I attended a public forum last month regarding the future of the Traffic Bridge. I met a friend there and listened to him comment that there was no way the city could do any of the four options presented for the costs stated. Although he has a background in construction I thought perhaps he was just lipping off. I owe him an apology.
In today's SP (Oct. 21/10) the new suggested prices are listed for the available options for the Traffic Bridge. Each option is about $10 million dollars more than the last. That is a 40% increase in a little more than a month. This price differential cannot be written off as increased cost of labour and materials. Someone is not doing their job!
And what good is the public feedback when it is solicited on fraudulent information?
Then I read heritage guru Peggy Sarjeant's letter to the editor wherein she stated: "Let's not be swayed by pessimistic predictions of the structural integrity of the bridge. The engineers assure us that it can be rehabilitated to the same standard as the other options, at a comparable cost." Can we believe this statement?
This is an ongoing problem at City Hall. It seems every capital project comes in substantially higher than initially quoted. Either council is being intentionally mislead by administration or administration doesn't have the skill level to properly estimate projects. Either/or scenario is problematic for decisions makers and those of us who foot the bill.
Its time to take a time out and get qualified people to provide accurate information to both council and the public
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
"And what good is the public feedback when it is solicited on fraudulent information?"
ReplyDeleteGiven that "fraud" constitutes an intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another person's decision, such wording about the cost estimates seems a little strong: but you are most certainly on to something.
The public process was kicked off with what could be perceived as "fraudulent information" when Atch went running to the first microphone he could find to proclaim "The bridge is going to collapse. It's imminent that it is going to collapse" despite no substantiating evidence.
And while "fraudulent" may be a bit strong to describe Atch's actions, "Chicken Little" doesn't seem quite the right descriptor either.
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/Uncertain+future+Traffic+Bridge/3444502/story.html#ixzz130e0RIEd.
It is not that the bridge rehabilitation is any more that the other options it is the estimate of the cost to maintain the old bridge in the $150,000 annually to paint the present bridge about every four years. I could even swallow that if I had any faith that succeeding councils would do it, alas when budgets get tight we all know how that will play out, "well it's time to paint the bridge,hmmm looks good to me let's leave it a few more years we'll get er painted later." There are too many examples of CofS admin not knowing enough about current practices from being out of private business.
ReplyDelete"Each option is about $10 million dollars more than the last. That is a 40% increase in a little more than a month. This price differential cannot be written off as increased cost of labour and materials. Someone is not doing their job!"
ReplyDeleteIIRC when the original 10 possibilities were presented to council I though the administration was quite clear that the initial cost estimates were very rough, not absolute. And that they were more for comparison between the relative costs between the various options.
At least that was my understanding.
A former councilor accusing the city administration of fraudulent acts upon the public is a significant accusation.
ReplyDeleteDoes she have proof that actions were intentionally undertaken to purposely mislead Saskatoon citizens? Can she justify this accusation? Or is it simply a potentially libelous smear?
Given the Mistress's penchant to promote lawsuits, she may find herself in one if she is not careful with her accusations.
Haha Anon 12:01 you are clown. Why even bother coming to the Mistress blog?
ReplyDeleteYou are so delusional, hopefully none of your left wing loonies get elected to council in byelection
@ 8:02
ReplyDelete12:01 raises a question about an allegation against city administration, and you call names back.
If there is a clown torch to be had here, it appears self-foisted.
I too have felt the fraudulence or rath of the city administration as an inner-city resident. Lots of decisions behind the scene with city planning dept. Sneaky zoning changes! Look at our roads, some have switchbacks comparable to mountain terrain. I support the mistress! Look at the screwups we are paying for over and over!
ReplyDelete