The Tostada Paradox and Ludington Politics

[XLFD]

A friend asked me to pick up a regular tostada at Taco Bell for them recently, and I was informed by the manager of that local restaurant that regular tostadas were not part of the menu anymore.  Always adaptive to the task at hand, I then asked for a spicy tostada without the spicy sauce on top and got what was effectively a classic Taco Bell tostada at the spicy tostada value price of one dollar plus tax.

This reminded me of a somewhat Seinfeldian discussion I have had with my brother over the years regarding a strange phenomena that existed back when the Taco Bell value menu came out and with its various new items, including the spicy tostada.  The menu boards had the spicy tostada as a $1 item while the regular tostada had a cost of $1.29 and was the exact same thing as a spicy tostada without the spicy sauce drizzled on top.

So somebody with decision-making capability at corporate Taco Bell headquarters had made the calculation that it takes $1.29 of costs to make a tostada, but if employees add spicy sauce and supply the nominal effort to drizzle the sauce over the tostada, that seemingly extra labor and materials cost for some reason brought its overall value down 29 cents, or nearly 25%.  It was a corporate decision, don't question it.

It contradicted everything that we knew about ordering food-- you don't ever see cheeseburgers selling less for hamburgers at a restaurant.  And it wasn't a Taco Bell thing, for when they make the 'supreme' versions of tacos, burritos, and nachos, the price goes up substantially with the addition of other toppings.  It was an apparent conundrum, a paradox, with no easy answer or conclusion that has been totally satisfactory since the time we first considered it back in 2013.

What do tostadas have to do with Ludington politics?  Through the years, people at city hall with decision-making capabilities have ramrodded certain costly ideas without a lot of thought put behind them, or any apparent care about whether the original value or purpose of what they changed was sufficient, or even better than what the outcome was. 

Regular people without city hall goggles and without any concern about whether their disagreement will signal the demise of their public employee/official career, see the folly involved in the following projects:

- City Marina transient docks (2010):  This $1 million project constructing seawalls and temporary dockage along the north end of the city marina replacing the layered rock walls still existing on the east and west marina perimeters gets very little actual usage.  Definitely, not enough usage to pay for itself for many, many years-- well past when it will need another million dollars in maintenance.

The foolishness of replacing the rocks with the docks has become clearest this year, as the water has risen above the seawalls and has jeopardized the concrete's integrity behind it.  Cracks are forming and will likely get worse with the combination of freezing/thawing and wave erosion acting on it during the off-season.  The east and west rock walls are holding up nicely as they have the last 40 years.

- West End Project, Phase 1 (2019):  This $600,000 project was widely panned by the public for a variety of different reasons:  loss of parking, loss of easy access to the southern beach, loss of the  view of the lake on approach due to obstructions.  Leveling the dune and putting up a concrete walkway and seawall along the south beach was nixed, at least for this phase, but it's still in future sights.  

Phase 1, in part or complete, was available for the public to enjoy this year, but few actually did, most forgoing the oppressive heat of the concrete and enjoying what they came to the beach for, sand and water.  Councilor, CVB and CoC President Brandy Miller and others are already planning events there for next year to make use of the pavilion anchor points in the concrete, the canoe livery will also likely see some action, amplified music (against beach rules) will surely be played as it has in the past in the beer tents.  

- Copeyon Park Splash Pad (2020):  This $400,000 project has led, like the WEP, to citizen petitions, this one against the idea of putting a kid's water park inside of an existing park, known throughout its history as a shaded fishing, family outing, and picnicking park; worse, it has zero pedestrian facilities leading into or out of the hilly park entrance.  City hall fails to recognize the problems that increased traffic in and out will amp up the dangers to neighborhood kids going to and from the park, and the lack of handicapped access.  

Citizens notice this, the problem of territorial geese, health & safety issues, potential parking issues and a host of other issues making the location bad for the splash pad.  City officials, in the course of many committee meetings where issues were discussed out of sight, only saw roses.

- James Street Legacy Park (future):  DDA Marketing guru Jen Tooman marketed this nicely a couple of years back when she told us that no taxpayer funds would be used to do this million dollar facelift of the 100 North James Street block right-of-way.  Great, since they seem to change that block often enough on whims that pass and are replaced by other fanciful notions.

Yet, since an initial fundraiser which probably cost more to put on than it raised, the tune has changed.  The community development director has vetoed a $700,000 price tag for the upgrade and has selected a $2.5 million price tag for the modest upgrades planned for the plaza.  That money will all come from the Amended TIF Plan, which means every penny will come from local taxpayers, if that plan should pass.  They have even contradicted that source of income by saying that they expect the MEDC was scheduled to help fund Legacy Park.  City hall folks will call this necessary for placemaking, common folks will tell you what it is, a waste of cash that takes their taxes meant for public services and uses it irresponsibly.

In conclusion, we see that those people at city hall with decision-making authority have all too often taken our area's tostadas, added plenty of 'spice' to them, and in the end have made those things less valuable to everyone.  But it was a corporate decision, don't question it.

[Freedom Seeker]

Those making these spicy decisions dont have to listen to the taxpayers. They just will anchor another tent and get drunk with the tourists and their own crowd slapping themselves on the back for such a good job they've done. They sober up a bit when their grant funding is in jeopardy, then they squeal bloody murder. It's like the kids sneaking "creative funding" to get the latest, most expensive Xbox when the family can't afford insurance or new tires for the car.

[Du Wright]

I don't completely get the analogy of paying more for for a plain version or less for a spicy version. In the case of the west end and legacy park, it seems we are paying way more for an unnecessary spicy version. In the case of the splash pad it is just a poorly-thought out location which will not have a good pedestrian pathway into the park, unless they plan something they are not telling us, but then we've been in the dark about the whole thing in secret meetings all along. Somehow the city needs to engage and inform it's citizens but it seems they don't want to hear input from citizens, the taxpayers. Or if they do, it's done in secret with a few certain friends of certain employees who push their project through at all costs. That is completely distasteful.

[XLFD]

The analogy is subtle so consider the following as your regular tostadas:  1) the city marina, 2) Stearns' beach, 3) Copeyon Park, and 4) the James Street Plaza.  

The COL adds some spice and sauce to each and makes them into spicy tostadas, namely 1) transient docks, 2) the west end plaza, 3) the Copeyon splash pad, and 4) Legacy Park.

In these instances the spice and sauce cost hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars, to spend on labor and materials.  Logically the end result should be of more value than what we started with, but it isn't because the change has detracted from the original 'product', whether it be prohibitive maintenance costs or the loss of what that area was originally and historically used for successfully before the change, and no longer can support.  

In using the word 'value', I use the public's subjective overall sense of a project's worth.  These are all projects that are rather unpopular when the public knows all the information about them, even if they are portrayed as not coming from state or local taxes-- which they all do to some degree.

[Du Wright]

Yes, it's definitely a new dish. Hold the rotten tomatoes and sup up.

[Willy]

X. Excellent recap of the useless, wasteful, backdoor projects that have been slipped by the taxpayers. Not to mention the officials in charge who are behind these unwanted projects and who have acted in a questionable and unethical [some may even say corrupt] manner and who are essentially being  paid from the taxpayers / citizen's wallets. Another huge waste of our money. 

I have to add another wasteful project that squandered taxpayers dollars. I'm speaking of the walkway linking the boat launch parking ramp to the breakwater just west of the boat launch ramps which collapsed under the weight of ice build up during the winter months. This should never have been built. Any knowledgeable engineer could have predicted the failure of this boondoggle. Now who do you think will be paying for this. Certainly not a beer tent revival or cookie sale.

[Freedom Seeker]

Good pictures, Willy! It would be interesting to figure out how much money has been and is still being wasted by these ill-thought out and unpopular projects, including the fake ice rink and show how many sidewalks could be have been built instead, or how many roads could have been repaired, or how many leaded goosenecks could have been removed.

It seems lately that LDN is not linking certain city-related articles to its e-version on Facebook for public comment (for instance, the article about site-prep on splash pad being started). I wonder if the city told them to not run anything that could be controversial. They only want to heat positive comments. They will never learn I'd they bury their heads in the sand and only look through rose-colored glasses.

[AQUAMAN]

Two of the items listed for Legacy, (Lunacy), Park are as follows too: 1) $36,000 for garbage cans and 2) $31,500 for sitting benches. Prime examples for wasted monies that exceeds all common sense.

[Freedom Seeker]

Thanks Aquaman for that info. That's absolutely crazy. Makes you wonder whose pocket a majority of that garbage can money is going? How could garbage cans cost that much? I wonder how many that is? If they placed 36 garbage cans around, that'd be $1000 each. I've never seen more than three or four garbage cans in that small an area. Maybe six if you supplied one for every restaurant, business and bathroom etc. Six garbage cans would cost $6000 each. What kind of garbage can costs $1000 (36 cans) or even $500 each (72 garbage cans)? Gold-plated garbage cans? Someone should audit their budget because that TIF taken away from other needscould put in many feet of sidewalk. It looks like a lot of swindling going down.

And benches? I thought there were so many people wanting to donate benches that there had to be a waiting list to get one placed.