St. Croix Crossing bid dispute costs taxpayers

  • Article by: Charles McCrossan
  • Updated: May 1, 2013 - 8:04 PM

With just a few weeks left in the session, members of the Legislature are sparring over how to erase a projected budget deficit of two-thirds of a billion dollars.

  • 23
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
supervon2May. 1, 13 8:37 PM

The government has stopped caring about being adults and has lowered it's standards to favoritism and vote purchasing. They forgot that there is not an infinite number of taxpayers to make their pie-in-the-sky utopia view of life promotion. Stop it.

30
18
Willy53May. 1, 13 9:39 PM

I would agree Supervon that MNDOT had a pie-in-the-sky approach when concieving of this bridge. Rejecting a more common sense approach that would have saved hundreds of millions in the design phase I don't know why they'd start taking a fiscally prudent attitude now.

24
12
erikj3May. 1, 1311:32 PM

Spend MORE and get LESS? Typical government.

21
9
cmo55May. 2, 13 4:11 AM

This example makes perfect sense in a Country where the Space Agency is given a mandate to use their funding to improve relations with people of the Muslim religion. Government agencies at all levels waste our tax dollars and are bringing us to economic collapse. Wake up taxpayers and make it stop.

22
13
rebeccagreenMay. 2, 13 6:34 AM

The even stranger part of this is that MnDot chose to bypass the local company for a contractor partnership that was half local and half Wisconsin. So, three of the six million extra Minnesota tax dollars being spent on this project will be tossed in a truck and sent east on 94. I get giving women and minorities opportunities, but what about giving local companies a preference as well when it comes to spending Minnesota tax dollars? I hope the Legislature looks into this mess and does the right thing...

28
4
comment229May. 2, 13 6:36 AM

I understand what the writer is saying. I will reserve and comments and judgement until I hear from the authors of the bill that created this project. I would love to hear their opinion.

16
5
jbpaperMay. 2, 13 7:24 AM

MNDOT has to be the worst when it comes to wasting money. Between overpaying on just about every project to it taking ten people to do the job that two should be able to do, nothing but waste.

14
12
wa0tdaMay. 2, 13 7:58 AM

What do we want to pay for, structural engineering or social engineering?

24
7
lenniechismMay. 2, 13 8:24 AM

The DBE program does not guarantee contracts to any business, nor does it provide bid discounts. Rather, it aims to ensure that DBEs are provided an equal opportunity to compete for USDOT-assisted contracts. Congress enacted and has repeatedly reauthorized the DBE program for nearly 30 years in response to decades’ worth of evidence of pervasive and ongoing discrimination in the transportation contracting arena. The United States has a significant interest in ensuring that States are able to vindicate the federal interest in ensuring that public dollars are not spent in a manner that perpetuates the effects of discrimination. The United States has regularly participated in litigation involving challenges to USDOT’s DBE program. Ames/Lunda were the responsible bidders who fulfilled the goal of the progr

5
21
ahandimanMay. 2, 13 9:02 AM

Thanks for your note Charles. While you have valid points, will save us money and build us a technically better bridge MN DOT has chosen another firm. MN DOT based their decision on a fraud ridden system that the US and MN justice systems have regularly uncovered fraudulent activity within. "The Justice Department’s total recoveries in False Claims Act cases since January 2009 have topped $7.5 billion" USDOJ YES, making this decision based solely on anticipated DBE participation is a failure on the part of MN DOT. Thanks MN DOT, I'm glad you feel my SAFETY and money are less important than an 'anticipated' DBE participation rate.

15
5

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT