At Valparaiso University, our senior civil and environmental engineering students work together in teams on projects that involve structural, transportation, water resources and environmental engineering disciplines. Each team has a representative from each discipline. The first semester takes them through the proposal stage, some preliminary design and evaluation of alternatives. At the end of the semester, each team must come up with a cost estimate for their project based on general square foot or per foot/per mile costs, since their final design doesn’t start until the next semester. Their cost estimates took me by surprise.

How High?

I recently read an article saying roads leading to airports cost as much as $20-million-plus per mile for larger airports that are generally more complex with limited alternatives. That sounded high to me so, as usual, I checked and limited my research to sources that are generally reputable. It turns out this may be an appropriate number.

Now, it has been a few years (read, many years) since I’ve done any construction cost estimating. It shouldn’t have been a surprise, because we all know costs always increase. Construction simply costs more due to inflation, supply and demand, labor costs—we all know these factors. That’s the easy part to teach our students. Look at bid tabulation history and try to project what your costs might be based on a representative sample.

But perhaps there are other factors. (Please note that some of these factors may be based on my opinion. But, as noted above, I try to find information from creditable sources.)

Experience in Both Sectors

I started my career as a state department of transportation (DOT) employee in the very early 1970s and basically worked on government-funded projects my entire work life. I mention this so you may understand my bias but also hope you’ll see the merit in my discussion.

Our DOT “design squads” of six to eight people could complete the design of 10 to 12 bridge projects every year. We didn’t have all the environmental justifications now required, but, even so, that work was done by another department. This was typical—I’m not bragging about our team.

Through the years, I witnessed the reduction in the number of state DOT employees and the increase in the number of projects done by the private sector. At the same time, the amount of projects completed was less and the cost of projects increased year over year. I wondered if there’s a correlation.

I read a study concluding that the lack of available DOT workforce and the shortage of contractor competition are two main causes of increased project costs. It’s common sense that less competition results in increased costs in any business, but let’s think about the first issue.

Are there too many people working for the government? Some people think so to the point that they will not do any evaluation but just reduce the number of employees.

Have you ever waited in line at the DMV or heard of someone who had to wait for hours just to be told they don’t have the correct form? Do you think reducing the funding and workforce would remedy that situation? Probably not. The workforce at the IRS has been reduced by 25 percent, and I can tell from firsthand experience that the response time on the phone has more than doubled, and, for about a year now, I still haven’t received the refund they already told me I was due. Would fewer people solve that? No.

More Means More

There has been a significant reduction in state DOT workforce during the last 20 years. With limited inhouse capacity, there has been an upsurge in the use of consultants, which, I would argue, increases the cost of projects. (Remember that I’ve worked for consultants much longer than as a government employee.) I would argue (based on real surveys of DOTs) that the larger the staff, the more efficient the DOTs become. Infrastructure projects create benefits for a broad scale of people across a broad scale of influences: economic growth, safety, connectivity, shared resources, etc. Larger government resources can provide greater coordination, standardization and interrelated planning.

It’s difficult for a consultant to get any benefit except from the project they’ve been assigned. So, they (we) maximize profits wherever they can. It’s clear to me that to better serve the public, a larger, more-efficient governing body will provide a more-efficient solution to rising infrastructure construction costs.

Are parts of our government oversized? Yes. But government should have the resources necessary to perform the infrastructure work required by the public … and to do it well. Especially those involved with our infrastructure.