Geographical Perspectives - A Geographer's Thoughts on Business, Real Estate, and Education.

2 years ago
Pueblo
Justin

Eight Reasons Pueblo Should Vote No on 200 and 300

I received my ballot yesterday. I can’t wait to move beyond this bizarre election. November 9th can’t come soon enough. In the meantime, I feel compelled to speak out against a pair of misguided local ballot measures.

Ballot Question 200
Shall the Pueblo County Code be amended by Ordinance to prohibit all licensed Retail (recreational) Marijuana Establishments in all areas under the licensing jurisdiction of Pueblo County, by requiring all existing Retail Marijuana Testing Facilities, Retail Marijuana Cultivation Facilities, Retail Marijuana Product Manufacturing Facilities, and Retail Marijuana Stores to close by October 31, 2017 and by immediately prohibiting Pueblo County from approving all new licenses for these Facilities? ______YES/FOR __X__NO/AGAINST

Question 300 (Prohibition of Marijuana Establishments)
Shall Chapter 11 of Title XI of the Pueblo Municipal Code be amended by the addition of a new Section and the adoption of Ordinance No. 9009 prohibiting new Retail Marijuana Establishments and ceasing the operation of all currently licensed Retail Marijuana Establishments by October 31, 2017?_______YES/FOR __X__NO/AGAINST

Here are eight reasons to Vote NO on Ballot Initiative 200 and 300.

Marijuana legalization has NOT caused an increase in crime. Despite the propaganda from Citizens for a Healthy Pueblo to the contrary there is no credible evidence, none whatsoever, that legalization of marijuana has caused any increase in crime in Pueblo County.
Addiction to prescription pain killers and heroin is the real drug problem and hospitals are complicit in its rise. Ironically, if there has been an increase in criminal activity, it is far more closely linked to the dramatic rise in heroin use. I say this is ironic because our 2 hospitals, Parkview and St. Mary Corwin are responsible for putting Initiative 200 and 300 on the ballot. They are also at least partially responsible for the growing heroin addiction problem in our community due to their dangerous habit of over prescribing opiate-based pain killers like Oxycodone.
Marijuana prohibition is a form of institutional racism. Marijuana and hemp were important crops in the US until racist Americans opposed to immigration from south of the border began to use anti-marijuana propaganda as an excuse to prosecute Mexican immigrants in the early 20th Century. I’m not suggesting local proponents of 200 and 300 are racists. But, they’re deploying the same tactics and propaganda used in the early 1900s to criminalize marijuana, providing a convenient tool for incarcerating people of color. One of Pueblo’s greatest strengths is our Hispanic population and our community’s many links to Mexican culture. Why then would Pueblo choose to re-enact a racially motivated prohibition, originally designed to criminalize Mexican immigrants?
Alcohol, tobacco… heck, even fructose all pose greater public health risks than marijuana. No one dies of an overdose from smoking marijuana. If we’re going to restrict freedoms based on risks to public health we need to be consistent. Check out the CDC’s website and read about the public health impacts of legal substances like alcohol and tobacco versus marijuana. It’s not even close.
Pueblo’s economy is finally showing signs of life thanks in part to investments in the marijuana industry. The positive impact of increased tax revenue is just a small piece of the puzzle. Ask local realtors how the real estate market would be impacted by a return to prohibition. Ask the Chieftain and the Pulp how they’ll do without ad revenue from retail marijuana businesses. Ask commercial property owners if they prefer higher vacancy rates. Ask employees working in one of the many new marijuana businesses how they feel about looking for a different source of income.
Prohibition of retail marijuana will not reduce consumption or improve public health. People will continue to use marijuana either way. This ballot measure won’t change that a bit. If you want to have a meaningful impact on public health, maybe consider making marijuana “edibles” illegal because of the risk to children and others who might unknowingly consume marijuana. Now that might make sense. Our medical community knows how to use a scalpel; why are they deploying a chainsaw?
Even if the Ballot measure passes it will be challenged in court. The people who have invested large amounts of money to become licensed marijuana business owners will have a legitimate claim to financial restitution. Do you think they’ll just close shop and walk away? Who’s going to compensate them for the bait and switch? Will the hospitals pick up the tab? Of course not, taxpayers will be stuck with the bill. And local government services will suffer deficits in the meantime. Furthermore, a long and drawn out court battle will keep a cloud of uncertainty over Pueblo County’s economy. Investors are already in a holding pattern waiting to see if we have enough sense to take their money.
Prohibition will advertise that Pueblo suffers from a bad case of economic illiteracy. The rest of the State and everyone in the U.S. laying the groundwork for the new multi-billion dollar cannabis industry will understand clearly that, despite 30+ years of economic stagnation in Pueblo, we don’t want prosperity. Not here. We’re too provincial for innovation. We’re too ignorant to recognize the potential benefits of making Pueblo a hub for cannabis research and industry. We’re too afraid of taking risks. We’re too stupid to grab an economic life-jacket even when it’s already securely fastened around our chest.

I know many people in Pueblo who are on the other side of this issue. I respect them. And I think I understand their point of view. They’ve been told their whole life marijuana is bad and wrong.

But clearly Marijuana is no more harmful than many legal substances. Scientists and physicians know this is true. The public has figured it out too. It’s game over for the prohibitionists. Legalized cannabis in the U.S is now inevitable. We can either prosper thanks to the head start we’ve been given in Colorado or we can let other communities reap the economic rewards.

If you’re on the fence on this issue, at the very least give it more time before succumbing to baseless fear mongering from the political conservatives fighting a culture war. Don’t chop down Pueblo’s first shoots of economic growth in a generation before we even see what sort of flower might bloom.

Vote NO on 200 and 300.

Thanks for reading.

2 years ago
Pueblo
Justin

“Citizens for a Healthy Pueblo” Making False Claims About Crime

One of the most contentious issues for voters in Pueblo this election season involves the future of retail marijuana.

A group associated with the 2 major hospitals in Pueblo, calling themselves Citizens for a Healthy Pueblo, have stated adamantly, as if it were proven fact, that crime has increased substantially since marijuana legalization.

Well, despite superior scientific training in medicine, these citizens seem to know nothing at all about data analysis.

Let’s look at crime statistics published by the State of Colorado to explore whether claims of dramatically increased criminal activity are valid. I downloaded all data presented below from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation on the State of Colorado’s official web portal. You’ll see reports from both the Pueblo Police Department and the Pueblo County Sheriff’s office are included in each chart.

There are eight major crime categories reported by law enforcement agencies: arson, assault, burglary, larceny/theft, motor vehicle theft, murder/manslaughter, rape and robbery (in alphabetical order). I’ve compiled data for the time period 2009-2015 illustrating 7 years of reported crimes with 2009-2013 data reflecting crime rates prior to marijuana legalization and 2014-2015 showing crime rates after legalization went into effect.

There are two anomalies worth noting in these data.

First, reports of rape by the Pueblo Police Department skyrocketed in 2013 (before marijuana legalization). My best guess is there was some sort of change in reporting criteria or some other irregularity since I don’t recall hearing about an explosion of rape incidents. Perhaps someone from the Pueblo PD can explain the eight-fold increase between 2012 and 2013?

Second, 2012 appears to have been an extraordinarily quiet year for the Pueblo County Sheriff’s office. To me, it looks like only a portion of crime data was reported for 2012. Perhaps the County Sheriff’s office could clarify?

I have no expertise in criminal justice so maybe I’m missing something here. That said, I do have expertise in data analysis and in my opinion there’s absolutely no justification whatsoever for claims of an increase in crime since marijuana was legalized in January 2014.

In fact, you might more convincingly argue crime is down looking at the assault, larceny/theft, and robbery categories. If you look at data reported by the Pueblo County Sheriff’s office you can see crime rates trending down in nearly every category since 2013. Good job Sheriff Taylor!

So, since all retail marijuana outlets are currently located outside Pueblo city limits, should we conclude retail marijuana has reduced crime? Well, no. I don’t see that either. Concluding crime is down due to marijuana legalization would be a dishonest interpretation of the data….sort of like violating the Hippocratic Oath.

Now who would stoop so low to deceive the good citizens of Pueblo?

Why do you hate Pueblo West?

I’m teaching a real estate class this term at CSU-Pueblo and a couple weeks ago one of my students asked, “Why do you hate Pueblo West?”

I answered, “I don’t hate Pueblo West. What makes you think I do?”

He replied, “You say so on your blog.”

Well, I don’t think I’ve come right out and said explicitly “I hate Pueblo West” anywhere on my blog. But I acknowledge I’ve written a few blog posts that aren’t terribly flattering. One post in particular (Funding the City of Pueblo) in which I suggest setting up a toll booth for inbound traffic on Highway 50, later published by the Pueblo Chieftain, even generated some hate mail from PW residents. So, I guess my student has a point.

The truth is I don’t feel any hatred toward Pueblo West. And I understand the appeal of living there for people who want a more quiet, serene version of Pueblo. Thanks to the ridiculous costs involved in building within city limits (courtesy of the difficult-to-work-with Pueblo Regional Building Department) Pueblo West is also the only place where you can find a reasonable supply of newer housing with modern amenities. I get it.

The problem is Pueblo West has become too densely populated. I don’t know who was in charge of zoning decisions during the housing boom but at some point developers were given the green light to build on relatively small parcels. If we could go back in time and enact an urban growth boundary, forcing residential developers to build on a minimum lot size, say 2-5 acres, things would be completely different. And much better.

The result of loads of people relocating to Pueblo West is a smaller tax base in the City of Pueblo combined with an expansive and more expensive infrastructure. This is why we don’t have enough money to hire sufficient numbers of police officers. This is one of the reasons District 60 is struggling. This is why my idea to set up toll collection for inbound vehicle traffic from Pueblo West makes sense to me.

It probably also makes sense to Joe Minicozzi, the architect and urban planning expert from Asheville, North Carolina who addressed the Colorado Downtown Inc conference at the Pueblo Convention Center this week. He analyzed land use data in Pueblo County and pointed out the negative economic impact of the sprawl in Pueblo West.

Please read the story by Dennis Darrow published in today’s Pueblo Chieftain. The Chieftain buried it on page 5A but it should be above the fold on page 1, instead of the Von Miller story, for all Pueblo residents to read.

We must become more intelligent and data-driven when it comes to financing government in Pueblo. Our only solution to budget challenges seems to be a never-ending parade of sales tax initiatives. Sales tax increases are the wrong approach because they unfairly burden low income city residents and create incentive for many businesses to locate outside the city limits. We must be smart enough to reward businesses and residents for using existing infrastructure rather than stretching our already tapped public budgets.

There must be more incentive to invest in Downtown Pueblo. And, there should also be disincentives for increasing the footprint of our infrastructure.

I still like my idea for a toll booth.

Pueblo Police Officers Call Out Chief and City Manager for Incompetence and Cronyism

Earlier this month the Pueblo Chieftain published a story indicating 95% of Pueblo Police Officers have No Confidence in Pueblo Police Chief, Luis Velez. Of the 99 Pueblo Police Officers who completed the survey 94 indicated they have “No Confidence” in Chief Velez.

Wow. Velez is about as popular as a root canal….without sedation. If he were an Animal House character he’d be Douglas C. Neidermeyer, killed by his own troops.

In addition to their lack of confidence in Chief Velez’s leadership they launch very serious accusations of cronyism, aimed primarily at Pueblo City Manager, Sam Azad. The following letter was released by IPBO Local 537, the local union of Police Officers. Our community’s Police Officers have spoken clearly. They need new leadership. I hope City Council is paying attention.

January 8, 2016

The recent release of the response by Chief Velez and City Manager Sam Azad in reference to the survey conducted by IBPO Local 537 has solicited a rebuttal by the Union E-Board.

Based on Chief Velez’s response, it is clear that he believes the frustration of his officers is a new problem. He states that 2015 had problems not seen before, such as gang violence, not enough manpower, forced overtime and the condition of police equipment.

We would like to point out that the gang problem in Pueblo has been here since the early 1990’s. However, we agree that recently the problem has become worse. The decision by Chief Velez to reduce the four man gang unit to a single Detective in the Pueblo Police Department Gang Unit has certainly not been in the best interest of public safety.

Nor has it been in the public safety interest to eliminate the ten beats that patrol officers used to be responsible for and essentially turn the ten beats into basically two beats referred to as North and South Sectors. When the Police Department had beats, there was a higher potential of the same officer responding to the same address for the same type of calls. The officer immediately knew the history of problems in the neighborhood and would have a better idea as to how to correct the issue.

By enlarging the area of responsibility to half a city, the chances of the same officer responding to the same address for the same type of call has decreased substantially. That puts the responding officer in the poor position of trying to be brought up to speed on what the history of the problems are. The officer is not aware of what tactics were used before and therefore is at a loss as to which tactic might work better.

As far as the manpower shortage, this is also not new. For the past several years, the department has been limited to 193 officers after City Manager Sam Azad froze fourteen positions. That brought the Department down to 193 total officers. That number includes 1 Chief, 3 Deputy Chiefs and 7 Captains. This actually leaves 182 officers on paper, but in reality there are only 164 officers. The 13 newly graduated officers, will not hit the streets on their own until the summer of 2016. The addition of 7 more officers, which were only hired due to an outcry by the public, is merely a drop in the bucket to where we should be.

The Union does agree that the forced overtime issue was a larger problem this year than in years past. However, it should also be noted that the Patrol Captains initiated a minimum staffing requirement that is the same for every day of the week, disregarding the days where fewer officers may not be needed and adding to days where they are needed. Again, the Union pointed out during contract negotiations that we were then at 1.7 officers per 1000 citizens when the state average was 2.4. So instead of having 264 officers, we only had 164. So even with the influx of 20 officers over the next ten months, we will still be 80 officers short.

Chief Velez mentions problems with police equipment, primarily the vehicles. This has been a problem for years, and a problem he said would be addressed during his first year as Chief. He has been able to purchase several new patrol SUV’s which have helped incredibly. We will give him that one.

Regarding the Departments ongoing partnership with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s SAFE Streets Program, this partnership includes a single FBI agent working with the Pueblo Police Department. It isn’t as huge as the citizens have been led to believe.

Chief Velez also states that the Department is going to undergo an overtime audit completed by an outside agency. It is our understanding that this was ordered by the City Council and was to be conducted by an independent organization. We have since been told that KRW will be the independent organization to conduct this investigation.

The “K” in “KRW” stands for Loren Kramer, the former Chief of Police in Colorado Springs. Chief Kramer was instrumental in turning the reins of Chief of Police over to his long time friend, Luis Velez, in Colorado Springs. Chief Velez received a vote of no confidence by the officers in Colorado Springs and resigned.

Approximately five and one half years ago, KRW was hired by Pueblo City Council to conduct an internal investigation into the Pueblo Police Department. KRW’s recommendation was to bring in former Colorado Springs Chief Luis Velez to run this department. It is not very comforting now to see that KRW is once again going to be the independent organization to determine whether or not the overtime issues within the department are based on management’s mismanagement of staff or rather to deflect the blame to the Police Union instead.

The citizens of Pueblo need to be aware that the City Attorney’s Office has had numerous qualified attorneys working for them for over half a century. During that time period, countless numbers of contracts were ratified between the employees and management. Coincidentally, upon the heels of the KRW report five years ago, the City of Pueblo hired one of the largest national law firms, Fisher & Phillips, to annually negotiate bargaining agreements with the City’s three Unions.

Fisher & Phillips not only specialize in contract negotiations, but also in decertification of Unions. We would be surprised if the City of Pueblo admitted that was their reasoning for hiring extremely expensive additional legal counsel during a time period when the city is also saying they have no money. If that isn’t the reason, why then do they still have a City Attorney sitting next to a Fisher & Phillips attorney making $450 an hour telling us the city has no money. It seems to us that the City Attorney could tell us the same information at a substantially cheaper cost.

Chief Velez has been here now for nearly five years. We admit he has done some positive things, but crime is up, morale is down and we have fewer officers now than when he started. Was that the 5-year plan or is there a new one because the first 5-year plan didn’t work? Or did it?

Chief Velez recently told us that he is thinking of placing a public safety initiative on the November ballot. Interesting since the Union supported an initiative 2 years ago that he publicly was against because he didn’t feel the fire department deserved half the money. He informed us that the “fire department deals with property, but we deal with people” therefore he deserves more of the pie.

Sam Azad is the former finance officer of the Colorado Springs Police Department and worked directly under Chief Velez in that capacity. Again, it is probably only coincidental that Sam Azad is now the Pueblo City Manager and Chief Velez works directly under Sam.

For the past three and one half years the Police Union has pointed out to Sam Azad that our manpower is substantially under manned and the crime problems are increasing. Nothing we have told Sam or Chief Velez again recently is anything new. It is the same issue that we have been bringing up for several years now and it has been falling on deaf ears.

We can appreciate the fact that both Sam Azad and Chief Velez have been looking forward to their not too distant retirements but assure you that the employees of the City of Pueblo, specifically the Police Union, can only say, “Godspeed, and the sooner the better.”

2016 Rankings: Top 10 Online Master’s Programs in GIS

Based on comments, the majority of readers are most interested in online graduate programs and several new players have emerged just in the past year. So, for my 2016 rankings, I’ve decided to focus on online Master’s degree programs in GIS/Spatial. To keep the task manageable I will not include any Certificate programs, only programs offering graduate degrees.

As I’ve cautioned in previous posts (see 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 rankings), the programs I consider to be the very best may not be the best for you. Graduate education is an individual decision; there is no one-size-fits-all approach. That said, I’ve ranked the programs according to my perception of quality and relevance for students wanting to pursue a Spatial Career.

University of Southern California: The Spatial Sciences Institute at USC has taken a commanding lead in creating an innovative graduate program designed to train the next generation of professional spatial data scientists. In addition to their Master of Science in Geographic Information Science and Technology, they are now offering a Master of Science degree in Spatial Informatics, a Master’s in Public Health with a GeoHealth focus and a Ph.D. in Population, Health and Place. Their programs are online with a short residential component. For now, this is the place to be for online spatial education.
Penn State: The Geography Department at Penn State is one of the world’s best and their online GIS program is the most established and probably the most prolific in terms of producing graduates. They have a huge number of course options and a variety of emphasis areas. I worry they’re still a bit stuck in the older, ESRI-driven GIS generation 1.0 world but there’s no disputing their expertise in GIS and online education.
Johns Hopkins: Although Johns Hopkins doesn’t have a geography department they have a long history of excellence in Regional Science, which is essentially quantitative economic geography. I’ve heard from students who have participated in the program and they give it very high marks. In addition, graduates benefit from strong brand recognition and a solid cohort of professional/adjunct instructors living and working in the Washington DC area where GIS jobs are plentiful.
North Carolina State: The Center for Geospatial Analytics has pulled together a strong interdisciplinary cohort of research and teaching faculty to offer a Master’s in Geospatial Science and Technology. The curriculum appears to be quite rigorous and the University’s location is likely to facilitate post-graduate job opportunities in North Carolina’s Research Triangle, a great place to pursue a career in technology.
Kentucky: One of four new offerings that have emerged in the past year, Kentucky’s program is called “New Maps Plus”. This is a strangely whimsical name for a serious graduate degree. Kentucky’s Geography Department has become one of the best thanks to Professor Matthew Zook‘s innovative leadership. You can expect to learn some really cool web programming and visualization techniques that should leave you well-equipped to build web applications and a career in GIS. On the downside, you will also be subjected to 2 classes in Social Theory where you’ll have to endure an annoyingly obscure and inane literature. This is great stuff if you want to be an academic sociologist, not so useful if you want to be an applied geography/GIS person.
Wisconsin: Another new program with a very exciting looking curriculum and offered from one of the best geography departments in the world. I like the looks of everything about this program except for the size of the teaching faculty. It’s not clear to me who will be doing the bulk of the teaching; in fact, there may be only one or two instructors? This seems inadequate. I look forward to seeing the faculty list lengthen after which I would likely improve Wisconsin’s position on this list.
Washington: The focus on Washington’s new program is sustainability which is a cool word, sort of like holistic, but I’m not really sure what it actually means if you’re looking through a GIS lens. It’s probably a very good program and worthy of investigation if you’re looking for an environmental career with GIS in your toolkit. But, if you’re more interested in programming, visualization and spatial analysis I think you could do better elsewhere. Also note there’s some requirements to show up in person which may make this less attractive for those not living on the west coast of the U.S.
Arizona: With a solid geography department, this could be an excellent program. But, Arizona doesn’t dazzle me with GIS/Spatial expertise, that prize would go to their in-state rival, Arizona State and Luc Anselin’s School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning (no online GIS programs I’m aware of at ASU). That said, the University of Arizona is an outstanding university and their program may far exceed my perception and expectations. Definitely worth a look but probably less cutting edge than some others on this list, though I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
Kent State: I’m seeing advertisements for Kent State’s new online program everywhere so they’re certainly doing a good job of promoting via Google AdWords. And, it looks like the program is geared toward use of GIS within Environmental Geography. This is cool and could be ideal for some. But, I probably wouldn’t want to be an early adopter here. If you are choosing from among one of the newest programs go for Kentucky or Wisconsin as I expect them to outperform Kent State in the long run.
Northern Arizona: If it were me I’d want to move to Flagstaff and emerge myself in the beautiful surroundings along with the graduate program as it’s offered both online and in a traditional residential format. This could be a good option for those inclined to the environmental side of geography and GIS but it’s a bit difficult to tell how current the faculty might be technologically. I would be worried about suffering through courses where you only learn how to push buttons in ArcGIS and don’t actually learn how to write code for the web.

Other programs worth investigating (in alphabetical order):

Well, there you have it! I hope this provides some direction and insight for those of you shopping for an online GIS graduate degree. I would have liked to include tuition information but for many programs it’s very difficult to figure out actual costs. It’s not clear how in-state/out-of-state tuition comes into play nor how additional fees might impact total program cost in some cases. You’ll have to investigate on your own. Obviously cost is a huge consideration so as I learn more I’ll try to keep you posted. Thanks for reading!

City Posted Assessment Notices on Veteran’s Day

Check this out.

I’ve posted an image of the papers served by the City of Pueblo. And I mean tacked on the door, not mailed (according to my tenant). The official date on the paperwork signed by Gina Dutcher at the City Clerk’s Office is November 11th, Veteran’s Day. I would love to hear from any Veterans who were indeed notified in the same manner on Veteran’s Day.

[highlight color=”options: yellow, black”]I can’t think of anything more ironic than the Home of Heroes using the Homes of Heroes to make up for their own incompetence.[/highlight]

And when I say “make up for the City’s own incompetence” I mean the City of Pueblo’s Finance Department did almost nothing to collect on these liens from the owner of record at the time of the code violation. I didn’t even own the property when this occurred. But that didn’t really seem to bother City officials I spoke to. I was told the “liens follow the property” so I’m financially responsible.

Home of Heroes or Land Where Homes of Heroes are used for Public Extortion?

Last week, on Veteran’s Day, I received notification from the City of Pueblo ordering payment of $1,588 for trash and weed abatement at a rental property I own on Polk Street in the Mesa Junction neighborhood. Apparently I’m one of the lucky winners thanks to City Council’s recent decision to seek payment for old liens.

At first I thought my current tenants might be at fault but then I looked at the notification again and realized I was being billed for a City Code Violation that occurred in August/September 2011 before I bought the property out of foreclosure. The owner of record at the time of violation was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, better known as Freddie Mac. Remember them? One of the Government Sponsored Entities (GSE) that helped facilitate the mortgage/housing bubble and ensuing financial crisis.

As I investigated the assessment I was being asked to pay it became clear that no one in the City’s Finance Department made any serious effort to collect the assessment from Freddie Mac. They mailed a few invoices and then gave up when a check didn’t magically appear. What a shame. As I recall the City really could have used that money in 2011 when the economy hit bottom. Maybe City employees were too busy drinking vodka and driving around town topless at the time.

In any case, what really bothers me is the thought that some of our military veterans who reside in Pueblo probably also received an assessment on Veteran’s Day. Sort of like having someone spit on your face as a birthday present.

It makes me wonder if Pueblo is really the Home of Heroes or if it’s actually a place where the Homes of Heroes are used in a public extortion scheme.

“We have to hold people accountable,” said Councilman Chris Nicoll.

Where were you and your tough talk when it was time to hold the big banks and mortgage lenders responsible?

Shame on you City Council.

Spatial Data Analysis is a Core Geography Skill. Is it misunderstood at AAG?

The other day a reader asked for information on careers in geography and I referred her to this page on the Association of American Geographer’s website: http://www.aag.org/cs/what_geographers_do

The page was still open in my browser this morning so I poked around a bit and found this.

Job options for expertise in Spatial Statistics include GIS Tech, Statistics Assistant and Architect? Really? I realize this page is somewhat dated but come on. How about Statistician? Or Data Scientist? I don’t know where the AAG gets the notion that spatial statistics people should consider a career in Architecture. I’m not saying it’s completely unrelated but it certainly doesn’t logically follow.

I checked the citation and didn’t find any hint of Spatial Statistics being related to pursuing a career as an Architect. I did, however, find an interesting chart illustrating strong demand for spatial statistics and GIS. If it was a top priority in 2008 imagine how it’s perceived today after the emergence of Big Data Analytics.

Tables 8 and 9 are from p. 368-369 in Skills in Professional Geography: An Assessment of Workforce Needs and Expectations.

Funny, I don’t see any mention of Social Theory. Although I suppose some would say it’s what the General Skill, “Critical Thinking” is meant to represent, anyone from outside Academia would probably not know there is extra significance to the word “Critical” here. In any case, these charts reaffirm my contention that Geography should marginalize Social Theory and more fully embrace Spatial Analysis.

In the meantime, could the AAG update these job titles so young aspiring geographers aren’t misled?

Conservatives Will Never Agree but Obamacare is a Big Win for Small Business

When I hear politicians like Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO) spouting off about how the Affordable Care Act (ACA) should be repealed I get annoyed. It’s especially frustrating when it’s coming from someone who’s been bought and paid for by large corporate interests.

Have you seen The Rainmaker? It’s a 1997 movie based on the book by John Grisham starring Matt Damon. There’s a great scene with Jon Voight where Matt Damon’s character, Rudy, asks Voight’s character, Mr. Drummond, “Do you even remember when you first sold out?” I’d like to ask Cory Gardner the same question.

It’s even more annoying when the local know-nothing, regurgitate-Fox newspaper echoes his comments with a smug “we told you so” op-ed piece. When did the Chieftain sell out?

The truth is the ACA has actually been pretty effective, much to the dismay of the anti-Obama crowd. Obamacare has saved the small business I run tens of thousands of dollars in insurance premiums in the past year and a half and a whole bunch of time too. But the GOP, ostensibly the party of small business, refuses to recognize this or anything else remotely positive about the ACA.

In 2013 before Obamacare went into effect the small company I run was paying about $1,200-$1,600 per month in health insurance premiums for each employee. In addition we were spending several hours each month dealing with an incompetent and unethical health insurance company. I don’t want to mention them by name but let’s say they made me feel BLUE and CROSS all the time. We would have to fax and re-fax paperwork. We would receive bills at various times of the month sometimes claiming payment was overdue even though the invoice was processed and posted after the due date. It was completely absurd.

They treated us like garbage because we’re a tiny company. Every year they would announce higher premiums combined with weaker coverage. We had no choice but to take it on the chin or require employees to contribute. There were no other alternatives that wouldn’t have left our employees in the cold without coverage, and probably without any ability to acquire new coverage on their own. We could have forced employees to shoulder part of the premium but that would have been equivalent to a pay cut so we continued to pay 100% of the monthly premiums. It seemed like the right thing to do but it was tough on the business.

The beginning of 2014, when Obamacare first went into effect, was absolute chaos. The insurance companies were using the chaos as an opportunity to cancel decent plans, hike rates and reduce coverage levels even further. Sort of like a land grab in the Wild West. In addition, the enrollment process became even more confusing and even less reliable. We had to spend hours and hours on paperwork and follow up calls to get the insurance company to provide proper coverage for all employees and their dependents. Talk about a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy. I’ll take a government agency, even a DMV, any day of the week rather than dealing with the bloodsucking health insurance vampires.

In any case, by the time May/June of 2014 rolled around it became apparent that the newly created individual health insurance markets were working. And prices were far more reasonable, less than half the amount we were paying for our company sponsored plan. So, we made a switch. We dropped the vampires and instead sent a monthly stipend to our employees to reimburse their expenses for individual/family policies. This worked well, and continues to work, for 3 key reasons.

We are saving a ton of money. Our costs have dropped by 50%. Maybe more if you include the cost of our time.
Our employees are able to choose coverage more closely tailored to their personal situations. Some employees have a family with kids. Other employees are older individuals with complex medical histories. The freedom to choose their own plans was helpful and seems to make them happier.
The headache of dealing directly with insurance companies has disappeared. You might argue we simply pushed the headache onto our employees but I disagree. Employees had to be involved either way when they used their insurance but were often powerless because the insurers would tell them they had to go through their company HR department for any issues. [I love how they assume every company must be large enough to have a separate HR department.] Now employees have full control. They can even change providers if they’re unsatisfied.

So count me as one of the millions of Americans who are grateful for Obamacare. I’m grateful because previously I had no leverage to negotiate premiums or shop for new policies for my company and my employees. The health insurance market had completely broken down, providing no legitimate individual policy market and no affordable market for small businesses. I saw first hand how some people were refused coverage after a cancer diagnosis. Or forced to pay out of pocket for what was considered a pre-existing condition. I figured, if nothing else, Obamacare would fix these problems. Surprisingly, it fixed some problems for my small business as well.

I have no delusions about Obamacare being a perfect solution. The new landscape still allows the insurance vampires too much influence over medical decisions. And costs are still too high. Nothing’s perfect. But this is definitely way, way better than 2013.

Now the vampires are looking for new ways to satisfy their appetite for profit margins. So they merge with one another and work to put low cost providers out of business. In other words, there’s now a market and the big carriers are trying to tilt it in their favor. Isn’t a market approach what conservative politicians wanted?

Apparently not. Politicians like Cory Gardner and unwitting conservative propaganda machines like the Pueblo Chieftain will take any opportunity to undermine the Obama administration. American small businesses (the true job creators) be damned.

P.S. Democrats aren’t much better. Their favorite vampires are in a different corner of the financial services industry.

I closed my eyes and she slipped away. – Boston (1976)

What a game.

The 115th Bell Game was a great contest with momentum shifting back and forth throughout. Michael Ranson was the best player on the field and led Central to a thrilling victory. It was a Wildcat win that will go down as one for the ages if you were wearing blue last night. But for me, and for others wearing red who stayed to watch the game until the bitter end (and shame on you Bulldog fans who left early), it was the one that got away.

From where I sat at about the south 30 yard line on the Centennial side of Dutch Clark Stadium, I had a perfect view of the action (though not the play clock) in the final 18 seconds and I believe the Bulldogs were robbed of one, possibly two, plays. Not because the refs blew a call, but because they didn’t manage the game properly in the final seconds. Overall, the referees called a good game. They may have missed a pass interference penalty in the end zone during the first half but, generally, I thought the refs were pretty solid.

But, something went wrong in the last 10 seconds.

I remember without a doubt (and posted on my live Bell Game blog) the Bulldogs had the ball at the 32 yd line (in Cats territory) with 18 seconds on the clock. Centennial Quarterback, Jake Sanchez, spiked the ball and 16 seconds remained. What happened next turned out to be the last play of the game.

Sanchez dropped back to pass moving to the right and threw a completion near the Central sideline for a 12 yard gain to the 20. The receiver was tackled in bounds. But, there was a defensive penalty. The flag was thrown in the backfield for a personal foul on Central for hitting the QB after he threw the ball. If I remember correctly, Sanchez was shaken up on the play and slow to get back to his feet. I also remember the officials gathering to figure out the penalty and the proper spot. The refs didn’t look like they were in a hurry. Central coaches may have been arguing the call. It was chaotic on the field and the crowd was going crazy. It was clear the Bulldogs had a real chance to steal victory from the jaws of defeat. While the refs gathered to sort things out, Head Coach Mike Palumbo (and, for full disclosure, my friend and classmate at Centennial in the late 80s) and his staff were on the field talking to their players and planning for the next play. The Pueblo Chieftain and maybe other sources said the kicking team was on the field but, to me, it looked like Palumbo and the Dogs were going for one more shot at the end-zone. After that try a kick to send the game to OT.

Then, without any warning, the game was over.

I never heard a whistle. I don’t even remember hearing the referee call the penalty or say “1st down”, although that may have been because for every official announcement the head referee faced the Central (west) side of the field and it was difficult to hear. Even the PA announcer had consistently announced a stirring “First and Goal … BULLDOGS (or WILDCATS)!!!” for every other first and goal. Not this time. The Centennial coaches had no idea the ball was being spotted and the clock was starting. When they got back to the sideline and turned around the game was over. If the clock was ticking there should have been a penalty for too many players (and coaches) on the field. Central players weren’t lined up at the line of scrimmage. I think a handful of Central coaches and players were out on the edge of the field too.

Some of my Centennial friends on Facebook concluded it was a coaching error because the team wasn’t ready to spike the ball and stop the clock. I saw it differently. Centennial had 1st and goal from the 10 (the penalty from the 20 was half the distance). And they should have had a chance to line up before the referees started the clock because of the penalty, because of QB Sanchez being shaken up by the late hit and because of the ensuing chaos on the field. At the very least the Centennial coaches should have been made aware when the refs had figured things out and the ball was being spotted. It seemed like an official timeout. And game officials can’t covertly end their own official timeout to quietly spot the ball and wind the clock. They have to make an announcement and blow a whistle.

Ask some of the Central players who were on the field at the very end. They appeared to be as surprised as anyone when the ref called the game. Slowly they began to realize they wouldn’t need to defend another play and began to erupt into celebration. I think Central’s players and coaches, if they’re being honest, would probably say Centennial deserved another play.

But it wasn’t to be.

The Central players and coaches are to be congratulated for their victory. From my vantage point, the Wildcats played and coached a smart, clean game. I didn’t see any cheap shots or excessive trash talking. It got chippy here and there but the refs and players kept it in check. And I didn’t see any frustration during the game from the Centennial sideline. Certainly not like last year when the officiating was far worse.

It wasn’t until the very end when all the Centennial Assistant Coaches went ballistic. They threw their hats on the field and tossed their clipboards. They ran onto the field to confront the referees and one of the assistant coaches had to be restrained by someone who looked like a Centennial administrator. The Centennial coaches were seething because the referees failed to communicate what was happening on the field. The refs may have followed the “letter of the law” but they failed to observe proper game protocol. With 10 seconds left after a defensive personal foul, the refs needed to take control and let everyone in the stadium know what was going on. But they didn’t. And, as a result, we were all robbed of what could have been. Especially the Centennial student athletes, who played their hearts out and left it all on the field.

The final seconds could have resulted in an incomplete pass or a missed field goal and the same game outcome. But the same seconds might also have resulted in a touchdown pass in the corner of the end zone. It could have been a moment for Centennial fans like “The Catch” for San Francisco 49er fans, that classic play when Joe Montana threw a touchdown pass to Dwight Clark at the back of the end-zone to secure a victory in the 1982 NFC Championship Game.

But no….instead, she slipped away.