http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2865/?utm_source=publicintegrity&utm_medium=social_media&utm_campaign=twitter
Even by Washington standards, $26 billion is a lot of money.
That’s the amount spent by taxpayers annually to provide housing for needy Americans. But there’s significant evidence that some of the monies have been poorly spent for years.
A joint investigation by ABC News and the Center for Public Integrity found that the Department of Housing and Urban Development has struggled to combat theft, corruption, and mismanagement in the more than 3,000 public housing agencies nationwide it funds, and particularly inside the 172 that HUD considers the most troubled.
The problems are widespread, from an executive in New Orleans convicted of embezzling more than $900,000 in housing money around the time he bought a lavish Florida mansion to federal funds wrongly being spent to provide housing for sex offenders or to pay vouchers to residents long since dead.
Despite red flags from its own internal watchdog, HUD has continued to plow fresh federal dollars into these troubled agencies, including $218 million in stimulus funds since 2009, the joint investigation found.
One of the public housing authorities Henriquez cited for superior performance: Philadelphia. It has long been praised by HUD as a model agency, supposedly far removed from the “troubled” class of housing agencies.
But investigations last summer uncovered allegations that the then-Philadelphia Housing Authority’s executive director had spent lavishly on parties that included belly dancers, and had used more than $500,00 in housing authority funds to secretly settle claims accusing him of inappropriate sexual advances with female employees.
[less]
Response by MidtownerEast
about 15 years ago
Posts: 733
Member since: Oct 2010
I hereby sentence you to six months of living in a studio apartment with Glen Beck in Co-Op City.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alanhart
about 15 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
I agree with the basic premise that housing agencies are inept, corrupt, and perpetually out of control ... and I suspect that NYCHA is the worst one out there. It also appears to be the only NY City agency/department that has completely escaped official identification and reform of its worst practices.
Perhaps it's because NY's severe housing shortage has made our projects very successful by some key measures -- low turnover and long waitlists.
Perhaps it's because, collectively, we don't care about the primary victims of ineptitude and corruption: the tenants. I visited one a few years ago. She paid the same in rent for her small 2/1 in a 40-year old building as I did in common charges for my brand-new condo (one that included probably-ample allocation for future capital projects, and for all utilities/hot water except electricity). The building, especially the lobby and other common areas, were disgusting -- not in terms of vandalism or graffiti, of which there was little, but in terms of poor maintenance, and patch-up repairs made in a highly unworkmanly manner -- totally mismatched replacement wall tiles in lobby, etc. And the elevators were most often broken, perenially.
They really should get the F.B. of I. and lots of forensic accountants to pay a call on all levels of NYCHA management, staff, contractors and vendors.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by MidtownerEast
about 15 years ago
Posts: 733
Member since: Oct 2010
Agreed! Also, when Alan writes "the F.B. of I.," it really helps if you imagine Tommy Lee Jones saying it.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alanhart
about 15 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
Forgot to mention: my condo was a 2/2, about 50-75% larger than the NYCHA apartment.
I hereby sentence you to six months of living in a studio apartment with Glen Beck in Co-Op City.
I agree with the basic premise that housing agencies are inept, corrupt, and perpetually out of control ... and I suspect that NYCHA is the worst one out there. It also appears to be the only NY City agency/department that has completely escaped official identification and reform of its worst practices.
Perhaps it's because NY's severe housing shortage has made our projects very successful by some key measures -- low turnover and long waitlists.
Perhaps it's because, collectively, we don't care about the primary victims of ineptitude and corruption: the tenants. I visited one a few years ago. She paid the same in rent for her small 2/1 in a 40-year old building as I did in common charges for my brand-new condo (one that included probably-ample allocation for future capital projects, and for all utilities/hot water except electricity). The building, especially the lobby and other common areas, were disgusting -- not in terms of vandalism or graffiti, of which there was little, but in terms of poor maintenance, and patch-up repairs made in a highly unworkmanly manner -- totally mismatched replacement wall tiles in lobby, etc. And the elevators were most often broken, perenially.
They really should get the F.B. of I. and lots of forensic accountants to pay a call on all levels of NYCHA management, staff, contractors and vendors.
Agreed! Also, when Alan writes "the F.B. of I.," it really helps if you imagine Tommy Lee Jones saying it.
Forgot to mention: my condo was a 2/2, about 50-75% larger than the NYCHA apartment.