The following comes from an Apr. 30 story in Catholic San Francisco.
Catholic, private and charter K-12 schools face potentially devastating earthquake retrofitting and other costs and even school closures if the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passes a seismic evaluation ordinance being pushed by the mayor’s office, archdiocesan officials say.
“The City of San Francisco is poised to impose a crushing burden upon the Catholic schools of the city. And the worst part is that much of this burden is totally unnecessary,” Auxiliary Bishop Robert W. McElroy said.
A third of the children in San Francisco attend private or religious schools, the largest percentage in the state of California. “Most private schools have not been adequately evaluated for their performance in a serious earthquake,” says a December 2013 report by the Private Schools Earthquake Safety Working Group.
“While most San Francisco parents assume that all schools are required to be safe in earthquakes, this is not, in fact, the case,” the report says, noting that since 1933 public school construction has been regulated by the state Field Act while private school buildings fall under what were less stringent local building codes. The report estimates “33 percent of all San Francisco private school buildings have characteristics that indicate they might perform poorly in future earthquakes.”
The archdiocese and most private schools only became aware of the working group and its report near the end of last year although the group began meeting at the end of 2012, officials said.
“The problem with the proposed ordinance is not with its goal, but its design,” Bishop McElroy said.
“The ordinance grew out of the deliberations of a City Hall working group on private schools which had more than 40 members, but not a single pastor, principal or teacher from a Catholic School,” Bishop McElroy writes in a commentary appearing on Page 14 of this issue of Catholic San Francisco. “Nor did the panel include significant representation from the many non-Catholic private schools in San Francisco, especially those which predominantly serve the poor and students with learning or physical disabilities.”
Tor read the entire story, click here.
If the city of San Francisco is going to require the retrofitting, then it should pay for it!
I agree.
SFO could probably lose in Court – since making any law retroactive is difficult.
(All Buildings without discrimination used by the public – built prior to law passage.)
if yur king ya don’t pay ya decree, and as things are it will always go this way, and they will shut down that which they don’t want and excempt that which they do want, whats new. but THEIR IS A GOD and we do not despair and HE has already triumphed so continue to point their errors out with JOY.
OK, so Bob, taking your post to its logical conclusion, you would prefer to have our kids die in the next earthquake? How is that even remotely the Christian response to this issue?
YFC, is there no limit to the burdens San Francisco could impose upon the Church that you would not support? In this case the same municipality which refuses to impose building standards upon abortion clinics is simply attempting to regulate parochial and private school buildings out of existence.
There is no “concern for the children” based good will here. This is just another in a long line of harrassements and harm seeking, designed against the Church and against private education in general.
Note that no one is alleging that the buildings don’t meet the required building codes, including the required post-construction seismic retrofits that have been written in their post-construction years.
With the Field Act, in 1933, California wrote rules for itself to insure the safety of some of the buildings under its direct regulation. It was an advance on building codes at the time and did eliminate the shoddiest of practices, practices now largely eliminated by the improved general codes and none of which are alleged in the historical buildings now under seige.
You may wish to seek some understanding of the effects of that law from Architects or Engineers of your acquaintance, I am confident they will advise you that marginal safety increases over standard codes are obtained only at very large regulatory expense and at the cost of design innovation.
YFC, what about closing down hospitals, clinics, abortion clinics, private homes, etc., all because they do not meet the newest earthquake requirements (-which are always subject to change), in the name of saving lives ?
There won’t be much left in the city and those in power can confiscate all the property.
It was very dishonest on the part of the city officials not to notify the public and not allow the public to observe any such discussions.
Ed, Board of Supervisors meetings are open to the public. So are the committee meetings. And they have time for public comment.
Go to the board of supervisors hearings!!
Even a fool knows this needs to be done in order to respect life, the questions is how to pay for it!!
No, this doesn’t need to be done.
Field Act standards and reviews are simply not required for most high occupancy buildings, including those normally full of people whom no one desires to see hurt, including (in San Francisco), the Transamerica building.
Indeed, the case can be made that, by greatly increasing the cost of school construction and thus inhibiting the construction of new school buildings, the Field Act actually increases the danger to children.
The Field Act was written in response to earthquake damage in 1933, when California was full of unreinforced masonry buildings. Earthquake research has advanced a great deal, and this research has found its way into the Codes used by every city, including San Francisco, since. This is simply an attempt to ban private schooling.
Retroactive laws need to be paid by the City (City taxpayers).
Since up until now, the state cannot absolutely control what is being taught in Catholic schools, so they will try to close as many as possible by this new tactic. The state will stop at nothing in order to spread their false gospel of atheism, and unnatural, and anti family practices. This is ONE way they will attempt to get their way. What the state does not realize is, GOD is in charge of nature. If HE so wills, HE can destroy any building, no matter how strong it is.
Fr. Karl, before even starting to read this article, I thought the same as you. The line which jumped out to me was the sub-title; “One-third of San Francisco kids attend private schools.” What you wrote IS the intended purpose of this policy!
The fact that no one from Catholic or other private schools were included in the discussions to retrofit their schools shows another secrete overreach of government. What exactly was the final goal of their decision? If one third of student are now required to attend public schools because of the prohibitive cost of retrofitting, then the public school district now have tens of thousands more in government funds.
Sure, let’s just let the kids die in the next earthquake, rather than bringing them up to code. That makes sense, right?
That’s a false dichotomy. Standards evolve and we build to the standards of the time. That these may make our buildings SAFER does not suggest the current buildings are UNSAFE. Get a grip.
So YFC, you believe in secret government meetings?
You don’t think meetings should have been publically advertised?
You don’t think the public should be able to observe government meetings?
In most States, this is against the law.
Board of Supervisors meetings are open to the public as are the committee meetings. Put your name on the public comment list, and stop whining about not being part of the discussion.
Did you read the post ED? The supervisor postponed the hearing so that everyone can be at the table. Read the article instead of spouting off, please.
As a 33-year veteran teacher, I think we ought to get ahold of ourselves. As McElroy noted, this is stuff we should be doing (as we can) anyway. We owe our families safe buildings. We have met the local standards to date and GIVEN REASONABLE TIME can continue to meet them. No court will allow any property owner to be deprived of his assets because of a sudden change in local standards like this.
CORRECTED Copy
Given that it is time to Re-Think Catholic Education anyway, and many Schools (Catholic, Charter or the Public Zoo System…) have Safety Issues, and staffs that are often unprepared for emergencies, being more concerned enforcing with a Common Core of PC Conformity in place of ‘education’…
Retrofitting versus Re-Purposing may be a valid discussion topic. Certainly the ‘uniformity’ of Teaching the Catholic Faith is lacking – as the numerous threads on Rogue ‘catholic’ (small ‘c’) Schools & Administrations, actually preaching the types of Anti-Catholic Hatred common to the Gaystapo Trolls here in place of the Truth of the Magisterium, has made painfully clear.
(BTW – The CA Teachers Unions are fighting a proposed law to require certain injection meds (like ‘Epi-Pens’) be available for use by staff – saying that schools need Full time Nurses on site, and not band aids from teachers)
However – using Safety Codes as a Tool to destroy Catholic Identity is just one of many scams of the Gaystapo, and nothing will ever be safe enough for them until Catholicism itself is stomped out – in the service of ‘tolerance’.
We need to look to this issue ourselves – and take wise precautions in stewarding the Future of the Church in many ways. Big glass cathedrals are pretty, but if no one is going to visit them except as tourist attractions – then it is time to Re-Purpose our Treasure to that which is valuable – teaching Children the Truth in a Safe place – and not subsidizing the ‘social justice’ scammers of this age of Abominatoin.
Tom Byrne,
“No court will allow any property owner to be deprived of his assets because of a sudden change in local standards like this.” Have you examined the insane liberal makeup of “our” courts lately?
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc
Given that it is time to Re-hink Catholic Education anyway, and many Schools (Catholic, Charter or the Public Zoo System…) have Safety Issues, and staffs that are often unprepared for emergencies, being more concerned enforcing with a Common Core of PC Conformity in place of ‘education’…
Retrofitting versus Re-Purposing may be a valid discussion topic. Certainly the ‘uniformity’ of Teaching the Catholic Faith is lacking – as the numerous threads on Rogue ‘catholic’ (small ‘c’) Schools & Administrations, actually preaching the types of Anti-Catholic Hatred common to the Gaystapo Trolls here in place of the Truth of the Magisterium, has made painfully clear.
(BTW – The CA Teachers Unions are fighting a proposed law to require certain injection meds (like ‘Epi-Pens’) be available for use by staff – saying that schools need Full time Nurses on site, and not band aids from teachers)
However – using Safety Codes as a Tool to destroy Catholic Identity is just one of many scams of the Gaystapo, and nothing will ever be safe enough for them until Catholicism itself is stomped out – in the service of ‘tolerance’.
We need to look to this issue ourselves – and take wise precautions in stewarding the Future of the Church in many ways.
I knew there had to be a gay angle to this! There always is with those who are obsessed with homosexuality.
McDermott offers another one of his breathtakingly absurd accusations: “However – using Safety Codes as a Tool to destroy Catholic Identity is just one of many scams of the Gaystapo, and nothing will ever be safe enough for them until Catholicism itself is stomped out – in the service of ‘tolerance’.”
Call me naive, but I don’t believe this is a Catholic issue. After the ’89 earthquake all buildings used by public were inspected. Public buildings that cannot survive a big one have been retrofitted. Homes must now be earthquake resistant. Why should Catholic schools be any different? Why would any Catholic believe it is ok for their kids to go to unsafe schools but not for kids in public schools? It is a bit like the Bishops who didn’t report child molesters because they had canon law and didn’t have to meet the standards of civil law. If the school your child or grandchild attended was not earthquake resistant, would you let them go there? The arch-diocese needs to stop whining and get on with it. They can afford millions of dollars for predatory priests but not the safety of our kids? Really?
Bob One – As you note, the ’89 earthquake (as with each major earthquake that preceeded it) prompted retrofit requirements applied to all buildings, including these.
These buildings have been retrofitted over time. There is no credible accusation that these buildings are unsafe.
San Francisco is a beautiful city, but the people want the type of government that, to me, seems surreal. It is blatantly anti-Catholic; remember when they wanted to tax the Church properties because they transferred ownership to another part of the Diocese. There was no sale. As I recall the Diocese went to court and had this law changed. Who wants to live in a community where evil is celebrated ? Why would anyone want to live there?
How did these structures do in the Loma Prieta of 1989? I remember countless photos and endless coverage of the destroyed Embarcadero, Bay Bridge damage, and even significant cracks in Candlestick Park. Buildings sliding off their foundations in the Marina District made the cover of Time Magazine. The buildings at these schools never made the news. Seems like they already passed the test. Anybody who thinks this is anything other than a ruse is assisting an anti-Catholic agenda. Anything can be made stronger, but nothing guarantees safety. Pray you’re not indoors when the big one hits.
Retro Said: ” Pray you’re not indoors when the big one hits.”
Actually,, better that you be in an open field – that doesn’t open up and swallow you like a sinkhole.
Otherwise it is duck and cover ( which means keep you head down under something sold until it stops and probably for a 60 count afterwards) – because what is going to shake loose from the tops of buildings and rain down on streets is anybody’s guess.
Not to worry though, the Fukishima Tsunami was relatively small along the west coast this time – and when (not if) the Cascadia Subduction Zone goes (the big one offshore to the north), the huge waves may not even reach this far, much… Ahem.
Folks should take the time to read the entire article, not just the excerpt posted to CCD. If you READ the whole article, instead of going off with half baked accusations that this is an attack on catholicism, you see that Supervisor Weiner postponed the committee hearing so that he could get everyone at the table. You’d also learn that the proposed legislation merely requires schools to undertake an assessment of their buildings likely performance in an earthquake but does not require any construction or fixes to occur. You would also learn that the Supervisor expressed an appreciation for Catholic school’s role in educating many of our most economically challenged families.
“Get a grip”, I say back to those who lambast me and my concern for Catholic school kids. I wish you all had some sense of how crazy many of you sound when you post ridiculous accusations that everyone is out to destroy the catholic church. Cra-cra as the kids like to say.
My above remarks of 6:02 pm should have read “morally insane your remarks read”!
I wish CCM could add a review before posting function as some others have.
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc
Kenneth, California Catholic Daily does not NEED to add a “review before posting function.”
You just need to think before you start banging on your keyboard, and then re-read what you have typed before you hit the button “post comment.”
CCD is run by volunteers now, and they can’t babysit people with poor communication skills.
I hope it is obvious, but a review function for the posting software would not add to anyone’s “babysitting” requirements.
As for comparative communications skills, Anonymous, your rudeness comes through loud and clear.
YFC, I read the entire article. I make it a habit to do so with all the abbreviated articles posted here on CCD, which I choose to comment on. The comments from the entire article which you refer to, in no way changed my opinion as to why this committee was set up in the first place. But since you bring up the balance of the article, I thought the readers would be interested in this statement which did not make the CCD cut;
“Although two-thirds of school children attend PUBLIC school, San Francisco public school seismic evaluation.” information is NOT available online. –
I would think the City could have made a couple of phone calls to the Archdiocese to get professional input to this process. So I agree with the Bishop on that point.
What is unclear to me is whether the City is proposing to hold Catholic schools to the same rules as the public schools, other private schools, and any similarly situated buildings.
It doesn’t matter whether it’s the same standard as public schools. Public schools are publicly funded and cost is hardly a concern. Public schools are razed and re-built everyday. The point is that this is government encroachment on Catholic schools. These buildings have stood for 50 plus years. Somebody needs to tell the city get the h–l out. This requirement, if it is not a ruse altogether, conveniently aids those with an agenda against the Catholic schools, and there are many. Another chapter in the City of Man v The City of God.
If you read the article that this post was lifted from, you get all your answers.
YFC, you and other “Statists” who are soooo concerned about “Catholic school kids” know very well that the committee, which was set up to “study” the soundness of Catholic school structures, does not have the power to force those schools to make any changes. The leftists politicians in power along with their cronies in the lame stream media will see to it that the the Catholic schools WILL be “forced” to make the changes. The article drops a not so subtle clue as to how this will be done; “by PUBLISHING the information the schools will likely be forced to take action because of legal or parental pressure”. The Leftist controlled news media will hound the airwaves day and night with this information. They will carry on with how heartless the Catholic leadership is and how concerned “THEY” are for “OUR” children! They will show interviews with outraged parents who “feel violated” and “forced to remove their children from the “unsafe” schools. They will drum up “legal experts” who will talk about the liability the Catholic schools now face. Liberals are soooo predictable!
Just a reminder, “Although two-thirds of school children attend PUBLIC school, San Francisco PUBLIC SCHOOL seismic evaluation.” information is NOT available (i.e. POSTED) online.”
The nanny state wants to take over our lives, and we cannot deny that it is happening, slowly but surely. Yes, seat belts save lives, but we are forced to use them. Homogenized milk is legal, but raw milk isn’t, because we might get sick from it. Child proof caps are on every medicine bottle, but many elderly who have arthritis have a problem opening them. All these laws ARE limiting our freedom. To make school buildings totally earthquake proof is IMPOSSIBLE! And this latest attempt to force big brother (and big sister) into the private sector is outrageous. For several decades now, the state has been at war with the Catholic Church, and now under Obama and other socialists (communists) the war is more aggressive and out in the open. Yes, our children should have a safe environment in which to learn, but there is a limit on how extreme the measures should be without trampling down on the God given rights of the Church and of the individual.
Pilar, thank you for your thoughts. Too many “modern” Americans have been duped into handing over our God given freedoms to the authority and enforcement of men under the “promise of safety”.
I guess you could say that “safety” has become America’s version of the “The Golden Calf”.