This is just mental meandering, no real point....

I finish a Master’s in Public Administration in June.  Theoretically it is necessary for “higher administrative” levels of local or federal government, as well as starting up and maintaining not for profits.  I could go into why I went into this field, but that’s a topic better explored in another blog.  Suffice it to say, I believe government should be like the pipes in your house; unseen, small as possible, with the added benefit of making your life better or more convenient, and used at the owner’s discretion.

As part of my degree requirement, I’ve taken the opportunity to study and work with different levels of government over the last two years.  This covers a multitude of functions from economic re-development at the local level, to real estate analysis, GAO studies, neighborhood stabilization programs, etc.

One of my colleagues began a not for profit last year.  Ohio has a lot of abandoned homes, and in some places, those homes are historic.  Meaning, the wood work is hand carved, the chandeliers cut from real crystal, the stained glass windows each hand made, the doors solid oak, the wood floors in mint condition.  In short, these homes were abandoned for various reasons and left to rot.  My city has a demolition schedule for our historic districts, but destroying a home is expensive and the list is over 6 years out. 

Back to the not for profit.  My colleague made a deal with our city.  Using ex-cons and others, they go into these homes and “de-construct” them.  Essentially stripping the house down to the studs, taking everything from fire place mantels and light fixtures to their Re-Sale store, and selling the items for profit.  The profits pay the workers de-constructing as well as the store employees.  This has been a tremendous success.  People seem to love the idea of buying wooden floors from homes built in the 1800’s for the “super rich,” to put into their new homes today.  The same goes for things like door knobs, solid wood doors, and crown molding.

This is a win-win for everyone and once the house is stripped, its easily taken down.  When the lot is just a yard again, the city offers it to the neighbors on each side (usually for super cheap, maybe $500-$1000 for 1/4 to a 1/2 acre) to add to their own lot.  This ensures the “vacant” lot is maintained,  taxes can be collected, and it increases the buyer’s outdoor living space and property value.

Again, win-win.

My colleague’s not for profit is considered a “green job maker” by the federal government.  Therefore, it qualifies for certain grants right now under Obama’s Green Jobs Plan.

Recently I attended a next phase meeting and someone “big” in the “green jobs” market for the U.S. lectured.  I won’t name names, you probably wouldn’t know it anyway, but what I found fascinating was this:  green jobs are very very hard to define.

This professional told us that “it is extremely difficult to break into the green jobs industry unless you’re a technocrat (an inventor).”

This troubles me for a couple reasons on a professional level.

First, if green is so, well, GREEN (i.e., natural), why should it be so difficult to “break into?”  Second, there wasn’t a single person in the room who used the same definition for “green.”  Last, there are very few ideas and innovations at present in this field.  I don’t mean to imply there aren’t some fantastic energy saving ideas and inventions in the private sector, but there are few new ideas and innovations in administering them at the public level.

What I found particularly disturbing was the general acceptance that creating green jobs isn’t perfected, and that’s OK (we’re just kids in the sand box trying to figure out how things work).  Its going to cost millions, maybe billions before (and if) we ever come to agreement on how best to go about green jobs in the public sector, or if they are actually realistic, or if they’ll ever pay for themselves.  And if they NEVER pay for themselves, if they in fact cause job losses, that’s ok, because well….it’s “green.”

A lot of people don’t know this, but generally in the federal government, before a big new social policy is taken on, the government will attempt a pilot test, a test study.   For example, there are numerous pilot tests and social experiments that have both failed and showed success when it comes to housing low-income families.  Many were scrapped because they just didn’t work…or frankly, by the time  the pilot test was over, politics changed and congress wasn’t interested anymore.  Whatever the reason, we have an arsenal of programs that were pilot tested and shelved, never to be seen by the public at large.

As I listened to this group of administrators attempt to define green jobs, willing to spend millions in pursuit of it, I wondered.  Why can’t we have a pilot program for this?  Instead of making like Nike and just doing it.  Sure, its not a social program specifically, more economic-environmental, but still….

The implicit agreement among many public administrators that green jobs are “the future” and we will pay significant sums of money to pursue them….(so long as money is coming in from the feds, and not just unfunded mandates), life is good…or can be REALLY good if we can just figure out how to twist a job description into leafy greens. 

The reason it is so difficult to create green jobs in the public arena is because it is not designed, by definition or service, to produce any material thing.  Sure there are exceptions (I mentioned one above).  But generally the public arena is designed to serve the public.  Many not for profits are based on social issues, and trying to make them “green” (so they can qualify for grant $), seems like an activity in frustration to me.  (But maybe I just don’t get it.) 

So what is a green job in the public sector?  What do you think?

So far from what I’ve experienced, it depends on who you ask.  But the general vibe in the world of government/non-profits seems best summed up in the words of Justice Potter Stewart while ruling on obscenity/pornography,…. ummmm, “I know it when I see it.”