Vista needs to be a charter city
By: Chuck Rabel - Commentary | ∞
My Vista neighbors, I urge you to vote yes on Proposition C on Tuesday. I am the guy who was behind the "L NO!" campaign last fall. You spoke and passed the measure. I can live with this and will continue to work to see that our tax money is spent prudently and wisely. I also believe that we should be able to complete the projects and attendant bonding in 20 years, not the 30 years Proposition L proponents are planning.
Passing Prop. C and being a charter city will give us taxpayers the best opportunity to have the many Prop. L projects completed at the most competitive prices. One major factor is to be free of the now-mandated prevailing wage requirements. Prevailing wage laws are an insidious holdover from long ago, and the state mechanisms for setting these non-market wages have been long ago rigged by the unions. The results can be a real rip-off to those of us paying taxes.
Let's compare some specific projects. From this week's San Diego Business Journal listing of "Largest Construction Projects":
The city of San Diego's City Heights Senior Housing Project will complete this September 151 units with a total of 95,000 square feet for $21,974,825. In February, with private funding, 148 condos totaling 188,000 square feet known as "Lofts at 677" on G Street were completed at a cost of $19,502,993. Compare $231 per square foot with prevailing wages versus $104 per square foot at market wages! Also, the completed market units are nearly twice as large as the government-funded units. What makes this comparison so interesting is that the same general contractor, Harper Construction, built both projects.
Both Qualcomm and Cardinal Health built or are building headquarters/class A office buildings. Qualcomm's project came in at $289 per square foot and Cardinal Health's is budgeted at $244 per square foot. This is where the market is for buildings of this type. UC San Diego has two similar projects: the Music Building at $537 per square foot and the Rady School of Management at $436 per square foot. The University of California, as a state agency, is compelled to pay prevailing wages, and these costs reflect that.
Vista has an opportunity, should the charter measure Prop. C pass, to use city-generated tax monies in the market without prevailing wage requirements. Savings could be as significant as those illustrated above.
Closer to home, right in Vista, dj Ortho recently completed its new headquarters building. If the data I have are correct, this 111,600-square-foot facility came in at $185 per square foot. Vista's most current estimate of the construction cost of the new Civic Center/City Hall is $328 per square feet for a comparable size (100,000 square feet) and comparable use project.
If only $50 per square foot could be saved on the new City Hall, we would save $5 million in direct cost and more than $10 million in bonded debt. This alone is reason enough to make Vista a charter city.
Let's give our city the ability to use the marketplace to determine how much to pay for the capital projects that we ask the next generation to pay for. Let's get Prop. L done prudently and expeditiously, then bond for 20 years, not 30 years. I urge you to vote yes on Prop. C.
Vista resident Chuck Rabel is former chairman of the Vista Chamber of Commerce and vice president of DDH Enterprise, a cable manufacturer based in Vista.
More Stories
Advertisement
Vista Dad wrote on Jun 2, 2007 9:24 PM:I was going to vote for Prop C, but now seeing that this author is pushing it...I am having serious doubts.
vote 'NO' wrote on Jun 3, 2007 8:23 AM:don't give politicians any more power than they already have. Its a breeding ground for corruption. Vote 'NO' on C
Statistical Sideshow wrote on Jun 3, 2007 10:33 AM:Whoa. So many facts and figures. Reminds me of the story of the statistician who drowned crossing teh river with an average depth of 2 feet.
Cal wrote on Jun 3, 2007 10:39 AM:How can this guy compare the cost of a tilt-up industrial/warehouse/office building with a city hall. The cost per sq. ft. to build a warehouse is a lot less than building office space and infrastructure for a modern city hall. Isn't that obvious? We got apples and oranges here in this article. Mr. Rabel is selling fruit, not common sense.
Absolutely vote NO wrote on Jun 3, 2007 12:59 PM:This Charter is simply a way for the council and their cronies to step in and make profits on the backs of all the citizens and workers. Anything over $5,000 and they don't have to bid it out? Ridiculous! And think of the unskilled workers who aren't getting paid enough to take care of health insurance...they'll flood the local hopsitals and we will all have to pay for that. In the end, this makes no sense. Vote No.
Meatball wrote on Jun 4, 2007 8:42 AM:Are you people nuts? I guess if you just want to continue to spend your money and get half as much, go ahead and vote no on Prop. C. If you want your hard-earned tax money to go as far as possible, then vote yes. The bottom line is this. Unions are working hard to convince you to vote no. They have created a system where non-competitive and unrealistic salaries are paid...that is your money...for jobs that pay much less in an open market. Think about it and then support this great idea.
Vote No so that the quality of vista buildings is professional wrote on Jun 4, 2007 8:19 PM:The city doesn't want to pay prevailing wages but where it the quality guarantee? Is this about the city council giving family members and relatives the business? There is more to this than the city saving a few dollars. The unions have programs that insure a journey man passes certain certifications. Non unions don't have these requirements and anyone can call themselves a journeyman. There have already been non union workers performing work in Vista and the city had to pay to have the work redone.
alex wrote on Jun 5, 2007 7:48 AM:the whole "prevailing wage makes projects costs more" argument is BS with a whole lot of rigorous analysis to back that up. the fact is that construction labor accounts for only about 20% of a building's total construction cost. the savings of rabel's fantasies would require the workers to actually work for free. having seen the product of low paid labor first hand, that's not something i would want in my public works. and since lowering wages for workers doesn't actually guarantee that the contractor will lower costs all we're doing is taking from the workers and putting it in the owner's hands. last thing to remember is that by lowering wages we're pulling money out of the economy that would otherwise be spent in our communities on basic things that families need to survive and giving it as increased profits to contractors who will probably stick in into a mutual fund or spend it on a vacation in a far off land. its better to keep the dollars local.
tom wrote on Jun 5, 2007 8:49 AM:There are hundreds of cities in California, but only a very small handful of Charter cities, why is that? must be a real good reason. It hold local politicians to a minimum state standard. VOTE NO
I think not !! wrote on Jun 5, 2007 9:47 AM:The first example was the best ...comparable building types and so similar trades used. why did it cost less ....might be labor cost ...but a lot more than that goes into the bottom line. I'd bet lower grade trim, fixtures and ammenities. And you can bet his profit margin was still there. There;s more to this issue than "prevailing labor rates". Charter status allows much more leeway that maybe we are ready to give. Its not like politicians aren't known for having our best interests in mind and they aren't even doing stuff we like now. Letting the leash out farther is not likely to be a good thing.
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement