April 09, 2008
After all, it is designed to cost the taxpayer more money, slow down construction projects, and likely result in shoddier work.
Mayor Daley's plan to bolster minority participation by changing the way the city awards construction contracts got the go-ahead from a City Council committee Tuesday despite concerns it could increase costs and slow the building process.Ald. Ginger Rugai (19th) told Chief Procurement Officer Montel Gayles she has waited "an inordinate amount of time" -- seven years and counting -- to get a new fire station in her Far Southwest Side ward.
"Hopefully, the contract changes you're recommending don't delay projects" any further, Rugai said during a Budget Committee hearing.
Ald. Bernard Stone (50th) said the decision to break up contracts into "bite-sized chunks" that minority businesses can more easily swallow could "make it more costly" and "harder for management to monitor."
* * * Instead of hiring an architect to design a project, then awarding the construction contract to the lowest bidder, City Hall would do it all in one fell swoop. A request for proposals would be issued and price would not be the only factor. Selection would be based on qualifications and levels of participation by minorities and women.
Don’t you love that part that says “price would not be the only factor”? That is Chigagoese for “The city will pay the contractors more so the right pols will get their kickbacks.” And rather than getting the best for the least, what we’ll see Chicago get is a rainbow coalition of contractors – and the taxpayer get the shaft.
Reminds me of the court ruling 25 years ago in the Chicago area in which a judge actually held that holding minority contractors to the same performance standards was a violation of the Constitution because such businesses cannot perform at the same level of quality as those owned by white men. Fortunately, a higher court struck that one down – and hopefully another will declare this blatant racial and gender-based favoritism to be unconstitutional – and a violation of the fiduciary duty of elected officials to taxpayers.
Posted by: Greg at
10:11 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 395 words, total size 3 kb.
19 queries taking 0.0099 seconds, 28 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.