In the Waxahachie Daily Light, I took issue with this paragraph:
Rudolph recommended contracting with a single service as a result of resident complaints of high cost for tows.
The article is about the Red Oak City Council tabling a towing contract. I didn't read the entire article due to the idiotic subscription one must pay to read the stuff that you will eventually get on my blog for free anyway. But, allow me to inject some free market views here:
1) High prices for towing contracts are caused by government-created monopolies. If people didn't want to pay high prices to one company, they could and should go to another one.
2) Economies cannot be centrally planned. They have never worked. So why would Chief Rudolph think that only one service being allowed to do business in the city (i.e., "towing") settle this?
If Tow Company A charged $75 for one vehicle and people thought that was too high, the concept is not to go with one company exclusively that is lower than that price. IT is to make it to where five, eight, 24 companies are operating within the city. More competition brings lower prices.
It's science. It's also fact.
Think of it this way: (using these as examples only)
1. Roach Waste Services charge residential customers say, $35 per month; residents think this is too high. So, residents have other companies to consider, such as DCI out of Ennis or (God forbid) IESI out of ...Hell. By increasing the competiton instead of making a monopoly, you produce lower prices...
Same for ambulance/EMS services. Why contract with only one company? Why not have East Texas EMS, CareFlite, AirEvac and others perform the same services in one town, or one taxing entity, instead of a monopolized contract with only one company?
The free market will work if you give it a chance...instead of monopolizing things. Next up on the list should be utilities and schools.
Texas was never fully deregulated, and if I ever hear of a grown man or woman in elective/appointed office ever say that it was deregulated, I want to spank them. Oncor still owns the lines. There are dozens of companies ready to bill you, but only one state-protected monopoly controls the lines.
Competition works just fine in education in Red Oak, too. Look at Life Charter School. Huge success. Lots of parents just waiting in line to put their kids in that school.
With so much money being spent on "education," you would think you geniuses with your college degrees and your "leadership" could factor this sorta economic material into your voting decisions...
Joey, I think the issue is the Red Oak PD, like most other PD's has a rotation of wrecker services that they call, in order on that rotation, when there is a wreck. The wreckee must, after attending to his injuries if any, go pick up their car and pay whatever that particular wrecker service wants to charge the individual. The problem of course here is that the individual has no say over who comes to tow his car and what he has to pay. Maybe the ROPD is trying to at least regulate that and keep the individual from getting screwed.
ResponderEliminarRed Oak can set the tow amount within the City limits. Then those who want to get in the rotation can, those who don't, won't.
ResponderEliminarI owned a wrecker business in Houston. One company in charge is a bad idea.
BTW- while you are "taking issue" with WDL-
ResponderEliminarWhat about Joanne's headline "Farmer in the Cell"? Totally classless....
I was at the City Council meeting last nite 14 jun 10, and I heard about the proposed city contract with 1 wrecker company. The idea sounds like a good one (set a price for city contract towing so folks don't get gouged by tow companies taking advantage of their misfortune) but as usual, the city didn't do its homework either.
ResponderEliminarWhat happens if the 1 company chosen to carry the city contract is all full up and all the trucks are busy?
WHOOPS!!! Didn't think about that one.
Wait, it gets even better...
When they (the City) advertised for contracts with the city they advertised in the Waxahachie Light. Now, the Red Oak Record is billed as the "Official paper of Red Oak" but no ad was put there either time (according to Tim Kelty/City manager). The Red Oak towing companies were never notified about this contract bidding and completely left out of the process. They (the RO tow companies) were noticeably distraught at this revelation and let the city council know about it.
Only one bid came through and the city apparently wanted to award the contract w/o so much as picking up a phone to give tow companies in Red Oak a fighting chance.
So much for the Vision 20/20 plan of shop Red Oak first principle.
Luckily, the mayor reversed the proposal and the city council tabled it until the proper review process could be done. All parties (the tow companies) in this "pooch screw" left noticeably "upset".
So much for efficient city government.
The other thing that was made all too evident was the city always being in a rush:
ResponderEliminarThey wanted to get this issue to the meeting ASAP, so they skimped on notifying the potential bidders due to "time constraints." How's that timeliness factor looking now, eh?
Alan Hanes asked why the lake dredging isn't being done for the bid amount [hidden costs-- surprise surprise]. Mr. Kelty's response [in a nutshell] we wanted to get started ASAP and we picked a bad time to do it.
hearken back to the dog breeder ordinance: bad research on the city's part = wrong AKC section being consulted, too much time wasted analyzing and meeting, and a new ordinance that does nothing that the current basic dog care ordinance already does.
and don't forget Ben Goodwyn's temper tantrum because the P&Z board wanted to *gasp* consult businesses and citizens to coordinate a sign ordinance. {{and for anyone else interested, he made it clear last night that he [mainly] wanted to be on IDC so he could keep money flowing to Parks and Rec.}}
Red Oak needs to learn how to properly research stuff and to be PATIENT. Andy Bell nailed it w/ the Parks Master Plan stuff: we need to do this RIGHT cuz our city's future is at stake.
on the towing issue:
I'll give Clint Byers kudos for being the first to point out the obvious [that Mayor Hugley agreed with]: just because the City was "technically legal" doesn't mean the City was Right in exercising that sort of technicality. There's more to serving the interests of Red Oak than just exploiting all the legal loopholes. Tim Lightfoot said point blank that he had "no problem" with the technical sidestepping Red Oak used.
to echo Steve's phrasing....
So much for representing the citizens and businesses of Red Oak.
---------------------------
and as far as the "Shop Red Oak" stuff -- notice that the "Strategic" meeting council had last Thursday was at a hotel in WAXAHACHIE. I guess there was NO WHERE ELSE in the city of RED OAK that they could meet for a RED OAK *City Council* meeting.
???