in fact? Darn right. Although individuals' common sense (such as not wandering around dark streets, dead drunk, at 2:00 a.m.) can do a lot to minimize them. But it's hard to predict, let alone prevent, what those risks will be. Handguns are of little use in providing protection from tornadoes. To the maximum extent prudently possible, the more freedom of movement -- and absence of focus on "security," "terrorist threat levels," and military/police/weapons solutions to society's problems -- the better it is for a community of learning and research.

Regents: Guns, Naming and Governance

Diane Heldt, "Regents to Discuss Naming Rights Policy," The Gazette, July 20, 2007, p. B3.

Regents Miles and Downer are absolutely right to suggest -- as I proposed in a blog entry some time ago -- that the College of Public Health naming controversy needs to become part of an overall policy rather than treated as a single case to be resolved.

Ditto for guns on camps.

The point is, it all goes back to the Regents' lack of a meaningful, integrated, rational theory of governance. Without that they are going to continue to, at best, continue to only address policy issues after the fact as individual cases blow up like IED's along an Iraq road, and at worst not even see them as policy issues, micromanaging that which makes its way into the media and failing to micromanage that which does not.

As John Carver says, most advice for boards only tells them how to do the wrong things better. But they're still doing the wrong things. Figuring out what the right things are is this new Board of Regents' priority number one, in my humble opinion.

See, Nicholas Johnson, "An Open Letter to Regents on 'Governance," in "UI Held Hostage Day 451 - Open Letter to Regents," April 17, 2007, and Nicholas Johnson, "Regents, Governance, PR Firms, Strategic Planning, Presidential Selection, and June 13" in "UI Held Hostage Day 487 - Governance Regents Number One Priority," May 23, 2007.

President Sally Mason's Dilemma

Ashton Shurson, "Diversity Tops Mason's List," The Daily Iowan, July 19, 2007

If Sally Mason were not a skilled street fighter she never would have become Provost, and a finalist for President, at Purdue -- or selected as the next president for the University of Iowa. So I have no doubt she's going to be able to handle herself just fine once she gets here.

But she is walking into some real challenges at a time when, whatever may be said about the eyes of Texas, the eyes of Iowans are going to be on her every move.

So far as I know, Fethke has yet to express himself on the UI athletic program's ties to the gambling industry (in the form of various partnerships with the Riverside Gambling Casino) over the protests of the NCAA and many on campus. So she'll find that one on her otherwise cleaned out desk when she arrives.

The Governor and Regents are handing her the hot potato -- or gun barrel -- regarding arming the campus police.

The organizational structure of the UIHC and College of Medicine was radically altered ten days before her arrival -- a near billion-dollar-a-year component of the University for which she's ultimately responsible.

Then there's the Wellmark naming controversy -- which Pomerantz wants resolved before she arrives, and for which the Regents and faculty want more time. She's going to have to reassure Jim Merchant that he's not going to have to retire before his previously scheduled retirement next year (or not), and see if it is possible to start the UI relationship with Pomerantz all over again.

But the substance of those issues (and many, many more) is the least of her problem.

The great dilemma will be how best to control and present herself in the first few weeks. There are lots of ways of avoiding taking a stand on issues. She can say she looks to Robillard to run the hospital and College of Medicine and Barta to make decisions about gambling industry partnerships. She can set up committees or task forces to study guns on campus or other issues, and then wait for the issue to go away -- or, when necessary, say she's simply adopting the proposals of those groups. She can say she needs more time to study an issue.

But there's a hazard in over-using those techniques. Ultimately they can leave her open to a perception that she is being weak and not in charge. On the other hand, if she immediately starts proposing new policies, changing directions and making decisions that are clearly hers, for which she takes responsibility, there's a risk that she may get some of them wrong (for want of sufficient networking and input), or be criticized for being too authoritarian and going it alone.

She's undoubtedly already figured this out -- and more. And there's every reason to believe she has the experience, skill and charm to pull it off. But it is going to be interesting to watch.

# # #

K-12 Alternatives to Calling Police

July 2, 2007, 6:15, 7:30, 9:45 a.m. [times reflect additions to the entry -- for the benefit of those few individuals who check back occasionally during the day -- as well as reflecting the fact that what is called "life" occasionally interrupts blogging]

Add-Items: Senator Biden in Iowa City this evening;
Register (and me) on tax policy. See below.

In School: There Are Alternatives to Calling the Police

"The number of police calls to area schools has increased sharply in recent years, according to the Sixth Judicial District Juvenile Delinquency Annual Statistical Report.

The report, which includes Johnson County, shows that police responded to 563 complaints within the Iowa City School District."

Rob Daniel, "Police calls to schools on the rise; Report: 563 complaints in district," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 2, 2007

The column that follows was published in 2001. My commentary about today's school news, and why I thought of this old column in that connection, follows the column.

Smaller Schools Are Better
Nicholas Johnson
Iowa City Press-Citizen, "Opinion," August 28, 2001, p. 9A
(available online here)
What do these prestigious organizations have in common?

Annenberg Foundation, Carnegie Corporation, Center for Collaborative Education, Center for School Change, Gates Foundation, Harvard’s Change Leadership Group, Open Society Institute, Pew Charitable Trusts, and the U.S. Department of Education’s Smaller Learning Communities Program.

Give up?

Each believes smaller is better. Not smaller class sizes. Smaller high schools of 400 to 600 students each.

Many are willing to bet millions of dollars they’re right; $200 million from Gates alone. They have enough data to prove it that, says one, “it seems morally questionable not to act on it.”

In New York’s worst school district, an East Harlem secondary school is one of the city’s best. It graduates 90 percent. And it’s reduced violence without metal detectors. How?

Former Secretary of Education Richard Riley asked top security experts how to improve school safety. Question: Was their top recommendation metal detectors, more police in hallways, or video monitors? Answer: None of the above. It was smaller schools.

I graduated from University High School with 40 classmates in 1952. Then seven percent of high schools had over 1,000 students. Today two-thirds of all high school students attend such schools – including ours.

Smaller schools reduce students’ estrangement. They nurture a sense of belonging. And safety is only one of the benefits.

Smaller schools have better attendance rates, fewer dropouts, more academic achievement and extracurricular participation, more college-bound. Students feel closer bonds with teachers. Teachers with each other.

There are dozens of proposals for improving high schools. Even summaries require something closer to 650 volumes than 650 words. But smaller size is a good beginning.

John Carver says most school boards are incompetent groups of competent people along a continuum from micro-managing at one end to rubber-stamping at the other. All such boards can hope for is to do the wrong things better.

Competent and caring high school teachers confront a comparable dilemma. The system processes 150 students a day along a conveyor belt through their classrooms. They must function with a curriculum and classrooms designed to produce the assembly line workers of a bygone industrial age.

It is not teachers’ fault that, like board members, all they can hope for is to do the wrong things better.

They may be the best source of ideas on how to fix this system, but all the community’s stakeholders must have ownership. And decisions have to come from school boards and administrators.

Our superintendent, Lane Plugge, now chairs Iowa’s Urban Education Network. It’s just stepped up to the plate with a new book-length report titled Redefinition of High School – one of the 650 volumes anyone who cares about these issues ought to read.

The individual authors of its 12 chapters each focus on an issue. Waterloo’s superintendent, Arlis Swartzendruber, cites our school board’s contribution to concepts of board governance. Our own Pam Ehly and Bill Dutton propose “instructional strategies” that if read, understood and implemented would solve many high schools’ problems.

Many chapters note the value of smaller schools.

We’re not about to tear down City and West High and build eight new high schools of 400 each. So how can we gain similar benefits? It’s called “schools within schools.” Four teams of teachers in each. Four “schools” of students with their own portion of a building.

Athletic and music groups continue to draw from all four. Theaters and cafeterias are shared. It’s a best-of-all-possible-worlds win-win. Shared facilities and administration mean lower costs. Smaller schools produce better relationships and climate – and more learning.

Dr. Plugge has thrown an added starter into the board’s consideration of boundaries and educational opportunities: a redefinition, and possible physical redesign, of our high schools.

Architects need to know if clients want a cathedral or a tractor barn. So we’ve begun the process of redefinition.

Now every district stakeholder needs to participate in planning what will, hopefully, include the benefit of smaller schools.
_______________

Nicholas Johnson is an Iowa City School Board member. More information is available on his Web site www.nicholasjohnson.org.

# # #
The Answer is Blowing in the Cyberspace As the organizations cited in this column have concluded, the data is pretty convincing -- and support one's natural intuition -- that as high school size increases above an optimum (around 650 students) there is an increase in bullying, vandalism, teen pregnancy, graffiti, fights, alcohol and drug abuse, absenteeism and dropouts. It only makes sense.

Is manageable size a cure-all? Of course not. But it stands to reason that where a student is known by name by teachers and classmates alike, where adult mentoring becomes logistically possible, where everyone can participate in student activities (rather than just an athletically or musically gifted elite), that social constraints, rather than the presence of police officers, can be a major factor in controlling behavior.

As any regular reader of this blog knows, I'm a big fan of the Internet. It provides public access to orders of magnitude more material than most towns' public libraries can offer their patrons (in hard copy). It permits much more flexible and through searching than hard copy reference works. And it retrieves the material at orders of magnitude faster speeds.

Are there drawbacks? Of course. We don't do a very good job of training students (or ourselves) in effective Google searching techniques, so Internet research experiences are sometimes more frustrating and less fruitful than they could be. And just as everything in hard copy books needs to be verified and confirmed, so sorting through the Internet's content -- open as it is to submissions by anyone -- requires even greater sophistication by users.

During the three years I served on the local school board I wrote a column every two weeks for the Press-Citizen. The column above is one of them. (Links to the full collection can be found here.) Although I had first hand knowledge as a student in the University of Iowa's experimental schools (University Elementary and University High School in a building now called "North Hall") I never attended a College of Education. So I spent a lot of time surfing the Internet while looking for ideas for the columns.

And what I discovered was a variation on Ralph Nader's observation that, "This country has more problems than it deserves and more solutions than it applies." I finally concluded that, with 15,000 school districts in this country, it was likely that there was no problem confronting any given one of them that had not formerly been confronted by another school district (1) identified, (2) addressed, (3) resolved, and (4) written up and made available on the Internet.

When we were considering the $40 million bond issue I noted that the need for that money and additional buildings (at that time) could have been avoided by applying the concept of "cluster schools" for our elementary schools. (Such an approach would also have eliminated, or radically reduced, the problem of disparity in class size.) Had we followed the recommendations of the National Commission on the High School Senior Year for our high schools we could have instantaneously eliminated all of their "overcrowding" and any need for expansion. I noted at the same time the advantages, if additional high school space was to be created anyway, of building high schools for 650 rather than expanding the populations in the two conventional high schools we had. (Tate was deliberately designed for fewer students.)

[Alas, it appears that the National Commission's report is no longer available online. However, a preliminary report and summary is available: The Lost Opportunity of Senior Year: Finding a Better Way, January 2001.]

With "local control of schools" school administrators, parents and taxpayers have the legal and political right to ignore such advice. If they are willing to pay $40 million for the privilege -- and the result is not otherwise criminal or illegal -- they can do whatever they want with their money. And I support local control of schools -- even when it results in plans and policies more driven by their impact on our competitive athletic teams' records than the entire student body's academic records. That's the stakeholders' right.

But there are consequences to those decisions that go well beyond their financial costs.

And our district's school board and administration now confront many comparable decisions as they are coming into the millions of additional dollars to be provided by our local 20% hike in sales taxes.

Prevention is almost always cheaper and more satisfactory than treatment.

Call the cops if you must.

But it seems to me that once you've let things get to the point that you need an Iraq-like surge of additional police in your school it's already too late. You've already lost that battle.

# # #
Add-Items:

Biden. Although you wouldn't know it from the local papers, Senator Joe Biden is making two appearances in Iowa City today.

5:00-6:00 PM SEN. BIDEN TO ATTEND A HOUSE PARTY

Home of Bob and Maggie Elliott
1108 Dover Street
Iowa City, IA

7:00 PM SEN. BIDEN HOSTS A CONVERSATION WITH THE GAY COMMUNITY

Givanni’s Restaurant
109 East College Street
Iowa City, IA

Taxes. I wrote at some length in May about the categories of issues involved in tax reform policy. Nicholas Johnson, "Taxes: Categories of Inquiry" in "UI Held Hostage Day 490 - Search & Taxes," May 26, 2007. This morning the Register editorializes on the subject, Editorial, "Iowa needs full-fledged tax reform; Sales-tax plan is a response to high property taxes," Des Moines Register, July 2, 2007.

# # #
[Note: If you're new to this blog, and interested in the whole UI President Search story . . .

This blog began in June 2006 and has addressed, and continues to addresses, a number of public policy, political, media, education, economic development, and other issues -- not just the UI presidential search. But that is the subject to which most attention has been focused in blog entries between November 2006 and June 2007.

The presidential search blog entries begin with Nicholas Johnson, "UI President Search I," November 18, 2006. They end with Nicholas Johnson, "UI Held Hostage Day 505 - Next (Now This) Week," June 10, 2007 (100-plus pages printed; a single blog entry for the events of June 10-21 ("Day 516"), plus over 150 attached comments from readers), and Nicholas Johnson, "UI Hostages Free At Last -- Habemas Mamam!," June 22, 2007.

Wondering where the "UI Held Hostage" came from? Click here. (As of January 25 the count has run from January 21, 2006, rather than last November.)

For any given entry, links to the prior 10 will be found in the left-most column. Going directly to FromDC2Iowa.Blogspot.com will take you to the latest. Each entry related to the UI presidential search contains links to the full text of virtually all known, non-repetitive media stories and commentary, including mine, since the last blog entry. Together they represent what The Chronicle of Higher Education has called "one of the most comprehensive analyses of the controversy." The last time there was an entry containing the summary of prior entries' commentary (with the heading "This Blog's Focus on Regents' Presidential Search") is Nicholas Johnson, "UI President Search XIII -- Last Week," December 11, 2006.

My early proposed solution to the conflict is provided in Nicholas Johnson, "UI President Search VII: The Answer," November 26, 2006.

Searching: the fullest collection of basic documents related to the search is contained in Nicholas Johnson, "UI President Search - Dec. 21-25," December 21, 2006 (and updated thereafter), at the bottom of that blog entry under "References." A Blog Index of entries on all subjects since June 2006 is also available. And note that if you know (or can guess at) a word to search on, the "Blogger" bar near the top of your browser has a blank, followed by "SEARCH THIS BLOG," that enables you to search all entries in this Blog since June 2006.]

# # #