Comments about ‘Utah Legislature: Seismic bill for school buildings back to rumble’

This information needs to be made available, then the schools that are not retrofitted need to be given the money to retrofit. We spend money on bigger, better roads (which pleases conservatives), we spend money on energy efficiency upgrades (which pleases liberals). Neither group seems concerned with this basic safety issue. Why? Out of sight out of mind? Look at Chile and Haiti - Chile had a much larger quake, but had better buildings and the death toll was 1/200 of the death toll for a smaller quake in Haiti. Money spent on seismic retrofitting and upgrades is money well spent.

If we fail to upgrade the seismic safety of our schools, universities, hospitals, fire stations, police stations, and other critical public buildings, the day will come when the blame for needless deaths will be squarely on today's legislature and the public that did not demand upgrades.

We cannot afford NOT to do it.

When evaluating risk/benefit, it is important to calculate objectively rather than just knee-jerk your way to a decision.

Schools are occupied by children about 6 hours per day for 180 days during the year. (1080 hrs/year) There are 8670 hours during a calendar year. This means that children are in schools for 12.3% of the time an earthquake could happen.

How much time do they spend at home? How about estimating 14 hours per day--58.3% of the time an earthquake could happen.

Why don't we legislate seismic improvements to homes? It would have a much more profound effect on statistically guarding children against risk from earthquakes

My point is--there are costs/probabilities involved with all kinds of decisions. To say that we should do EVERYTHING we can at all times to protect ourselves is simply not feasible.

We can afford NOT to do it.

Now go ahead and color me an insensitive boor....

@ Actuarial

Your assessment does seem fair. We should reinforce the home to be safe, but we should do the schools as well. In times of crisis they become shelter to those who lost their homes. They become a community gathering point. The earthquake does not need to hit during school hours for the community to benefit from a stronger school.

RE: Actuarial

It's that kind of thinking that gets people killed. It's the same kind of thinking behind the misnamed "100 year floodplain" that bears no relation to reality. That kind of thinking wagers people's lives against a statistical construct that often bears no relation to actual events.

Seismologists calculate that there is a greater than 65% chance of a M5.0 or greater quake affecting the Salt Lake valley in any 50 year window. No matter what kind of statistics you use, that means Be Prepared.

Actuarial | 11:22 a.m-

Single or two story wood frame structures such as houses are among the safest buildings to be in during an earthquake by their structural nature while multistory unreinforced brick are the most dangerous. The unreinforced brick schools are death traps even in a relatively moderate quake that would still leave the homes potentially damaged but for the most part standing.

Actuarial, you also forget that schools are frequently used as shelters after an event. That event could be a local terrist attack, tornado, flood, fire, earthquake, etc. The bill is written for seismic events but will have numerous upside benefits most people aren't even considering.

Actuarial tables have little to do with actuality when it comes to natural processes.

This would appear to be another unfunded mandate from the legislature to the schools. Our legislators regularly complain about unfunded mandates from the federal government to the states, but seem to fail to recognize the same problem as they this additional mandate to schools which are already only funded at 2/3 the national average cost.

If you are a seismologist, then you would be aware that a magnitude 5.0 earthquake is very different than a magnitude 7.0 quake -- about 100 times different, if I remember correctly.

A more accurate statistic for planners would be the chances of a magnitude 6.0 quake or larger during a 50 year window. But I would suspect that would be much less than 65%, and thus not support your claims of imminent doom as effectively.

Unreinforced masonry and poorly constructed or weakened buildings can be heavily damaged by a M5.0 quake.

Maybe Wiley and his building inspector friends would do the work for free since it could save the lives of children. Otherwise this legislation might appear as though he is creating job security for himself in these slow building construction times.

I think the timing (and the funding) is just wrong for this bill at this time.

I know you can get rhetorical and say, "what's more important than the safety of our kids", but you also need to be realistic. With tax shortfalls like we have this year... this is probably not the time to propose a multi-Billion dollar rebuilding campaign.

If we weren't stuck with a record deficit this year I think the legislature would be more likely to swallow this one.

This bill does not fund a multi-Billion dollar rebuilding program — it only requires school districts to perform a seismic evaluation on each school building in their respective districts. From those evaluations, a future funding authorization can then be made to rebuild those schools, on a year-to-year priority basis, and to better estimate all future funding needs to bring all schools up to current seismic protection standards as funding can be made available.

2 bits: The bill was first proposed 4 years ago (you know, when there was actually a little breathing room in the state budget). This bill came up in the education subcommittee the same day as the Wells EQ in NV 2 years ago(just over the state border near Wendover) and it failed that year too.

Currently there is no fiscal note attached. Yes, the structural engineers in this state feel this is an important enough issue to volunteer for the effort. And for the record, even if this results in construction / retrofit of schools, Rep Wiley won't get any additional work. The state and city building officials don't inspect school construction. That is the responsibility of the school districts.

As for the price to fix the schools, that's the whole point of the exercise. NOBODY KNOWS WHAT IT WILL COST. Many people have opinions, nobody KNOWS. FEMA 154 (read the bill or look up the document) is meant to help prioritize the seismic hazards. The information will allow locals and the state to prioritize problems so we can eat the elephant one bite at a time.