My Run In with Regulations

I don't think you actually read the entire OP, because there are multiple disgusting offenses done to the people. Read the whole thing....

a reply to: KansasGirl

I was responding to a specific point brought up in a specific post, not specifically the OP.

If you believe that individual paper pushers are somehow responsible for the "multiple disgusting offenses", I don't think you truly understand how the government works.

You don't blame the shelf stocker at Walmart for moving the orange juice away from the milk or whatever.

It sounds like the legislation that was passed has some serious flaws, and those flaws manifested in a big charlie foxtrot for a bunch of people. It has nothing to do with the public servants, but the programs and laws they're employed to carry out.

If someone wants to throw blame around, at least make sure its being thrown at the right people and place.

a reply to: Grambler

They said the next contractor will have to go hours away to Pittsburgh to get an estimate from a minority owned business.

Well that's dumb. There's this thing called the internet, or a telephone.

It was a federal grant I believe,

Your bitch is with the contractor, not the federal government.
You, and others, dealt with a cheater. The thing is, the way the MWBE system works, is that the government makes up the difference in bid price by absorbing a fixed differential of the bid (they shave, say 5%, off of the bid of an MWBE contractor) for those contractors which qualify (yeah, I know). In other words, part of the reason the price was kept down for you (low income and stuff) was because it was subsidized. The original contractor was taking the gravy but not producing the meat.

A bit ironic, you like the price break (thanks fed), but not the regulations behind it (asshole, fed).

I am surprised they had problems finding minority owned businesses.

I have 3 friends that are disabled veterans that have incorporated as minority owned businesses and all they do is act as a bidding agent for companies and the non minority owned companies do any contracts they get.
For this my friends get a small cut of the money from the contract.
All the veteran needs is a service-connected disability of at least 10% or more;
en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
I doubt Trump can do anything about it.

It will need to be addressed at the state/local level.

I don't think so. It was a federal grant I believe, and it is a federal regulation that says that a minority owned building supply store must be contacted for a chance to receive the bid.

What is the name of the grant and the regulation?

The grant name is the Community Development Block Grant, it is through the federal HUD program.

I can not find if the regulation that a minority business must be consulted is federal or state regulation.

Either way, it shows the ridiculousness of these types of regs.

these grants are usually given [as a lump sum] to a local entity for "administration".
who knows what caveats the administrators added

originally posted by: Phage

Your bitch is with the contractor, not the federal government.
You, and others, dealt with a cheater. The thing is, the way the MWBE system works, is that the government makes up the difference in bid price by absorbing a fixed differential of the bid (they shave, say 5%, off of the bid of an MWBE contractor) for those contractors which qualify (yeah, I know). In other words, part of the reason the price was kept down for you (low income and stuff) was because it was subsidized. The original contractor was taking the gravy but not producing the meat.

A bit ironic, you like the price break (thanks fed), but not the regulations behind it (asshole, fed).

But your argument ignores the fact that the regulation had nothing to do with the lower price, it had to do with minorities being contacted.

Yes, a regulation would make sense that said the contractor had to shop around for the lowest price. But to then say on top of that that you have to contact someone based on race or sex is ridiculous, and totally arbitrary.

a reply to: Phage

Lets see how this would work.

The township gets this grant and has to put out a notice to get bidders.

Lets say 4 bidders respond, A,B,C,D.

Bidders C and D are highest and let go. Now bidder A has the lowest price, he can dig each house for $1000 a house. Bidder B says $1500.

Now lets say al they need to buy to complete this project is pipes. Bidder A shops around and can get pipe for $50 a house, but bidder B finds it for $45 per house.

Why in gods name would the government care how much they are getting pipe for? Only the final offer of the bidder should matter.

Maybe bidder A, although he is paying $5 more a house for pipe is doing the whole project for almost no profit. Thats his choice. Maybe the supplier he is buying from is his friend, and he doesn't want to give another supplier his business. Who cares, the government still saves $500 a house by going with him.

And this is without factoring in the insane bit about minorities needing to be contacted. Why does race or sex have anything to do with this? And why are women considered a minority?

Your claim is that a regulation that makes the contractor get the cheapest price is good for the feds because they subsidize. But thats not what the regulation does, its only concerned with minority status.

So had the contractor that won the bid in my town contacted 4 suppliers, and they were all minority owned, it wouldn't have mattered what price those suppliers offered. Maybe they were selling pipe at $75 per house. Meanwhile the local non minority owned place is selling for $50 a house. The regulation does not care that the local guy was not consulted to get a cheaper price, they are merely concerned rather a minority was contacted.

This shows that your interpretaation about the feds subsidizing and wanting cheapest costs is untrue. They are more concerned with race and sex than the cheapest price.

Lastly, why stop at a minority supplier having to be contacted. Lets say the winning contractor can get his supplies from Bobs Hardware, or Sara's hardware. Well Sara is a woman which is apparently a minority, so thats seems like a good choice.

But wait, Sara gets here pipes from Pittsburgh Steel which is owned by a man, but Bob gets his pipe from Erie steel which is owned by a black man.

Now what a dilemma we have! Why don't the regulations demand that the suppliers that a contacted have to get there inventory from minorities. So the regulation is this; bidders -no minority needs contacted; supply store- minority needs contacted; creator of supply- no minority needs contacted.

This system is ridiculous.

And now, when its all said and done, its easy to blame the contractor. I will contact that person and ask why they didn't use the internet, etc.

But at the end of the day, I am out $6000 because of the minority regulation, and some of the elderly residents that thought for three years now that they were taken care of have two weeks to scramble in hopes that they don't get evicted.

And all because of a regulation that says a minority supplier must be contacted.

a reply to: Grambler

This shows that your interpretaation about the feds subsidizing and wanting cheapest costs is untrue. They are more concerned with race and sex than the cheapest price.

Where did I say the feds want the cheapest cost?

And all because of a regulation that says a minority supplier must be contacted.

I think you might find it goes deeper than that.


A bit ironic, you'll go for the grant, but not the regulations behind it.

originally posted by: Phage



A bit ironic, you'll go for the grant, but not the regulations behind it.

Two points.

I went for the grant because of the ORIGINAL regulation that said if I didn't connect to the sewage I would be evicted.

Secondly, your argument makes no sense. So because I am against a regulation that says a minority must be consulted, it is hypocrtical of me to accept a grant?

You seem to lean liberal Phage, so there is a chance you are against tax cuts. So I assume you do not take any deductions on your taxes, you give the government the maximum amount right.

I mean, otherwise you are a hypocrite according to your interpretation.