A bill that would ban local governments from requiring that companies bidding on public projects enter into project labor agreements is heading to Gov. Scott Walker’s desk after a 64-35 vote in the Assembly.
A bill that would ban local governments from requiring that companies bidding on public projects enter into project labor agreements is heading to Gov. Scott Walker’s desk after a 64-35 vote in the Assembly.
I’m surprised our rezident lib in pen-name’s clothing hasn’t responded about how this is a Madison power grab from local governments. He/She is slipping. Oh, I get it, since Kevin hasn’t commented, He/She isn’t compelled to get the last word in.
This is restoring local control because these mandates from liberal cities drive up cost of projects for rest of us.
This is local control restoration.
Just curious if either of you read the article, as it says, “A bill that would ban local governments from…..”. Hence, by definition, it is a bill that takes away local control. Unless Owen is lying to us you guys are wrong. And why would either of you folks care what was decided by Oconto County, or the City of Park Falls ? Or are you again imposing your Washington County values on others without their input.
Nord,
Of course I read it. The simple problem is: when Milwaukee or Madison does something dumb it drives up the bidding standard for rest of us. Contractors cannot reverse pay requirements for staff based on geography. So pay increases, for instance, mandated by liberal crazy cities become a cost for all.
Oh Nord, way to jump in with both feet. The wording is actually “…ban local governments from requiring…”
Think about for a minute… the wording does does not restrict local governments from entering into labor agreements. You’ve told everyone on this blog over and over how intelligent you are… but you stumble over some very simple concepts time and time again.
kevin:
“when Milwaukee or Madison does something dumb it drives up the bidding standard for rest of us”. Why ?? Prices bid in southern WI surely don’t affect those in the north. Provide some sources on that, because you aren’t making sense.
“Contractors cannot reverse pay requirements for staff based on geography”. That just isn’t true. It happens all the time. I know for fact that the contractors on a large public works project in our county have different wage rates based on where they are working. I’ve seen the wages scales from bidders during the bidding process.
“So pay increases, for instance, mandated by liberal crazy cities become a cost for all”. More absolute nonsense.
j:
The key here are the words “ban local governments”. Hence by definition this is a taking of local control by the state, and by your own words, ” ban local governments from requiring…” Glad to by of service to you.
Nord,
It’s almost impossible to believe you are that clueless.
kevin:
I guess you are doomed to live in a world governed only by your beliefs rather than in reality. Your cliams above are all nonsense, but go ahead, believe what you want even if the rest of the world does otherwise.
BAN:
verb (used with object), banned, banning.1. to prohibit, forbid, or bar; interdict:
You forgot one:
Ban – something that should happen to pissant bureaucrats with White Nationalist monikers.
Ah yes, here we are parsing words again but missing the point. In our State, we have some laws that artificially increase prices for projects we taxpayers are ultimately on the hook to pay for. Given the waste in government and the reluctance on the part of some to take advantage of the tools given them to better provide value for each and every dollar, it make perfect sense to me to end some antiquated practices. Along with prevailing wage, minimum markup comes to mind.
Having been on the inside of government, it is worse than just making sausage. It may make some who have chosen politics as a career but I favor term limits on all levels of elected office from local all the way up (including school boards). Until that time, changes like this seem entirely appropriate.
Oops, missed a couple of words. It may make some who have chosen politics as a career head’s explode but I favor term limits
Wow comedy gold here. Mr Correct everything Kevin says is hanging it all on a word parsing argument. Lol. Hey budx why don’t you explain to us common folk what EXACTLY would ve taken away from local government? This should be really entertaining.
bill:
No parsing of words. The claims kevin made are all not based on reality. . This proposed “ban” is a taking of local control, and is a solution looking for a problem. Makes a good sound bite for politicians talking to the uninformed, but really doesn’t solve much if you delve into the details.
And speaking of local control, there was a great article in the Green Bay Press-Gazette regarding the inability of local government to have any say in the siting of cell phone towers. Two republicans, Ott and Allen, “want to curb the law that prevents municipalities from having a say about the placement of cell phone towers”. This is the law that Kevin said really didn’t apply to his municipality.
Nord,
As I have explained before, if you have correct legal advice, it is not an issue.
I can’t help it there is an abundance of dumb politicians out there.
Sorry, I missed the connection between ending project labor agreements and cell phone towers.
In our State, we have some laws that artificially increase prices for projects we taxpayers are ultimately on the hook to pay for. Given the waste in government and the reluctance on the part of some to take advantage of the tools given them to better provide value for each and every dollar, it make perfect sense to me to end some antiquated practices.
>This proposed “ban” is a taking of local control
And yet you haven’t enumerated the exact controls you contest have been taken from local governments. I bet that’s because you are unable to do so.
kevin:
If “correct legal advice” is to violate the law, then your actions and those of your legal advisor must put Kewaskum is a perilous legal position. Appleton, Eau Claire, Prairie du Sac and Neenah have all been involved in lawsuits regarding cell tower siting, all have been found in favor of the cell tower. I would wager you are making stuff up again.
WI Act 20 of 2013, codified in Ch. 66.0404 . I mentioned that several times in the past, guess you forgot.
With apologies to Patrick McManus: “Unencumbered by knowledge and experience, and daring Fact to raise Her ugly head, Kevin and Jason proceeded blissfully in ignorance…”
Dear Northwoods Troll,
The only reason I could be considered ignorant is due to your lack of response. I’d attribute that lack as more trolling on your part
j:
I realize that comprehension isn’t on the top of your skill list, but here is the proof, once again. “WI Act 20 of 2013, codified in Ch. 66.0404 “. It can’t get any simpler.
Oh I’m sorry, how embarassing for you to claim I have a comprehension problem when it’s you with the issue. In this entire thread I’ve been asking for you to back up your statement… ‘Just curious if either of you read the article, as it says, “A bill that would ban local governments from…..”. Hence, by definition, it is a bill that takes away local control.’
I don’t give a shit what meaningless tangent you and Kevin and arguing about this time.
Nord,
Not at all. We have good legal advice.
When you can distinguish between good and bad let me know.
You have had challenges with that in the past.