Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: just Warren on July 21, 2018, 11:54:37 PM
-
After a spate of fires here in California the Army Corps of Engineers paid for debris to be cleared from home sites.
They paid contractors by the ton.
What do you suppose happened?
Answer here. (https://www.kqed.org/news/11681280/cleaning-up-inside-the-wildfire-debris-removal-job-that-cost-taxpayers-1-3-billion)
-
Stand by while I find my shocked face. I know it is around here somewhere.
-
There are basically only three ways they could have paid, and each is wide open for abuse without sufficient and proper oversight -- which the Corps of Engineers is apparently incapable of providing.
- Lump sum: requires someone to do accurate surveys of each demolition site to identify and quantify exactly what is to be removed, and how much of it there is. In a situation like this, basically impossible, even if they could find honest people/companies to do the surveys. Adds an additional layer of bureaucracy, and an additional set of consultants whose own contracts include a profit margin.
- By the ton: requires someone to monitor the work at each site to clamp down on the abuses seen. Contracts should have included robust requirements that the actual work be done by local contractors, or at least by contractors within the affected state (California). Up for discussion is whether or not the Corps should have opened it up to out-of-state entities to oversee the entire process, but since it's federal money maybe that's a legal necessity.
- Time and materials: Pretty much a variation on "By the ton," except that this way the price per ton is less, but the .gov pays separately for the hourly cost of each piece of equipment and each operator/driver. The prospective abuse here, obviously, is that there's no incentive to work quickly or efficiently. This way would probably eliminate the problem of over-loaded trucks, though -- there's more money to be made by running them half-filled.
-
Shouldn't Mr and Mrs. Fire Victim's* Homeowners insurance paid for the cleanup and to rebuild their homes ?? I know that's what I pay my insurance company to do.
*- Because I guarantee that I couldn't afford to own most of those homes in those counties in CA. So why do I have to subsidize their risk management ??
-
Shouldn't Mr and Mrs. Fire Victim's* Homeowners insurance paid for the cleanup and to rebuild their homes ?? I know that's what I pay my insurance company to do.
Yes. The .gov should have only taken care of clearing the streets and other public properties.
-
Yes. The .gov should have only taken care of clearing the streets and other public properties.
Have to agree. The local, county & state should have taken care of their respective areas, with financial assist from the feds if/as needed. Personal homeowners ins. takes care of the homeowners property.
Still many ways for abuse, but more local control & easier to get hold of the responsible parties.
-
Still many ways for abuse, but more local control & easier to get hold of the responsible parties.
And far more difficult for out-of-state carpetbaggers to rish in to slim the cream off the top while performing shoddy work without required licenses.
-
I can see a certain amount of government oversight involved in the clearing of private property given the toxic nature of the debries as well as the potential for more fires. I'd be pretty peeved of I got all my stuff cleaned up and my creek was all screwed up everytime it rained because my neighbor didn't clean up up.