Probe follows allegations of flawed selection process, and near award of the $183,000 dollar contract to an economist who had been jailed for non-payment of child support.
Governor John Lynch blocked the deal from reaching the executive council and has asked Attorney General Kelly Ayotte to look into possible violations of state bidding laws…….Lynch told the council during their pre-meeting breakfast that he saw no choice in doing otherwise.
"I can't believe in this state we are contemplating giving an award to a vendor to help write child support guidelines when he himself was jailed for failing to make child support vendors."
The vendor in question…….Georgia-based economist Mark Rogers was jailed for two weeks in for non-payment of child support in 1993…..A fact uncovered earlier this week by the Nashua Telegraph…..Rogers's incarceration came amid a disputed bankruptcy proceeding…….a Georgia judge called the economist's use of bankruptcy laws to secure lower child support payments repugnant.………Some executive councilors, though, seem a lot more forgiving.
"But governor, in all fairness to him, he eventually became the custodial parent so there was obviously something there."
That's District 4 councilor Ray Weiczorek……He says the contract should have been awarded to Rogers……who was the lowest bidder……Weiczorek's opinion was shared by District one's Ray Burton……Both men also question the propriety of awarding the contract to alternate vendor Policy studies Incorporated, the firm favored by the majority of the bid screening team…..They maintain that PSI would have a profit motive in writing high support payment guidelines because the firm also makes money by helping states to track and collect overdue support. …..The two councilors were also quick to criticize the alleged conduct of Governor Lynch's delegate to the screening panel -- Public Utilities Commissioner Clifton Below, …..Here's they are relaying criticism from panel members who backed the contract going to Rogers…..first Ray Burton.
"He said it was so evident that Clif Below was so determined and so beligerent. Beligerent was the word he used that he questioned the process of why this contract was not on."
"You know councilor I heard the same things you did about the way Clifton Below behaved with this thing…I was even told he had changed the minutes of the meeting……..And he said well I've got the Governor's ear and I'm going to get to him…..Well, he did obviously get to you."
"I've never talked to him by the way."
-You never did?
-No.
-Well, that's what he said….
Clif Below, for his part, says he did nothing inappropriate, and disagrees with the councilors' characterizations.
Other on the council doubted the Below would have acted in such a manner……They added that they, too received plenty of phone calls about the contract and its selection and came to a different set of conclusions. Councilor Deborah Pignantelli said she believes the factors used to select Mark Rogers. And said her worries weren't allayed by a visit to his website.
"I googled the persons name and I found out how he encouraged how he encourage people to fight paying child support to their spouse and I thought this is not someone the state ought to be hiring."
District 2's Peter Spaulding cited one panelists rating PSI zero in terms of background, even though the company operates child support in nine states and a long track record of helping craft guidelines……He says he's not sure if the overall process was illegal, but it was certainly unususal……Spalding also questioned the motives of some who called him on behalf of Rogers.
"One person called me and said he had a good-paying job and said 'the state is making me pay more for child support than the state pays for a foster child." And I said , they damn well better….It was just the attitude of these people…..And it’s the same people who have been involved with the calls on the men's commission…..It's just these people who believe the courts are out to get them."
Further work on crafting new guidelines will remain on hold pending the Attorney General's investigation…..Governor Lynch says it's important for the state to move as quickly as make progress, but that the entire contract may have to be re-bid.
You are missing the true scandle. The other bidder, PSI incorporated
http://www.policy-studies.com/company/
is engaging in a criminal conflict of interest. The are in the child support collection and computer business amongst other child support related business. They have absolutely no business bidding on child support related research. You have a mamoth business picking on an underdog and you missed it.
Please look into this!
Please revisit paragraph five
"Both men also question the propriety of awarding the contract to alternate vendor Policy studies Incorporated, the firm favored by the majority of the bid screening team…..They maintain that PSI would have a profit motive in writing high support payment guidelines because the firm also makes money by helping states to track and collect overdue support."
Mark Rogers uses unassailable analysis and objective research data to support the objection to excessive child suppport awards when such objections are warranted. He knows the existing NH guidelines are both baseless and indefensible. Rogers' detractors are unable and unwilling to address his economic analysis because it is absolutely sound. So, instead they attack the fact that the system abused him over a decade ago the same way it continues to abuse so many others.
Those who care about the true best interests of children and NH's parents of divorce should withhold judgement until they understand the facts. I hope Josh will explicitly ask the Councilors where the basis lies for the current NH guidelines and whether it is fair to obligor parents and their children to deny any child support from going toward the children's benefit at that obligor parent's household.
The work of Policy Studies Inc. is in large part the reason for most all guidelines around the country. And PSI's conflict in this matter is unconscionable.
I wonder if the Councilors would pre-judge the guilt of an accused criminal just because he was hauled into a NH courtroom as a defendant...?
When they pre-judge those NH obligor parents who have brought them valid concerns which are supported in fact, yet jump to conclusions about the agenda of these citizens who dare to confront them with the facts, they do no citizen or child of NH a service...
Marc Snider
WWW.NHCUSTODY.ORG