Friday, April 18, 2014


It just astonishes me that Trimet so routinely allows every single contractor to go over budget and the puppet board routinely approves this farce.
Why do they bother even taking bids at Trimet? 
They are NEVER accurate and always underestimated.
Coming up at next board meeting
And after the oligarchs get through handing away this $3 million dollars the following is left, who is gonna get it I wonder?
And even after the remaining $5.2 million is given away  if anybody needs more they can have it
"owners reserve"

(Funny how union members can't get the same treatment, nope, for them there is only cuts)


Al M said...

I love how the additional costs are always EXACT FIGURES, like $450k or $200k, it's obscene.

Jason McHuff said...

The figures are exact because they are estimates and budget amounts, not final actual costs.

Also, I think there was not a bid for the overall project, and instead TriMet picked who was best qualified. In any case, the resolution says the extra work was not foreseen or in the original contract and I don't think it's unreasonable for them to get extra money to complete it.

Al M said...

That's a standard response Jason
extra work was not foreseen or in the original

It's like We need raises to keep qualified personnel.

Complete and utter bullshit

Jason McHuff said...

I see those statements as different because raises for employees not under a contract aren't mandatory like dealing with contaminated soil or permit requirements are.

But what would you do if you signed a contract to have some work done, and later it was realized that more work than was specified in the contract was needed?

Al M said...

When a contract is signed at this building that I run, IT'S HONORED.
And if they can't they eat the loss.


Al M said...

Furthermore Jason this is not an occasional thing that happens over there, THIS IS STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE!
I might be able to buy that explanation if it was an occasional thing but its not!

Jason McHuff said...

And I believe you would find that each contract/spending authorization is for distinct items, and that they are dividing work up so that the spending can be better overseen versus just handing over giant lump sums and letting contractors keep the extra money when it turns out that a lower amount of work then forecasted actually needs to be done.

Take dealing with the unstable or contaminated ground. TriMet could tell the contractor to bear full responsibility for dealing with those issues no matter how extensive. But if they did, the contractor would likely increase the price to cover that potential risk.

Instead, TriMet has the original contract cover a base amount of work that they believe will be required, and agrees to pay more only if additional work is needed, and only for the actual amount of work needed.

Anonymous said...

The difference between Al and Jason is basically this.

Jason thinks that Trimet operates efficiently and in the best interest of the public.

Al on the other hand thinks that Trimet operates for the benefit of the few and find ways to funnel tax money into special interests.

My own opinion, special interest is the American way right now.

Al M said...

No, Jason just enjoys arguing with me in reality.

Jason McHuff said...

All I'm trying to say is that there appear to be reasonable justifications for the money being given to contractors, and that they aren't being given whatever they want.