The failures of the D.C. Housing Authority have been on full display for some months now (or years, depending on who you’re talking to), and the D.C. Council hearing that “can’t come soon enough” finally happened. The day after DCHA finalized its responses to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s damning audit that included 82 findings of deficiencies, DCHA Director Brenda Donald and members of her leadership team fielded about three hours of questions from councilmembers.
HUD’s report, issued in October, found failures in just about every part of DCHA’s business, from managing and maintaining the city’s public housing stock, to running the voucher program and managing its finances. DCHA fully or partially disagreed with 44 of HUD’s findings, observations, and recommendations, according to its responses. Here are some takeaways from Wednesday’s hearing:
Multiple councilmembers are skeptical of the pro bono consultant on loan from John Falcicchio
A major part of DCHA’s plan is to use the support of consultants who are already under contract to the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, John Falcicchio. Falcicchio is also Mayor Muriel Bowser’s chief of staff and sits on the DCHA board of commissioners as an ex-officio member. His office will pay for consultants from CSG Advisors and loan them to DCHA for support in implementing reforms. CSG will lead a team of additional consulting firms, Donald said.
Multiple councilmembers expressed concern and confusion about the unusual deal. Asked why the housing authority didn’t just procure a consulting firm on their own, Donald said the short time frame in which the agency must address the issues HUD identified doesn’t allow for a full procurement process.
She said she is not concerned that the consultants will be more accountable to DMPED, who is paying the bills, than to her and that they will report directly to her.
“They’ve been working with us side by side in developing this report, understanding operations, and bringing in best practices in areas where we’re struggling, like for example with leasing up and pulling from the wait list,” Donald said.
She likened the arrangement to another agreement that DCHA will establish with contractors already working for the Department of General Services. To help with maintenance and repairs, the housing authority intends to use firms who already have contracts with DGS.
“If we did all of this on our own without additional resources, our people would be waiting much much longer, and nobody wants that,” Donald said.
She could not say how much in taxpayer funds the work would cost DMPED. Falcicchio referred City Paper’s question about the cost to the mayor’s spokesperson, who said in an emailed statement that “the DC Government is contracting with CSG Advisors to support its response and compliance with the HUD report. The final contract will be sent to Council for approval.” By law, the Council is required to approve contracts over $1 million.
Receivership is a real possibility
At-Large Councilmember Robert White said during the hearing that DCHA’s plan “does not inspire great confidence that things will be different.” He also suggested that federal receivership “is a possibility on the horizon.”
“Aside for being an embarrassment to the city, [it] generally does not end well for residents,” he said. Were it to establish a receivership, HUD would fire the director and the board and essentially take control of the entire agency.
DCHA to HUD: No Refunds
HUD identified several contracting issues that involve federal funds and instructed the housing authority to repay those funds to the federal government (DCHA operates with funding from the federal and local government).
Ward 2 Councilmember Brooke Pinto asked for the total repayment amount that HUD is requiring. Donald said that she has not calculated a specific figure because DCHA believes HUD is incorrect in saying the procurements violated internal policies and HUD requirements. If HUD disagrees with DCHA’s explanations, Donald said the two agencies will have to negotiate over a specific figure. “We really don’t know the magnitude of that exposure,” she said.
HUD issued at least five findings requiring DCHA to repay federal funds.
Donald claimed that, actually, she was retaliated against
DCHA’s internal auditor, Petuna Cooper, issued a report earlier this month accusing Donald of breaking contracting and procurement rules by approving two emergency, sole source contracts. Donald has denied wrongdoing and described the findings as incomplete and inaccurate. She then excluded Cooper from her executive team meetings, which Cooper has said amounts to retaliation.
Donald previously told the Washington Post that the board of commissioners changed Cooper’s reporting structure so that she reports directly to the board, not Donald. But there is no record of such a change taking place.
Asked Wednesday about the situation, Donald insisted that Cooper still has access to everything she needs to do her job.
“You can imagine the appearance of [after] the auditor report comes out and then a change in behavior in what meetings she is or is not invited to can appear as retaliation,” Pinto said.
Donald repeated her position that after she disputed Cooper’s findings, “that resulted in a change [in reporting structure]. So I think you can look at it as perhaps retaliation on the other side.”
DCHA’s internal auditor was conspicuously absent
Speaking of the internal auditor, she was not on the panel of housing authority leaders answering questions alongside Donald. At a hearing where city leaders are seeking answers about urgent issues facing a critical agency, should they hear from the person whose job is to identify those issues and how to fix them?
Vince Gray had just one question
Ward 7 Councilmember Vince Gray came to the hearing with only one question: Why does Brenda Donald want this job?
It’s a relevant question. DCHA has been a mess for years, and whomever took over after Tyrone Garrett’s departure would face an uphill battle to say the least. But perhaps Gray should have read the room. This hearing was an opportunity for councilmembers to conduct oversight of an agency that provides housing for D.C.’s lowest income residents, not to mention the $150 million the Council has appropriated to DCHA in the past three years.
But before the loquacious lawmaker paused to let Donald respond to his softball question, he lavished her with praise. “I think the world of you, and I always will,” Gray said. “You are such a great professional in so many ways that I want to see you succeed, and I will do whatever I can to help you be as successful as I possibly can.”
Not one to pass up an opportunity like that, Donald said she wants to help make big systems work for the people who count on the government.
“We know what we inherited,” Donald said. “And we know that it’s up to us to fix it. … At this point in time, nobody wants to come here. They see the challenges and the external pressures and quite frankly some of the internal pressures as being insurmountable. I don’t.”
Donald also acknowledged that she has until March to deliver on HUD’s recommendations, and if she can’t, “other decisions will have to be made.”
After the hearing, At-Large Councilmember Elissa Silverman was still left with questions, particularly around the consultants Donald will bring in. One of the major problems, she says, is DMPED, through Bowser and Falcicchio, has more control over DCHA than it should.
“DMPED’s agenda is not about providing housing for the lowest income families. Their agenda is about expanding the tax base and providing market rate housing,” she says.
Donald is in the director’s chair, but Silverman ultimately lays the blame at Bowser’s feet.
“They’ve been in power for eight years. She’s appointed the majority of the board, and it’s only gotten worse,” says Silverman, who intends to introduce a bill that will, in part, “refocus the housing authority on extremely low income households and remove its ability to serve moderate income residents.” But time is running out to see it through—the Council session ends at the end of the year, when any leftover bills will die, and Silverman lost her re-election bid in November.
“When will we get serious?” she asks. “I guess when HUD takes over.”