Good Work If You Can Get
Congratulations to Hoffman Construction, winner of the $900k no bid emergency contract to build the I-94 crossover.
I’m not in any way suggesting anything underhanded went on (heck, someone needs to do it), but I wonder how they were chosen over all the other qualified road builders in the state.
From the article: “the company was selected for the project because it is experienced and could start immediately.”
Posted by scott on June 17, 2008 at 1609 hrs
A quick glance at the WDC “Follow the Money” site, and over the last several years, the Hoffman family has donated about $17,000 to Governor Doyle.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 1625 hrs
I see what the article states, and I saw Busalacchi say it. I am curious if other companies, like Lunda or others, were asked if they were available to do the project. How did Busalacchi know Hoffman was able to do it right away? Did he call and ask? Did other road builders get the call as well?
$900k is a big load to drop without a bid. I would like to know how Hoffman was chosen.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 1629 hrs
I am not that upset with the decision to go with a firm that is known to be capable and competent to complete the job on budget and in time. If there is another firm capable of starting this job immediately it should have been competitively bid out to all interested and capable firms with bids due in 24 hours. But that is a tough task for any construction manager or estimator. In a time crunch decisions like that get made everyday in the construction industry. It is the same story in the private sector as it is in the public. Competitive bidding is not always feasible when time is critical.
$900K is pocket change compared to the no bid contracts that have been handed out to political contributors and cronies in the Iraq debacle.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 1707 hrs
Wow. How quickly that turned to Bush-bashing…again.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 1709 hrs
Wendy:
Lunda wouldn’t be able to do the work because they only build bridges and the things that go along with it. -Pile driving, Dam building etc.
One of the main reasons I would suspect that they got the contract is that they are doing so much work in this area-The Hwy 83 bypass in Burlington, as well as having a major role in the I-43 at Moorland project,(the Rock Freeway in New Berlin) so naturally the have the capabilities and the equipment in place to be able to do the work ASAP.
However, how hard would it have been to call the State approved road contractors and say “Hey we need bids within the next 24 hours on this project” To me this almost sounds like a name your price deal.
If I were Hoffman though I would be asking if the check will clear. Since the Transportation Fund is BROKE!
Thank you Jim Doyle!And as a taxpayer I’m wondering how much our taxes will be going up because of the flooding, along with the fact that the transportation fund has no money.
Posted by Michael J. Cheaney on June 17, 2008 at 1726 hrs
I wonder how quickly that bypass would have been done if Busalacchi didn’t live in Brookfield and work in Madison.
Posted by Cindy on June 17, 2008 at 1826 hrs
I’m sure Frank got a ride from the State Patrol. Their cruisers were the only two vehicles I saw moving in the westbound lanes west of 83 (though Waukesha County took the time to patch some potholes).
Posted by steveegg on June 17, 2008 at 1831 hrs
WHY IS EVERYONE CALLING IT A BYPASS?
Its a CROSSOVER people, NOT a bypass. IT is not bypassing anything, well except water.
All the Madsion newspapers have been calling it a bypass and well they are WRONG!
Posted by Michael J. Cheaney on June 17, 2008 at 1834 hrs
Good question, Michael. Bypasses are what the DOT has been building around every outstate town for the last 20 years (usually 4-lanes wide).
Posted by steveegg on June 17, 2008 at 1900 hrs
You’re right about Lunda. I was trying to think of another road construction company. My experience is mostly with bridge contractors, so Lunda came to mind.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 1930 hrs
I thought it was funny when the reporter asked Busalacchi where the money was coming from. He stumbled a bit.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 1932 hrs
If they’re qualified and have a good track record I say go for it. I mean, Halliburton is the most qualified to take care of oil well fires. For now, I have no problem with it. But I think Busalacchi should be on notice throughout the project and expected to get it in under “budget”.
Posted by phel on June 17, 2008 at 2003 hrs
Wendy and Owen:
Here is some more of my useless accumulated road contractor info for you. (Just in case)-Payne and Dolan
-Zignego Ready Mix. (They do concrete road building)
- Stark Grading/Northwest asphalt (Handles mostly City of Milwaukee contracts, and some state work)
-Milwaukee General Construction.
-Musson Brothers (Rhinelander/Pewaukee)
Those are the Main ones in the Southeast part of the State.
Posted by Michael J. Cheaney on June 17, 2008 at 2015 hrs
But I think Busalacchi should be on notice throughout the project and expected to get it in under “budget”.
Actually doesn’t “under budget” somehow imply that the money is there in the first place?
The Indians and School teachers have all the road money remember?
Posted by Michael J. Cheaney on June 17, 2008 at 2020 hrs
That’s why it’s in quotes darlin.
Posted by phel on June 17, 2008 at 2021 hrs
I wasn’t aiming that dart at you Phel.
That was actually meant for our more ah-hem “unenlightened” commenters. They know who they are…...
Posted by Michael J. Cheaney on June 17, 2008 at 2027 hrs
Who….. my peeps? My friends? Betta…reco-nize!
Posted by phel on June 17, 2008 at 2029 hrs
Wait a second. Are you the same person who once said, “I’m not here to help, I’m here to take pictures”?
Posted by phel on June 17, 2008 at 2030 hrs
It’s deliciously ironic that many of you who now make out as if this is the crookedest of political cronyism imaginable—with absolutely no proof of it—are the same ones who grumbled bitterly when anyone wanted to make something of Halliburton. And then when someone points out the elephant in the living room, he’s dismissed as a rabid victim of BDS.
First cast out the beam from thine own eye, that’s what I say.
Posted by scott on June 17, 2008 at 2037 hrs
First cast out the beam from thine own eye, that’s what I say.
Isn’t that what Jesus said?
Posted by phel on June 17, 2008 at 2039 hrs
Who said it was crooked? I just said I wonder how they chose that company out of the dozens available.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 2045 hrs
That’s what they say.
Posted by scott on June 17, 2008 at 2045 hrs
I’m not here to help, I’m here to take pictures”?
No Phel unfortunately I’m not that witty!
And you of all people should know that since I almost never appear in the MRQ’s
Posted by Michael J. Cheaney on June 17, 2008 at 2053 hrs
Confidential to scott and 3rd way.
Just in case you 2 are having problems keeping up with the topic, and judging by all appearances you both are…let me sum this up for you in a few simple words….
HALLIBURTON IS NOT BUILDING THIS CROSSOVER!!!
Posted by Michael J. Cheaney on June 17, 2008 at 2104 hrs
When I see someone questioning a no bid contract issued under a Democratic led administration on a conservative blog a word comes to mind… it starts with an “H”.
When it comes to cronyism and no bid contracts the bar has been set pretty high, $900K = peanuts.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 17, 2008 at 2240 hrs
From the article: “the company was selected for the project because it is experienced and could start immediately.”
However, how hard would it have been to call the State approved road contractors and say “Hey we need bids within the next 24 hours on this project”
From the article (the full print version, not the “lite” on-line for dummies version); “The DOT put the word out to the Wisconsin Transportation Builders Association that it was looking for a reputable firm that could start the work quickly. About a dozen firms responded.”
I would also think that the DOT has enough construction experience to know what something like this should cost. It’s not like they haven’t done crossovers before.
As an aside, a meeting that I was supposed to attend in Waukesha this week was cancelled because some of the participants were coming from west of Jefferson & Madison. I wonder what the daily financial impact is due to this road closure. The recommended route from Milwaukee to Madison is now via Beloit. $900,000 is chump change when you look at it from a business perspective - increased travel costs & time, lost business, and lost productivity. I don’t think trucking companies can add their extra travel cost & time - I am sure they will have to eat those costs.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 0653 hrs
Why the assumption that hard bid work is less expensive? The most profitable projects I’ve done were all hard bid.
In addition, on something like this done in an emergency, there are not plans in place good enough to hard bid the project. A hard bid job would be an open invitation to change orders.
There are also a whole assortment of easy ways to discourage or control bidding on a project. Hard bid jobs can, and often are, very uncompetitive.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 0744 hrs
The Halliburton analogy is weak because aside from a French company, Halliburton is the only organization that can do what it do.
Road builders, on the other hand, are quite abundant in Wisconsin; see post #14. Mann Brothers can also be added to that list in SE Wisconsin.
The original post and question is basically why was Hoffman chosen over all the others. It wasn’t really about the money, but rather the selection of Hoffman. There are at least a half a dozen other road builders in the area. How did Hoffman get the contract over those others?
See, you all need to take your BDS pills and remain focused on the original context of the post.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 0910 hrs
Yeah, I can see now how that’s totally and completely different, Pellican. Thanks for clarifying.
I remain utterly convinced that when your ideological brethren and sistren are in similar circumstances it doesn’t inspire the same vocal curiosity on your part. And, that being the case, I wish we could put aside this kind of BS and talk about the real reasons why you don’t like the Democratic party or American liberalism in general. Constantly having the same “your guy is more scummy than my guy” pissing matches gets boring really quickly. They generate a lot of heat, but no light whatsoever.
Posted by scott on June 18, 2008 at 0916 hrs
When it comes to cronyism and no bid contracts the bar has been set pretty high, $900K = peanuts.
$900,000 is chump change when you look at it from a business perspective -
Am I the only one to think that a MILLION f’ing dollars is a DAMN lot of money to build a crossover that only needs to last a couple weeks?
We are not talking about miles and miles of roadway?
How wide is a median? A hundred yards? Maybe?
So we have to truck in a bunch of gravel, pave a couple hundred yards, drop in plastic center divider posts.
This costs a MILLION dollars? Are you serious?
I’m sorry, but a little chump change here and a little chump change there adds up to billions.
I’m not prepared to dismiss a million dollar expenditure because its ‘chump change’
ONLY IN THE EYES OF GOVERNMENT is a million dollars chump change.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 0951 hrs
It’s not that I don’t “like” Democrats or Liberals, but rather that I disagree with their philosophy, ideology and policies of how to maintain and create a better state and nation.
The difference is that most Democrats and Liberals I come across base their current philosophy and ideology on their hatred of Republicans and Conservatives. This thread shows it, as the impetus for the post was questioning how and why Hoffman was selected for this project. It quickly turned into, “Oh yea? Well, Bush and Halliburtun and the war, blah blah blah….”
See, you didn’t respond to the question, but rather used it as another opportunity to express your hatred for the President.
And I wish you all would set aside your own BS.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 1036 hrs
Of course by “don’t like” that’s what I meant: policy and ideological disagreements, not personal disdain.
The difference is that most Democrats and Liberals I come across base their current philosophy and ideology on their hatred of Republicans and Conservatives.
That’s funny to me, coming as it does from one of the bitterest conservative commenters on this highly partisan conservative blog.
It quickly turned into, “Oh yea? Well, Bush and Halliburtun and the war, blah blah blah….”
Dude, this entire blog is partisan sniping. (Apologies to the authors, but c’mon. It’s a continual stream of conservative red meat.) You can’t throw that kind of shit out there and then cry foul when someone points out the obvious one-sidedness of the whole thing.
As I said before, the distinctly uneven coverage of government scandal and (supposed) corruption here reminds me that what really bugs most of y’all is that you don’t like the policies of Democrats. It has nothing to do with the scandal du jour; it’s entirely about partisanship.
Posted by scott on June 18, 2008 at 1046 hrs
Moi? A bitter(est) conservative?? Hmmm….not only is that not a word, I don’t believe it’s accurate.
Bear this in mind, I am a lifelong resident of the City of Madison. If I were the “bitterest conservative” as you say I am, I would have moved to more friendly confines years ago.
But I stay because I love my hometown and believe it is necessary for conservatives like me to remain here and be a voice in a very noisy liberal town. I have numerous liberal friends who I love, appreciate and respect. But they have changed over the years from “I disagree with you Republicans” to “I hate you F***ing Republicans”.
Thus, I can’t have a policy or ideological discussion with them anymore because it quickly turns into them hurling insults at me and what I believe in. I can handle partisanship; what I can’t handle is uncivil discourse, general disrespect, and using vulgarity and profanity to express an opinion.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 1107 hrs
I’m sorry to hear that your friends are angry. But you know what? They have good reason to be. And it’s not just us liberal nutjobs, man. Look at a poll once. See how your president has the lowest approval rating in the history of approval ratings. We have a whole laundry list of outrages—none of which are imagined or peripheral—ranging from illegal wiretapping, torture, an unnecessary war, and absolute intransigence concerning his botched execution of that war. And those are just the biggies. The entire administration has been one big middle finger to anyone left of Joe Lieberman—and another middle finger to the rest of the world, friends and foes alike.
It’s sucks that some of these folks are too angry for polite conversation. But I can’t say I don’t understand it, and I won’t say that it’s unjustified.
By the way “bitterest” is a legitimate word.
Posted by scott on June 18, 2008 at 1116 hrs
For the record, I was simply curious about the selection process. I even wrote in the original post that I was not suggesting anything underhanded was going on.
Road contracts fed my family for more than half a century, I was interested in how this no-bid contract was let. Now I know, thanks to mht.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 1157 hrs
Glad to be of service - I don’t know if it was intentional or not, but last night’s on-line article stopped right before that information. Rest of the details showed up in this AM’s version - I get a sense the media intentionally does that sort of thing.
The other thing that I noticed is that it is a “time & material” contract - I imagine that DOT staff will be on-site counting hours, loads of gravel, pavement, etc. I’m sure the media will be there most of the time - MJS had pictures, and channel 4 had this video:
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/20094324.html?video=YHI&t;=a
Don’t have to take your kids to a construction site today - just tune in to the news and you will see all the bulldozers that you need to see.
As to me, what would make an old guy happy is Lauren Leamanczyk (Channel 4) doing a site broadcast on a breezy, warm day in a sundress. Would make up for all those broadcasts last winter of them standing by the side of a street or on an overpass during those snowstorms.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 18, 2008 at 1253 hrs
Total Entries: 19998
Total Comments: 134036
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 11:00 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 93
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 11:38 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).