|
“Best value” is the term the state government bureaucrats at MnDOT called the process by which they selected the contractor to build the replacement 35W bridge. The term and the process, however, are a complete contradiction. It’s not the best process for selecting a contractor and certainly no one can call it a “value.”
The bridge contractor selected to rebuild the 35W bridge through this absurd process had the highest bid and would require the longest time to complete the new bridge – how could anyone in their right mind call this “best value.” Every Minnesota taxpayer and Twin City commuter should be outraged by this selection.
Consider this scenario…a bunch of bureaucrats (six to be exact) sit around a table and talk about such factors as aesthetics, site improvement (trees and flowers), quality assurance (which is important) and public relations and then have the chutzpa to select a bid that’s $57 million above the low bid.
Does anyone remember Governor Pawlenty stating he wanted the bridge replaced as quickly as possible? The company given the nod by MnDOT to build the new bridge put in their proposal that it will take them more than two months longer to complete the project than their competitors.
But what is even more unbelievable is that Flatiron Construction, the firm that MnDOT selected in this “best value” process, could be paid an additional $27 million in bonuses if they finish the project early. One simple question --- why not select a contractor that stated in their proposal they could complete the project two months sooner?
The result of this selection means Flatiron could receive a total of $84 million more than the lowest bidder and take two months longer to complete the job.
Did the folks at MnDOT lose their minds, or did they just want a pretty bridge with trolley cars and just forget about the taxpayers.
While it is obvious that this bureaucratic dream of a selection process has run amok, it is important not to forget the Legislature’s culpability and role in the “best value” boondoggle. As MnDOT spokesman Kevin Gutknecht stated about the selection process: “it was through and done according to state law.” It other words some of the same legislators who are screaming the loudest about not having enough money for transportation projects voted to allow MnDOT to squander tens of millions of dollars more than is necessary to replace this one bridge. How many other “best value” contracts have been awarded under this flawed process?
Let’s revisit just how this term “best value” slipped into the state government lexicon? It began with another large transportation project in the Twin Cities --- the Hiawatha light rail line. In order to fast track the construction of the states first light rail line, MnDOT wanted to use the “design-build” process. Under the design-build method, one contractor is selected to do both the engineering design and the actual construction of the project. Under extreme pressure in 2001 to speed the construction of the Hiawatha LRT project, MnDOT was exempted from following the standard procedure of awarding bids to the lowest qualified bidder.
With one stroke of the pen, the decade old process of design, bid, build was out the window. This simple change that was supposed to have saved money by reducing construction time resulted in the Hiawatha LRT project cost skyrocketing from $450 million to over $700 million before completion.
Minnesota Statute 161.3412 reads…”the commissioner may solicit and award a design-build contract for a project on the basis of a best value selection process.” This law allows MnDOT to select any bid at any price. Instead of complaining that their isn’t enough money to repair and replace bridges in Minnesota perhaps legislators should remove the ability of MnDOT to use the “best value” method of contract awards and return to the tried and true method of awarding contracts to the lowest qualified bidder. It is far easier to complain that there is not enough money to spend than it is to actually look at how current dollars are being spent.
|
