Republican Congressional Candidate “Burnin ‘ Vernon” Parker Terminated by SBA due to falsifying information and lack of business integrity?by Dee Dee Garcia Blase on Apr. 11, 2012, under 2012 Presidential elections, female-led political movement, National tequila party movement
There is a lot of smoke and mirrors going on in Congressional District 9 — namely with Vernon Parker in an attempt to run for another office.
Since there seems to be confusion, allow me to cut and paste directly from the SBA website with regard to their findings and the conclusion of terminating Vernon Parker from doing business with them in the future.
Why is this important?
Because he wants us to trust him with our Arizona TAX DOLLARS!
How can he be an appropriate public servant and elected official if the SBA doesn’t really trust him?
From the SBA report:
Petitioner was established on February 6, 2006, by its owner and president, Vernon B. Parker. Administrative Record (AR), Ex. 24 at 379 and 386. On February 17, 2006, Petitioner applied for the 8(a) program. AR, Ex. 24. On June 8, 2006, Petitioner was certified as a participant in the 8(a) program. AR, Ex. 13.
On July 3, 2008, SBA notified Petitioner of its intent to terminate Petitioner from the 8(a) program. AR, Ex. 8. Among the grounds for the proposed termination were:
- Submission of false information in the concern’s 8(a) program application, regardless of whether correct information would have caused the concern to be denied admission to the program, and regardless of whether correct information was given to SBA in accompanying documents or other means. 13 C.F.R. § 134.303(a)(1);
- Conduct by the concern, or any of is principals, indicating a lack of business integrity. Such conduct may be demonstrated by information related to a criminal indictment or guilty plea, a criminal conviction, or a judgment or settlement in a civil case. 13 C.F.R. § 124.303(a)(17); AR, Ex. 8.
B. SBA’s Response
On March 18, 2009, SBA responded to the Appeal. Response. SBA asserts Petitioner has failed to overcome two of the grounds for termination: submission of false information in the concern’s 8(a) program application, 13 C.F.R. § 134.303(a)(1), and conduct indicating a lack of business integrity, 13 C.F.R. § 124.303(a)(17). Id. at 1.
For these reasons, the SBA’s conclusion that Mr. Parker falsely responded that he was not a federal employee in his 8(a) program application was rational and based on the facts in the record. I find no clear error of judgment in the SBA’s determination. Further, the SBA’s determination that it had good cause to terminate Petitioner from the 8(a) program because of that false response was reasonable and not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law.
Because I have sustained the SBA’s termination on one of the grounds alleged, it is not necessary to review the allegations of lack of business integrity. See Matter of Blind Detective Agency, SBA No. BDP-163 at 8 (2001).
Accordingly, I agree with the SBA and conclude the SBA’s decision to terminate Petitioner from the 8(a) program is supported in the record, reasonable, and not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law.
Respondent Small Business Administration’s decision to terminate Petitioner from the 8(a) program is NOT ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, OR CONTRARY TO LAW. See 15 U.S.C. § 637(a)(9)(C); 13 C.F.R. § 134.406(b).
Subject to 13 C.F.R. § 134.409(c), this is the final decision of the Small Business Administration. See 15 U.S.C. § 637(a)(9)(D); 13 C.F.R. § 134.409(a).
RICHARD S. ARKOW
Administrative Law Judge