FACTS about Public Roofing Procurement, and Oversight. Copyright 2010 by Robert R. Solomon

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Pennsylvania S.B. 813 (Senator Pat Vance) for "FAIR COMPETITION" in Public Roofing Procurement.

Friends:

Again welcome, and I am overjoyed to bring you such positive news.

A number of roofing material manufacturer leaders (especially Carlisle Syntec's Michael Ducharme) have defeated "Exclusion" practiced by purchasing cooperatives in Pennsylvania.

The premise is simple:  Fair competition for taxpayer dollars, and not the predatory sales models of Tremco, and Garland.

Do not be confused.  We encourage Tremco and Garland to "Compete" for our taxpayer dollars, but eliminate false pricing scams prevalent in purchasing cooperatives.  By now, you know that purchasing cooperatives are a horrid way to secure costly roof systems, and services.

THIS is the LAW:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDF&sessYr=2013&sessInd=0&billBody=S&billTyp=B&billNbr=0813&pn=0852

This is of course public record, and availailble to all.

Much respect to Senator Pat Vance of Pennsylvania:

Senator Pat Vance

A little of the text:


"(a) General rule.--Notwithstanding any other provision of

law, specifications for roofing projects shall be based upon

generally accepted standards in the commercial roofing industry

and shall be written to encourage open and competitive bidding

and to prevent corruption and favoritism in order to achieve the

best work and materials at the lowest reasonable cost.

(b) Preparation of specifications.--The plans and

specifications for a roofing project shall be prepared by a

design professional and shall bear the stamp or seal of the

design professional who prepared the plans or specifications.

The contracting officer shall require that every design

professional preparing plans and specifications submit

verification to the contracting local government unit that the

design professional holds a valid Pennsylvania license or

registration and a certification required by section 4705

(relating to disclosure of financial interest).

(c) Brand name specifications.--

(1) A local government unit may specify materials by

brand name in order to signify the kind or quality of

materials sought. Specifications calling for materials by

brand name shall be construed as requesting materials of the

general style, type, character and quality of the materials

identified by brand name.

(2) In response to any specification calling for a brand

name, a bidder may furnish the brand name or a brand name

 

equivalent.

(d) Specification features.--None of the following features,

if present in the specifications for a roofing project, may be

used to reject materials substituted for a brand name:

(1) Requirements applicable to substitute materials or

bidders proposing the use of substitute materials that differ

substantially from the requirements to be met by the

materials named in the specifications.

(2) Provisions conferring authority to accept or reject

substitute materials upon persons other than the contract

officer acting upon the recommendation of the design

professional who prepared the specifications.

(3) Testing requirements that may be met by only one

manufacturer's materials. However, specifications may require

materials to meet standards issued by independent testing

organizations. In any case in which a material is required to

meet a certain standard set forth in the specifications, the

material shall be deemed to do so if it meets or exceeds that

standard.

(4) Testing requirements that are exclusionary due to

time or expense for compliance.

(5) Provisions setting a standard for, or placing a

restriction on, the use of substitute materials that are not

related to the purpose, function or activity for which the

contract is awarded.

§ 4704. Prohibited acts.

(a) Separate contracts.--A local government unit,

contracting officer or design professional may not divide a

roofing project into smaller projects to avoid the application

of this chapter."
That is a representation ONLY, and I urge you to read the full bill, and it's affect upon you.

Again, thank you to Senator Vance, and the many who participated. 

An earlier post here showed how Lower Dauphin Schools (Pa.) spent 2.2 million dollars without competition.  I worked very hard to bring this to Superintendent Smith's attention, but she was having no part of the "Fair Competition" I was pleading for her to consider.

But, the persistence of honorable people removes the "stigma", and "darkness" associated with school roofs purchased through purchasing cooperatives.  Remember, the cooperative gets (on average) 4% of the total contract, so all incentive to save, is immediately extinguished.

A refresher:

All anyone has to do is type "School Roofing Scam" into your browser, or "YouTube", and there is no shortage of Tremco and Garland participation in it. I'm even in one here:

http://www.news9.com/story/15953631/school-districts-accused-of-wasting-tax-dollars

And:

http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/news/16683132-418/oak-lawn-may-rebid-roofing-contract.html

And:

http://www.cvschools.org/news.cfm?story=592

And:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEKVSrPui08

And:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev0Yd2SGNes

And on it goes.

I believe this came from Ms. Janet Campbell's excellent "School Roofing Scam" blogsite, but will correct that if necessary.  Regardless, Ms. Campbell is quite the authority on these things, and you should visit her at:  .

 "SCHOOL ROOFING SCAM:

A GENERIC GUIDE IN SIX STEPS

The following is a composite scenario that illustrates the types of abuses
uncovered by the State Commission of Investigation during its investigation of public
school roofing projects in New Jersey.

STEP I
School District X determines that several failing roofs on school
buildings require repair and/or replacement.

STEP II
When plans for the project are announced, District X officials are
contacted by the sales representative of Company Y, a leading seller of
roofing materials.

The sales representative refers the district to a roofing
consultant/architect who has a secret arrangement under which he
receives compensation from Company Y.

Knowing that he will be paid by the company, the consultant is
able to under-bid all other potential architects to obtain the project
design contract.

STEP III
The consultant writes “proprietary” project specifications
explicitly built around Company Y’s products.

The specifications also contain an array of special requirements,
or “hurdles,” designed to block the substitution of materials from any
other manufacturer, even though they may be less expensive and of
identical quality".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Once you've taken that "Easy Money", you will forever bear the stain. The roofing community knows how it works, and what you are. Souls seem to be going cheaply nowadays.

Hundreds of you have written letters to me describing the abuse in your own communities. NRCA must understand this, and stop facilitating such horrible, predatory models upon the taxpayers of North America. It is extremely bad in Canada as well.

Tremco and Garland are so great, they specify 10 and 15 year roofs for our schools. Then they charge an exhorbitant sum for an ADDITIONAL warranty.

SCAM, SCAM, SCAM. ALL of it perpetrated upon the PUBLIC sector! No private owner is illiterate enough to fall for such an obvious rip off.
 
With Pennsylvania S.B. 813, the law will be enforced, and the stealing by "exclusion" vastly reduced.
 
Recent example of savings first hand:
 
This came to me from an honorable consultant who felt inspired to help his school district.
 
"Brother Ron,
The bid was just awarded for the roofing at the middle school.
Together we saved the taxpayer over 410 k!! Once Garland/ Tremco were exposed,with your great effort,the project award was 719k ,as opposed to 1.29 mil. Just wanted to give you an update. Be well Brother Ron".

 
To all PARENTS:  It is people like this who fight to insure your tax dollars are spent with oversight.  The exact opposite of what purchasing cooperatives represent.

I will translate $410K into visual terms for you, and then it becomes 4 brand new school buses.  Simply because someone cared enough to try, and I am humbled by the civic pride in this fine person.

You should be too, but there is a shortage of "Courage", and an abundance of "Greed".  Chalk one up for the "Courage" team on this one.

Friends, I am very thankful for your time spent here.  Sometime the subject matter may be tough to read, but I have confidence in your desire for "Truth".

Please reject negativity in all forms, and always remember to keep looking "UP".

Respect.

Ron

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
Director, Roof Consultant's Alliance
Public Procurement Analyst
CCC 1325620







Giving the facts on energy efficiency and how to help.

  Welcome Good People; Today's topic is rather basic, but extraordinarily important. Clients getting BAD INFORMATION regarding Solar. Po...