Slog - Comments on Yay Senate Bill 6427!

Comment by Mr. Poe

Mr. Poe — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:45:24 -0800

I love you.

Comment by ellarosa

ellarosa — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:55:15 -0800

who defends no bid contracts other than the people who directly financially benefit from them? people were hating you over THIS? were they all contractors?

Comment by vooodooo84

vooodooo84 — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:58:43 -0800

People hate for no good reason, Josh is awesome

Comment by Lloyd Clydesdale

Lloyd Clydesdale — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:05:06 -0800

And one, Feit. And one.

Comment by inquire the fire

inquire the fire — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:06:41 -0800

Could you explain this in simpler words? I want to understand. Seriously. I am not being sarcastic-just a young mind looking for the deeper issues. Thanks.

Comment by SeMe

SeMe — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:10:22 -0800

i wish i were like you, easily amused...

Comment by Fnarf

Fnarf — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:22:20 -0800

Haters with unsubstantive arguments can and should be ignored.

Comment by w7ngman

w7ngman — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:33:26 -0800

#5, basically some public officials needed lobbying (or did they?), so they decided to award a $100,000 contract to their lobbyist friends.

The problem is that instead of saying "Hey everyone, we need X amount of lobbying, make us an offer" they went straight to their friends. If there had been actual competition involved I'm guessing it would not have been $100,000 worth of lobbying.

At best they're bad business people (do you always go with the first price you're quoted?). At worst they're laundering public money to their friends.

Comment by Reality Check

Reality Check — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:40:16 -0800

It's nice to see local public officials reading the Stranger's political postings...

Comment by Dianna

Dianna — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:27:06 -0800

Josh, I'd say you should be giving yourself a big 'ol pat on the back right now.

Comment by UnReality Check

UnReality Check — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:27:03 -0800

@10: I'm pretty sure he just did.

Comment by Cook

Cook — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:27:58 -0800

did you see how HOT senator hobbs was? wow.

Comment by G-13

G-13 — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:45:15 -0800

Umm, not to throw cold water on this delightful parade, but how much do you suppose it costs to bid out a $100,000 contract? You have to advertise it, then have staff screen responses, then pull together an evaluation panel, then interview respondents, then enter into negotiations. I'm not saying it's not worth it, but really, how much do you think you're going to save? This is a Tim Eyman Republican wet dream (waste and fraud! waste and fraud!). If you think bidding out $100,000 contracts is going to free up enough money to house the homeless, think again.

Comment by John

John — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 03:59:40 -0800

@13,

Point isn't the $100K. Point is they shouldn't have done it the way they did it. You accept a certain amount of bureaucratic cost as a necessary expense to make sure that the process is open - who knows, maybe that company would have won the bid anyway?

But you don't do no-bid contracts in cases like this.