[LWVNM Action] Fw: State Ethics Commission squashed procurement move by Lujan Grisham. Here’s why it matters.

Wed Aug 16 12:37:26 MDT 2023

   ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Marjorie, New Mexico In Depth <nmindepth at gmail.com>To: "polirich at aol.com" <polirich at aol.com>Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 12:27:34 PM MDTSubject: State Ethics Commission squashed procurement move by Lujan Grisham. Here’s why it matters.

|  
|  
| 
|  
|    |

  |

 |

  |
|  
| 
|  
|  
|  This is New Mexico In Depth's mid-week newsletter. We think it's crucial to stay in touch and tell you what's on our minds every week. Please let us know what's on your mind as well. Or, got tips? What do we need to know? Contact us: nmindepth at gmail.com  |

  |

  |

|  
|  
New Mexico’s State Ethics Commission notched a win last week, negotiating a settlement with Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and the Human Services Department (HSD) to honor the outcome of its open bidding process under the New Mexico Procurement Code for companies to administer the state’s multi-billion dollar Medicaid program. 

In January of this year, just as the Human Services Department readied letters to notify four managed care providers they had been selected to help run the program, the governor’s office stepped in to pull the plug. Administration officials said none of the companies that had bid for the contract had scored high enough. This despite HSD employees evaluating the proposals based on the criteria set forth in the state’s request for proposals. 

Of the five that made bids under the official procurement process, Western Sky Community Care, a subsidiary of Centene that runs the Medicaid program now, was not selected. 

In the midst of the legislative session, lawmakers expressed alarm at the casual tossing of the state procurement process, one that in this case is worth billions of dollars. State ethics officials took notice too, launching an investigation and then a lawsuit in April. 

Here’s why it matters. 

Procurement code. Insurance adjuster. Financial investment. Purchasing agent. Invoice acquisition. These terms are a snooze fest, right? 

But in truth, they’re at the center of the biggest corruption cases in New Mexico’s modern era.

State treasurers – two of them – took hundreds of thousands in kickbacks to direct state business to investment advisers. A powerful state senator took kickbacks to award contracts for a new courthouse, including allocating some of his own state capital outlay money for some of the work. An insurance regulator threatened hefty fines unless insurance companies made contributions to a nonprofit in the business of purchasing books he himself had authored. A state senator ushered legislative approval of the sale of a public building, then pocketed a hefty real estate fee for the sale of that building. And coming up in January – a former House Majority Leader goes on trial for allegedly manipulating the purchasing process at Albuquerque Public Schools, where she worked, to funnel money into bank accounts under her control. 

These were powerful people who were able to persuade, hoodwink, arm wrestle, or simply direct the use of public funds for their own financial gain.

The procurement process is notorious for corruption – here, nationally, and globally. Reams have been written about the danger of fraud, about actual cases of fraud, about codes of conduct for procurement, about the duties and responsibilities of procurement officers. 

New Mexico lawmakers have incrementally taken steps to increase safeguards. In fact, the idea for New Mexico’s State Ethics Commission, which embodies an idea at the core of democracy — the public’s oversight of government, came out of an ethics task force created in the wake of the scandal involving the state treasurers. 

No one is suggesting corruption by the governor in this case and in the settlement with the Ethics Commission the governor’s office admits no wrongdoing and in fact continues to express concern that the four quite large and prominent managed care organizations aren’t good enough for the job. 

But there are other reasons besides corruption for adhering to the procurement process. 

Number one, it’s meant to ensure the public its dollars are well spent, by laying out criteria that selected teams then use to score applicants and award contracts to the highest scoring candidates. Number two, it’s meant to inspire confidence in the private sector that the work that goes into bidding on projects will be assessed in a transparent and fair process – so that qualified companies actually choose to do these jobs in the first place. 

Lujan Grisham flouted the state’s procurement code, an important process that legislative analysts have for years been warning needs more guardrails, not less. And the State Ethics Commission more than earned its annual budget by investigating, suing, and in the end, forcing the most powerful elected state official to honor the process.
  |

  |

|  
|    |

  |

|  
|   |

  |

|  
|  
|  NUMBER OF THE WEEK
472

The number of non-emergency contracts issued in 2021 by all state, local or other government entities without requiring a competitive bidding process. That’s 167% more than the number of non-competitive contracts in 2017. Source: The Legislative Finance Committee 2021 evaluation report on issues with state procurement.  
  |

  |

  |

|  
|    |

  |

|  
|  
Personal Corner

For years, New Mexico In Depth investigated how well the state’s capital outlay process performs. We’re not alone in highlighting the millions of unspent dollars that sit on the books year after year. 

Along the way, in 2015 to be exact, we also realized lawmakers who were divvying up a huge pot of capital outlay money among themselves to distribute as they saw fit – an archaic practice that as far as we can ascertain is only done in New Mexico — didn't have to disclose publicly the details of how each legislator spent those dollars.

To illustrate the lack of transparency, in 2019 I spent months asking each lawmaker to send me their capital outlay distributions, which we published in a spreadsheet. It took a lot of time and effort, more than any one member of the public should have to undertake to be able to see how lawmakers spend their money. This has changed now. Once the majority of lawmakers realized a state law kept their constituents from seeing how they spent the state’s dollars to help their communities, many began disclosing their allocations on their own websites and within a few years mandated that legislative staff publicly disclose the information each year. 

During the capital outlay transparency reporting years, I often heard lawmakers argue that disclosing the information would cause them problems with their constituents. I’d hear advocates argue in committee hearings that transparency is the antidote to corruption, and I’d see some lawmakers get angry, as though they were being accused personally of corruption. 

This week, refreshing my memory on the litany of corruption cases that have cascaded through New Mexico over the last several decades, I’m reminded of just how important that transparency reporting was. Manny Aragon, the incredibly powerful Senate Pro Tem, beloved by many but also a crook, allocated his own capital outlay money for an audio visual courthouse contract, some of which went right back into his own pocket as a kickback. 

Back in those days, there was no list of which lawmaker allocated money to specific capital outlay projects. Had there been, maybe his crimes would have been realized .
 |

 |

| 
|     |

  |

 |

  |
|  
| 
|  
|  
|  
|  
|  
|  
|    |

  |

  |

|  
|  
|    |

  |

  |

|  
|  
|    |

  |

  |

|  
|  
|    |

  |

  |

  |

  |

  |

  |

|  
|    |

  |

 Our mailing address is: 
 New Mexico In Depth7820 Enchanted Hills Blvd. Ste A-137Rio Rancho, NM 87144
Add us to your address book 

 Want to change how you receive these emails?
 You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 

  |

  |

 |

  |

  |

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/action/attachments/20230816/412f9e6a/attachment-0001.htm>