Pubdate: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 Source: Kansas City Star (MO) Copyright: 2002 The Kansas City Star Contact: http://www.kcstar.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/221 Author: Dan Margolies and Mark Morris JACKSON COUNTY CONTRACT WAS IMPROPER, LAWSUIT ALLEGES A "politically motivated" Jackson County Legislature illegally awarded a $628,000 drug-treatment contract last month to a Kansas City company, according to a lawsuit filed Monday. County Court Services Inc., the current contractor, says the Legislature gave the contract to Addiction Recovery Services Inc. even though independent bid evaluators recommended sticking with County Court Services. County records show that the evaluators gave Addiction Recovery's proposal failing marks, while giving high grades to County Court Services and recommending that it retain the one-year contract. "The legislature improperly and illegally awarded the contract not based on the lowest and best bid, but as a result of bad faith, favoritism, collusion and/or corruption," the lawsuit states. Lawsuits against government officials over decisions they made in their official capacity are relatively rare. But a lawyer for County Court Services, Thomas Schweich, said he had "never seen a company with such low scores be awarded a contract like this. The numbers alone prove that something is wrong." Timothy G. Donaldson, owner of Addiction Recovery, did not return calls and was not at home when a reporter visited his house on Monday evening. In interviews last week and Monday, Legislature Chairman Victor Callahan defended the Legislature's decision, saying the issue "is ultimately the savings to the taxpayer and can we have quality service." "The Legislature went with the lowest bidder after determining it could do the job and approved it unanimously," Callahan said. Addiction Services' bid was $42,000 lower than the one submitted by County Court Services. Callahan dropped out of the race for re-election in May amid rumors he is preparing to run for the Missouri Senate. His last day in office is today. Jackson County's anti-drug program is funded by a quarter-cent sales tax and was approved in 1989. The tax generates about $18 million annually for drug prevention, treatment and law enforcement efforts. The treatment program is an adjunct of the county Drug Court and provides services for an average of 400 clients at any given time -- or thousands per year. Drug charges are dropped if defendants complete a year or more of intense drug treatment, job counseling and other requirements. It was unclear what effect the lawsuit would have on the program's clients. Addiction Recovery had planned to take over operation of the program on Thursday morning. County Court Services is seeking an injunction to prevent that from happening. A hearing has been scheduled this morning before Jackson County Circuit Judge Jay Daugherty. Treatment Contract County Court Services has administered the county Drug Court's treatment program since 1995. It and Addiction Recovery were the only firms to submit proposals when the contract came up for renewal earlier this year. At least two independent evaluators reviewed the bids and concluded that Addiction Recovery's was seriously deficient. Although its bid was less than its competitor's $670,000 proposal, both evaluators recommended that County Court Services be given the contract. Acting independently of one another, the evaluators gave County Court Services an average score of 90 out of a possible 100 and Addiction Recovery an average of 45.5. Both concluded that Addiction Recovery's bid was not responsive to the bid request. In two sessions in October, the Legislature proposed to award the contract to County Court Services. Then, on Oct. 28, Legislator Dan Tarwater, head of the Legislature's anti-drug committee, informed contract administrators that the contract would be awarded instead to Addiction Recovery, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit states that County Court Services believes that Tarwater and Donaldson "have a personal relationship, as friends and neighbors," that may have influenced Tarwater's and the Legislature's decision. Donaldson is a certified substance-abuse counselor who has owned Addiction Recovery since 1998, according to his resume. He also owns Skylander Psychological Services Inc., which operates a crisis system for Ray County, and Health Productivity Services, which performs drug testing for Jackson County's Drug Court. The lawsuit names the Legislature and Tarwater as defendants. A companion action asks the court to declare that the Legislature's action was improper and illegal, and to award the contract to County Court Services. Tarwater did not respond to numerous calls over the past week seeking comment. Defending The Contract Callahan last week said that the evaluators' assessment "was important, but I think we can't go off the evaluation. You have to evaluate the evaluation. It's a beginning point. Sometimes they're wrong or have their own agenda." The evaluations were performed by Bruce Eddy, executive director of Resource Development Institute, and Pat Stiler, director of Mid-America Addiction Technology Transfer Center. They were hired by Vicki Boyd, deputy administrator of the county's anti-drug program. Callahan said he considered Addiction Recovery well-qualified to do the work, noting that it has a similar drug-treatment contract in Clay County. That program deals with a much smaller caseload, about 25 clients. Clay County officials could not be reached for comment. The lawsuits filed Monday came after the owner of County Court Services, Judy Chase, wrote to Legislator Bob Spence on Nov. 4 about her concerns over the way the contract was awarded. Five weeks later, Schweich, County Court Services' lawyer, sent a letter to Spence, Tarwater and Callahan demanding that the contract with Addiction Recovery be rescinded. Shortly after that, Spence introduced a resolution to re-award the contract to County Court Services. The resolution wasn't seconded and died. Spence on Monday said he introduced the new resolution "because I was asleep at the switch when we awarded the contract." "It wasn't our finest hour, when there's a process set up to grade vendors and then it's totally ignored," he said. Spence said that Tarwater and Callahan later "relieved my mind to some extent by pointing out that the current provider got the contract in 1995 under similar circumstances....They also said the grading process was flawed." The lawsuits allege that after Dec. 12, unidentified "influential proxies" for Tarwater, Callahan and the Legislature promised County Court Services "undetermined future government work" if the firm would forgo "exposing the improprieties" charged in the lawsuits. County Court Services said it rejected the overtures. Chase declined to comment last week and referred inquiries to Schweich. Callahan on Monday rejected the allegations about proxies acting on his behalf, saying he didn't know "what the lawsuits are talking about." - --- MAP posted-by: Tom