Collusion: Garland, U.S.Communities, and Cobb County, Georgia.

This one will be harsh.

Reason:  The Cobb County "Pricing" does not exist, and U.S. Communities (prior to today's date) cannot prove that it does.  On U.S. Communities website, they show 54 pages of BLANK "Line Items".  No construction project can be "competitive" with Garland, and all of them know it.  Yet, they keep deceiving the public (throughout all of North America).

So, we round up a few politicians to "go along" with the scam, and guess who pays for it?  I've grown tired of people who lie, cheat, and steal.  Further incensed over personal greed, at the expense of our schools.

In a fair, transparent, and 'open" bid scenario, Garland will lose 100 out of 100 times.  They know it, and everyone else knows it.

I've requested pricing from U.S. Communities (David Kidd) five times without benefit of reply.  This is an outfit purporting to save money, but the opposite is true.  U.S. Communities is paid a 2% "Commission", and the Garland Representative gets paid 25%.  Your tax dollar immediately turns into 73 cents, and nothing to show for the stupidity.

Click to enlarge:

If you ever see Garland, or U.S. Communities involved in your school district, you are getting soaked, and your children denied services.  My best suggestion is to insist upon 4 major manufacturers, locally distributed, and locally represented.  Here are a few:

Johns Manville: A Berkshire Hathaway Company.
Firestone: Backed by billions of dollars in Bridgestone assets.
GAF:  Largest roofing material manufacturer on earth.

We have a number of qualified manufacturers like Carlisle Syntec, Barrett, Sika Sarnafil, etc.

ANYTHING but Garland, or Tremco (just fined $61,000,000.00 by the DOJ for abusing GSA contracts.  The schools they defrauded got NOTHING.  Purchasing Cooperatives STILL use them as if nothing happened.  The arrogance is offensive, and shameful to any rational person.

I do not want to "Exclude" Garland, or Tremco, but add them to a bid list with mainstream manufacturers, and let them have an opportunity to "Compete".

Does that seem fair?  Does that seem reasonable? Does that seem rational to clear thinking people?  Of course it does.

It is against the law for any administrator to show even the slightest hint of favoritism.  That is called "Collusion".  It is happening at an alarming rate, and you are paying for it.  YOU are putting that 25% "Sales Commission" directly into one person's pocket.  YOU are paying U.S. Communities 2% 'Commission' for the privilege of being cheated, and paying approximately 40% MORE for a school roof.

By the way, "Roofing" is the only construction trade U.S. Communities lists.  Why is that Ron?  It's because roofing is the costliest item in any school maintenance budget.  Administrators are normally "soft targets' for the sales pitch "We handle it all".  A grotesque dereliction of responsibility may not be countered with the argument of "Ease" over "Cost".

All publicly funded structures are subject to oversight, and evaluated by "measurable units".  Not a new "made up" system that invites deceit, collusion, and corruption.  That is the Garland/U.S. Communities way however, and if they focus on public work, must "Compete" just like everyone else.

I don't want Garland "Excluded", but "Included".  Garland will not openly bid, and will quickly run away if asked to compete.

Cobb County, Georgia is responsible for conducting fake pricing scams to suit U.S. Communities, and Garland.  Period.  

Friends, I am thankful for the time you spend with me here.  Reject negativity in all forms, and always remember to keep looking "UP".

Respect.

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

Profile:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/robertrsolomon

"Bloated Nuclear Spending (Including Roofing) Comes Under Fire"

http://www.wfla.com/story/23421170/nations-bloated-nuclear-spending-comes-under-fire

"In Tennessee, the price tag for a new uranium processing facility has grown nearly sevenfold in eight years to upward of $6 Billion dollars that include a redesgn to raise the roof".

Nation's bloated nuclear spending comes under fire

Posted: Sep 13, 2013 12:27 AM EDT Updated: Sep 13, 2013 12:17 PM EDT

By JERI CLAUSING and MATTHEW DALY
Associated Press

 

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

 

I believe the descriptions are fairly common, and representative of public procurement practicing "Favoritism", "Sole Source" bids, and assisting "Preferred Vendors".

 

They discuss "Private Contractors".  Those "Private Contractors" are facilitated by the complete negligence of "Competitive Bid" laws in every state.

 

You and I expect fair competition for our tax dollars, but lobbyists, attorneys, and government purchasing cooperatives, spend huge sums of money to secure favor.  "Favor" that is virtually limitless when spending YOUR money.
 

 

"Virtually every major project under the National Nuclear Security Administration's oversight is behind schedule and over budget - the result, watchdogs and government auditors say, of years of lax accountability and nearly automatic annual budget increases for the agency responsible for maintaining the nation's nuclear stockpile.
 

The NNSA has racked up $16 billion in cost overruns on 10 major projects that are a combined 38 years behind schedule, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reports. Other projects have been cancelled or suspended, despite hundreds of millions of dollars already spent, because they grew too bloated.
 

Advocates say spending increases are necessary to keep the nation's nuclear arsenal operating and safe, and to continue cutting-edge research at the nation's nuclear labs. But critics say the nuclear program - run largely by private contractors and overseen by the NNSA, an arm of the U.S. Energy Department - has turned into a massive jobs program with duplicative functions.
 

 

 

"The post-Cold War nuclear warhead complex has become a gigantic self-licking ice cream cone for contractors," said Greg Mello of the Los Alamos Study Group, a watchdog organization".

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

 

 This may be a bit too off topic for those in the roofing discipline, but the $6 Billion dollars spent on ONE "Private Contractor" (I will research that further) to "raise the roof" is bizarre.

Initial report indicates it was to allow new equipment to be installed.

By comparison, the complete cost, furnished and installed, taxes included, to build a high school in my district is $52 Million dollars.  When you can "visualize" the money, it becomes "Real", instead of numbers with zeros behind them.

If you want to "see" what the numbers represent in terms of "Real Money", take a look:

"$100 Million Dollars = 1 year of work for 3500 average Americans

Here are 2000 people standing shoulder to shoulder, looking for a job. The Federal Reserve's mandate is to maintain price stability and low unemployment. The Federal Reserve prints money based on the assumption that increasing money supply will boost jobs.

If you want to "see" what the numbers represent in terms of "Real Money", take a look:

Respect to: http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/us_debt/us_debt.html

$100 Million Dollars = 1 year of work for 3500 average Americans. Here are 2000 people standing shoulder to shoulder, looking for a job. The Federal Reserve's mandate is to maintain price stability and low unemployment. The Federal Reserve prints money based on the assumption that increasing money supply will boost jobs.    Courtesy: http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/us_debt/us_debt.html One Billion Dollars:   $1,000,000,000 - You will need some help when robbing the bank.   Interesting fact: $1 million dollars weighs 10kg exactly. You are looking at 10 tons of money on those pallets."     

"One BILLION Dollars"     Back to the astonishing waste, please read further:   http://www.wfla.com/story/23421170/nations-bloated-nuclear-spending-comes-under-fire   "U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security financial and contracting oversight subcommittee, said a key problem is the Energy Department's reliance on private contractors to carry out its mission. The DOE has fewer than 16,000 employees and more than 92,000 contractors.   "Unfortunately for the taxpayer ... cost overruns, scheduled delays and technical failures are the rule, not the exception," said McCaskill, D-Mo. "We need to find a better way to do this because we can't just afford the status quo anymore." The retired head of one of those contractors, former Lockheed Martin CEO Norman Augustine, told Congress this spring that the absence of day-to-day accountability and an ineffectual structure at the NNSA pose a national security risk. He described a "pervasive culture of tolerating the intolerable and accepting the unacceptable." DOE and NNSA officials agree there are problems. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said earlier this month that addressing the cost overruns, and also embarrassing security breaches at some facilities, is a top priority. A congressionally appointed panel, co-chaired by Augustine recently began studying a potential overhaul of the NNSA". Okay, I will slow down my "alarmist" rhetoric, but frankly, you should be "alarmed" by the definition of public procurement that is destroying "competition" for your money. The problem is we think money withheld from an individual's paycheck means almost nothing.  They bite it off in such big chunks, that we've become numb to it.  Often, I hear people complaining about out of control government spending.  I've just laid out for you here, the same way I will lay it out to my government representatives.  I think the moral is to not complain about things you are not willing to solve yourself. I will return to Public Roofing Procurement in my next post, but felt this news, and illustrations, were necessary to put things into perspective. A gold star to anyone who cared enough to read and comprehend the post today.  I do know it is mind numbing at times, but I happen to think your money is important.  Any money they take from you must result in a "benefit" for you, the taxpayer.  Not a "Burden" that comes at the hands of unfit people, running unfit purchasing schemes. As you know, I do not discuss politics here, as I think "shared blame" of politicians on both sides is more appropriate.  Fair? Please reject negativity in all forms, and always remember to keep looking "UP". Respect. Robert R. "Ron" Solomon Director, Roof Consultant's Alliance CCC1325620 RobertRSolomon@aol.com