Why Scammers Won't Give Up and Do the Right Thing

Update:
Garland Product Sales listed on this chart are approximately $131,176,000 for the first 11 months of 2011  (see the "Pts." column and multiply by $1,000).

Garland Reps made 25% of those sales in commissions.

That's $32.794 million - about $33 million -  in commissions in 2011.

Most of Garland sales are in public work.....

Double the product sales for construction by various entities, including Garlands' own construction firm, and conservatively you would have about $262 million - or say at least a QUARTER OF A BILLION dollars - was lost in taxpayer funds in the roofing scam in the US  alone in 2011.

And that's just Garland, not including Tremco and any other roofing "manufacturer" pulling the same stunts!

We know this scam is operating in Canada, the UK and possibly  beyond ??? as well now.

Can we afford this???

Check the yearly sales figures on www.zoominfo.com and look up the various manufacturers.  The latest range of sales for Garland they list are $50 to $100 million in revenues.
_______________________________________

We all have always wondered why scam manufacturers and their reps won't give up destroying all of us through massively overspent bond monies we have to pay back.

In fact, it has sent this country into a downward spiral.

So what is it?

M-O-N-E-Y.

As long as the Government keeps allowing it to continue....it only gets worse.  

Because they keep getting away with it....to the point they are making videos now oh-ha-ha-ha "debunking" the indefensible.  

Even Garland's highest paid rep in the country - who is in New Jersey - made one of those videos.

Little wonder why.

Here's the proof.

What Garland Reps all over the US were paid in Commissions in the first 11 months of 2011:

Enlarge it on Legal or Ledger Size Paper when you print it out - the numbers are astounding....as to what schools and kids and teachers and the taxpayers are losing...no wonder we have saddled college kids with such heavy debt.


So how to read it?

Multiply the  numbers under "PTS" - Points - Column by $1,000 - to get how much in Sales that rep made in the first 11 months of 2011.

That's right.

They make 25% on sales.....so that tells you how much the PUBLIC is being hit up for.....

The highest paid Garland Sales Rep, Bill Pancoast, made $5,495,000 in sales the first 11 months of 2011.

That means his commissions were about $1.4 million or more in that same time period.

Many others made over $1 million in sales the same time period.

Tremco Sales Reps do the same.

Question:  Why do Garland Reps complain so bitterly about getting so little of their commissions?  

We know why.

Johns-Manville Sales Reps, et. al.:  How do you like your company openly private-labeling or allowing its products to outright be used under Garland's "top cap sheet" - charging 6 times for the same material you sell - while you aren't allowed to compete with them - and struggle to make $60,000 per year?

The Teacher's Union:  How do you like your teachers who haven't been laid off or made to take on many more students per class still paying for classroom supplies out of meager salaries?

Taxpayer Organizations:  How do you like the taxpayer being overly sold on products and installations not needed at ridiculous prices?

Bond Financiers must LOVE these practices, lining their fleecing pockets with more, more more enslavement of the public.

Qui Tam Case Against Tremco, Inc. Alleged Defects In BURmastic Roofing Systems

Apparently, one of the charges in the Qui Tam case against Tremco that has just been won is that there are defects in the BURmastic roofing systems. 

The article is located here:
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/qui-tam-case-against-tremco-inc-alleging-defects-burmastic-roofing-systems-settles-6

It reminds me of the Quality Tile Roofing case in Boise, Idaho during the mid to late 1990's, where the owner, a Western Roofing Contractor's Association President, was accused by Tremco of mixing polymers into their product and diluting it.  

Turned out that the Tremco sales scheme of selling wayyyyyyy too much product of what they "think" would be on the job backfired.

He had about 1,000 unopened cartons of their SBS modified product left on his yard - because they wouldn't take back all that way oversold product.

He sent 10 unopened cartons of the Tremco materials to Dick Baxter at CRS Monroe in Monroe, NC, who tested it.

Sure enough, the material was bad alright.  And it came from their plant, where the only high-speed Austrian-made mixers were available to mix the product.

He proved that Tremco knowingly sold him bad product, and then when he got disgusted and stopped playing the "round robin" of contractors to get their jobs, and bid a Malarkey product - at way less - they went to the US Attorney General's Offices and asked to have him criminally charged for making the product bad.

That's right.  Tremco tried to have him charged with mixing bad product on two roofs at Mountain Home Air Force Base, only one of which he had done...... with products they knew were bad and sold him.

By the way, not only was the cost way less to use the Malarkey materials, Malarkey had a REAL warranty, not that cooked-up massively expensive "Maintenance Agreement" Tremco, Garland and Hickman used......and still use with the two left.

It also reminds me of the San Francisco Bay Area roofing contractor estimator, a former Tremco Field Inspector and a roofing rep all reporting the same thing to me:  the practice of Tremco Sales reps to force "shorting" of the material between the plies, to ensure that the roofs would get done way, way way too soon.  Around here, about years 6-8 we would see the roofs redone at enormous prices......  

Incredible amounts of Churning going on.  Fraud, in fact.

The classic example?

IBM facilities managers, enamored somehow, used Tremco materials over their SIlicone Valley plant, so I heard from a very reliable roofing rep.  He got a call one day, from them, frantic.

Seems that the roofs were shorted of the asphalt materials, dried out and were leaking.  

Only in this case, the roof was over a Clean Room for chip-making - and water had gotten in.  

They had called the Tremco rep, who had it "fixed" - and had to replace the Clean Room and throw out all the chips.

It leaked again.  And that's when they called the roofing rep I know - and many of you know him too.  Another Clean Room destroyed and many more chips.

Total loss I heard was around $160 million.

He got to the site, the Tremco rep arrived, and the Facilities Manager threw the Tremco rep off the site.  My friend got it fixed - with another system.

But look at how much IBM lost in the deal.


Hickman did the same thing in New Jersey shortly before they went under, paying about $40,000 out in kickbacks on about $300,000 jobs, taking the money out of the SBS modified materials to be put down and effectively shorting the materials between the plies.  A former Hickman rep in that area told me this - I don't make these things up.

In Hickman's case, the roofs were already leaking by year one - and frantic former Hickman guys called me to see what they could do about their warranties - so-called.  I heard later all of a sudden any number of their school roofs in New Jersey got redone right away - with "Green Roofs".  Which previously were done by Hickman.  Unnhhh-hunnnhhhh......right........"green" roofs.......all on schools.......

So the BURmastic systems have had their problems .... all to further sales..........

Me oh my.....it's finally coming out.......but look at how long it took.  

Wonder how many of all the scammers' roofs are done in the same manner?

You have to know - I hear way lots more than I put up on here....unbelievable but true things going on in the roofing world.   Now you know why I keep hammering away......

The guys doing it right need not be ashamed and need to be bold in going after work - we all need good competition from folks doing it right!

The Department of Justice's Press Release on the Tremco Qui Tam Case

Click on the page below or download and read..... or go to:  

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/August/13-civ-968.html

This blogger thanks so much the man in Rocky River, Ohio who did the Qui Tam.  II have seen many entries on the blogs from Rocky River, and always wondered who it was.  Thank you so much!

It's been 16-1/2 years since I went to the FBI, and they "Strongly Recommended Prosecutions" of my bosses.  Unfortunately, the US Attorney General's Offices at that time refused to prosecute.  It was run at that time by Robert Mueller.  

The recommendations were regarding the illegal, restrictive proprietary performance specs written by Tremco and inserted into bidding documents, for the reroofing of four hospitals at the University of California, San Francisco.  

Their repeated, illegal specs on over 20 years' worth of building roofing projects on that 110-building campus was one of the big reasons a colleague of mine, a woman architect 20 years my senior, argued with bosses over "all those illegal contracts, how do they keep getting away with it?" and got run out for it - and in despair, killed herself over it on a Sunday in July, 1996 at her home in Mill Valley, California.  

Managers at UCSF later laughed at me, telling me that "EVERYONE!" was on the take - four years after lying to FBI Agents - all while seeing to it I have been blackballed.

Thank you so much for persevering - and I think many more than myself tell you the same!!!!

For a copy of the long complaint, please contact the US Dept. of Justice or email roofreports@gmail.com for the .pdf file.

GSA Wins Qui Tam Case Against Tremco

It's official - Tremco was hit with a Qui Tam Case from the GSA - and lost.


A former Tremco executive turned them in.

Read about it here:
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/08/27/5685826/former-tremco-employees-whistleblowing.html 

and 
http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/1435862

Which states, in part:

"Mr. Rudolph sued on behalf of the united states government alleging that Tremco, and its parent company RPM, had made false claims to the United States government by offering less favorable pricing to the government as opposed to pricing afforded to private customers, marketing expensive materials to federal government purchasers without disclosing the availability and opportunity to purchase comparable lower-cost, identical materials, and selling and installing defective products and systems on federal government buildings.

On August 13, 2013, Tremco and RPM International Inc. reached a settlement under which they will pay the government $60,958,963 plus interest for claims arising during the period from January 2, 2002 through March 1, 2011.  As the whistleblower, or relator of the information leading to the settlement, Mr. Rudolph is entitled to a portion of the recovery, which in this case amounts to 17.9% of the settlement."


Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/1435862#ixzz2dotoaswx

Tremco is the company that I observed at the University of California, San Francisco getting their illegally, sole-sourced non-competitive bid specs put out to "bid" by my bosses.  The FBI ruled in my case in 1997 "Strongly Recommending Prosecutions" of my bosses for those specs.

They had been in the campus for at least 20 years, doing reroofing ad infinitum on most if not all of the over 110 structures.  Today, they have not been stopped and the campus has many more structures.

You can see Tremco's In-House Training Document, here - detailing how they scam the schools::
http://schoolroofingscam.blogspot.com/2008/02/tremco-in-house-training-documents.html

Here is what is supposed to be happening instead:
http://schoolroofingscam.blogspot.com/2013/08/roles-responsibilities-of-facility.html

Tremco is the same company which Thomas L. Smith, the Roof Consultant in Chicago did the New Jersey State Commission of Investigation Report on Tremco and Hickman's practices, released Sept., 2000.

See that report here:
http://www.state.nj.us/sci/school.shtm

Thomas L. Smith also did the blistering Investigative Report on the Tremco Specs for four major hospitals' reroofing at the UCSF Medical Center, for the California State Auditor, released Sept. 17, 2003.  They were the same specifications the FBI strongly recommended prosecutions of my bosses over.

See that report here:
http://www.bsa.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/I2003-2.pdf
and look at Chapter 5

For the great work of the Midwest Roofing Contractor's Association and their Testing Manager, LB "Huck" Morris' reports on the activities of Tremco, Garland and Hickman, you can see many of those reports in this blog and the associated blog, 
www.roofingscam.blogspot.com 

Their reports came out in 1997-8, with more in the early 2000's.

Copies of the reports and the actual Qui Tam Case are available by email.  Write roofreports@gmail.com and they will be sent to you.

Thanks to Diana Vice for obtaining the case for distribution.  At some point, it will be made available along with all other documents on this site and associated sites in .pdf form, for easy download.

School District Personnel Fired for Whistleblowing to the FBI Re: Garland Purchase Order Scam WIN Their Case

That's right.

Two School District Personnel Fired for Whistleblowing to the FBI Re: Garland Purchase Order Scam WIN Their Case

They settled with a frantic School Board attorney on the morning their case was to start trial....Monday, August 12, 2013.

A First.

Have you ever heard of a Facilities guy or School District guy who fought or reported to the authorities anything about these scams winning?

I haven't.  If you have, please write and let me know!

Well, it just happened.

And it didn't "just happen".  I explain below - with a lot of stuff I have never yet disclosed.  There's much more than I say below....that will be in the book.

The original news story:

-->

http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/x43955892/KHSD-workers-allege-being-fired-for-whistleblowing

Announcement of the Settlement:

-->

http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/grade/x588417077/KHSD-settles-whistleblower-lawsuit

Long story short:

An Assistant Maintenance Director in the largest High School District in California noticed that with the influx of a cadre of new men coming into the Business Office and above them in various positions, that the normal and required competitive bidding specifications in roofing and other products were thrown out the window.

The men who came in and instituted the practices all seemed to know each other also seemed to party hardy together, knowing each other from CASBO and CASH.

CASBO is the California Association of School Business Officers (www.casbo.org)

C.A.S.H. (which sends investigators into slack-jawed shock of the open brazenness of obvious aims with the name) is the Coalition for Adequate School Housing (www.cashnet.org)

Right.  We all know what kind of "adequate" C.A.S.H. reserves they are for the con men targeting school funds.

Slobbering at the pig's trough....hogs, really.

Time for the hog slaughter.

So these men coming in as Business Officers and Facilities Directors/Managers and more targeted - get this? - TARGETED the largest High School District in California, a remote area.

It's Kern High School District in Bakersfield, at the end of the massive Central Valley in California, well above the mountain range that separates it from the huge Los Angeles area.

Kern High School District has 18 high schools and assorted other schools and structures, at one time over 35,000 students.

These men circumvented all normal competitive bidding processes and state licensing laws regarding who should be making decisions regarding fire-rated materials and commercial/public structures.

It's not business officers, it's not facilities personnel,  it's not school board members and it's not Superintendents.

It's only supposed to be licensed Architects and Engineers.

Period, end of story.

Instead, they forced $200,000 a year Garland Purchase Orders in a cooked-up scheme - and it's complex - and one roofing contractor was used in broken-up contracts for years, inserting "Garland" products (just whose were they really?) into warrantied roofs - destroying good warranties and good roofs.

The direct boss of John Fox, an Assistant Maintenance Director, was involved.  John Fox was confounded with what was happening - like so many in facilities abused for speaking up and saying something when they see something not being bid properly.   John came to me for help in February, 2009.

And man, did he need it.  Completely confused, hurt, angry and pissed (with good reason) beyond belief.

I had to listen for weeks and not just a few hours a day, tons of them, letting him talk, then teaching him what it was all about, then unraveling the problems.

And putting it in a form to give to the FBI.

He saw kickbacks.  He reported them.

The FBI Office in Bakersfield refused to do anything with it.

His boss came from - get this - the heart of Hollywood, the Beverly Hills High School District, where he was sole sourcing Tremco, in 2002-3.  Wonder what those benefits were for him?  He seemed to be driving a massive SUV and another vehicle that went bye-bye right before his death from cancer a couple of years ago.  And he kept a safe in his office, out of which $20,000 a time would appear, suddenly.....nice drop for _________?

John had tried with School Board Members and the local Taxpayers Association, to no avail, before he got to me.

Strangely, one of those Board Members called me at same time as John trying to do something locally, in or about 2007, and the Board Member called me at the behest of someone else in the conservative political community that knew me, and wanted to know the names of the companies involved.  I told him.  He asked the  Superintendent if they were doing work with those companies.

The Superintendent lied.

Now we all know that if you have to lie, you know something about it is wrong and you have to be complicit in it.

More background:
 We already heard that Sam Salamone, working for Johns Manville (who private labels for Tremco, undermining their own reps!), caught two Santa Monica School Board Members driving Mercedes leased by Tremco.  Sam tried to get something done, not one person would listen (authorities) and then Sam died young.....that was in the late 1990's or early 2000's.

So the boss of John Fox had to be well-acquainted with the scams in schools.

You'll have to wait for the rest of the story.  In a book.


Bottom Line?

The facilities guys that were hurting so badly because of the Garland Roofing Purchase Order Scam found me because of the blogs.  And the work involved was massive.....to get them in a winning position, even before the lawyers got involved.

It's a whale of a story - and involves the second of the two scam manufacturers still operating.

Yes, it's a massive scam.  It involves politicians...and it's seriously bad stuff. And not just in the USA.


I will put up on here when the book comes out - and where to get it.

If you want something included in the book, let me know.  Or on the blog, anytime, contact me at roofreports@gmail.com

Previous posts on the blog are slowly being put back up over time, with improvements.  The service revamped them without my ability to control them!  If you know of a way to get .pdf's onto these blogs, or on another service, let me know, so I can link to them or put them up - easier than downloading off the blogs!

What a Shame!

The Short Version:

Place:   State of Washington School District

What happened?

            The district agreed to hire Tremco Roofing, 
             headquartered in Ohio, through King County 
             Directors’ Association

Who protested?

            Scott Henden, school board member, voted against the
            contract, saying he saw it as a “single source” contract.
            He would have preferred the roofing contract go out to
            bid and that local companies be allowed to submit
            bids.  "I am not comfortable going single source at
            $400,000,” he said.

Now there's a good man! 

____________________________________________

How many of you have seen this scenario before?

A School Board is approached to fund a new roof - by a manufacturer.  You know, the you know who's going around duly licensed architects and engineers to "sell" products direct, at E-N-O-R-M-O-U-S prices.

Or the Facilities Director says it just has to be one manufacturer and NOW.

In this case, two commissioners and the President of the School Board vote it in - after the President of the School Board de-clares in no uncertain terms their kids don't need to be rained or snowed on....approving a $400,000 contract to Tremco - with one lone dissenter.

We'd love to know how much product that was sold to them was applicable, and how much was left over after the job was done on the winning contractor's yard....it's not returnable.

But we also all know what will happen next.  That dissenter will be off the board in no time - just like Assistant Maintenance Directors and staff architects, etc. forced off the job for questioning their bosses as to why why why are we doing something that has no checks and balances in it and costs so-so-so much and redoing them soooooooo quickly?!?!?!?

For instance:  The Facilities managers at the largest high school district in California, after years of questioning new bosses ramrodding through purchase orders for roofing, go to the FBI, who does nothing and then the concerned facilities managers take it to the Legislature- with a Legislative aide apparently sending the FBI documentation to the School District (the very men involved).

The concerned facilities managers, harrassed because they were good and doing bidding the right way - then find themselves fired and frankly slandered by the Superintendent in a closed School Board meeting in order to get them fired.  (Just proven in depositions in June, 2013).

Men who were doing their jobs, felt something was terribly wrong, did not go along with the Garland Purchase Order Scheme brought in by new managers and directors from various parts of the state that seemed to know each other from certain organizations (CASH and CASBO, apparently)..... to the tune of $200,000 a year plus broken-up construction contracts going to a relative of the Garland rep at one point....and one contractor on most of the work....putting products into warrantied roofs and you know what happens to the real warranties....

Did you get that?

You have probably seen it hundreds of times.

So one North Kitsap School Board member in  Poulsbo, Washington, Scott Henden, has that familiar "Queasy" feeling that somethings' not right - but he can't stop the ramrod machine.

Here's part of the article:
"
Scott Henden, school board member, voted against the contract, saying he saw it as a “single source” contract. He would have preferred the roofing contract go out to bid and that local companies be allowed to submit bids. “I am not comfortable going single source at $400,000,” he said.

Dave Dyess, director of maintenance and facilities for the district, said it was important to get the work done quickly while the weather was cooperative. He said there were leaks in 13 different places during the last school year.

Henden took issue with the hurried nature of the bidding process, saying someone knew for years the roof at Vinland was a problem."

Read more: http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2013/jul/12/north-kitsap-school-board-approves-roofing/#ixzz2ZGxAOd1M

So here we see the ol' hurry up and fix the years-long problem - without normal checks and balances.

How much of the structure was looked at by a structural engineer?

Hmmmmm.....good question, Scott Henden.

We know what will happen next, Scott.
1.  No FBI investigation.  He doesn't know what the kickbacks are....or why that door is slammed shut real tight to competition, as required by law.
2.  Certainly no State Attorney General Investigation will happen - this is liberal Washington, and if it's a liberal area, you can bet nothing will happen.  It's been the pattern......
3.  The Architects and Engineers, afraid of losing work, go wibbly-wobbly.  What they don't know is that if that roof has the asphalts shorted, it could cause leaks, damage to the structure and in snow country, possible roof cave-ins over time.  In essence, it threatens the life, safety, health and welfare of everyone inside and who owns the structures...what Architects and Engineers hold licenses for in the first place.

Just ask the nervous former Hickman Reps calling me from New Jersey, after they inherited their own jobs as Viridian, as to how to keep from honoring the warranties.  The roofs were leaking after one year because.....drum roll!.....the asphalts were shorted because, according to one of those reps, "My bosses took me to lunch last year and told me they were pulling $40,000 out of a job (job was in the low $100,000's) to pay off the folks they needed to - and shorting the asphalts - that's how they got the money out of the jobs to make payoffs!"......are you getting this?

One of the involved manufacturers' reps wrote in a recent spec, in a disdainful "joke" - showing three incompatible systems being done on one roof  for a "clueless" school system in southern California.

That's how much respect they have for their Marks.

Specified were SBS Modified parts, APP Modified parts, and Coal Tar listed all as parts of one roof....Holy Moly!  Clearly, the reps had no respect for their "Marks"!

A few months later, numerous persons were arrested and indicted for taking kickbacks, including most of the School Board for that School District.  No kidding.....and no surprise.

So to the one lone member on the School Board, Scott Henden, don't you stop what you are doing.  Yes, you will catch hell - but guess what?

Someone on the East Coast sent me your newspaper clipping.  There are people all over the US and in other countries, watching - and they are here for you.

See the story here:
 http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2013/jul/12/north-kitsap-school-board-approves-roofing/#axzz2Z4tn1sdo

Garland Named by Tea Party Activist at Televised School Board Hearing - in the largest California High School District

Bill Lind, the head of the local Tea Party in Bakersfield, California has named Garland in a televised School Board Hearing last night as being involved with their local high school district's personnel in corruption - and the school board covering up - for over 10 years.

To their faces.

The Kern High School District is the largest in California, with 18 high schools and other schools.

The Garland Roofing Purchase Orders in the amount of $200,000 per year with broken-up roofing construction contracts in the tens of thousands at a time going to Commercial Roofing - all of them - for over 10 years was the focus of Bill Linds' remarks.

A previous post on this blog from July, 2010 details those broken-up contracts.

Bill Lind showed a report from a staff accountant, John Cronen, detailing the Garland purchase orders.

New Story on air - naming Garland:
http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/Tea-party-member-accuses-Kern-High-School-District-of-corruption-212869701.html?tab=video&c=y

New Story in print - naming Garland: 
http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/grade/x607077386/Tea-party-activist-criticizes-KHSD-board

Original Story on Air:
http://www.kget.com/news/local/story/Retirees-suing-KHSD-are-honored-by-trustees/PX4rHjOe502Ffc533Nwp3w.cspx

UPDATE, Tuesday, June 25, 2013:


A protest was held this date outside of the Kern High School District by the NAACP.  The televised version is here:

http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/Protesters-alleged-Kern-High-School-District-corruption-213008961.html?tab=video&c=y

Oklahoma Enacts Legislation Addressing Gratuities for Sole-Sourced

Oklahoma has just instituted a new law - Enrolled Senate Bill No. 630 - aimed at but missing the bulls' eye of the heart of the roofing scams targeting schools and other public construction works dollars.

I was contacted several weeks ago just after its' passage, and sent a copy.  I have posted it below.

However, I was just as dismayed in reading it as I was the debacle passed in the California Legislature - after more than 13 years' work at that point to expose the scam.

The new Oklahoma law targets contractors as the source of bribes in the scam, when they are not the source and method of how the scam operates.


We believe and have heard repeatedly the same story in two countries - that particular  manufacturers train their reps to get in way ahead of any planning to budgetary "decision makers" - practicing architecture and engineering without a license in most cases.  We even have posted their in-house training documents that show how they do so.

Tremco and Garland's own in-house documents state precisely how they do it, minus the kickbacks involved.

But the new law does not require product manufacturers whose products are part of the winning bid, local officials such as School Boards or City Councils, or school administrators and other personnel to certify they had no involvement with gifts of any kind for bid awards.  
The Law should have primarily - primarily - required manufacturers whose products are part of the winning bid sign the same document.  

The document should require all and any Manufacturer's Managers and Reps in the area who were involved with the School Boards, Purchasing Organizations, City Councils, Superintendents, School Administrators and staff and Facilities Directors and staff to sign the same document as required of contractors.

The Law should have also required all decision makers - every School Board Member, Purchasing Agency Directors on down, City Council members, Superintendents, School Administrators and staff, and Facilities Directors and staff - to sign the same document.

And there is no mention of those supposedly writing (or copying) manufacturer's very own restrictive proprietary performance specifications being required to certify they did not receive gratuities to sole-source products.

Here is a copy of the new Oklahoma Governor's signed Bill, copied in below.
____________________________________________

AN ACT

ENROLLED SENATE

BILL NO. 630                       By: Jolley of the Senate

                                               and

                                        Murphey of the House

An Act relating to sole source purchase contracts; amending 74 O.S. 2011, Section 85.22, which relates to competitive bidding; modifying certification requirements; authorizing substitution of certain products; prohibiting purchasing restrictions to certain geographical areas; authorizing promulgation of rules to implement act; providing for codification; providing for noncodification; and declaring an emergency.

SUBJECT:  Competitive bidding procedures

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

SECTION 1.     AMENDATORY     74 O.S. 2011, Section 85.22, is amended to read as follows:

Section 85.22.  Any competitive bid submitted to the State of Oklahoma or contract executed by the state for goods or services in excess of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) shall contain a certification, which shall be in substantially the following form:

A.  For purposes of competitive bids, I certify:

1.  I am the duly authorized agent of _____________, the bidder submitting the competitive bid which is attached to this statement, for the purpose of certifying the facts pertaining to the existence of collusion among bidders and between bidders and state officials or employees, as well as facts pertaining to the giving or offering of things of value to government personnel in return for special consideration in the letting of any contract pursuant to the bid to which this statement is attached;

2.  I am fully aware of the facts and circumstances surrounding the making of the bid to which this statement is attached and have been personally and directly involved in the proceedings leading to the submission of such bid; and

3.  Neither the bidder nor anyone subject to the bidder's direction or control has been a party:

a.   to any collusion among bidders in restraint of freedom of competition by agreement to bid at a fixed price or to refrain from bidding,

b.   to any collusion with any state official or employee as to quantity, quality or price in the prospective contract, or as to any other terms of such prospective contract, nor

c.   in any discussions between bidders and any state official concerning exchange of money or other thing of value for special consideration in the letting of a contract, nor

d.   to any efforts or offers with state agency or political subdivision officials or others to create a sole brand acquisition or a sole source acquisition in contradiction to Section 2 of this act.

B.  I certify, if awarded the contract, whether competitively bid or not, neither the contractor nor anyone subject to the contractor’s direction or control has paid, given or donated or agreed to pay, give or donate to any officer or employee of the State of Oklahoma any money or other thing of value, either directly or indirectly, in procuring the contract to which this statement is attached.

Certified this _______ day of_________________ 20__.

SECTION 2.     NEW LAW     A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 85.45j.1 of Title 74, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

A.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law or agency rule to the contrary, any bid submissions received by a state agency or any political subdivision pursuant to authorized sole source bidding procedures established by the provisions of Section 85.45j of Title 74 of the Oklahoma Statutes, which substitute an item with one that is alike in quality and design or which meets the required specifications of the bid shall be considered and shall not be prohibited.  In terms of public construction contracts, with exception of specific products submitted and approved prior to release for bidding by the Oklahoma Attorney General for matching preexisting materials, at least three equivalent items from more than one manufacturer and more than one supplier or representative shall be included in the required specifications.

B.  In addition, no sole source bid proposal shall require any limitation that materials must be supplied from a vendor within any specific geographical area.  Geographic preference for vendors inside the geographical boundaries may be given, but only when the cost is the same or less.

SECTION 3.     NEW LAW     A new section of law not to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes reads as follows:

The Office of Management and Enterprise Services is authorized to promulgate rules as necessary to implement the provisions of this act.

SECTION 4.  It being immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and approval."

Passed the Senate the 30th day of April, 2013.

                             

                                 Presiding Officer of the Senate

Passed the House of Representatives the 17th day of April, 2013.

                            

                                  Presiding Officer of the House

                                              of Representatives

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR

Received by the Office of the Governor this ____________________ day of ___________________, 20_______, at _______ o'clock _______ M.

By: _________________________________

Approved by the Governor of the State of Oklahoma this _________ day of ___________________, 20_______, at _______ o'clock _______ M.

                                _________________________________

                                Governor of the State of Oklahoma

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE

Received by the Office of the Secretary of State this __________ day of __________________, 20 _______, at _______ o'clock _______ M.

By: _________________________________