10/31/2022 0 Comments Feedy vs feedy tvStill, he said throughout the hearing that, by his reading of federal regulations, the department’s decision to stop payments was premature and that it must give Feeding Our Future time to submit documentation that would demonstrate compliance. Guthmann acknowledged that the lawsuit concerned the timely approval of site applications and that he had no jurisdiction over payments. MDE told the judge it was prohibited from paying on invalid claims and had put conditions in place for the nonprofit to come back into compliance. The kids are going without food,” Feeding Our Future attorney Rhyddid Watkins said. ‘GOING BANKRUPT’Īccording to a transcript of the hearing, the department at the time was holding up $20.5 million in reimbursement requests from Feeding Our Future. That letter informed the nonprofit that the department would stop reimbursements until it could validate the claims.įeeding Our Future complained to the judge that the department had broken its promise, and Guthmann called an April 21, 2021, hearing. On March 31, 2021, the department issued a second deficiency notice related to the audit and other concerns, including reports that suggested the nonprofit’s clients weren’t actually serving the meals for which they were getting paid. RELATED: JENSEN WANTS WALZ INVESTIGATED AS FEEDING OUR FUTURE FRAUD CASE GOES POLITICAL Guthmann never had to rule on that request because the two parties reached an agreement in which the department promised to approve or reject the applications “in a reasonably prompt manner” and to provide any technical assistance necessary to get them approved.īut in January 2021, the department informed Feeding Our Future that it was “seriously deficient” as a food program sponsor because it lacked tax-exempt status - that turned out to have been a mistake - and because it did not properly file a financial audit. The nonprofit wanted Guthmann to grant an emergency temporary restraining order requiring speedy decisions on the applications. Department of Agriculture about an implausibly large increase in reimbursement claims, Feeding Our Future sued the department for taking too long to approve 51 applications for new sites to feed children during the coronavirus pandemic. Six months before that hearing, while the education department was consulting with the U.S. Guthmann said through a spokesman Monday that the department’s interpretation was inaccurate, emphasizing that he had no jurisdiction over payments. “Feeding Our Future demanded that MDE make payments, and the court made it clear that if MDE were to continue the legal fight to withhold payments, MDE would incur sanctions and legal penalties,” the education department said Friday. However, a nearly three-hour hearing in April 2021 seems to have left state officials with the impression that they had no choice but to keep paying. Guthmann says he “ never issued” such an order and that the department “voluntarily resumed payments.”Ī review of the court record shows Guthmann is correct that he did not order the department to pay Feeding Our Future.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |