Feds downgrade troubled Housing Authority

|
(9)
SFHA Director Henry Alvaerez: More trouble

The federal government has declared the San Francisco Housing Authority a “troubled” agency and dispatched agents to review the agency’s finances and management failures.

The team of experts from the Department of Housing and Urban Development arrived Jan. 7 and has begun poring over the SFHA’s books.

The federal decision came in an October 31 letter to the city’s Housing Authority Board, with a copy to Mayor Ed Lee.

“The Board of Commissioners of the San Francisco Housing Authority should take immediate action to identify the sources of the performance deficiencies and develop and implement a plan to recover” at an “acceptable level of performance,” wrote HUD in its letter.

The troubled ranking is further bad news for Executive Director Henry Alvarez, who was hired in 2008 to help steady the agency's management. He has since faced allegations of mistreatment and discrimination by some of his top staff, including the agency's lawyer. He is the target of three lawsuits by his staff.

In addition to the “troubled” status for public housing, SFHA already faced stepped up monitoring if its Section 8 program that provides rental assistance for program participants in privately owned units. The agency scored zero points in its section 8 program because it failed to submit its report.

San Francisco's “troubled” status was due to low scores for management of the agency and its finances. On financials, SFHA scored five points out of a possible 30, and on management it scored 12 points out of a possible 25. On physical conditions, SFHA squeaked above the cut-off with 27 out of 40 points. The agency’s total score was 54 out of a possible 100.

The score was a drop from score of 75 the prior year. The SFHA explains the change as new scoring criteria by HUD. The looming issue is the lack of effective management at the agency’s top level.

The arrival of a HUD team this week for a week-long examination of the Housing Authority will produce a plan for the agency to correct its management and financial practices with a set of deadlines and specific actions. Failure to implement the plan can bring new consequences with even tighter oversight.

“HUD is at SFHA offices starting today,” said Bill Ford, SFHA attorney speaking for the agency on Monday. “They are reviewing the situation related to the Troubled status. That’s why they are here. They will help develop a plan to pull the agency out of Troubled status.”

The agency had managed to stay off the troubled list -- a designation for those scoring under 60 out of 100 points--for the previous two years. A troubled status can make San Francisco ineligible to compete for special funding beyond what it receives by formula.

HUD scoring lags by several months after the agency's year-end as local officials and federal officials go through appeals and responses before settling on a final outcome. The current troubled status is for the SFHA year that ended September 30, 2011.

SFHA scores for the year ending September 30, 2012 are tentatively estimated also to be in the troubled category or possibly a point or two higher to earn it a “substandard” ranking. Those results are expected shortly to be followed by additional appeals and reviews.

Some one out of 10 San Francisco households receive some form of federal housing aid, not including those who benefit from lower mortgage interest rates under FHA and other federal homeownership mortgage programs.

SFHA earned high marks in the credit market for its HOPESF program that aims to replace decrepit public housing and expand the number if units. That process involves to outside managers to develop and operate and does not rely on SFHA management.

Comments

Jason Grant Garza here ... wow SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE ... now if only the FEDS would look into the DEPARTMENT of PUBLIC HEALTH, SF Police and Sheriff's Office over http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cP3jCmJFRo or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFd-KtS8Zss or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYFPtQ0F_jU or maybe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaMW9xGq-LU

It is NOT that I have NOT gone to them ... shall we see what the FEDS and FBI do since I have filed complaints ... stay tuned or go to youtube.

Rigged is as Rigged DOES ...

Oh and WAIT till I show you my DAVID CHIU paperwork regarding "CIVIL GIDEON" and their FAILED referral to SF BAR Association who could NOT help me with a LAWYER after sending them copies of the videos ... it is a LOVELY ILLUSION as long as they RETIRE and live the GOOD life ... Keep drinking the KOOL-AID.

Oh and speaking of accreditation (CCSF) , Fed intervention (Prisons) and this ... please refer to case # 11099 in SUNSHINE where DPH does NOT know who accredits its patient/medical side and the MINISTRY let pass since as the MINISTRY states ... they CAN NOT make DPH produce something it does NOT have ... ha,ha,ha.

Rigged is as RIGGED DOES ...

Oh and by the way ... I did SUNSHINE DPH who replied to SUNSHINE that they DO NOT have a RESTRAINING ORDER as again lied to by DPH on 12/19/2012 ... see the YOUTUBE videos to see HOW the GAME is played and what are the CONSEQUENCE for the PLAYERS and what the INNOCENT VICTIM gets. Think BOY SCOUTS, MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS, COURT, LAW ENFORCEMENT and naturally forget the VICTIMS ... it does NOT suit their PURPOSE.

Posted by Jason Grant Garza on Jan. 09, 2013 @ 7:26 am

Or the State. Even more so in Oakland, where the State ran the school district for many years and it looks like the Feds will be running OPD.

Posted by Guest on Jan. 09, 2013 @ 9:33 am

Thats discrimination, just because a Negro is running it!

Posted by Guest on Jan. 09, 2013 @ 1:17 pm

Seriously - this is an agency in perpetual crisis.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jan. 09, 2013 @ 2:35 pm

i believe sfha need total change from executive director and hire new director for sec 8 and public housing, and for supervisors, need evaluation and change of current software.

Posted by henry on Jan. 09, 2013 @ 8:20 pm

All I know is that this Alvaerez dude looks like someone I wouldn't want to come across in a dark alley.

Posted by Greg on Jan. 11, 2013 @ 8:32 am

The Feds should look at this so called modernization of utility usage. My mother lives at the Pine St. development and has had little or no heat since August and all that the housing people have done is say that the contractors are working on it.

While the contractors are working on it these senior citizens are going through the coldest period of the year without heat!!!!!

Posted by Guest on Jan. 14, 2013 @ 1:46 am

The Chron reports today that Lee won't fire him yet. Why? Because he will be a 5-year city employee as of June, entitiling him and his wife tot free health insurance for life on the taxpayer's dime.

Good bless our "city family."

Posted by Guest on Jan. 22, 2013 @ 6:20 pm

...Alvarez is just what is reported.

More tax increases says SFBG- so they can steal some more...!

Posted by Guest on Jan. 22, 2013 @ 9:56 pm

Related articles

  • How SF politics (and journalism) really works

  • Should city employees be commissioners?

  • Editor's notes

    Think of it as a managerial tool: the guy who runs public housing should live in it

  • Also from this author

  • Stealing an election -- and more

    Ed Lee's pledges to "restore the trust" just don't hold water