To me it's not a choice between portraying this as some great civic effort, or as a failure of governance. In reality it's both. The city trusted some specialized place to do this work, and they didn't do their job, and a local guy fixed it. Why did this happen? Likely because someone at the city didn't do their research.
Like it or not, many instances of government incompetence would never come to light if it weren't for the news media. If you consider this "gotcha" journalism, that's certainly your view. To me it's holding government to account for how they spend taxpayer money. I know it's the current thing to dump on the news media, and yes sometimes it's warranted. But again they play an important role no matter how much some want to minimize it.
Completely agree about the responsibility of the media- but having worked with many photo-journalists from some of the largest news outlets, I can tell you from their experience- the media is now driven by “hits”, and serious reporting is not valued-it doesn’t sell advertising (and that’s not on the journalists- that’s on the owners of the media outlets).
This story could have a complete picture of project mismanagement followed by local man saves the day- but it’s not as sexy as as just reporting the negative side.
I’m 100% behind a free press (even if I don’t like what they are reporting) and the value of the work they do- my indictment isn’t on them- it’s on the consumers and their appetite for junk and commentary and not investigative reporting.
A counter-point to this situation being a matter of government incompetence is that it may be a result of how the system for government contracts are awarded. I don’t know how the bid process works with a local government in Canada, nor do I know the particulars of this situation, but on the US Federal level, situations like this can go very badly by no fault of the organization, rather because of an inherently difficult process of contract policy.
If this were a US federal property, the restoration of the clock would have been charged to a contract manager within the agency. This contract manager may be an engineer or architect, but clockmaking is most likely not their speciality. They reach out to the previous clockmaker who had worked on the clock before and he declines the offer (they could have constructed a no-bid contract based on sole-source justification).
So the next step is to create a scope of work put the project out for bid. The parameters of the contract are structured to yield an outcome with milestones, but rarely are they written specifically to process (unless the PM has specific knowledge of the process).
The bid is then put out publicly (or to a minimum of 3 vendors who can meet the requirements of the contract), and the lowest bidder is awarded- regardless of if one of the two other bidders may have previous experience with the agency/clock. Even if the bid comes in at one penny lower, the lowest bidder is awarded the contract.
I have seen countless projects go into litigation because the vendor screwed up, and the agency had no control over the award- they were the lowest bidder.
I’m not excusing what may or may not have happened here, but as a 20 year government employee who takes great pride in his work- I get chuffed when people are quick to point to waste, fraud and abuse before understanding all of the facts. The phrase “close enough for government work” is one that can make me blow a gasket.