The humor writer Sholem Aleichem set many of his funny tales in Chelm, an Eastern European village whose inhabitants, according to folklore, were all complete idiots.
For instance, here’s a Chelm joke:
Two men from Chelm got jobs on a construction site. One day the foreman saw one of them standing on the shoulders of the other, holding up a long pipe and dropping a tape measure from the top of it.
“What on earth are you doing?” the foreman asked. “Why don’t you just lay the pipe on the ground and measure it that way?”
“Boss,” one of the men from Chelm explained, “we don’t need to know how long it is – we need to know how high it is.”
There is no evidence that Sholem Aleichim ever visited Bend, Oregon, or even heard of it. But there are days when I feel almost sure that Bend was the inspiration for Chelm.
Like when I read the story the other day about the city’s latest ADA screw-up.
The Americans With Disabilities Act requires public sidewalks to have ramps cut through the curbs to provide wheelchair access at street corners. It seems that 90% (you read that right, 90%) of the more than 7,000 curb ramps in the city don’t meet ADA standards.
Estimated cost to fix them: $34 million. For a city that’s already staring into a multimillion-dollar budget hole.
Okay, it wouldn’t be a big surprise if a few – hell, even a few dozen – curb ramps were improperly built. But 90 frickin’ percent???
As City Councilor Jim Clinton said, “You think at random they’d get something right.”
I’m not an engineer, but I suspect that building a curb ramp is not on the same order of technical difficulty as, say, launching the space shuttle or performing a heart transplant. I also know that the ADA specifications for curb ramps are not some arcane secret; they have been public for a long time.
Presumably the contractors who built these ramps had specifications to follow. And presumably the city had some knowledgeable person or persons inspect the ramps after they were built to ensure they had been built according to those specifications.
Which leads me to ask three questions:
1. Who signed off on those defective curb ramps?
2. Are they still employed by the city?
3. If so, why?
Set as favorite
Share
Email this
Comments
(27)
written by Richard Fargher , September 11, 2010
I was wondering the same thing, Bruce. let's look into it.
written by Joben , September 11, 2010
Can citizens file a class-action lawsuit against the City for gross misuse of our tax dollars and get some of our hard-earned money back? Wow. The ADA was first passed in 1990. 20 years ago. And the City still can't get it right? Wow. Seriously. That is laughable. The people and businesses responsible should never receive another cent of our money.
written by JC , September 11, 2010
Nah - they're not employed any longer. They received a lovely golden parachute and were promoted to another highly competent government. Maybe in Salem or DC?
written by bruno , September 11, 2010
Did you expect gonernment to get it roght the first time?Just wait until they start running health care.
written by Jack Elliott , September 12, 2010
The best part is that the out-of-spec ramps have all been signed off by the city, which relieves the contractor(s) of any liability. The city is on the hook. The taxpayers are on the hook. The money that needs to be spent re-doing the ramps will have to come from other projects.
Engineering specifications can often be difficult to interpret. It ain't rocket surgery but does require close attention to detail. Because of this, a contractor can be forgiven for building a few ramps wrong at first, knowing that the city has someone on staff with a tape measure and a level and a copy of the specifications in his or her pocket who can point out the mistakes so that the other 7,000 ramps aren't built incorrectly.
Or the city /should/ have someone on staff to do that.
But it looks like they don't.
Without knowledgeable inspectors, the contractor(s) apparently kept building incorrect ramps, sorcerer's apprentice-like, and the city just kept signed them off. If problem(s) had been caught early, the contractor might have been out of materials and labor for a few incorrectly-built ramps, the rest would have been built right. Now the city is on the hook for all the ramps.
It appears that the city's inspector was in over his or her head, and his or her supervisor should have known that.
The city has gotten itself involved in several boneheaded ideas: Juniper Ridge and the ridiculously-bloated UGB growth plan come to mind. But those are speculative projects based on guesses and wishes and hopes. They aren't engineering.
Something either meets spec or it doesn't.
This imbroglio is not just painful: it points to incompetence -- incompetence to the tune of $38M, and as such, it's unforgivable.
I hope Miller or somebody can follow up on this story to see if the city takes corrective action. I'd like to see them fire the inspector or downgrade them to the storm drain maintenance department.
It's the least the city can do help assure that something like a bridge or hospital wing doesn't fall down due to poor engineering.
Engineering specifications can often be difficult to interpret. It ain't rocket surgery but does require close attention to detail. Because of this, a contractor can be forgiven for building a few ramps wrong at first, knowing that the city has someone on staff with a tape measure and a level and a copy of the specifications in his or her pocket who can point out the mistakes so that the other 7,000 ramps aren't built incorrectly.
Or the city /should/ have someone on staff to do that.
But it looks like they don't.
Without knowledgeable inspectors, the contractor(s) apparently kept building incorrect ramps, sorcerer's apprentice-like, and the city just kept signed them off. If problem(s) had been caught early, the contractor might have been out of materials and labor for a few incorrectly-built ramps, the rest would have been built right. Now the city is on the hook for all the ramps.
It appears that the city's inspector was in over his or her head, and his or her supervisor should have known that.
The city has gotten itself involved in several boneheaded ideas: Juniper Ridge and the ridiculously-bloated UGB growth plan come to mind. But those are speculative projects based on guesses and wishes and hopes. They aren't engineering.
Something either meets spec or it doesn't.
This imbroglio is not just painful: it points to incompetence -- incompetence to the tune of $38M, and as such, it's unforgivable.
I hope Miller or somebody can follow up on this story to see if the city takes corrective action. I'd like to see them fire the inspector or downgrade them to the storm drain maintenance department.
It's the least the city can do help assure that something like a bridge or hospital wing doesn't fall down due to poor engineering.
written by H. Bruce Miller , September 12, 2010
Jack: I'm assuming all 7,000 ramps were not built at once, probably were not built by the same contractor, and probably were not all inspected by the same inspector. Which in a way makes it all the more absurd and infuriating that so many were f'ed up.
written by Stephen Cramer , September 13, 2010
My business fronts a street in Bend thatlacks paved sidewalks. A few years ago I wanted to upgrade the frontage and when I contacted contractors I was told to NOT do it because the city would possibly approve the plans, inspect the site and sign off on it, then refuse to give final sign off because of a mistake discovered at the end requiring the removal of the work done and complete reconstruction. This had already happened to the contractors I spoke to and they didn't want any part of it.
Remember two-three years back when the restaurant, 38 degrees, on Mt Washington was found to be in ADA violation--and after several weeks, if I recall correctly, the city suddenly discovered that no violation existed. None of this may appear to be rocket science, but it appears beyond the ability of the city, doesn't it?
I wonder how many of the ramps that failed have been redone by the city over the last several years while they were trying to comply with the court order. Dollars to donuts there are a few.
Remember two-three years back when the restaurant, 38 degrees, on Mt Washington was found to be in ADA violation--and after several weeks, if I recall correctly, the city suddenly discovered that no violation existed. None of this may appear to be rocket science, but it appears beyond the ability of the city, doesn't it?
I wonder how many of the ramps that failed have been redone by the city over the last several years while they were trying to comply with the court order. Dollars to donuts there are a few.
written by Viki Wooster , September 13, 2010
ADA compliant ramps, UGB, Juniper Ridge, and let's not forget the bus buying fiasco...has the City done anything right in the last several years? Inexcusable incompetence and waste of our dollars. Do they every think through what they are doing?
written by JC , September 13, 2010
Don't forget the Mountain High utilities company "taking" then continuing to fight what must have been a personal vendetta and ending up required to pay penalties and interest...how many millions was THAT?
written by aaychbee'em critic , September 14, 2010
This speaks to why these non-safety, non-road repair/street paving activities need to be privitized so that competent parties with "at risk" investment, bonding AND E&O insurance could be used and eliminate the PERS, clock watchers.
Sidewalks, parks, water, garbage (already private), development, buses, etc. (even planning perhaps)should be privatized. City staff would be technically competent MANAGERS to oversee these subcontractors with close oversight by the city manager, internal/external audit and the city council.
Sidewalks, parks, water, garbage (already private), development, buses, etc. (even planning perhaps)should be privatized. City staff would be technically competent MANAGERS to oversee these subcontractors with close oversight by the city manager, internal/external audit and the city council.
written by H. Bruce Miller , September 14, 2010
"This speaks to why these non-safety, non-road repair/street paving activities need to be privitized [sic]"
I'm sure most if not all of the defective curb ramps were built by private contractors.
Major street/road paving and repair jobs also are usually done by private contractors.
"Sidewalks, parks, water, garbage (already private), development, buses, etc. (even planning perhaps)should be privatized."
"Development" already is privatized. (I'm not aware of the City of Bend building any developments.) If "planning" was privatized, who would do it? How could we ensure that whoever did it acted in the public interest and not just in his own selfish interest? I have a lot of respect for some developers (the good ones) but I would not want to turn city planning over to any of them.
A private water system might work, but it would have to be a tightly regulated monopoly (i.e. a public utility) to prevent price gouging and ensure good service.
As for private sidewalks, how would that work? When we went for a walk, would we stop and pay a toll every couple of blocks to whoever owned that stretch of sidewalk?
I don't particularly relish the idea of paying a fee every time I visit one of our local parks either.
"City staff would be technically competent MANAGERS to oversee these subcontractors"
That's what they already are, supposedly.
I'm sure most if not all of the defective curb ramps were built by private contractors.
Major street/road paving and repair jobs also are usually done by private contractors.
"Sidewalks, parks, water, garbage (already private), development, buses, etc. (even planning perhaps)should be privatized."
"Development" already is privatized. (I'm not aware of the City of Bend building any developments.) If "planning" was privatized, who would do it? How could we ensure that whoever did it acted in the public interest and not just in his own selfish interest? I have a lot of respect for some developers (the good ones) but I would not want to turn city planning over to any of them.
A private water system might work, but it would have to be a tightly regulated monopoly (i.e. a public utility) to prevent price gouging and ensure good service.
As for private sidewalks, how would that work? When we went for a walk, would we stop and pay a toll every couple of blocks to whoever owned that stretch of sidewalk?
I don't particularly relish the idea of paying a fee every time I visit one of our local parks either.
"City staff would be technically competent MANAGERS to oversee these subcontractors"
That's what they already are, supposedly.
written by aaychbee'em critic , September 14, 2010
HBM, we would still pay taxes to the city (and not pay on a user fee basis for parks). The city would pay contractors and they would bear the risk/responsibility for properly interpreting and adhering to ADA and other regs rather than relying on city staff to interpret regs and then to properly incorporate those into contracts. Sorry for mis-spelling "privatized."
written by Stephen Cramer , September 14, 2010
You're right, HB, almost all of the burb ramps were constructed by private contractors, according to plans designed by private engineers interpreting the ADA requirements, then approved by city staff plan reviewers, and signed off by city inspectors. Looks like none of this gang can shoot straight.
Something is seriously wrong with our process in Bend if after all of the years of ordered compliance we are in worse shape than we were when it all started.
Something is seriously wrong with our process in Bend if after all of the years of ordered compliance we are in worse shape than we were when it all started.
written by old Bendite , September 14, 2010
Most people do not realize the city brought it all on themselves. The building dept. was being over the top strict with a guy trying to open a store[he is handycapped himself]. After some words with the city about the city not haveing to following the same rules, he called the A.D.A. So as a contractor I think it could'nt have happened any better.
written by Jack Elliott , September 14, 2010
Stephen Cramer writes that "...almost all of the burb [sic] ramps were constructed by private contractors, according to plans designed by private engineers interpreting the ADA requirements, then approved by city staff plan reviewers, and signed off by city inspectors. Looks like none of this gang can shoot straight."
My point exactly. There was plenty of time for someone with a tape measure, a level, and a copy of the specs to catch the mistakes early on, before they all get built wrong, willy-nilly.
As Miller points out, the ramps weren't all built at once. So the first few cookies come off the assembly line with too much salt and shaped funny. You fix the recipe before you push the button to start making all the cookies. And you sample the cookies to make sure they are made right. If the cookies are really expensive cookies, costing thousands apiece, then you figure out a way to check each one individually before you pack it and ship it.
My other point is that the UGB, Juniper Ridge, and the "bus buying fiasco" (Viki Wooster) were all boneheaded in their own ways, but they weren't engineering. A different kettle of mushrooms altogether. The former are based on guesses, wishes, and speculation. The latter comes with printed specifications.
I want names. I want the names of the cretins that signed off on the ramps, I want the names of the nitwits who supervised them, and I want the names of the persons who sat back and figured the inspectors, builders, and engineers knew what they were doing WITHOUT EVEN CHECKING.
Is this information even available?
My point exactly. There was plenty of time for someone with a tape measure, a level, and a copy of the specs to catch the mistakes early on, before they all get built wrong, willy-nilly.
As Miller points out, the ramps weren't all built at once. So the first few cookies come off the assembly line with too much salt and shaped funny. You fix the recipe before you push the button to start making all the cookies. And you sample the cookies to make sure they are made right. If the cookies are really expensive cookies, costing thousands apiece, then you figure out a way to check each one individually before you pack it and ship it.
My other point is that the UGB, Juniper Ridge, and the "bus buying fiasco" (Viki Wooster) were all boneheaded in their own ways, but they weren't engineering. A different kettle of mushrooms altogether. The former are based on guesses, wishes, and speculation. The latter comes with printed specifications.
I want names. I want the names of the cretins that signed off on the ramps, I want the names of the nitwits who supervised them, and I want the names of the persons who sat back and figured the inspectors, builders, and engineers knew what they were doing WITHOUT EVEN CHECKING.
Is this information even available?
written by Stephen Cramer , September 14, 2010
Another thought--the same group that misinterpreted legal requirements, reviewed and approved maldesigned plans, and the approved the on site construction and layout are NOW telling us we have to redo $34 million in construction. How do we know that their recommendations concerning almost 7000 sites are any more valid than what went before? Can we actually trust the review if it was done by the same people who couldn't do it right in the first place?
written by John Personna , September 15, 2010
I was working down in Lake Forest, California, last year, and saw them cut out ramp after ramp to replace them. Same thing. It was really amazing over a year of commuting to see the concrete saws go to work first on one ramp and then then next.
I'd think it was a bureaucratic thing, where neither ramp was actually bad, but they just had competing specifications.
I'd defer to a wheel chair rider who had used both, of course.
I'd think it was a bureaucratic thing, where neither ramp was actually bad, but they just had competing specifications.
I'd defer to a wheel chair rider who had used both, of course.
written by Jack Elliott , September 16, 2010
repeating myself here: I want names. I want the names of the cretins that signed off on the ramps, I want the names of the nitwits who supervised them, and I want the names of the persons who sat back and figured the inspectors, builders, and engineers knew what they were doing WITHOUT EVEN CHECKING.
Is this information even available?
Is this information even available?
written by John Personna , September 17, 2010
Jack, when the same dynamic happens in a town 900 miles away (perfectly good ramps torn out, new ones put in) don't you think it might be a national problem?
And of course, there is the possibility that nobody cared that much, because tearing out ramps was "shovel ready stimulus" and just about the classic "dig a hole and fill it up again."
And of course, there is the possibility that nobody cared that much, because tearing out ramps was "shovel ready stimulus" and just about the classic "dig a hole and fill it up again."
written by Stephen Cramer , September 17, 2010
'And of course, there is the possibility that nobody cared that much, because tearing out ramps was "shovel ready stimulus" and just about the classic "dig a hole and fill it up again."'
A problem that appeared in the 90's and has continued unabated for almost 20 years has nothing to do with the stimulus plan. Nobody may have cared but this dog won't hunt.
ADA requirements should be strait forward. But read OSHA ladder regs: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshawe...p_id=10839
Let a blind committee get hold of anything and an elephant is the result.
A problem that appeared in the 90's and has continued unabated for almost 20 years has nothing to do with the stimulus plan. Nobody may have cared but this dog won't hunt.
ADA requirements should be strait forward. But read OSHA ladder regs: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshawe...p_id=10839
Let a blind committee get hold of anything and an elephant is the result.
written by Jack Elliott , September 17, 2010
"ADA requirements should be strait forward."
Heh -- you ain't seen nothing until you've tried to hack your way through European Union consumer product safety requirements.
Just as articles in peer-reviwed medical journals are impenetrable to laymen, regulations such as the ADA one cited are not meant to be read by the Average Joe: they are intended for civil engineers. A specialty. And the city is expected to have such people or contract with such people to read and understand those regulations. And if they are not sure, go back to the Feds and get clarification.
That's been my frickin' point all along: not that the regulations are difficult to interpret by laypeople -- such things are -- but that the city apparently didn't have people on staff who knew they were in over their heads. THAT'S what frosts my pumpkin.
Heh -- you ain't seen nothing until you've tried to hack your way through European Union consumer product safety requirements.
Just as articles in peer-reviwed medical journals are impenetrable to laymen, regulations such as the ADA one cited are not meant to be read by the Average Joe: they are intended for civil engineers. A specialty. And the city is expected to have such people or contract with such people to read and understand those regulations. And if they are not sure, go back to the Feds and get clarification.
That's been my frickin' point all along: not that the regulations are difficult to interpret by laypeople -- such things are -- but that the city apparently didn't have people on staff who knew they were in over their heads. THAT'S what frosts my pumpkin.
written by Michele Romeo , September 19, 2010
I said "ha" right out loud when I read HBM's column last week. "Ha" as in he got it right. And as I've read through the postings here, I've found myself nodding along in agreement with all that Jack Elliot has written.
I wondered if anyone at the COB would be paying attention to HBM's column and his closing three questions. I suggest the article on the front page of today's (Sunday's) Bulletin was the COB staff's attempt to answer HBM's questions indirectly.
I have a lot of respect for the Bulletin reporter who wrote that article, and he can only report what the staff tells him is so. But for staff to suggest that building compliant curb ramps is like brain surgery (stop laughing - that's the analogy they used - read the article "Is this ramp on the level") and a penny's width problem upends the entire shebang is... Well. I'm seldom speechless. But it's somewhere in between laughable and infuriating for how parochial it is.
Of course, the question for staff might be that when the ADAAG standards and ODOT (and DOT and OSSC) standards all name 1:12 (or per the article today 8.33%) as the maximum running slope allowable, so it can be 8.33% or less, why engineering is still done so close to the max dimension that a coin's width difference...as staff explained in the article today...can make them need to have work redone? (Not that people with disabilities are splitting those hairs, but the brain surgeons on the city staff these days.) In the engineering for keep in mind the maximum allowable and design give yourself room for in field error. Just as the US Access Board that creates these standards and has them published in ADA after a lengthy period of public rulemaking, suggests. These standards entered their third decade on July 26 of this year. It really is not brain surgery, or rocket science, although it is something an entry level civic engineer ought to know.
And to reinforce Jack's Elliot's point, the US Access Board provides free to nearly free advice, as does the DOJ who enforces the design standards as developed by the US Access Board. But public works staff completely ignored those resources, as well as the consulting of ADA expert firm Sally Swanson Architects brought in by the former ADA coordinator in 2006 - 8. (And SSA's observations about what was broken in public works process and performance fell on deaf ears up Bend's management ladder - although they sure stuck their necks out to be heard.)
As good a reporter as the Bulletin writer is, and he is top notch at making information understandable, I imagine 80% of the readership does not have the technical background to know what a bunch of self serving nonsense public works staff put forward. And so they will translate it as "Oh...poor COB staff...those standards seem so unrealistic." Which is about how I imagine four - maybe five - of the seven councilors will respond. Which is how we got into this pickle with the DOJ on basic ADA compliance to begin with.
When you peel back the layers of the onion to get to the core for the answer to "who dunnit", the folks sitting on city council are ultimately accountable for the churn. From the late 1990's through 2010.
So, Mr. Miller's question is a good one...but one probably needs to look a ways up the ladder beyond the guys (or gals) who were supposed to be doing curb ramp inspections to let the ax fall.
Everything is connected to everything else.
I wondered if anyone at the COB would be paying attention to HBM's column and his closing three questions. I suggest the article on the front page of today's (Sunday's) Bulletin was the COB staff's attempt to answer HBM's questions indirectly.
I have a lot of respect for the Bulletin reporter who wrote that article, and he can only report what the staff tells him is so. But for staff to suggest that building compliant curb ramps is like brain surgery (stop laughing - that's the analogy they used - read the article "Is this ramp on the level") and a penny's width problem upends the entire shebang is... Well. I'm seldom speechless. But it's somewhere in between laughable and infuriating for how parochial it is.
Of course, the question for staff might be that when the ADAAG standards and ODOT (and DOT and OSSC) standards all name 1:12 (or per the article today 8.33%) as the maximum running slope allowable, so it can be 8.33% or less, why engineering is still done so close to the max dimension that a coin's width difference...as staff explained in the article today...can make them need to have work redone? (Not that people with disabilities are splitting those hairs, but the brain surgeons on the city staff these days.) In the engineering for keep in mind the maximum allowable and design give yourself room for in field error. Just as the US Access Board that creates these standards and has them published in ADA after a lengthy period of public rulemaking, suggests. These standards entered their third decade on July 26 of this year. It really is not brain surgery, or rocket science, although it is something an entry level civic engineer ought to know.
And to reinforce Jack's Elliot's point, the US Access Board provides free to nearly free advice, as does the DOJ who enforces the design standards as developed by the US Access Board. But public works staff completely ignored those resources, as well as the consulting of ADA expert firm Sally Swanson Architects brought in by the former ADA coordinator in 2006 - 8. (And SSA's observations about what was broken in public works process and performance fell on deaf ears up Bend's management ladder - although they sure stuck their necks out to be heard.)
As good a reporter as the Bulletin writer is, and he is top notch at making information understandable, I imagine 80% of the readership does not have the technical background to know what a bunch of self serving nonsense public works staff put forward. And so they will translate it as "Oh...poor COB staff...those standards seem so unrealistic." Which is about how I imagine four - maybe five - of the seven councilors will respond. Which is how we got into this pickle with the DOJ on basic ADA compliance to begin with.
When you peel back the layers of the onion to get to the core for the answer to "who dunnit", the folks sitting on city council are ultimately accountable for the churn. From the late 1990's through 2010.
So, Mr. Miller's question is a good one...but one probably needs to look a ways up the ladder beyond the guys (or gals) who were supposed to be doing curb ramp inspections to let the ax fall.
Everything is connected to everything else.
written by Stephen Cramer , September 20, 2010
The Bulletin article was very revelatory: The requirements are NOT so complex they can't be figured out and the equipment to measure the job correctly not cost prohibitive--the digital levels are $300 or less. The problem seems to be that the contractors insist on building ramps as small and steep as legally allowable--and if anything goes wrong in the finishing of the ramp, it's out of tolerance. Why try to build the smallest ramp possible and risk failure? Perhaps a cost issue? Less materials? Less labor in set-up and finish? Was it a 'good enough for government work' attitude?
The comment in the article that there was a 'close enough' attitude about the ramps reveals a great deal about the construction, approval and inspection process. Even though there was a court order, compliance just wasn't that important.
"Everything is connected to everything else."
Ain't that the truth...
The comment in the article that there was a 'close enough' attitude about the ramps reveals a great deal about the construction, approval and inspection process. Even though there was a court order, compliance just wasn't that important.
"Everything is connected to everything else."
Ain't that the truth...
written by H. Bruce Miller , September 20, 2010
"The comment in the article that there was a 'close enough' attitude about the ramps reveals a great deal about the construction, approval and inspection process"
As an acquaintance of mine, a well-known local developer, likes to say: "There's never time to do it right but there's always time to do it over."
As an acquaintance of mine, a well-known local developer, likes to say: "There's never time to do it right but there's always time to do it over."
written by Michele Romeo , September 20, 2010
Stephen,
I cribbed the everhthing is connected to everything else line from Gene Simmons. You know of him...sure you do...from Kiss fame.
A business analyst was interviewing Simmons some time back and askng to what he attributed his still remaarkable sucess after all these years, personally as well as Kiss. And Simmons said there was one rule. When making decisions you needed to keep in mind everything is conntected to everything else.
I think John Muir made a similiar comment that goes about like this "When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe. "
Beautiful. But I think I sound more "with it" to reference Simmons.
That said, and the not so funny thing connected to the story here, is that the COB policy setters and staff too often seem to act as if each thing can be considered in isolation. But these aren't separate circles on the ground. If you have enough quality focused management view perspective you can see the Venn diagram.
Sadly, this same crew is about to take on the water systems project. Whew! A ten year window negotiated with a Federal Agency in February 2002, which takes us to March 2012 and with less than eighteen months to go staff still doesn't have a viable plan for council to sign off on, no firmly identified funding (or cost foro that matter) and just said "surprise, surprise, surprise" that the hydro power station that they said just six or so months ago woudl generate a whopping $1.7M of revenue in the first year is "ooops..." only $700K. Maybe.
Same old. same old...everything is connected. Root causes are the same as the ADA curb ramp fiasco and they're all rooted in failed process and performance in public works all the way up to the head and at city manager level and at the oversight level. And HBM is exactly right in the twist on the quality maxim above...it is always better to take the time and use the process discipline to get it right the frst time.
I cribbed the everhthing is connected to everything else line from Gene Simmons. You know of him...sure you do...from Kiss fame.
A business analyst was interviewing Simmons some time back and askng to what he attributed his still remaarkable sucess after all these years, personally as well as Kiss. And Simmons said there was one rule. When making decisions you needed to keep in mind everything is conntected to everything else.
I think John Muir made a similiar comment that goes about like this "When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe. "
Beautiful. But I think I sound more "with it" to reference Simmons.
That said, and the not so funny thing connected to the story here, is that the COB policy setters and staff too often seem to act as if each thing can be considered in isolation. But these aren't separate circles on the ground. If you have enough quality focused management view perspective you can see the Venn diagram.
Sadly, this same crew is about to take on the water systems project. Whew! A ten year window negotiated with a Federal Agency in February 2002, which takes us to March 2012 and with less than eighteen months to go staff still doesn't have a viable plan for council to sign off on, no firmly identified funding (or cost foro that matter) and just said "surprise, surprise, surprise" that the hydro power station that they said just six or so months ago woudl generate a whopping $1.7M of revenue in the first year is "ooops..." only $700K. Maybe.
Same old. same old...everything is connected. Root causes are the same as the ADA curb ramp fiasco and they're all rooted in failed process and performance in public works all the way up to the head and at city manager level and at the oversight level. And HBM is exactly right in the twist on the quality maxim above...it is always better to take the time and use the process discipline to get it right the frst time.
