Article

2014-03-10 Economy

CBO Finds Private Roads (Slightly) Faster and Cheaper

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bobby 2014-03-10 09:03|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 "have built highways slightly less expensively and slightly more quickly, compared with the traditional public-sector approach,"

BFO. No bid contracts to two or three road outfits that corner the market for state (sub-)contracts that include a line item which one way or another is functionally "kick-back patronage [including the state employee union political fund] and nepotism hiring program"

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-03-10 10:35|| 2014-03-10 10:35|| Front Page Top

#2 Most of the ridiculous contracting rules which governments impose on themselves are pushed down onto private contractors as well. Makes it hard to realize much in savings when you have to do all the same stupid and wasteful things that the government does.

Posted by Eohippus McCoy1112 2014-03-10 10:59|| 2014-03-10 10:59|| Front Page Top

#3 I finished one of these P3s and am working on another, now. In the first. the State loaded up on testing requirements, equating loads of tests with high quality. So we wasted some dollars, which (as the article said), ultimately come from the taxpayer. Five years, $1.5 B, roads and bridges.

The agencies like having the private cash, but - deep down - they believe they could do a better job if only the State would give them the time and money. So the CBO report tends to feed that theory/fantasy.

The biggest "patronage" for the completed project was the 40% goal for the various disadvantaged groups. In the finest 'Chicago' tradition, we were threatened with disbarment if we didn't meet the goal - by far, the highest the state had ever attempted/mandated (not Illinois, BTW). We achieved about 90% of the 'goal' and ultimately got some praise from the agency. Minority goals add some 5-10% to the final cost, but agencies refuse to recognize that.

The current project, just underway, seems a lot more reasonable (10% goals), but the various groups are still jostling for position.

Giant corporations tend to lead the way for mega-projects, but carry a lot of subcontractors with them - minority and otherwise. As long as the state doesn't regulate the P3 concept to death.

Posted by Bobby 2014-03-10 12:16|| 2014-03-10 12:16|| Front Page Top

#4 small and minority contractors aren't generally capable of handling large complex projects (like bridges). That's why they're small and minority contractors

Posted by Frank G 2014-03-10 12:39|| 2014-03-10 12:39|| Front Page Top

23:56 JosephMendiola
22:21 SteveS
21:14 SteveS
20:45 JosephMendiola
19:41 Besoeker
18:53 Au Auric
18:42 Uncle Phester
18:35 Uncle Phester
18:29 Uncle Phester
18:03 Au Auric
18:00 Uncle Phester
17:53 Uncle Phester
17:14 Old Patriot
17:11 Old Patriot
16:54 Alaska Paul
16:28 g(r)omgoru
16:22 Zenobia Floger6220
16:06 Uncle Phester
15:31 g(r)omgoru
15:28 Zenobia Floger6220
15:22 USN, Ret.
15:07 g(r)omgoru
14:52 trailing wife
14:42 Zhang Fei