"MTA chief recommends against Italian firm's rail cars; Agency staffers report that the cars being built by AnsaldoBreda under an existing contract are too heavy and years behind schedule." L.A. Times story by Maeve Reston, July 21, 2009. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-rail-car21-2009jul21,0,7988438.story
The Italian company, AnsaldoBreda, is favored by the mayor and the union really wants the Italian firm to get the deal, even though it may not be the best deal for the city's money and future. A $300 million expense for 100 light rail cars to be built would really have to be considered in light of the past performance of AnsaldoBreda, and it's not been making the grade.
The idea of a company making jobs, regardless of whether the expectations may be accurate, is all that matters to the union and to many on the City Council, too. Just claiming membership on the Council does not ensure that the best for the City's interest will be done by them. There's been plenty of goofs in the past. And by "goofs," I mean mistakes and bad choices, and not a characterization of the members of City Council, thought it may be fitting. It may be that the costs may not be a good deal, but when you deal with unions, that's not their concern, only that there's jobs present to use by, or to produce, union membership. That's their business. The welfare of the city and it's limited finances are not best left to be judged by any union.
There's even less credibility with politicians. They just want to be re-elected and keep running for offices so what ever gets them the most votes is their baby. With some, when the City Council is involved, you just mention jobs and you've got Ed Reyes and Bill Rosendahl already moving to your side. Now whether there's any jobs with futures of any sort attached to them can be an entirely different matter, and usually the details seem to me to be treated too lightly by the decision makers. Pitching "jobs" with any project is a good move that is a good way to get results to go your way, and you bet that that's always something that is tried to be woven in for the best reception.
Well, we will see if there's any integrity there or if the pressures that the special interests and assorted lobbyists used will get this deal to look good enough to vote for, even if it's just wishful thinking or - and this could be what it is- if it's really just a plain, out and out, bad deal for the city that puts money into important pockets.
Posts
