Congratulations, Ellwood City! The Pittsburgh Pennsylvania area has sure "gotten it" in some school districts where you have gotten savvy to how certain manufacturers and not just in roofing target your schools for overcharges and construction done again way tooooooo soon!
Your area districts got it also in regular bidding contracts again, and we reprinted your presentation here: It's a great model for opening others' eyes!!!
For those who want to know what happened, here is the article from the Ellwood City Ledger: (located at: http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=19431938&BRD=2724&PAG=461&dept_id=563781&rfi=8
Your area districts got it also in regular bidding contracts again, and we reprinted your presentation here: It's a great model for opening others' eyes!!!
For those who want to know what happened, here is the article from the Ellwood City Ledger: (located at: http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=19431938&BRD=2724&PAG=461&dept_id=563781&rfi=8
Rescinded roofing contract
victory for minority
NORTH SEWICKLEY TWP. -
"In a triumph for the Riverside School Board's minority, members Derek MacKay, Emmett Santillo and Amy Marberger presented a decision-changing argument Wednesday to reinforce their belief the board voted prematurely for a contract to replace the high school roof.
Just nine days earlier, the board voted unanimously to have Weatherproofing Technologies of Cleveland replace the roof prior to the start of the next school year.
That decision was unanimously overturned at a special meeting Wednesday.
At the start of the three-hour meeting, several board members were agitated that MacKay had even called it. Bob Snyder, board president, said that in the three months prior to the vote, no members raised any serious concerns with using Weatherproofing Technologies Inc., a subdivision of Tremco in Ohio.
MacKay and Santillo said had they been provided information about pending lawsuits against Tremco or been presented with a cost comparison for other roofing contractors, they would have voted differently.
Superintendent David Parry said he had seen information on an Internet blog about litigation concerning Tremco in Indiana, but did not remember when."
[Note: Diana Vice's blog - she is specifically involved in exposing the newer educational purchasing association aspect of the scam.]
"Parry said that during the three-month process leading to the vote on Tremco's contract, he was concerned about determining whether the district should join the Association of Educational Purchasing Agencies and forgo the bidding process. He said he spoke with five other school districts and a representative from UPMC Shadyside, who all gave Tremco an extremely high recommendation."
- - - - - -
[Note: to those not in the know - Tremco is the chosen roofing materials provider through the Association of Educational Purchasing Agencies. It is documented that Tremco was instrumental in assuring that selection.
There are two known parts to the roofing scam targeting schools:
One is the traditional path, through bidding on {illegally} sole-sourced construction products in construction specifications, known as contract documents, or through school purchasing associations - much more recent than the now over 40-year marketing scam attached to SBS modified bitumen roofing products by certain manufacturers. See here for graphic charts that clearly describe the way bidding documents should be prepared, how they are prepared in the scams....and how the educational purchasing association process was subverted by tremco: http://schoolroofingscam.blogspot.com/2008/02/roles-responsibilities-of-facility.html
The problem for those using the latter path, that of buying roofing products through a purchasing association, is that those doing so are practicing architecture and engineering without a license, could be doing so without the approvals of building permit officials and lack of obtaining building permits, and possibly without the approval of School District Officials, including School Boards.
Roofing Products are fire-rated materials that must be specified by architects and possibly engineers; conditions on roofs and the elements to which they are exposed demand - for standard of due care issues - that Registered Roof Consultants (RRC's) not tied to any manufacturer have bona fide roof testing labs look at existing conditions, and that the RRC's do the design in conjunction with architects. During construction, the owner should only employ a Registered Roof Observer (RRO), not tied to any manufacturer, in order to protect the life, safety, health and welfare of the public.}
- - - - - -
" 'It's the responsibility of the superintendent to provide the board with enough information to make good decisions," Parry said. "In hindsight, I should have shared the information.'
In addition, the decision to use Tremco was pushed ahead because of concerns the roof would not last another year. Mary Hoffman, board secretary, said $15,000 has already been spent on roof repairs since its warranty expired in 2003 or 2004.
Board member Mary Grzelka said her notes showed the roof had been fixed 13 times since 2004 and 33 areas of the roof had leaked. "
" 'If we had accepted bids, sure there could be better ones,' Snyder said, 'but we didn't want to leave our kids in that environment, so we voted to use Tremco and get a roof this year.'
In addressing litigation involving Tremco, Greg Fox, district solicitor, said that he would need more time to look at each case individually to see whether Tremco was the plaintiff or defendant before determining the validity of the claims.
Regardless of what information was shared or withheld, MacKay's actions led to the Pennsylvania Department of Education's rejection of Tremco's contract with Riverside.
In a letter addressed to MacKay, a department representative said that engineering or architectural services for the project must be obtained by the district, not through Tremco and the purchasing agencies organization.
That letter left the board with decisions to rescind the contract with Tremco or hire an outside architect at an additional cost to Tremco's quote of just under $2 million.
Prior to making their decision, the board heard from Phillip Foreman, owner of Foreman Architects Engineers, which was hired at the March 17 meeting to do a capital improvement study. Foreman said his company could get the roofing job done this summer if hired by the district in the next two weeks.
Its estimated cost was $1.5 million to $1.6 million, plus a 6 percent architect fee of approximately $96,000.
Foreman also said that, if the project was not completed by the start of school, work could be done with students in the classroom. Foreman said should Riverside use his firm, its design company, PerFOREMANce Roofing Design, would design drawings and specifications for the project.
Foreman Architects would then put the project out for bid to contractors."
" 'Professional registered architects and professional registered engineers would observe the installation of the roofing system," Foreman said. Most manufacturers of flat roofing systems provide a 20-year warranty on their product, Foreman said. After the contractor installs the roof, that warranty would then be handed over to the district.
In Tremco's defense, Rich Kosuda, a senior field adviser for the company, said that any legal questions could be addressed with Tremco's legal department."
" 'We've proved we are the leader in the roofing industry,' Kosuda said, saying the company has had 350 projects in Pennsylvania with 150 school districts."
©Ellwood City Ledger 2008
"In a triumph for the Riverside School Board's minority, members Derek MacKay, Emmett Santillo and Amy Marberger presented a decision-changing argument Wednesday to reinforce their belief the board voted prematurely for a contract to replace the high school roof.
Just nine days earlier, the board voted unanimously to have Weatherproofing Technologies of Cleveland replace the roof prior to the start of the next school year.
That decision was unanimously overturned at a special meeting Wednesday.
At the start of the three-hour meeting, several board members were agitated that MacKay had even called it. Bob Snyder, board president, said that in the three months prior to the vote, no members raised any serious concerns with using Weatherproofing Technologies Inc., a subdivision of Tremco in Ohio.
MacKay and Santillo said had they been provided information about pending lawsuits against Tremco or been presented with a cost comparison for other roofing contractors, they would have voted differently.
Superintendent David Parry said he had seen information on an Internet blog about litigation concerning Tremco in Indiana, but did not remember when."
[Note: Diana Vice's blog - she is specifically involved in exposing the newer educational purchasing association aspect of the scam.]
"Parry said that during the three-month process leading to the vote on Tremco's contract, he was concerned about determining whether the district should join the Association of Educational Purchasing Agencies and forgo the bidding process. He said he spoke with five other school districts and a representative from UPMC Shadyside, who all gave Tremco an extremely high recommendation."
- - - - - -
[Note: to those not in the know - Tremco is the chosen roofing materials provider through the Association of Educational Purchasing Agencies. It is documented that Tremco was instrumental in assuring that selection.
There are two known parts to the roofing scam targeting schools:
One is the traditional path, through bidding on {illegally} sole-sourced construction products in construction specifications, known as contract documents, or through school purchasing associations - much more recent than the now over 40-year marketing scam attached to SBS modified bitumen roofing products by certain manufacturers. See here for graphic charts that clearly describe the way bidding documents should be prepared, how they are prepared in the scams....and how the educational purchasing association process was subverted by tremco: http://schoolroofingscam.blogspot.com/2008/02/roles-responsibilities-of-facility.html
The problem for those using the latter path, that of buying roofing products through a purchasing association, is that those doing so are practicing architecture and engineering without a license, could be doing so without the approvals of building permit officials and lack of obtaining building permits, and possibly without the approval of School District Officials, including School Boards.
Roofing Products are fire-rated materials that must be specified by architects and possibly engineers; conditions on roofs and the elements to which they are exposed demand - for standard of due care issues - that Registered Roof Consultants (RRC's) not tied to any manufacturer have bona fide roof testing labs look at existing conditions, and that the RRC's do the design in conjunction with architects. During construction, the owner should only employ a Registered Roof Observer (RRO), not tied to any manufacturer, in order to protect the life, safety, health and welfare of the public.}
- - - - - -
" 'It's the responsibility of the superintendent to provide the board with enough information to make good decisions," Parry said. "In hindsight, I should have shared the information.'
In addition, the decision to use Tremco was pushed ahead because of concerns the roof would not last another year. Mary Hoffman, board secretary, said $15,000 has already been spent on roof repairs since its warranty expired in 2003 or 2004.
Board member Mary Grzelka said her notes showed the roof had been fixed 13 times since 2004 and 33 areas of the roof had leaked. "
" 'If we had accepted bids, sure there could be better ones,' Snyder said, 'but we didn't want to leave our kids in that environment, so we voted to use Tremco and get a roof this year.'
In addressing litigation involving Tremco, Greg Fox, district solicitor, said that he would need more time to look at each case individually to see whether Tremco was the plaintiff or defendant before determining the validity of the claims.
Regardless of what information was shared or withheld, MacKay's actions led to the Pennsylvania Department of Education's rejection of Tremco's contract with Riverside.
In a letter addressed to MacKay, a department representative said that engineering or architectural services for the project must be obtained by the district, not through Tremco and the purchasing agencies organization.
That letter left the board with decisions to rescind the contract with Tremco or hire an outside architect at an additional cost to Tremco's quote of just under $2 million.
Prior to making their decision, the board heard from Phillip Foreman, owner of Foreman Architects Engineers, which was hired at the March 17 meeting to do a capital improvement study. Foreman said his company could get the roofing job done this summer if hired by the district in the next two weeks.
Its estimated cost was $1.5 million to $1.6 million, plus a 6 percent architect fee of approximately $96,000.
Foreman also said that, if the project was not completed by the start of school, work could be done with students in the classroom. Foreman said should Riverside use his firm, its design company, PerFOREMANce Roofing Design, would design drawings and specifications for the project.
Foreman Architects would then put the project out for bid to contractors."
" 'Professional registered architects and professional registered engineers would observe the installation of the roofing system," Foreman said. Most manufacturers of flat roofing systems provide a 20-year warranty on their product, Foreman said. After the contractor installs the roof, that warranty would then be handed over to the district.
In Tremco's defense, Rich Kosuda, a senior field adviser for the company, said that any legal questions could be addressed with Tremco's legal department."
" 'We've proved we are the leader in the roofing industry,' Kosuda said, saying the company has had 350 projects in Pennsylvania with 150 school districts."
©Ellwood City Ledger 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment