San Diego residents are still not building most of the local school district’s large construction projects as hoped, and a goal for hiring local residents to build 70 percent of large jobs is now further away than it was five years ago, according to new data released this year.
Even so, leaders who put the local hiring goals in place say they are unconcerned with the shortcomings. One called the targets aggressive and singled out the district resident goal as unrealistic.
Under a project labor agreement the San Diego Unified School District signed with area labor unions in 2009, local workers and not out-of-towners would build all of the school district’s bond-funded projects over $1 million.
More specifically, 100 percent of workers would live in San Diego County, at least 70 percent would be district residents and 35 percent would come from the district’s poorer neighborhoods. According to the district, that includes southeastern San Diego and Barrio Logan, as well as downtown, Normal Heights, City Heights, North Park, South Park, Clairemont and some other areas.
Both the district’s Proposition S and Z bond programs — totaling $4.9 billion — are subject to the deal.
But now, more than eight years since Prop. S was passed by voters, those local worker targets remain out of reach. Numbers released Jan. 5 to the district’s citizen’s bond oversight committee show some targets are slipping slightly further away as more large projects are built.
We Stand Up for You. Will You Stand Up for Us?
You really have to feel sorry for SDUSD.They have to lay off teachers, then cancel the layoffs.They have to pay teachers and administrators to retire, then hire some back.And now they can’t meet their hiring quota under their project labor agreement.
Maybe they should hire a management consulting firm to run the district? Think of all the administrative salaries they'd save. Or, Bob Filner is probably available. He has lots of education sector experience. After all, he was on the school board.
The one thing they shouldn’t do is try to float another school bond past the taxpayers for at least ten years. The majority of voters, those that DON’T have students in the system, are not likely to vote “yea”.
School Board screwed the taxpayer on the school bonds. They voted after the bonds were passed to pay prevailing wages. Which mean they are paying 20% more on each project. I would guess if there were a vote by the taxpayer to pay the extra 20% the bond would be defeated. Hopefully when they go back to the voter this issue is discussed.
This may have more to do with economic forces than anything else. Many workers left the trades or were laid off in the wake of the 2008 crash, and with the market steadily improving, we are now facing a labor shortage across the construction industry. In other words, it is difficult to find enough workers to get the job done at all, even without the additional zip code restrictions.
A possible alternative approach would be to set more realistic goals, then provide incentives for contractors that can exceed those targets.
Thomas, just a thought, with the "economic forces" you speak of maybe SDUSD shouldn't ban hundreds of local apprentices from school work. Hundreds of LOCAL state approved certified apprentices are denied work on SDUSD construction projects because they are not union apprentices.
Your statement, "it is difficult enough to find enough workers..." seems funny when the school district in question banned all workers from its projects that don't pay union dues. The union only Project Labor Agreement was never expected to do anything other than shut out non-union companies from school construction work. The comments from union hacks Barrera, Magallanes and Teflon Tommy Lemon were icing on the cake, I'm surprised Hoffa wasn't quoted with a smug backhanded response.