b'~ contractors through ariety ofcompetition and maximize profits,social relationships with roofingsu titution of m ls from va bs ateria any means,includinginadequatecertain roof installation contractorsconsultants and sales represen other manufactur even though er, public notice of project propos have engaged in practices that helptatives who secured a sharethey may be less expen and ofsive als, selective offers of preferen themevadeandcircumventlawsvariousdistricts\'roofingbusi of iden cal q This locks the ti uality. tial pricing and mandatory pre governing proper labor a p ness. Incases, these offi project in forp Y, whndayrollseveralCom anyich bidmeetings.Inat leastonepractices.cials agr after the fact to act aschargesp iumpricesfor its eedreminstance, the mandatory pre-bidesomeinstances,contractorsreferences for afing consult goods. Districtials, some of Inroo officmeeting was held the same dayhave been able to secure schoolant.whom socialize with the consultthe bid proposaladvertised.roofing work by submitting lowN Jerseylacksaneffectiveant, takethecon s w d wasewsultant\' oresome instances, work on pub bids secretlyn on themechanism at thelevel tothat the process istirely legitiInconditio edstateenlic school roofs has been turnedfactthattheirlaborerswillbemon the pub c-scho roof mate. itorli ol overtosubcontractorswithoutpaid substantially less than theingindustryandtoprovideSTEP IV:The bidding process approvalby the schooldistrictlegallymandatedprevailingschooldistrictswithtechnicalis further manipulated to ensure and in violation of State Divisionwage.trainingandadviceon how tothat the actualinstallationconofBuildingandConstructionCertified payroll forms subm avoid abuses.tract is awarded to atractor ittedconrules.inwith school roof "certified" byCompany Y.Tconnectionhe ing projects have been found toSchool Roofing Scam:Afavoredcontractor u sI ndercut al School Safety Issuesbe rep with phony efT]ployeeGeneric Guide in Six Stepsother bidders by arr to pay leteanging Amber of unusual and ques socialsecuritynumbersandThefollowing is a compositehis employees at asubstannu rate tionable circumstances give rise tofalsedatarelativetohoursscenario that illustrates the types oftiallybelowthestatutorily concernsaboutthesafetya worked and wages paid.abusesuncoveredbytheStaterequired prevailing wage, a ploy nd structural integrity of public schoolSome contractors have failed toCommissionof Investigation d wh reduceshisestimated ur ich roof repairs and replacements com make standard employee payrollingitsinvestigationofpubliclabor costs. pleted through this process.deductions,deductionsforsch lprojects in New Jer STEP V:If inspectionsur oo roofingocc at )project plansincome tax, disability insurancesey.allduringinstalla on, theyare In some instances,ti~or merely copied byandunemploymentbenefits.STEP I:SchoolXter conductednotbyindependent were drawnDistrictdeindividualswhowerenotThesecontractorshavealsomines that several failing roofsexpertsbutbyCompanyY\'s licensed architects. In others, nofailed to remit their own contri onschoolbuildingsrequiresales representative, bycomthe design professionals were usedbutions toward these benefits.repair and/or replacement.p roofingconsultant romised at all. Drawings lacked the requi STEPII:Whenplans for theand/or bytheinstallation consite detail and architectural seal,Inadequate Oversightproject are a ounced, District Xtractor underpayment from the nnandrequisitebui !dingpermitsTheabusesuncoveredbytheofficialsarecontactedbythesales representative. Th a s isllowwere not obtained prior to con commission in public-school roof sales r oftheco-conspiratorstoinflate epresentativeCompany struction.ingprojects wereabettedbytheY,a leadingsellerofroofingtheir profits e more by substiven Less expensive and som m action, and inaction, of school dis materials. The sales represen tutingcheaper materialsduring eti estainferior roofing products may betrict officials and by tax oversighttive refersdistrictainstallationwithoutanydownthetoroofing used in place of specified mate and guidance at the state and localconsultanVarchitectwhohasaward adjustment in the cost to the rials. Specified materials some levels.secret arrangement underichdwh istrict. times are left outwithRanking schooldistrict officialshereceivedpensation fromSTEP VI: The final cost tops $1 altogethercomno substitutions.placed millions of taxpayerCompanyY. Knowing that hellmillion.DistrictX\'s taxpayers dol wiStructuralproblemsraisedinlars at the disposal of consult be paid by the company, the con she!out 20 percent toperceI30nt variousfeasibilitystudiesmayants,contractorsandroofingsultantisable to under-bid allmore than theyhave for a should notbeaddressedinprojectmanu withoutaskingotherpote a itectstos ool roof th m inferior. facturersntialrch ch atay be plans and specifications.thebasic questions aboutobtain theprojectdesigncon Profits are shared by Compa Y, mostny On-siteinspectionsw lax,their q ns andibletract.by its sales repres tative,the ereualificatio poss en by nonexistent or taintedby con connections.STEP Ill: The consultant writesroofingconsultanta bythe nd flicts of interest.District officials in a n r of"proprietar projectspecifica contractor - who team up again umbe y" instancesokayedquestionabletionsexplicitlybuiltaroundtoobtainbusinessinanother Improper Laborcontr eventhey hadCompanyY\'sproducts.Thesch lict. actsthroughoo distr0 ractices/Payroll and Taxbeen warned of potential abuses.specifications alsocontain anI werefoundin59 \' rregularities ~ iolationsDistrict officialsresponsiblearray of special requirements, orpercent of the sch ltricts examforoo disIn an efforttoundercuttheirroofmaintenancestruckup"hurdles," designed to block theined.'