Don't Retreat, Rethink.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

The drama of urban snow removal has preoccupied this newspaper for 150 years. In 1910, The Times wrote about no-show contractors failing to get men and wagons onto the streets after a storm that buried New York City and snarled the Long Island Rail Road. In 2010, we — and pretty much everyone in the city — criticized a no-show mayor who left town before a storm that buried the city and snarled the Long Island Rail Road.

So we were intrigued by a report that Quincy, Mass., has found a way to get rid of snow more efficiently and more cheaply. Last year, it decided to pay contractors not by the hour but by the inch to remove snow in about one-fourth of the city. A storm of up to 2 inches cost $8,455 per ward, rising as the drifts got deeper, up to $42,500 per ward for storms of 14 inches to 18 inches. Above that, the rate fell sharply. This means companies take a gamble when bidding on a contract, and Quincy is unlikely to be bankrupted by a monster storm.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/opinion/22tue4.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211

This is the sort of thinking we need. Keeping the roads clear is absolutely a responsibility of government, albeit often one contracted out to private companies, and while in this case speed is of the greatest essence, it's not bad to save money either. This is good government, and privatizing it, especially this service in particular, doesn't seem like it would be any better.

Of course, if you read to the bottom of the link, everything old is new again.

Comments

[dwer.livejournal.com]

it is administering the service. The customers pay the city, not the provider. The city makes sure that the contractors are meeting the requirements for the job. The city tells the contractors how many trucks they want on the road. The city tells the contractors when to start the job, and assesses if they're finished when the contractors say they are.

This is the same kind of situation with building construction. When a city needs to build a new city hall, they don't hire construction workers directly, they contract it out, and administer the process.

[mijopo.livejournal.com]

The customers pay the city, not the provider

Oh, I see, yes, there could be even more radical privatization but that would occur only in some radical Ayn Randian situation in which the government was no longer responsible for the roads, no? In a situation in which governments still build and maintain roads, what kind of scenario would be more privatized than this?

The city tells the contractors how many trucks they want on the road.

Does the city tell the contractors this? Why, wouldn't they just tell them how quickly they needed the work done?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm making some judgment calls. Maybe they'd do what you suggest.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Tell you that last storm that hit-- the primary roads out here in Brooklyn were cleared pretty quick, but it took nearly 10 hours to get to the side streets. And OT-- it was nearly 68 on Friday (people wearing tees and shorts), and that cold front went through Saturday-- this AM it was only 15. It's insanely cold today BUT I LOVE COLD WEATHER AND SNOW ;)

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Efficient work flow I'd suppose. The city would always want the primary roads cleared first and as quickly as possible.