Monday, September 22, 2008
Guilt Free Shopping
Updated
In the WTF department, the Times Picayune reports:
In case you don't get the WTF? reaction:
Is anybody still pushing the line that Orleans Parish residents should do as much of their shopping as possible in Orleans Parish? I stopped feeling that way two years ago, but, even now that any lingering personal anger has largely subsided, I really can't feel any guilt about spending money in Jefferson Parish that I could be spending in New Orleans. As a matter of fact, I do most of my grocery shopping at Terranova's or Canseco's on Esplanade, but that's a matter of convenience and supporting small businesses. I certainly don't feel any need to give the city my tax dollars. Can anybody seriously argue that I should?
For more on the subject, see Celcus (this post also) and my earlier post. Since we've heard this joke before, I'll repeat the question. Can anybody seriously argue that Orleans Parish residents, or people who work in Orleans Parish, have any kind of obligation to try to keep their tax dollars in New Orleans?
Alternate Question: Considering the fact that the city makes no apparent effort to set budget priorities and spends more for the same services than its more prosperous neighbor, how can anybody accept the budget shortfall/staff shortage excuse for anything? Jefferson Parish doesn't exactly have a reputation as a model of good government.
Update: As Al points out in the comments, $12.33 per cubic yard works out to just over $40 per ton. That still means that, at $60 and $200 per ton, two of the city contractors are being paid significantly more than Jefferson has started to pay its contractors. Those contracts were negotiated before the Ike and Gustav forced Jefferson Parish to raise its price, they were also negotiated when the price of oil was much lower. Unsurprisingly, the two contractors making pre-Ike wages don't seem to want any more work.
In the WTF department, the Times Picayune reports:
Amid intense demand to collect storm debris stretching across two states, Jefferson Parish President Aaron Broussard said Monday that he has raised the price the administration pays contractors for hauling.
The increase to $12.33 per cubic yard, from $9.97 spelled out in a contract that was awarded before the storm season, went into effect Sunday, designed to sharpen Jefferson's competitive edge in vying for debris crews and to speed the pace of collecting tree branches downed by Hurricanes Gustav and Ike.
In case you don't get the WTF? reaction:
White said last week that SDT Waste & Debris, which charges $200 a ton to collect storm debris, would be called on first to handle the task. The city's other garbage collectors, Richard's Disposal and Metro Disposal, earn $30 and $60 a ton, respectively.
Is anybody still pushing the line that Orleans Parish residents should do as much of their shopping as possible in Orleans Parish? I stopped feeling that way two years ago, but, even now that any lingering personal anger has largely subsided, I really can't feel any guilt about spending money in Jefferson Parish that I could be spending in New Orleans. As a matter of fact, I do most of my grocery shopping at Terranova's or Canseco's on Esplanade, but that's a matter of convenience and supporting small businesses. I certainly don't feel any need to give the city my tax dollars. Can anybody seriously argue that I should?
For more on the subject, see Celcus (this post also) and my earlier post. Since we've heard this joke before, I'll repeat the question. Can anybody seriously argue that Orleans Parish residents, or people who work in Orleans Parish, have any kind of obligation to try to keep their tax dollars in New Orleans?
Alternate Question: Considering the fact that the city makes no apparent effort to set budget priorities and spends more for the same services than its more prosperous neighbor, how can anybody accept the budget shortfall/staff shortage excuse for anything? Jefferson Parish doesn't exactly have a reputation as a model of good government.
Update: As Al points out in the comments, $12.33 per cubic yard works out to just over $40 per ton. That still means that, at $60 and $200 per ton, two of the city contractors are being paid significantly more than Jefferson has started to pay its contractors. Those contracts were negotiated before the Ike and Gustav forced Jefferson Parish to raise its price, they were also negotiated when the price of oil was much lower. Unsurprisingly, the two contractors making pre-Ike wages don't seem to want any more work.
Labels: Cronyism, debris removal, garbage collection, waste
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Context
Spent too much time on blog-related matters last weekend, so I really can't put the time and effort into this that I'd like.
Since the Mayor's Communication Director complains about a lack of context in a recent Times Picayune item, I thought it would be appropriate to add some context to some other recent reporting. As you read, or hear, reports about the mayor's recent fund raising, try to remember the mayor's campaign commercials in which he insinuated that businesses that contributed to his opponent must have been motivated by a desire for city contracts.
I've already discussed Lee Zurik's report on the mayor's fund raising activities, Frank Donze followed with a report in today's Picayune. Individually, each made a stronger connection between the mayor's fund raising and city contracts than anything we'd seen before. Together, they make an unmistakable impression.
I don't want to be overly critical of either report (I was impressed with both), but even taken together, the two reports understate the case. For example, Donze informs us that "more than 10 percent of the money Nagin raised last year came from the city's three major trash haulers," and Zurik informed us that Jimmie Woods, of Metro Disposal, is part owner of other businesses with city contracts. However, neither mentioned that SDT's major sub-contractor and its parent company (link) are both Nagin donors.
As hard-hitting as this is:
I still believe that Donze understates the case, but it would have been impossible for Donze to describe each donor individually*.
Still, take away firms and individuals who do business with the city, and you won't find many donors left that aren't from the Kansas City area (I'm assuming that the Kansas and Missouri towns that I'm unfamiliar with are in the KC area). This brings me to my one objection to Donze's report:
It might have cleared up some questions, but it raised more. Even if none of the KC donors gave much, the number is intriguing. I assume that most attended the mayor's KC fund raiser, but there's still the question of why Nagin had a fund raiser in Kansas City in the first place.
Offhand, I can only think of three connections between New Orleans and Kansas City. Hank Stram died a few years ago and I doubt that Anthony Amato hosted the fundraiser. That leaves me wondering how many of the KC fundraiser attendees were MWH subcontractors.
Before you dismiss the MWH connection out of hand, note that Donze reports:
I would add that Nagin's report contains a contribution from "Friends of Terry Riley for City Council." Did you click that last link?
Update: Of course, Donze mentioned the more obvious connection between N.O. and K.C., Black & Veatch is headquartered in K.C. and does do work for the S.&W.B. MWH does much more, however.
*interesting connection.
Since the Mayor's Communication Director complains about a lack of context in a recent Times Picayune item, I thought it would be appropriate to add some context to some other recent reporting. As you read, or hear, reports about the mayor's recent fund raising, try to remember the mayor's campaign commercials in which he insinuated that businesses that contributed to his opponent must have been motivated by a desire for city contracts.
I've already discussed Lee Zurik's report on the mayor's fund raising activities, Frank Donze followed with a report in today's Picayune. Individually, each made a stronger connection between the mayor's fund raising and city contracts than anything we'd seen before. Together, they make an unmistakable impression.
I don't want to be overly critical of either report (I was impressed with both), but even taken together, the two reports understate the case. For example, Donze informs us that "more than 10 percent of the money Nagin raised last year came from the city's three major trash haulers," and Zurik informed us that Jimmie Woods, of Metro Disposal, is part owner of other businesses with city contracts. However, neither mentioned that SDT's major sub-contractor and its parent company (link) are both Nagin donors.
As hard-hitting as this is:
More than a third of Nagin's contributions last year came from architects and engineers who do business with the city. All told, 33 such firms and individuals donated $74,500 to Nagin's war chest, with most giving $2,500.
In addition, Nagin raked in $8,750 from insurance brokers who share in commissions from city insurance contracts. The group includes the firms Fulton Johnson Newman & Pittman and Swanson & Associates, as well as brokers Felton Walter and Charles Kennedy.
Meanwhile, individuals and companies sharing in a city contract to collect delinquent property taxes and hold annual tax sales contributed a total of $6,000.
I still believe that Donze understates the case, but it would have been impossible for Donze to describe each donor individually*.
Still, take away firms and individuals who do business with the city, and you won't find many donors left that aren't from the Kansas City area (I'm assuming that the Kansas and Missouri towns that I'm unfamiliar with are in the KC area). This brings me to my one objection to Donze's report:
The campaign finance report also cleared up lingering questions about a fund raiser Nagin held last summer in Kansas City, Mo. Nagin has dodged questions about the out-of-town event, which brought in about $9,900, according to the filing.
It might have cleared up some questions, but it raised more. Even if none of the KC donors gave much, the number is intriguing. I assume that most attended the mayor's KC fund raiser, but there's still the question of why Nagin had a fund raiser in Kansas City in the first place.
Offhand, I can only think of three connections between New Orleans and Kansas City. Hank Stram died a few years ago and I doubt that Anthony Amato hosted the fundraiser. That leaves me wondering how many of the KC fundraiser attendees were MWH subcontractors.
Before you dismiss the MWH connection out of hand, note that Donze reports:
The report by CHANGE Inc. showed that two Kansas City companies helped stage the fundraiser. Black & Veatch Corp., which has done work for the Sewerage & Water Board, supplied food and beverage services worth about $2,600, while Walton Construction Co. provided entertainment worth $800, according to the report.
The filing also showed that CHANGE Inc. gave a $1,000 campaign contribution to Kansas City mayoral candidate Alvin Brooks.
CHANGE Inc. listed a $2,500 contribution in 2007 from Montgomery Watson Harza, the engineering management firm that received a $6 million contract last month from the Nagin administration to coordinate the work of architects, engineers and building contractors hired by the city to fix flood-damaged public buildings and parks.
I would add that Nagin's report contains a contribution from "Friends of Terry Riley for City Council." Did you click that last link?
Update: Of course, Donze mentioned the more obvious connection between N.O. and K.C., Black & Veatch is headquartered in K.C. and does do work for the S.&W.B. MWH does much more, however.
*interesting connection.
Labels: Cronyism, MWH, Nagin, Terry Riley
