Garland, U.S. Communities, and YOU!

This is from public record, and readily available.  I will respectfully request anyone to offer comments correcting me (referenced) on anything you feel I am factually incorrect.  I will amend my comments ONLY if proven wrong through record.
When that happens, I will reveal the U.S. Communities "Bid" results used to facilitate this behavior in my next post.

NOTE: I am independent of influence. Retired (2003), do not work for anyone, do not solicit, nor accept compensation or personal advancement of any kind, from anyone for anything I do. My writings are intended for public consumption, and free to distribute as you wish.

This will also be a lesson (textbook) on how ONE roofing material manufacturer (Garland), and ONE "Purchasing Agency", spend YOUR tax dollars.

Every state in the Republic has public procurement laws in place to insure "Competitive Bidding".

Today's lesson will show you specifically how "Purchasing Agencies" eliminate all that, and how it's manufactured for their benefit.  I'm going to be very specific, and offer only data that is public record.

Before we begin, please let me thank the good men and women of Roof Consultant's Institute, the reference standard within our industry for their official position AGAINST such deception.

http://www.nrca.net/rp/news/stories/rci-announces-position-on-procurement.7-2-2012.2795.aspx

RCI, Inc. Position Statement on Procurement – Support Document

June 21, 2012RCI’s Position Statement applies to all publicly bid work, including federal, state (provincial/ territorial), municipal, and local government projects or otherwise taxpayer-funded projects in which RCI, Inc. members may participate. Projects not under the procurement requirements of government agencies or that do not utilize taxpayer funds should also employ similar fair and impartial procurement practices.

It is the position of RCI, Inc. that all public work and taxpayer-funded projects clearly adhere to all applicable procurement regulations, maintain the highest levels of transparency and value, and comply with the following principles.

In addition to the owner, projects should involve three distinct entities: the design professional, the manufacturer (or supplier), and the qualified contractor (contractor).

1. The design professional should be selected by the owner based on qualifications, experience and past performance. The design professional should prepare contract documents to be in compliance with all applicable code requirements (including but not limited to fire, wind, drainage, thermal resistance or performance, warranty and environmental requirements).

Contract documents should not be proprietary or exclusive to a manufacturer, a supplier or a qualified contractor. A product or system that may be able to be produced, supplied or installed by other competitors but is not, is considered a proprietary product/system. Procurement regulations have specific procedures that are required if proprietary materials or systems are to be considered.

Design professionals are discouraged from utilizing proprietary specifications. All projects should utilize a minimum of three manufacturers or utilize materials commonly available from three manufacturers. Systems should be selected to meet specific performance criteria or standards.

The design professional must adhere to all state (provincial/territorial) licensing requirements and carry the appropriate errors and omissions insurance.

2. The manufacturer and its suppliers should provide the materials and systems adhering to the contract documents. A manufacturer should not act as the design professional unless qualified to do so, and should state in writing and publicly its financial interest in the specifications/requirements provided.

Contractual obligations or agreements should not exist between owners and manufacturers. Proprietary and/or exclusionary specifications intended to limit competition among manufacturers, suppliers and/or qualified contractors are strongly discouraged. Manufacturers are encouraged to provide data.

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

I think it's pretty clear that "ELIMINATING COMPETITION" is a bad idea, and wildly inappropriate.  This lesson will show how a state (Georgia) enlists the "Purchasing Agency" to eliminate all that "Competitive Bid" stuff for us, and eliminate anything that may resemble "Value" for the taxpayer (YOU).  Keep in mind this is only ONE example of a condition that exists throughout N. America.

1.)  Enlist the "Purchasing Agency" to "buy in bulk", and to "save money".

2.)  Identify a "Preferred Vendor".  In this case "Garland".

3.)  Issue a bid notice eliminating competition by practicing "Exclusion".

The manufacturer has this sewn up, and there is absolutely no incentive for them to compete.  Of course they have several "Approved Applicators" who know how the game is played.

 Here is a pretty standard example:

GARLAND MATERIAL LIST

It

is the intent of the Dekalb County Schools ("Agency") to purchase materials for the Dekalb Middle

School ("Project") located on 1132 West Broad Street directly from Garland

/DBS, Inc., based upon the Agency's participation in the U.S. Communities ™ Government Purchasing Alliance's program for

Roofing Supplies and Related Products and Services,

as priced by and awarded to Garland/DBS, Inc.,

resulting from the competitively solicited Sealed Bid

# 09-5408 issued by the Cobb County Board of

Commissioners.

As a

bidder on the Project, you are required to fill in your order quantities for the following materials as

listed below:

Product# Product N arne Unit

I Size Coverage Rate Quantity

4363-60 Versiply

60 1 square (34'8"x 3'-3"

4121 HPR Tri-Base Premium

2 square (72'x3')

4369

Versiply Mineral .75 square (26'-2." X 3'-3")

7425-5

Silver-Flash 5 Gallon (1 Gal/ 7 1ft)

How can a public project be so blatantly abusive to the taxpayers?  "Competitively Solicited?  We are illustrating Garland in this case, but other manufacturer's like Tremco, are widely known throughout the industry, and all you have to do is check out "School Roofing Scams" on YouTube.

 There will be no shortage of investigative reports by news outlets.  NOTHING I say matters, and it's entirely up to you to compare and confirm (or deny)to your own satisfaction.  If you believe your tax dollars should be spent without competition, that's fine by me.  It would be very difficult to support that line of reason however.

Forgive me for shifting gears, but I get tired of such negative scenarios it is my promise to tell you the truth.  Unfortunately, the truth can be very ugly at times.

Let's close with something upbeat and positive though.

Involved with the "Sustainable Florida", and "Sustainable Schools" initiatives, and serving 8 judgeships, I meet some very nice peiople along the way.

This is a photo of world famous wildlife photographer, Mr. Clyde Butcher and I.  Check out his work, and his Everglades photography is magnificent because he shoots virtually everything in large format.

                                    http://www.clydebutcher.com/ 


Do not adjust your settings, as my head must be viewed in 16:9 ratio to fit your screen.  What a joy it was to meet, and speak with this genius, and amazing photographer.

I don't want to be secretive with you, but I really do prefer uplifting, positive, and fun things over conflict and strife.

Please confirm my words, and you are the judge.

I am honored with each and every visit you make to this space, and only hope I am serving a need for you.

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

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
Manager, Roof Consultant's Alliance (2,100 members)
CCC1325620
RobertRSolomon@aol.com


NOTE: I am independent of influence. Retired (2003), do not work for anyone, do not solicit, nor accept compensation or personal advancement of any kind, from anyone for anything I do. My writings are intended for public consumption, and free to distribute as you wish.

"Collecting Water From Asphalt Shingle Roofs"

I thought the best source of information was from the largest roofing materials manufacturer in the world.  They also produce the best selling "Timberline" series.

Before I share data from GAF, let me describe GAF to you from personal experience:  They are an honest manufacturer, fight fair, and have an extremely comprehensive line of roofing products.  I must praise them for telling you the TRUTH, and not trying to eke out one more sale through decption.

By now, you know I hold GAF, Firestone, Carlisle-Syntec in the very highest regard.  So let's answer your question:

SUBJECT: Reclaimed Water From An Asphalt Shingle Roof

Can I Reclaim Water (Collect Water For Use) Run-off From My Roof?

Yes… But you should only use this water for lawn, shrubbery, and flower irrigation since water run-off from asphalt shingles is not FDA approved for potable water reclamation or agricultural use.

What this means…is that because it is not FDA approved, the reclaimed water is not suitable for:
• drinking
• cooking
• bathing
• watering of fruits or vegetables for human consumption

What Should I Know?

Water reclaimed from a shingle roof… may present a variety of hazards that may affect you or your animal’s health. While the water may seem “clean”, consider:

• Asphalt is processed from crude oil and there are chemicals in asphalt that can be hazardous to your health if consumed.

• The granule surface can collect dirt and other air pollutants which vary by location… water running over these granules can collect the dirt and pollutants as it runs off the roof.

• Under the correct conditions, algae, mold, moss, and mildew can grow on the shingle surface. These fungi may be harmful to people and animals when introduced into a drinking water supply.

• Shingles may contain copper oxide, or other algae inhibitors that may harm aquatic life.

                               Where Can I Get More Information?

GAF-Elk Technical Services can assist you… with these and other questions you may have regarding your new roof installation. GAF-Elk Technical Services can be contacted at 800-ROOF-411 (800-766-3411). Also, the GAF-Elk website is a great resource for just about any question you may have or for additional information you may require. That site is at: www.gaf.com

So, now you've heard it from the "TOP", and don't have to depend upon hearsay.

You know those little "Rainbows" that form on asphalt pavement in puddles after a rainstorm?  They are not your friends.

The same principle applies to petroleum on the TOP of a structure, just like it does on the street.

Make sense?

I am researching the possibility of presenting an actual recording of my presentations here, as it may provide a more personal aspect to what we're trying to do.  If that's something you'd like to see and hear, please do let me know.

Thank you for spending time with me today.  I feel strong, mentally where I want to be, and most of all: HAPPY.

Respect each other.  Help each other. Encourage each other.

We will all be better for it.

I will encourage each of you to reject negativity in all forms, and remember to always keep looking "UP".

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
Manager, Roof Consultant's Alliance
CCC1325620 State Cert.
RobertRSolomon@aol.com

"BURNIN' DOWN THE HOUSE" (or School)

I tell people all the time that with today's modern roofing materials, and techniques, there should be no reason to expose workmen (and structures) to open flame or molten asphalt.

Yet another building (school) burned down using outdated methods.  This particular one is approximately 20 miles from my home, and have visited there many times.  A crying shame.

Video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baUSnP8SHPM&feature=relmfu

Tampa Bay Times, By: Laura C. Morel, and Cara Fitzpatrick

Times Staff Writers, Tampa Bay Times In Print: Saturday, September 1, 2012.

 ST. PETERSBURG — For drama students at St. Petersburg High, the school's auditorium is much more than a stage.

Seniors keep their lockers there. Students sit in circles on the stage and chat over lunch. They mingle there before and after class.  "It sounds really trite to say," said Whitney Essman, a senior and a member of the Thespian group, "but it's like a home for us."

That home sustained significant damage early Friday when a fire tore through part of the roof and tech booth, causing more than $1 million in water and smoke damage.

About midnight Friday, firefighters received a call about flames showing from the school's roof. They arrived and found a group of workers with a blow torch. About 3:30 a.m., the workers left.

Thirty minutes later, the fire alarm went off. When fire crews arrived, flames were shooting through the roof of the school's historic three-story auditorium. They called for reinforcements and cut off power to the school, said St. Petersburg Fire Rescue spokesman Lt. Joel Granata.

Two hours later, the blaze was extinguished. But the damage was done.

The tech booth that controls the sound and lighting system was destroyed. Water and smoke damage covered the auditorium. A gaping hole opened in the ceiling. Classes on Friday were canceled for more than 2,300 students.

"I was just, like, stunned," Essman, 17, said. "When a school catches fire you think of, like, the science lab. I didn't think it would be in, like, this place that is so important to me. Then I just started fearing the worst."

The cause of the fire is under investigation, but Granata said investigators think the roofing work contributed to the start of the blaze.

Fort Lauderdale-based Taylor Contracting and Roofing Inc. was hired by Pinellas schools more than three weeks ago to install a roof replacement. After numerous requests for comment Friday, the company issued a statement saying it was "in full cooperation" with the school district to get to the source of what went wrong.

School district officials met Friday to discuss the damage, the repair plan and how to pay for it, said spokeswoman Melanie Marquez. It was too soon to know if the district or the company's insurance would cover the damage.

The district still needs reports from its risk management and fire departments, she said.

"I know there's going to be a lot of work going on," Marquez said.
School principal Al Bennett received calls and emails Friday from students, teachers and alumni.

St. Petersburg High opened in 1898 and had its first graduating class in 1901, according to its website. Its current building at 2501 Fifth Ave. N was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1984.

"They all want to help," he said. "I know we can fix it. It's just disruptive."
Bennett said the auditorium may reopen by November, when the Thespians have planned to hold their first play of the year, The Curious Savage. Most of the repairs, including replacing the carpet and cleaning up debris, should be completed by then.

"The show should go on," said Trish Grunz, drama director. "I was happy not everything was affected."

Among the items spared by the fire: props, costumes and the stage.
But until November, the Thespians will need another place to rehearse. The group has a theater conference in October.

About 20 of the 60 or so Thespians met at Crescent Lake Park after the fire. They sang songs from old shows and "bonded for a while," said Luisa Laitano, 17, the group's president.

Classes were expected to resume Tuesday. About 20 maintenance workers will begin the auditorium cleanup and temporarily fix the roof to prevent any leaks this weekend, Marquez said.

"These things do happen," said principal Bennett. "And we just have to persevere and move forward."

Staff writer Marissa Lang and Times researchers Carolyn Edds and Natalie A. Watson contributed to this report. Laura C. Morel can be reached at (727) 893-8713 or lmorel@tampabay.com.

[Last modified: Aug 31, 2012 10:40 PM]

St. Petersburg Copyright 2012 Tampa Bay Times

Many examples of this exist.  My hope is that one day we can understand applying petroleum roofs with FIRE, is a bad idea.

This is what the workmen see all day long, and you wonder how the building catches on fire:

In essence, "PAVING" a roof in asphalt.  These roofs DO REPEL WATER, but all roofs do that by their respective design processes.  This particular roof system can reach roof surface temperatures of 200 degrees F. (creating a 20% energy demand), and will never break down in landfills. 

To this moment, I cannot find a RATIONAL explanation of it's use.  I almost forgot:  The TAXPAYERS are paying a PREMIUM without the slightest realized BENEFIT for that expenditure.

Dear friends, I would rather spend my time showing you the POSITIVES of roofing (and there are some), than harping on primitive oil based (bitumen) roofs, and wasting money.

Unfortunately, these scenarios are almost always in public works, even though the DOE preaches against it. Do as I say, not as I do" seems to be the theme.

Lately however, I am meeting interesting people who (I believe) are serious about making a difference, and reversing this trend.  GOOD people whom I appreciate.

As always, I am thankful for the time you graciously invest reading what I have to say, and am humbled you spend your valuable time with me here.

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

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
Procurement Analyst - Division 7
Manager Roof Consultant's Alliance
CCC1325620 State Certification

"Courage, and Carlisle-Syntec's stand against Co-Op Purchasing"

Anyone who's read a single word here, knows how much I despise "No Compete", "Proprietary Specifications", and "Sole Source" arrangements in Public Works.

They serve no purpose except to cheat you (the taxpayer) out of billions of dollars.  They do this through "Cozy" arrangements with Purchasing Agencies that eliminate, or severely restrict competition to favor only one material manufacturer.

In other words, there is absolutely no incentive to compete for your hard earned taxpayer dollars.

There are only a handful of people in North America who fight hard against "The Machine" for you. 

Often wondering why major roofing material manufacturers do not stand up to blatant abuse of the law, I'd now like to use Carlisle-Syntec as an example of how it CAN BE DONE! I finally see someone with the courage and spine to fight.  And, WIN!

In previous posts here, I've described GAF, Firestone, and Carlisle-Syntec as HONEST roofing material manufacturers.  Today I would like to congratulate, and acknowledge, Carlisle-Syntec's stand against taxpayer abuse.  I happen to know the people at Carlisle-Syntec to be honorable.

Please see source, and full content here (highlighted areas are by me):

http://cumberlink.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/cv-school-district-settles-lawsuit-with-carlisle-syntec-systems-employees/article_4e09a08c-9e18-11e1-9085-001a4bcf887a.html

CV school district settles lawsuit with Carlisle SynTec Systems employees:

Cumberland Valley School District recently settled a lawsuit in which it agreed to stop using cooperative purchasing programs for roofing projects.

Nicholas Shears and Michael DuCharme, both employees of Carlisle SynTec Systems, filed the lawsuit in June 2009, which contends the district’s use of a purchasing cooperative skirts state competitive bidding laws, resulting in higher costs for taxpayers.

While the district admits no wrongdoing, it has agreed to comply with state competitive bidding laws and cease the use of purchasing cooperatives, SynTec spokesman Brandon Peach said in a press release issued Monday.

"We’re glad the school district understands it can save taxpayer money by competitively bidding projects requiring roof work to ensure that the most qualified option is selected," said DuCharme, director of product marketing for the company.

"Unfortunately, the well-intended cooperative purchasing method has resulted in inflated costs due to the inherent complexity of construction work," DuCharme added.

Still bid co-op

While the district has agreed to cease the use of co-op programs for roofing projects, it reserves the right to use competitively bid co-op programs for many of its other business functions, district spokeswoman Tracy Panzer said.

"The district continues to maintain the contract in question was awarded through a competitively-bid cooperative purchasing program administered by the Central Susquehanna Intermediate Unit (CSIU), which is permitted by the Commonwealth Procurement Code," Panzer said.

The Cumberland Valley School Board in February 2009 awarded a $1.5 million contract to Tremco/Weatherproofing Technologies Incorporated for repair work at Monroe and Silver Spring elementary schools and at the Eagle View Middle School.

The lawsuit challenged the board’s authority to choose Tremco through a co-op agreement run by the Association of Educational Purchasing Agencies, which consists of educational consortiums from across the country.

In February 2009, SynTec spokesman Tony Matter said the company was not seeking a monetary award from the suit, but was instead seeking a ruling from the courts that the district was incorrect in using such a program.

Matter added SynTec brought the suit not because it was displeased the repair work went to another contractor, but because of its belief that use of the program undermines the spirit of the state law that requires competitive bidding.

Debating the costs

In May 2009, DuCharme said his company could have done the repair work for far less than Tremco, especially because the roof at Eagle View was still under warranty at that time as a Carlisle SynTec product.

The cooperative purchasing program allows school districts the option to use recommendations by a third party. In this case, CSIU receives quotes from a wide array of contractors, both in-state and out-of-state, through the AEPA and selects one as a default for work done in that area of expertise.

In its press release Monday, SynTec mentioned how cooperative purchasing methods have come under fire across the country for subverting the competitive bidding process.

"Independent surveys have demonstrated that roofing work procured through a cooperative can cost two to three times the average market value," Peach said. "While the competitive bidding model requires a design professional to approve any structural alterations, cooperatives often do not, resulting in a dangerous lack of construction oversight."

Peach added legislation has been implemented in Virginia and California to prevent such practices, with ongoing policy discussions taking place in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Indiana, Texas and California.

---

Posted earlier on Cumberlink:
Cumberland Valley School District recently settled a lawsuit in which it agreed to stop using cooperative purchasing programs for roofing projects.

Nicholas Shears and Michael DuCharme, both employees of Carlisle SynTec Systems, filed the lawsuit in June 2009 which contends the district’s use of a purchasing cooperative skirts state competitive bidding laws, resulting in higher costs for taxpayers.

While the district admits no wrongdoing, it has agreed to comply with state competitive bidding laws and cease the use of purchasing cooperatives, SynTec spokesman Brandon Peach said in a press release issued Monday.

“We’re glad the school district understands it can save taxpayer money by competitively bidding projects requiring roof work to ensure that the most qualified option is selected,” said DuCharme, director of product marketing for the company.

“Unfortunately, the well-intended cooperative purchasing method has resulted in inflated costs due to the inherent complexity of construction work,” DuCharme added.

Check Cumberlink and Tuesday's print edition of The Sentinel for more on this story.

Meet the Reporter

Joseph Cress

Sentinel Reporter

Twitter:

@Cumberlink

Facebook:

The Sentinel Newspaper

Google+:

The Sentinel Newspaper

Email:

jcress@cumberlink.com

Covers:

Education, Military 

Friends, we have a very long way to go, but if only a few more manufacturers take a stand as Carlisle-Syntec has,  the end of corruption, and taxpayer waste, is in sight.

THANK YOU CARLISLE for thinking outside a "Typical", passive, comfort zone, and WINNING.  We stand shoulder to shoulder with you, and celebrate your victory as our own.

I will encourage contractors to reward them with your P.O. book. 

THE "GOOD GUYS" WIN!

Dear friends, please reject negativity in all forms, and remember to always keep looking "UP".

Much Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon

Manager, Roof Consultant's Alliance

CCC1325620

RobertRSolomon@aol.com
Tampa, Florida - USA

Roofing Contractors/Consultants Accepting "Bribes"

Everything I say here is only for your consideration.  I write it, and you may evaluate the content as you see fit.  Fair?

I know the post title is rather provocative, but we'll break it down in smaller portions to understand the process.

First of all "Bribes" may be considered on any level.  From lunch at McDonald's to European Vacations, or African Safaris, and often this is the case.  I will offer the body of a recent post I made on Roof Consultant's Alliance:

Roofing Contractors accepting extravagant gifts from Material Manufacturers: A/K/A 'Indentured Servants".

Who is to blame for that? Manufacturer or Contractor?

Frankly, I think it is a practice that should be eliminated, much the same as handing out liquor at Christmas has. It's base, and ugly.

How many of you can be "Bought Off"? The fishing trips, the hunting trips, the golf trips, TV's, shotguns, etc. are not "Rewards", but bribes.

No one can tell me they don't expect you to pay for these things one way or another.

Trips to Europe, Alaska, Hawaii, etc. are not remotely uncommon, and we act like it's okay. Why isn't it Ron? After you've received their "Gift", they own you. That is until another manufacturer comes along and offers more free stuff.

I find it very unflattering, and a tool based upon greed alone. Yet, we see it like we "Won" something. No we didn't, we "Bought" something.

Here we are dealing with many billions of dollars in commerce, and sell ourselves to the highest bidder. I suggest you revisit your supplier, material manufacturer, and roofing contractor relationship.

Before we proceed, let me please state there are many fine, credible, and honest manufacturers, consultants and contractors.  This is not about them, but for the ones who are guilty of it as a "Lifestyle".

Consultants are being bought by manufacturers, and then they buy off the roofer. This is extraordinarily damaging to taxpayers who pay for the scam.

Nobody has to care about this, but once you lose your "Honor and Integrity", you might as well have a brand on your forehead.

This debauchery is insulting to all of us, and I'm sure the manufacturers will agree, once they think of their "Beggars". The "Beggars" are people who are always calling for a free lunch. They like to feel "Important", when in fact, they are nothing but "Pawns".

I'm sure many of you will try to justify it, just as I've tried to denounce it, but "Buying Business" always ends up on a dead end street.

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
Manager, Roof Consultant's Alliance
CCC1325620

Okay, you may think I'm being abstract for even questioning this long standing practice, but it has grown to epic proportion.  Why is it so bad now Ron?

Government Purchasing Agencies:

Help facilitate this behavior, and naturally, come the hogs to feed at the trough. 

Do they care about you?  Of course not.  Do they care about our educational facilities?  Of course not.  Do they have any self respect?  Of course not.

They understand one thing:  MONEY.

It's so bad that normally honest roofing contractors unwittingly allow themselves to be "Owned", and immediately lose all objectivity when providing the best products for the end user.

Far worse are the government agencies, and roof consultants, being bought off on a very regular basis.  Why should I care Ron?  You should care because these "Perks" cost money, and lots of it. 

They will try their best to eliminate any competition for taxpayer dollars (schools), so they can continue feeding the beast. It's thieves telling other thieves how to be thieves. 

The lure of money seems to strip many of their dignity, and I find that a crying shame. 

Whatever they do with a private owner is not my concern.  But when they bring it upon the taxpayers, I make it my business to bring a heightened awareness.

That "Heightened Awareness" portion means personal attention.

I catch a number of them, but I am only one person on a $0.00 budget.  I'm finding that I can overcome all thieves who steal from the government.  It's just a matter of how many hours a day I can devote to them.

My priority is streamlining the technique, and addressing them on a state or federal level.

The reason your taxpayer dollars are being stolen in huge chunks is because you remain silent, and they know you will remain silent. 

Apologies to all the honest people within the roofing discipline, as it's only the few (same ones every time) who bring shame.  Many times I've illustrated to you who they are, and who they are not.
 
Friends, I hope you and your families have been well since the last post.  Also hoping business is as you wish, and you are happy.

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

HELP EACH OTHER

Ron

RobertRSolomon@aol.com

"Respect to Roof Consultant's Institute BOD for Protecting Taxpayers"

Today, all TAXPAYERS, consultants, manufacturers, and contractors within the roofing discipline, may be proud.  RCI has taken a very definitive stance on "Government Purchasing", and "Purchasing Co-Op's", who do everything EXCEPT serve the taxpayer.

Before I go further, please let me list the complete position (with permission graciously provided by RCI):

 RCI, Inc.
1500 Sunday Drive, Suite 204
Raleigh, NC 27607-515
800-828-1902
 http://www.rci-online.org/

RCI Announces Position on Procurement

Raleigh, NC – RCI, Inc. President Arthur "Chip" Ward last week announced RCI's position on public roofing project procurement. RCI is dedicated to the attainment of quality roof systems that are within the customer's budget, durable, code compliant, and environmentally friendly. Because the use of group-purchasing agencies, "buy boards," and other similar purchasing models in any type of building construction, remediation, or rehabilitation is not transparent, does not provide a competitive bid situation, and may not ensure compliance with the minimum requirements of the codes, RCI believes they should not be utilized. Independent consulting and competitive bidding are much more likely to meet these objectives and conserve the taxpayer/stakeholder assets. The RCI Board of Directors has therefore adopted the following position on procurement: RCI, Inc. supports public policies, requirements, and administrative procedures in public procurement processes that mandate the open selection of goods, services, and construction contracts on the basis of qualifications and opposes such procurement on the sole basis of fees, costs, and/or proprietary specifications. Competitive, qualifications-based selection is essential to fostering fair and impartial purchasing that serves public health and safety in the built environment. Preserving the health, safety and welfare of the public is a moral, ethical, and legal requirement for a procurement agency as well as the provider. RCI, Inc. maintains that the public is best served by a procurement process which meets the unique and specific requirements inherent in each individual project and contract. It is the position of RCI, Inc. that all public work and taxpayer-funded projects should clearly adhere to allapplicable procurement regulations, maintain the highest levels of transparency and value, and comply with the following principles. In addition to the owner, projects should involve three distinct entities: the design professional, the manufacturer (or supplier), and the qualified contractor (contractor). The design professional should be selected by the owner based on qualifications, experience, and past performance. The design professional should prepare contract documents to be in compliance with all applicable code requirements (including but not limited to fire, wind, drainage, thermal resistance or performance, warranty, and environmental requirements). Contract documents should not be proprietary or exclusive to a manufacturer, a supplier, or a qualified contractor. A product or system that may be able to be produced, supplied, or installed by other competitors but is not, is considered a proprietary product/system. Procurement regulations have specific procedures that are required if proprietary materials or systems are to be considered. Design professionals are discouraged from utilizing proprietary specifications. All projects should utilize a minimum of three manufacturers or utilize materials commonly available from three manufacturers. Systems should be selected to meet specific performance criteria or standards. 1. The design professional must adhere to all state (provincial/territorial) licensing requirements and carry the appropriate errors and omissions insurance. 2. The manufacturer and its suppliers should provide the materials and systems adhering to the contract documents. A manufacturer should not act as the design professional unless qualified to do so, and should state in writing and publicly its financial interest in the specifications/requirements provided. Contractual obligations or agreements should not exist between owners and manufacturers. Proprietary and/or exclusionary specifications intended to limit competition among manufacturers, suppliers, and/or qualified contractors are strongly discouraged. Manufacturers are encouraged to provide data, information, or other assistance to qualified contractors to determine the best use and application of their materials and systems. Manufacturers should not control material specifications. 3. The contractor should be contracted directly by the owner. At no time should any contractual or financial obligation or agreement exist between the design professional and manufacturer, or the design professional and the qualified contractor, or the manufacturer and the qualified contractor. At no time should the manufacturer act as either the design professional or qualified contractor. At no time should the design professional act as the manufacturer or contractor. 4. Design-build delivery methods are acceptable under the following conditions:  * The principles noted above are met.  *  Design-build delivery maintains a competitive bidding/tender environment among all parties:      designer, contractor, and manufacturer.  *  A design-build contract is used to ensure that a clear line of responsibility for the design and compliance with code is established. RCI's Position Statement applies to all publicly bid work, including federal, state (provincial/ territorial), municipal and local government projects or otherwise taxpayer-funded projects in which RCI, Inc. members may participate. Projects not under the procurement requirements of government agencies or that do not utilize taxpayer funds should also employ similar fair and impartial procurement practices. RCI is an international association of building envelope consultants whose members specialize in design, investigation, repair, and management of roofing, exterior wall, and waterproofing systems. RCI regularly hosts education programs designed to demystify and explain the application of roofing, waterproofing, and exterior wall technologies. For more information about RCI, visit:   call 800-828-1902. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Friends, this will hopefully "shut down" the wasteful spending, and eliminate circumvention of procurement law. This very direct, concise, and bold, position is essential knowledge the fiscal guardians  we depend upon.  RCI "Stands Up" for it's members (and all taxpayers) trying to make an honest living, while COMPETITIVELY BIDDING GOVERNMENT PROJECT WORK. RCI has set the "reference standard", and now it's up to the NRCA, ARMA, and SPRI to follow suit in protecting us against such heinous taxpayer assault.

RCI, Inc.
1500 Sunday Drive, Suite 204
Raleigh, NC 27607-515
800-828-1902 | http://www.rci-online.org/


My dear friends, I've given everything I have for 9 years.  I knew the path would be strewn with obstacle, and the mission has been both physically, and emotionally, demanding.  But TODAY, we can rejoice by knowing RCI CARES!

The roofing discipline owes RCI for restoring honor, and integrity to our chosen trade, and for protecting the taxpayers, and ultimately saving hundreds of millions of dollars that would have otherwise have been wasted on absolutely NOTHING.

Thank you again to RCI's Board of Directors role of leadership for fighting what I consider the most fraudulent waste of taxpayer construction dollars going today.

I am humbled to be part of this movement, and bringing  it to your attention in the most specific way.

Today, I am happier than ever to say:  "Reject negativity in all forms, and always remember to keep looking "UP".

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
RobertRSolomon@aol.com
CCC1325620
Manager, "Roof Consultant's Alliance"

"What's HORRIBLY WRONG in Roofing Today"

Dear Friends:

I'm sorry to be away so long, but I've been literally consumed by hundreds of requests, and should have made time for you.  I am sorry, but maybe today we can share some thought.

I'd like to share a very disturbing issue currently within the roofing discipline, how it affects each and every one of you.  We will offset the dark mood with an uplifting post the next time (I promise).  This wiill be left to your interpretation, and as always, you can decide. Fair?

This is one of the biggest TAXPAYER SCAMS I've ever seen.  The topic:

"PROPRIETARY SPECIFICATIONS"

Friends, I will assume most of you do indeed pay taxes, so when I refer to "Taxpayer Money", you should understand that to mean "My/Our/Your Money".  The government doesn't "Own" anything.  We "Own" it.

This is a VICIOUS, and DEEP ROOTED ABUSE OF TAXPAYER FUNDS.  Plain, simple, and to the point.

Well known, and well worn.  It is primarily an "Aggressive sales model" designed to "dupe" Facility Managers, Purchasing Agencies (whom are riddled with fraud and corruption), School Districts (their absolute favorite targets), and generally ALL PUBLIC WORKS.

Rarely, if ever, do they try this scam on a Private owner, because in that scenario, the person who "Owns" the building actually has to pay for it.  In Public works, there is no such person, unless you consider a corrupt purchasing agency a rational and reasonable caretaker of your money.

Let me tell you something I KNOW:  The money may always be traced back to it's source, and whoever "Approved" the expenditure is the "Root Cause". 

Now, let me put away my broad brush, and share what I consider to be a fair option.  Once the person who signed off on it has been notified of this "Closed Specification" favoring only ONE MANUFACTURER, and unnecessarily limiting the specification (normally written by the offending manufacturer), they should have an OPPORTUNITY to change the procurement method.

This may be accomplished in a very civil manner, but most agencies I've dealt with find it "Intrusive", circle the wagons, and here we go.  NEVER have I dealt with a public entity where this was not absolutely the case.  Advising them of a potential liability to the district would be considered a good thing, right?

Please shake that notion out of your head right now, because the exact opposite occurs.  For some ungodly reason, they will fight to the death for something they KNOW is wrong, rather than accept STATE LAW, and follow it.  They are far above any laws, or so they think.

Example:  Some of you may know I was involved in the following Investigative News Report for NEWS 9 in Oklahoma City.  Here is a video of that report, and it will help a great deal if you take a moment to view it:

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

That's between 3 and 6 MILLION dollars of taxpayer overpayment in Tulsa alone.  Can you just imagine the outrageous sum throughout the State of Oklahoma?  Attorney General, Mr. Scott Pruitt issued a demand letter to Oklahoma State Auditor Mr. Gary Jones.

The demand letter is included in the above report, and all you have to do is click on it.  Click on the rest of the documents as well, because Tremco and the School Districts are caught red handed.

Mr. Jones has done absolutely nothing, and thinks I'm THE ENEMY!!  I'm not the one who manipulated those millions of dollars.  I'm the one who helped EXPOSE IT!!  Bob LaBass is the guy the money can be traced back to, and as he chuckles before the camera, everything he says is FACTUALLY WRONG!

The good people of Oklahoma deserve better.  Much better.

They DEPEND upon everyone simply forgetting, but I will not forget, and will see it to conclusion.

For example:  Flagler County Schools (Florida) fought me for three months, and stuck tight to the side of their "Preferred Vendor".  In this case it was "Siplast".  I quoted the law, and they ignored it.  I explained they only need to add two words "Or Equal", and they'd be fine.  NO, they took the side of the vendor over the taxpayers.

But when I presented discovery of .....let me think of how I want to say this....A rather "Covert" proceeding behind closed doors, the projects were put on hold.  NEVER ONCE did they acknowledge it is wrong to "Exclude Competition".  The head of PURCHASING there by the way, was the one appointed to open the bids.  Uh Huh.

Their procurement now reads: 

http://boardpolicy.flaglerschools.com/index.php?title=721_-_Purchasing_Policies_and_Bidding

The link above will take you to the procurement in it's entirety, but this is a segment illustrating what they ultimately did.  All that aggravation and pain, because they wanted it "Their Way".  But now it appears the district sees it my way.  If not, I welcome their criticism, or criticism from anyone really.

For any other School Districts out there who may accidentally read this, please take note:

721 - Purchasing Policies and Bidding

From FCSB Board Policy

Policy 721

The Superintendent or designee shall be responsible for all purchases of materials, equipment, and services from District school funds. Only persons authorized by the Superintendent or School Board rules may make any purchase involving the use of school funds. Unauthorized expenditures shall not be approved by the School Board. The following provisions shall govern purchasing and bidding procedures for materials, equipment, and services:

1. Authorization to Execute Purchase Orders. The Director of Purchasing or Purchasing Agent(s) shall be authorized to sign purchase orders.
2. Development of and Adherence to Specifications. Purchases through bids and quotations procedures shall be based upon justification and specifications which are clear, definite, and certain as to character and quality and shall conform to standard specifications for the various classes of supplies, materials, parts, services, or equipment desired. Such specifications shall be conducive to securing the most economical price for the highest quality product which best meets the needs of the educational program. Specifications shall be as open as possible and it shall be made clear in the invitation to bid that use of a trade name does not give exclusive rights to that product. Preferential bidding shall not be permitted. The Superintendent or designee shall be responsible for soliciting the assistance of District staff members who use the products to prepare specifications and to evaluate bids.
3. Requirements for Competitive Bids. Bids shall be requested from three (3) or more sources for any purchase of materials, equipment, or service exceeding $25,000.00, unless the item is purchased on the basis of an established state contract, through approved on-line procurement, under the provisions of Subsections (12) or (13) herein, or is otherwise exempted from bidding by Florida Statutes or State Board of Education rules. (See Policy 723 for requirements for competitive bidding on materials, services, or service related to Facilities Operations and/or Construction projects.) A particular item or group of similar items which is anticipated to exceed a collective legally permitted total during the fiscal year shall be subject to the bid requirements as described herein.
4. Standard Bid Procedures
   1. The Purchasing Department shall maintain a list of all potential bidders by category of commodity or service and shall include the names of all persons or firms that requested placement on the list. The Director of Purchasing or designee shall mail or email each request for bids to each person(s) and firm(s) on the list for that particular commodity and may mail or email the request for bids to other known persons or firms that are capable of providing the requested commodity.
   2. The Director of Purchasing may remove the name of any person or firm from the list upon failure to respond to three (3) consecutive requests for bids.
   3. The Superintendent or Director of Purchasing may remove the name of any unqualified or unreliable person or firm from the list. However, the person or firm may apply to the Director of Purchasing for reinstatement to the vendor list after being removed for one (1) year.
   4. Prior to issuance of a purchase order in excess of the threshold provided in 287.017, F.S. for Category Two, the vendor shall execute an affidavit, pursuant to Florida Statutes, certifying that neither the firm nor any or its principals have been convicted for a public entity crime and placed on the convicted vendor list within the previous thirty-six (36) months.
   5. Bid Receipt, Opening, and Tabulation. Sealed bids shall be received in the purchasing office at the time and date designated in the request for bids. All bids shall be opened publicly in the presence of at least one (1) School Board (Director/Administrator). The Purchasing Agent shall read aloud the name of the bidder and the amount and shall make recommendations to the Superintendent who shall make a recommendation to the School Board. The tabulation shall be signed by the Director of Purchasing and School Board employees in attendance. Bids received after the designated time shall not be accepted or considered.
   6. Award of Bids. Each bid shall be awarded on the basis of the lowest and best bid which meets specifications with consideration being given to the specific quality of the product, conformity to the specifications, suitability to school needs, delivery terms and service, local bidder preference and past performance of the vendor. In case of a tie, the recommendation shall be made by the flip of a coin. Samples of products may be requested when practical. The School Board shall reserve the right to reject any or all bids. All Bids submitted to the School Board for approval will be approved for validity by the Director of Purchasing.
   7. Public Inspection of Bids. Bids and quotations shall be made available for public inspection on the posting date and copies may be obtained subsequent to the posting date. The fee for photocopying shall be in accordance with the School Board entitled “Photocopying of Public Records.” Original bids and quotations and the transmittal envelopes shall not be removed from the purchasing office. Bid awards will be posted on the School District Purchasing Department website.
   8. Award to Other Than Low Bidder. Any bid recommendation other than the low bid shall be accompanied by a written statement signed by the Director of Purchasing giving the reasons and justification for such action as provided in Subsection (3) herein. Single or combination items may be considered in determining the recommendation.
   9. Electronic Bidding. Electronic bidding may be utilized when it is determined to be in the best interest of the District. All requirements for advance notification of bid specifications and date and time of bidding shall be met. Each bid shall be awarded on the basis of the lowest and best bid which meets specifications with consideration being given to the specific quality of the product, conformity to the specifications, suitability to school needs, delivery terms and service, and past performance of the vendor. Any bid recommendation other than the low bid shall be accompanied by a written statement signed by the Director of Purchasing giving the reasons and justification for such action. Documentation of the bid process shall be maintained for audit purposes.
   10. Bid Withdrawal. A bidder may withdraw a bid before the designated time for opening bids by submitting a written request to the Director of Purchasing and identifying the reason(s) for the desired bid withdrawal. A bidder shall not be permitted to withdraw a bid for any reason after the designated time for opening bids unless mutually agreed upon by both parties.

If you have any question regarding procurement laws in your state, please write to me at:

RobertRSolomon@aol.com

I will research them for you, but NO public entity should ever give the slightest impression of favoritism, nor shall they limit competition to one manufacturer, or contractor.

Remember, YOU own it, not them.  Roofing is not a "Specialty" item, and numerous manufacturers provide quality materials without having to CHEAT.

Since I've condemned bad behavior, let me praise good behavior.  37 years of experience have taught me the pitfalls of what I still consider to be a noble discipline.

NOTE:  This blogsite does not accept advertising money.  I am retired, and have been for 9 years at age 50.  I do not solicit, nor accept money from anyone for anything.  This includes manufacturers, consultants, distributors, or contractors, and can prove it in a court of law.

Friends, I'm prepared to place my 37 year career upon the honesty, and "Fair Play" of the following manufacturers:

FIRESTONE BUILDING MATERIALS

GAF

CARLISLE-SYNTEC

GAF also makes fine residential products, and perhaps you will consider them for your residence.  They do manufacture (and stand behind) the number 1 selling shingle in the world ("Timberline").

Certainly a number of others will voice "Opinion", but I invite you to research them yourself.  One technique I use is to type in the company's name, followed by the words "School Roofing Scam".  Then I go to YouTube, and do the same thing.  You will see the names Tremco, and Garland quite a bit, but you will not see the manufacturers I've mentioned.  If you do, I want to hear about it.  So do they.

I'm often told to "Keep Quiet", but I'd rather tell you the truth here, than simply "Go Along".  Your TRUST in me may not be compromised.

Frankly, I hope that is one reason you spend time with me here. Many of you from across the globe visit with me, and I am humbled by the mere thought of it. 

As always, I will ask you to reject negativity in all forms, and always remember to keep looking "UP"
(this one is for CTA)

Respect,

Robert R. "Ron" Solomon
Tampa, Florida