[tbran]

There was an article here on HN some time ago about some enormous project in California (a bridge? a tunnel?). IIRC the state's engineering department was quite small and underfunded, and so they depended on the contracted company for their engineering expertise. This did not go well. As I recall, the problems were that the state engineers were not experienced enough (because private pays better and seniors leave) and there weren't enough of them. For the life of me, I can't remember what the project was, but maybe someone else here does.

How about small towns entering into agreements with big box stores where they are simply unmatched and "hoodwinked" into accepting arrangements that aren't favorable. [0] Presumably, towns could make better contacts with better legal resources.

Do you have a better solution to this problem or should we just let the corps run our lives?

[0]: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/11/3/big-box-stores...

[willcipriano]

It's just highly suspicious that every criticism of government ends up at "You don't pay us enough money" especially in the United States. It's never incompetence, corruption or malfeasance, the solution is always hiring more of the people who made the mess in the first place and paying the existing ones more.

[tbran]

Alternatively, there is room for "incompetence, corruption or malfeasance" AND being underfunded or understaffed. I don't think there are any absolutes here.

[jholman]

I think you're looking for this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZxqVC_tBdc

Note, however, that the state, in this story, that has underfunding problems and cannot figure out how to adequately supervise the civil engineering contracts is not California, it's Texas. Y'know, for all those who like to take sides on California vs Texas.

[aequitas]

I remember this story to. Probably from a YouTube channel. My first guess would be this one[0] but I can’t find it.

[0] https://m.youtube.com/@PracticalEngineeringChannel/videos