See the TV News Reports at the top of the Sidebar below to the right, just below this links section....and click on the photos!


  • John Fox & Clemon Williams vs. Kern High School District, Whistleblowing to the FBI Re: Garland Purchase Orders, Bakersfield, California, 2013
  • GSA vs. Tremco, Qui Tam Suit, 2013
  • Los Angeles vs. Garland, Re: Bid Collusion, Racketeering, etc., Los Angeles, California, About 1997
  • Quality Tile Roofing vs. Tremco Roofing, Re: False Fraud Charges leveled at Tremco Certified Contractor for not bidding Tremco products at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Boise, Idaho, About 1997

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Garland Roofing Products Bought Directly by Purchasing Agents, Destroying Existing Roof Warranties on California School Roofs

In the San Francisco "article" about the West Contra Costa Unified School District Official defending his use of Garland Roofing products on an existing roof, that official said their application of another material would void the Garland "Warranty".

If you read the Midwest Roofing Contractor's Association's article on that so-called "Warranty" under: you would see that the so-called Garland "Warranty" was not a "Warranty", but a very expensive, 5-Year "Maintenance Agreement".

Let us be clear: There was no "Warranty" to be destroyed.


1. Since Garland has been known to substitute Johns Manville of Simon Roofing or other manufacturers' (without their knowledge) plies in their systems, and with or without the client's knowledge, it would seem that such a "warranty" was far more flexible than presented. See their "Business Model", described herein:

2. California school district officials have been known for rejecting less-expensive alternates submitted, with a real warranty - when that very product is private-labeled for Garland and is truly an equal.

3. The California Department of Education apparently has no central place for Warranties to be tracked, in order to safeguard the public's money.

4. How often and how much is spent on the usually tens of thousands of dollars for a 5-year Maintenance Agreement -much less roof replacements way too soon - is not known because there is no central place where roof expenditures are tracked.

5. The State Auditor is not allowed to track or investigate the Department of Education or schools...40% or more of the State Budget. The Bureau of State Audits should be the ones to keep the warranties, determine if the bids are truly competitive, and allow or not alternates - as well as allowed to investigate all of the expenditures of schools, colleges and Universities - and the Department of Education - for the taxpayers. No legislator should ever be allowed to stop any they are now. _______________________________________________

In other words - West Contra Costa Unified (Richmond Schools) - have been "had".

Garland "warranties" could not be destroyed - because they have 5-year, renewable with large payments, "Maintenance Agreements" instead of true "Warranties".

However, quite the opposite as described in the San Francisco Chronicle article has been happening.

Garland has had their products installed into real, warrantied roofs - destroying those warranties. ________________________________________________

Take the case of the largest High School District in California:
Kern High School District in Bakersfield, CA - with 18 high schools.

The Maintenance and Operations Department had had for years architects evaluate the roofs, and put out competitive bid specs, when necessary. Warranties of the systems that were installed did get the few hundred dollars' worth of repairs when needed.

Then in or around 2002, a curious thing happened. A few men from different school districts (like the Beverly Hills High School District) and who seemed to know each other descended upon this huge district out where no one might not be watching, and took over the Business Operations in a way never before seen there.

All of a sudden, the Purchasing Agent started ordering up $200,000 worth of Garland materials every year, until this year (due to a stockpile left to be used up).

No local contractor could get the work, it was all for one guy: Commercial Roofing Systems.

Funny how that is the name of the Garland Construction Arm.........

Total roofing supplies known to be bought since approximately 2002?

$1,400,000  (and still going on in 2013 we believe)

Total construction cost known?

$ 514,072

How much of that was competitively bid?


Also widely observed:

The new "administrators" went to Las Vegas, using District funds, causing a local scandal.

Then they were seen party-hardying, going off together with the Garland, Commercial Roofing and Tandus reps (Carpets)....boating, at CMAST (California Purchasing Agents for Schools) conventions, dinners etc......


In essence, the Kern High School District:

1. Allowed Purchasing Agents to engage in practicing architecture and engineering without a license by allowing them to specify, approve and purchase roofing products for installation; and that was one roofing manufacturer's products - Garland;

2. Had Garland products applied to other, truly warrantied systems - and destroyed those warranties;

3. "Broke up" contracts in order not to competitively bid them;

4. Had no independent, roofing consultant with an independent lab, uninvolved with Tremco, Garland or Hickman, look at the roofs to ascertain what did and did not need work done;

5. Threatened in-house personnel who objected - with their jobs.

Worse, they were known for similar infractions with other areas such as Carpets and Metals Recycling - literally taking thousands of dollars from metals recycling and redistributing it - to employees in the form of cash in envelopes, telling them it was from Metals Recycling, etc.

Not to mention middle-level managers somehow driving around a Hummer and an Eldorado SUV, a boat, etc. all at the same time, and then mysteriously, possibly at the end of a paid-for by somebody lease?, those item(s) disappearing?

Overspending for unnecessary roofing and unnecessarily expensive roofing systems in schools has to cease.

The only way to stop that?

NOT Allow Local School Districts to set standards - but direct the State Auditor's Offices to do so, instead.

The State Auditor's Offices, despite the interference of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee into what they can look into, is the only department or agency that has and can protect whistleblowers, that "gets it" when it comes to scams, and can prevent it by going to national sources for information and reviews - as they did in the audit in my case. _______________________________________

A List of Commercial Roofing Systems' known roofing contracts in the Kern High School District: ___________________________________