An Empty Answer

On Tuesday night, Trane (a part of Ingersoll Rand) presented to Council about supposed energy efficiency projects for Whitewater.  As it turns out, some of these projects weren’t even about energy efficiency but were additional items in a $1,924,749 project list. (See, previously, Whitewater’s a Small Town, for Goodness’ Sake – It Should Be Run Like One.)

A presentation like this is not a matter of mere showmanship, but reveals the thoroughness of preparation from both the vendor and the municipal administration, and the seriousness of those who are seeking millions in public – not private – money.

Below, I have embedded a portion of the presentation to Council.  (I will update with a link to the full video when it’s available online.)  Following it is my transcription of the excerpt, and my remarks on the clip.

Video:

An Empty Answer from John Adams on Vimeo.

Transcript:

Trane Representative 1:  So, that is part of the cost of doing a performance contact and having this comprehensive process: the measurement, verification, and commissioning, construction management, all of that is bundled in.  

Councilmember Binnie: So the 5% is construction management?

Trane Representative 1: Yep.

Councilmember Binnie: And the 7% is what?

Trane Representative 1:  General conditions.

Councilmember Binnie: Which means what?

Trane Representative 1:  Todd can probably explain that a little better than I can [softly laughs].

Trane Representative 2 [Todd]:  That involves everything from, umm, getting the project set up, umm, manning the job, getting the project ready, the dumpsters, cleaning everything up, all the general conditions on a project.  Umm, you come in and put the roof on but you gotta tear the roof out, clean everything up, handle the dumpsters to get everything removed.

Councilmember Binnie: I guess I would normally think that that would be included in the contract price, as opposed to being a separate price.  So, when you’re bidding this, you’re not asking the contractor to do those sorts of things?

Trane Representative 2:  On occasion not, on occasion yes we ask for it for it to be broken out.  Sometimes there’s efficiencies if you’re doing multiple things in a building to have one contractor handle it rather than every contractor handle them all, so it’s on a case by case basis.

Remarks:

1.  Empty Answer.  Trane Representative 1 can’t answer Councimember Binnie’s questions, and Trane Representative 2 gives only a generic answer (the laughable ‘on occasion not, on occasion yes.’)  Which occasion does Trane Representative 2 think this is, and why?  

That’s the answer the city deserved from Trane on Tuesday, and deserves at a future meeting, rather than their vacuous reply delivered in substandard usage.  

2.  How the local press fails.  Community papers and would-be news and sports sites fail our politics because they don’t share exchanges like this with their readers. They omit mediocre answers from vendors, for example, so residents don’t see how sloppy, or lightweight, these contract proposals are.  

Councilmember Binnie asks concise, pertinent questions, and the vendor representatives — who expect millions from Whitewater — can’t or won’t give him direct, responsive answers.  Their replies are just vacuous, canned talking points.  (Not just talking points, even, but second-tier, obvious ones.)  

His questions ably demonstrate fundamental inadequacies and hollowness with this proposal.  

Trane’s representative’s answers show a disrespect to this city and her residents: either they think lightweight work is good enough for them, or is good enough for us.  

3.  A final question.

Does Whitewater deserve better than this vendor’s efforts so far?

Yep.