Clinton praises Patrick; denounces GOP politics

Serghino René

A state auditor’s report released last Thursday said that years of insufficient state subsidies under the Romney Administration have contributed to a serious decline in the quality of Bay State public housing units and led to unsafe and unsanitary conditions for many low-income residents.

State Auditor A. Joseph DeNucci’s report claims that repeated failures by the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) to request adequate funds to maintain, repair and renovate public housing have jeopardized the health and safety of thousands of tenants, including low-income individuals, families, the disabled, the elderly and veterans.

“Our inspections found that the physical condition of the state-managed housing properties have deteriorated to the point that many residents are being deprived of the required safe, decent, and sanitary housing that the law mandates,” the report said.

DeNucci’s audit included visits to 66 of the state’s 247 local housing authorities (LHAs). His report details long-term neglect of facilities, including damaged foundations and walls, deteriorating concrete, extensive mold damage, rotted roofs and window casings, busted baseboard heating units, improperly repaired gas lines and, in one Easton house, a gaping hole in the kitchen ceiling. Over 1,000 units are uninhabited pending repairs, even as 81,000 people sit on waiting lists to enter public housing.

“This is an unacceptable situation,” said DeNucci in a statement. “The Department of Housing and Community Development has to do a much better job in fulfilling its responsibility to provide decent and livable public housing to those who deserve it.”

The findings of DeNucci’s report came as no surprise to those in the field.

“Absolutely everyone knew about this,” said Thomas J. Connelly Jr., executive director of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Association of Housing & Redevelopment Officials. “This is actually the third recent report laying out the problems.”

A September 2005 study prepared by the Harvard University Graduate School of Design found that while non-utility operating costs for running modest housing in Massachusetts came to about $340 per month, current state funding only supports monthly operating costs of $202.

A July report released by the state Legislature’s Subcommittee on Public Housing concurred, estimating the total need to be at least $1.5 billion over the next decade. It called the state’s funding “drastically inadequate” and offered a damning critique of its impact: “This devaluation can be described as a hemorrhaging of resources that is not only fiscally imprudent, but also deleterious to the health and safety of public housing residents throughout the Commonwealth.”

According to Chris Norris, assistant director of Citizens’ Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA), a nonprofit organization for affordable housing and community development activities, everyone involved with public housing knew the severity of the problem, even before those reports were released.

“It’s well-known information that was made available as early as 2001, if not before,” said Norris.

In 2001, CHAPA joined the Boston and Cambridge Housing Authorities in issuing a comprehensive review of Massachusetts’ state-aided public housing inventory. That review found that “state units are generally in worse shape with a longer backlog of capital needs and repairs than the federal units,” and concluded that increased funding, along with other changes in fund allocation, was necessary to “improve the existing stock [of public housing], protect the Commonwealth’s investment, and preserve the housing well into the future.”

In February 2002, the Legislature responded, passing a compromise bill that authorized $508.5 million in housing bonds financing the production and preservation of affordable housing in Massachusetts, including $350 million for local housing authorities to make repairs and improvements to public housing units. But as Norris explained, it’s one thing to approve funds, and another to actually spend them.

“Unfortunately, those funds are being spent at a rate of approximately $50 million a year, which makes it nearly impossible to catch-up on the existing work that needs to be done,” Norris said. “The expenditure of approved bond funds is in the sole discretion of the Administration.”

Connelly had harsh words for the “discretion” exercised during Gov. Mitt Romney’s tenure in office.

“I’ve got to tell you, I’ve been in this business for almost 30 years, and this administration has done more to destroy public housing than any I’ve ever seen,” Connelly said. “I mean, we did well with Governor [William] Weld, with Paul Cellucci, with Jane Swift. But with this administration, it just seems like since day one they’ve made a conscious effort to under-fund state public housing.”

In fiscal year 2006, DHCD provided $34.8 million in subsidies to the housing authorities, actually representing a decrease from the amount that authorities received 20 years ago. Simply by using the $38 million number from 1986 and increasing it with inflation over the past two decades, the audit said, indicates that the 2006 subsidy should have been $70.2 million, nearly double the amount actually received.

“We’ve gone through a bad five years of under-funding,” Connelly said. “And it’s not the Legislature. Whenever we’ve gone to them and told them what’s going on and that we need money, they’ve responded very favorably. But the administration uses the money to pay utility bills, and not to put toward repairs and renovations.”

That choice could result in legal action. State law requires the Commonwealth to provide sufficient funding for housing authorities to fulfill the mandate of providing safe, decent and sanitary housing, and to do so in a timely manner. According to the audit, however, DHCD has failed to get the authorities the money they need, currently owing LHAs more than $7.75 million in overdue subsidies for fiscal years 2002 through 2005, with funds from fiscal 2006 and now 2007 overdue as well. While the funds were appropriated in late July, the wait has caused many LHAs to delay repairs, deplete reserve funds, cut tenant services and eliminate staff.

Messages left with DHCD went unreturned, but in a supplement to the audit, the department disputed several of the report’s claims. The organization said less than one-half of one percent of occupied state-aided units may fit the “unsafe, indecent, unsanitary” description. DHCD also shifts some responsibility to the Legislature for a lengthy delay in authorizing supplemental appropriations to pay some subsidy debts, and asserts that 2006 funding levels fell below 1986 levels largely due to rent increases and other changes that resulted in increased revenues for LHAs.

The auditor stood by the report, saying the response “basically explained [DHCD’s] perceptions of the conditions noted without taking any responsibility for them.”

“As shown in our report, the facts indicate that, contrary to state law, many state-aided public housing units are not safe, decent and sanitary,” the audit said. “Such conditions can only be corrected through immediate action, not denial.”

For that to happen, DeNucci said, DHCD and the Legislature need to make the bottom line less about politics and more about people.

“Low-income families, the elderly, disabled persons and veterans deserve an accessible, safe, decent and sanitary place in which to live,” he said.

Connelly couldn’t agree more.

“Two-thirds of state public housing is occupied by disabled persons and the elderly. To cut funding to them, I hate to say it, but it’s just mean-spirited. And you can quote me on that,” he said. “Our people are outraged. They’re leaving the industry because they see it going down the tubes, and the people we’re supposed to be helping keep getting shortchanged.”