The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague.
In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior.
The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets.
The dangers spelled out in Three Felonies a Day do not apply solely to “white collar criminals,” state and local politicians, and professionals. No social class or profession is safe from this troubling form of social control by the executive branch, and nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional democracy hangs in the balance.
Traditionally favored by private and parochial institutions, school uniforms are being adopted by US public schools in increasing numbers. According to a 2020 report, the percentage of public schools that required school uniforms jumped from 12% in the 1999-2000 school year to 20% in the 2017-18 school year. School uniforms were most frequently required by elementary schools (23%), followed by middle (18%), and high schools (10%). (Encyclopedia Britannica)
PRO
School uniforms may deter crime and increase student safety.
School uniforms keep students focused on their education, not their clothes.
School uniforms create a level playing field among students, reducing peer pressure and bullying.
Wearing uniforms enhances school pride, unity, and community spirit.
School uniforms may improve attendance and discipline.
Uniform policies save valuable class time because they are easier to enforce than a standard dress code.
School uniforms prevent the display of gang colors and insignia.
School uniforms make getting ready for school easier, which can improve punctuality.
School uniforms can save parents money.
Most parents and educators support mandatory school uniforms.
Students’ legal right to free expression remains intact even with mandatory school uniforms.
Students dressed in uniform are better perceived by teachers and peers.
Students can express their individuality in school uniforms by introducing variations and adding accessories.
School uniforms restrict students’ freedom of expression.
School uniforms promote conformity over individuality.
School uniforms do not stop bullying and may increase violent attacks.
School uniforms do not improve attendance, academic preparedness, or exam results.
The key findings used to tout the benefits of uniforms are questionable.
School uniforms emphasize the socio-economic divisions they are supposed to eliminate.
Students oppose school uniforms.
Uniforms may have a detrimental effect on students’ self-image.
Focusing on uniforms takes attention away from finding genuine solutions to problems in education.
The push for school uniforms is driven by commercial interests rather than educational ones.
Parents should be free to choose their children’s clothes without government interference.
School uniforms in public schools undermine the promise of a free education by imposing an extra expense on families.
School uniforms may delay the transition into adulthood.
Everyone would basically be 50% happier if everyone dressed a little better. Clothes are everywhere. Everyone doesn’t have to be a clothes hound, but if the girls looked pretty and the guys looked nice, people would be happier and even more optimistic about the future. pic.twitter.com/iQcNPL1cMl
When is it ever NOT storm season somewhere in the United States; with several hundred schools, colleges and universities in the path of them? Hurricanes also spawn tornadoes. This title sets the standard of care for safety, resilience and recovery when education community structures are used for shelter and recovery. The most recently published edition of the joint work results of the International Code Council and the ASCE Structural Engineering Institute SEI-7 is linked below:
Given the historic tornados in the American Midwest this weekend, its relevance is plain. From the project prospectus:
The objective of this Standard is to provide technical design and performance criteria that will facilitate and promote the design, construction, and installation of safe, reliable, and economical storm shelters to protect the public. It is intended that this Standard be used by design professionals; storm shelter designers, manufacturers, and constructors; building officials; and emergency management personnel and government officials to ensure that storm shelters provide a consistently high level of protection to the sheltered public.
This project runs roughly in tandem with the ASCE Structural Engineering Institute SEI-17 which has recently updated its content management system and presented challenges to anyone who attempts to find the content where it used to be before the website overhaul. In the intervening time, we direct stakeholders to the link to actual text (above) and remind education facility managers and their architectural/engineering consultants that the ICC Code Development process is open to everyone.
The ICC receives public response to proposed changes to titles in its catalog at the link below:
You are encouraged to communicate with Kimberly Paarlberg (kpaarlberg@iccsafe.org) for detailed, up to the moment information. When the content is curated by ICC staff it is made available at the link below:
We maintain this title on the agenda of our periodic Disaster colloquia which approach this title from the point of view of education community facility managers who collaborate with structual engineers, architects and emergency management functionaries.. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting, open to everyone.
Today we amble through the literature providing policy templates informing school district, college and university-affiliated transportation and parking facilities and systems. Starting 2024 we will break up our coverage thus:
Mobility 100 (Survey of both ground and air transportation instructional and research facilities)
Mobility 400 (Reserved for zoning, parking space allocation and enforcement, and issues related to one of the most troublesome conditions in educational settlements)
Today’s session will be the last when we cover both land and air transportation codes, standards, guidelines and the regulations that depend upon all them. We will break out space and aerospace mobility into a separate session — largely because many universities are tooling up square footage and facilities in anticipation of research grants.
Like many SDO’s the SAE makes it very easy to purchase a standard but makes it very difficulty to find a draft standard open for public review. It is not an open process; one must apply to comment on a draft standard. Moreover, its programmers persist in playing “keep away” with landing pages.
The public school bus system in the United States is the largest public transit system in the United States. According to the American School Bus Council, approximately 25 million students in the United States ride school buses to and from school each day, which is more than twice the number of passengers that use all other forms of public transportation combined.
The school bus system is considered a public transit system because it is operated by public schools and school districts, and provides a form of transportation that is funded by taxpayers and available to the general public. The school bus system also plays a critical role in ensuring that students have access to education, particularly in rural and low-income areas where transportation options may be limited.
National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services
National School Transportation Association
School Bus Manufacturers Association
…and 50-state spinoffs of the foregoing. (See our ABOUT for further discussion of education industry non-profit associations)
There are several ad hoc consortia in this domain also; which include plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Charging specifications are at least temporarily “stable”; though who should pay for the charging infrastructure in the long run is a debate we have tracked for several revision cycles in building and fire codes.
Because incumbents are leading the electromobility transformation, and incumbents have deep pockets for market-making despite the “jankiness” of the US power grid, we can track some (not all) legislation action, and prospective public comment opportunities. For example:
Keep in mind that even though proposed legislation is sun-setted in a previous (116th) Congress, the concepts may be carried forward into the following Congress (117th).
Public consultations on mobility technologies relevant to the education facility industry are also covered by the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets 4 times monthly in European and American time zones.
This topic is growing rapidly and it may well be that we will have to break it up into more manageable pieces. For the moment, today’s colloquium is open to everyone. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
*After the Roman period, Bath remained a small town until the 18th century, when it became a fashionable spa destination for the wealthy. The architect John Wood the Elder designed much of the city’s Georgian architecture, including the famous Royal Crescent and the Circus. Bath also played an important role in the English literary scene, as several famous authors, including Jane Austen, lived and wrote in the city. During the 19th century, Bath’s popularity declined as other spa towns became fashionable. In the 20th century, the city experienced significant redevelopment and preservation efforts, including the restoration of its Roman baths and the construction of a new spa complex.
Today, Bath is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and a popular tourist destination known for its historical and cultural significance.
The West Virginia University PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) system is a unique and innovative form of public transportation that serves the WVU campus and the city of Morgantown, West Virginia. The PRT system consists of a series of automated, driverless vehicles that operate on an elevated track network, providing fast and convenient transportation to key destinations on and around the WVU campus.
The PRT system was first developed in the 1970s as a solution to the growing traffic congestion and parking demand on the WVU campus. The system was designed to be efficient, reliable, and environmentally friendly, and to provide a high-tech, futuristic mode of transportation that would appeal to students and visitors.
The PRT system currently operates five different stations, with stops at key campus locations such as the Mountainlair Student Union, the Engineering Research Building, and the Health Sciences Center. The system is free for all WVU students, faculty, and staff, and also offers a low-cost fare for members of the general public.
The PRT system has been recognized as one of the most advanced and innovative public transportation systems in the world, and has won numerous awards for its design, efficiency, and environmental sustainability. It has also become an iconic symbol of the WVU campus, and is often featured in promotional materials and advertising campaigns for the university.
“Evaluation of the West Virginia University Personal Rapid Transit System” | A. Katz and A. Finkelstein (Journal of Transportation Engineering, 1987) This paper evaluates the technical and operational performance of the WVU PRT system based on data collected over a six-year period. The authors identify several issues with the system, including maintenance problems, limited capacity, and difficulties with vehicle docking and undocking.
“Modeling of the West Virginia University Personal Rapid Transit System” by J. Schroeder and C. Wilson (Transportation Research Record, 2002) This paper presents a mathematical model of the WVU PRT system that can be used to analyze its performance and identify potential improvements. The authors use the model to evaluate the impact of various factors, such as station dwell time and vehicle capacity, on the system’s overall performance.
“Evaluating the Effectiveness of Personal Rapid Transit: A Case Study of the West Virginia University System” by K. Fitzpatrick, M. Montufar, and K. Schreffler (Journal of Transportation Technologies, 2013) This paper analyzes the effectiveness of the WVU PRT system based on a survey of users and non-users. The authors identify several challenges facing the system, including low ridership, reliability issues, and high operating costs.
Tallinna Ülikool | University of Estonia | Parking place art
Parking — the lack of it, the cost of it — has always been a sensitive issue in education communities. Into the mix add the expansion of electric vehicle charging stations, ride sharing, and micromobility. Their construction characteristics make them ideal locations for storage enterprises and emergency generators. NFPA 88A Standard for Parking Structures asserts best practice of a small but important part of it; the construction and protection of, as well as the control of hazards in, open and enclosed parking structures. Things get complicated with other occupancy classes merge with it; especially so when electric vehicle battery fires present another order of magnitude of risk.
The 2023 Edition (recently released) can be read in the link below:
Note the concern for the overlap and space between this title and passages in International Code Council catalog. We limit our concern for fire safety and more education communities build high rise student accommodation with integral parking structures. The bibliography is extensive (References Pages 92 – 99):
The 2027 edition of this standard is open for public input until June 4, 2024. CLICK HERE to get started on your own.
We hold this title on the standing agenda of our Prometheus and Mobility colloquium. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Electric vehicle charging stations are addressed in the 2024 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) within two specific appendices:
Appendix RE: This appendix provides detailed requirements for electric vehicle charging infrastructure, focusing on both residential and commercial buildings. It includes definitions and infrastructure standards to ensure that new constructions are equipped to support electric vehicle charging
Appendix CG: This appendix offers guidance on electric vehicle power transfer and charging infrastructure, emphasizing the integration of EV-ready requirements into building designs. It outlines the necessary provisions for installing and managing EV charging stations, ensuring compliance with energy conservation standards
.These appendices are part of the broader efforts to incorporate EV infrastructure into building codes, promoting energy efficiency and supporting the transition to electric vehicles.
Recharging infrastructure at at Google’s Mountain View (California) campus | Pretty ugly, eh?
“Gas” 1940 Edward Hopper
This standard will be updated within a reconfigured code development cycle linked below:
Keep in mind that many electric vehicle safety and sustainability concepts will track in other titles in the ICC catalog. It is enlightening to see other energy related proposals tracking in the most recent Group A code revision cycle
The following proposals discussed during the Group A Hearings ended earlier this month are noteworthy:
R309.6 Electric vehicle charging stations and systems. Where provided, electric vehicle charging systems shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 70. Electric vehicle charging system equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2202. Electric vehicle supply equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2594.
IBC 406.2.7 Electric vehicle charging stations and systems. Where provided, electric vehicle charging systems shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 70. Electric vehicle charging system equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2202. Electric vehicle supply equipment shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 2594. Accessibility to electric vehicle charging stations shall be provided in accordance with Section 1108.
TABLE R328.5 MAXIMUM AGGREGATE RATINGS OF ESS (Energy Storage Systems) – PDF Page 1476
Incumbents are socking in EV concepts all across the ICC catalog. We refer them to experts in the Industrial Applications Society IEEE E&H Committee.
One of the more spirited debates in recent revision cycles is the following:
Who shall pay for electrical vehicle charging infrastructure?
The underlying assumption is that the electrification of the global transportation grid has a net benefit. We remain mute on that question; the question of net gain.
Of course, many proposals pointed the finger at the stakeholder with the deepest pockets. Accordingly, new commercial building owners will be required to install charging stations for new buildings. During 2018 and 2019 we tracked the action in the workspace below so that we could collaborate with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee:
Given that most higher education facilities are classified as commercial, the cost of charging stations will be conveyed into the new building construction budget unless the unit takes an exception. Generally speaking, most colleges and universities like to display their electric vehicle credentials, even if the use of such charging stations remains sparse.
Cornell University
Issue: [11-40]
Category: Electrical, #SmartCampus
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey
* The education industry has significant square footage this is classified as residential; particularly on the periphery of large research campuses.
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
