Posted 10 months, 11 days ago in 
Loading ...
I find it incredibly hypocritical of our Mesa County and Grand Junction city officials, while giving millions of our tax dollars to recruit new businesses to the valley, turn around and outsource many of our taxpayer-funded contracts to out-of-county and out-of-state companies.
Mesa County had the 2008 ballots printed and sorted by an Omaha, Neb., printing firm (which may explain while I and 38 other neighbors in my precinct received duplicate ballots).
Mesa County property taxes are mailed to a Front Range firm for processing.
Virtually all local surveys are conducted by out of county firms (with the exception of Steve King’s under-the-table, no-bid security survey for Mesa State).
Few local construction companies build any of the government buildings or roadways. The list goes on and on.
Is it not ironic that Cumulus Broadcasting, a nationwide radio conglomerate that runs six stations in the valley, has a current campaign promoting support of local businesses.
I’m thinking in this time of economic distress, we as the citizens of Grand Junction and Mesa County need to seriously consider outsourcing our city and county leaders, along with their bloated salaried staffs. I’ll bet some competent people in India would be happy to do their jobs for a quarter of their pay.
MIKE FITZMORRIS
Grand Junction
8 Responses to “Local governments hypocritically outsource jobs”
Posted January 13th, 2009 at 1:57 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Some of us recognize Mr. Fitzmorris’ frustration with the “outsourcing” of jobs to “out of state”, “out of county”, and even “out of state” tasks. And, every effort should be made to keep expenditures “local” to an area, if at all possible. Unfortunately, such is not always the case.
There may be instances where the required facilities are not available or, that doing so is far more economical to do such outsourcing, which quite frequently it is.
Having looked into several instances of doing so in Delta County alone, what I have found is that the mantra of “staying local” is quite frequently used by local businesses, and not in the interests of the taxpayer. And, almost always, they use it in order to charge more for the same service or product than is obtainable from organizations no further than Grand Junction or Montrose. There is always some “margin”, but always higher. The “margin” may not make it worthwhile to go beyond the locality, but that appears to be intentional, the supplier knowing what will be “tolerated” and what will not. So, can we say that the supplier, is giving the government, and us, their “best price”? Some of us don’t believe so.
Posted January 13th, 2009 at 2:44 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I can’t believe I am writing this. In all likelihood the web editor will remove this from here before long.
I actually agree with RL on this issue.
Ouch, that hurt!
Posted January 13th, 2009 at 3:35 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
The gentleman mentions that the ballots for the 2008 Election were printed by a company in Omaha, Nebraska. He also mentions that he and some of his neighbors received duplicate ballots.
First, printing vendors wishing to print election ballots are required to go through a certification process. While there are only a few in this state, each jurisdiction (in the entire country) must reserve (with a certified printing vendor that meets all requirements) well in advance a specific time slot. Keep in mind, during a federal election, the entire country is reserving space with printing vendors at the same time.
Second, this is the first year Colorado counties were required to use the election management system through the Statewide Voter Registration System. While there were a few duplicate ballots issued through the new statewide system, we always encourage voters to contact the Elections Division in an effort to make those corrections, notify the state, and refine the processes.
These are just abbreviated explanations, but anyone is invited to call and ask questions they may have concerning the conduct of Elections. We certainly encourage those wishing to learn more about the election process to participate as an election worker or election judge is an effort to become more informed.
Posted January 13th, 2009 at 5:29 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullisfrog: “I actually agree with RL on this issue.
Ouch, that hurt!”
Why should it “hurt”? Actually, in things that are written, it is possible to agree with a conclusion while disagreeing totally with the facts and reasoning behind it. At other times, it is also possible to look at the underlying facts and reasoning have not led to the proper conclusion. What is wrong with disagreeing in either case?
Posted January 13th, 2009 at 5:38 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Even when I agree with RL I get psychoanalyzed.
Posted January 13th, 2009 at 11:56 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Wonder what bullishfrog understands by the term “psychoanalysis.”
Posted January 14th, 2009 at 8:00 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Stop it.
Posted January 14th, 2009 at 10:32 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
A couple of questions re: cost. When something is outsourced, are the things listed below considered in the final cost:
1-the carbon footprint
2-the wear and tear on the means of transport, be it roads, rails, or fiber optics or other
3-the lost local tax revenue due to the lost local wage
4-the lost local buying power
5-the cost of unemployment and other social services due to the lost employment
I ask these questions because so many times I have seen where the “cost savings” only applied if the hidden cost were ignored.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.