U.S. inspector general asked to probe SBDC

By
|
Posted on Nov 19 1999
Share

Saying that ulterior motive was behind a proposal seeking to remove the Small Business Development Center under the wings of the Northern Marianas College, Rep. Oscar M. Babauta yesterday said he would seek a probe by the U.S. Inspector General into the planned transfer of the SBDC to the Commonwealth Development Authority.

The House Commerce and Tourism Committee chairman questioned the integrity of the agency’s ex-director Jack Peters in pressing for the closure of NMC-SBDC as he noted that the move may have been motivated by a “personal vendetta” against college officials.

Backing up accusations leveled against Peters by Board of Regent Chairman Ramon A. Villagomez, Babauta disclosed that he rejected his attempt to corner a $10,000 contract involving a project being administered by NMC-SBDC due to possible duplication of work.

“The agenda of Mr. Peters for the closure of the center boils down to non-approval of his contract,” the representative said in an interview. “He wants to get even with NMC.”

Babauta was the chair of the Contracts Subcommittee of the CNMI Economic Development Conference, which was funded with $200,000 by the Office of Insular Affairs.

Held last March at the Hyatt Regency Saipan, the conference produced an economic report whose completion Peters attempted to take over through an independent consultant contract he offered in April.

Peters, who now heads the Pacific Islands Small Development Network based at the University of Guam, could not be reached for comment on these allegations, which came after Senate Floor Leader Pete P. Reyes and Villagomez had also criticized the plan.

Personal vendetta

According to Babauta, Peters is now using his new position to smear the office he used to supervise and that these problems he blamed on NMC could have been fixed during his five-year tenure.

The federally-funded center opened in 1989. Peters had been its director since 1994 until his transfer to Guam.

“As officer-in-charge of SBDC activities in the region, I wonder whether these issues on the overall program in the CNMI are not jeopardized by a personal vendetta,” he said.

Babauta added that he wants the Inspector General “to come in and investigate thoroughly” since as a federal employee, Peters may have violated laws governing his functions as former chief of NMC-SBDC and now director of the network office.

Likewise, he echoed Villagomez’ concerns that Peters had worn two hats when he worked with the college until his contract ended while starting to assume his new post at the UOG agency between April 1-15, 1999.

“If Peters were to be given a professional service contract from the NMC-SBDC, it would result in a serious conflict of interest since he was also the NMC-SBDC’s official supervisor,” said Babauta.

Based on documents obtained by Tribune, Peters had offered to complete the economic study from April 16 through July 31 of this year for a fee of $10,000.

“I advised [NMC) President [Agnes] McPhetres and [then] VP [Tee] Abraham that I will continue to direct these important projects, but not for free. The. . .contract will compensate me for my professional services as Project Director for both the conference and the study,” he wrote in a memorandum to Babauta.

The letter was delivered to Babauta’s office on April 6, who later informed McPhetres about the proposal. Peters, he said, also had met that morning with the NMC president to discuss the matter, but she was in a hurry to sit down with him.

The legislator later thumbed down the offer as the scope of work proposed by Peters was similar to the contract of Malcolm D. McPhee, who was hired between April 1 to June 30 for $10,000 as economic study manager.

`His subcommittee also agreed to extend McPhee’s contract until completion, while allowing McPhetres to assume the overall supervision of the project.

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.