The Buffalo Housing Authority’s poor financial rating is actually a step in the right direction

The Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority has been in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons over the years, but that light has been particularly intense in recent months.

Struggling with occupancy rates, the authority has been under the watchful eye of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, with the feds threatening a takeover if the agency can’t get its house in order.

In addition, a scandal broke this summer in which, as first reported by The Buffalo News, Joe Mascia – one of two elected tenant commissioners on the seven-member board – was recorded using racial epithets to describe many of the area’s African- American officials, including Mayor Byron Brown, authority Executive Director Dawn Sanders-Garrett and Assemblywoman Crystal Peoples- Stokes. Brown, with the support of the board and a variety of community and activist groups including the NAACP’s Buffalo Chapter, suspended Mascia from the board in anticipation of a hearing to determine whether he can be forcibly removed from his post.

But there is a glimmer of hope for the agency. Documents acquired by City & State through a Freedom of Information Act request to HUD show that the authority’s financial situation may be stabilizing, though a HUD spokesperson stressed that the numbers are unaudited and will need to be verified.

The document turned over by the federal agency is the housing authority’s financial data schedule, the annual submission required of all HUD-affiliated housing agencies. The numbers, when calculated through HUD’s Public Housing Assessment System, give the authority a score of 15 on financial health, the lowest score considered “standard.”

While still a troubling number, the fact that the authority is not in the “substandard” category can be considered good news, given the speculation surrounding the authority’s financial situation, with some insiders claiming that the housing authority was having trouble paying vendors. 

“It’s more encouraging than we had expected, the financial piece of it,” the HUD spokesperson said. “... The preliminary 2015 financial report does not suggest a risk of insolvency.”

However, the spokesperson also stressed that finances are only one measure HUD uses to assess housing agencies. The major concern for HUD has been the authority’s occupancy rate, which stands around 84 percent, nine points below what the agency deems acceptable.

The authority has introduced a plan that involves the renovation of 475 units and the removal of another 342 units from their portfolio in an effort to improve those numbers.

We’re continuing to work with them on their plan to address that situation,” the spokesperson said. “... Addressing their occupancy issues should further improve the agency’s financial health.”

Still, it’s curious that, with all the speculation about defaults and falling into receivership floating around, the housing authority seemingly has no desire to publicly discuss their relatively promising financial situation – or anything else for that matter. 

City & State has sent three Freedom of Information Law requests to the agency since late April seeking, among other things, financial records, waiting lists and communications between the authority and HUD, and has received only one response of any kind: an email dated May 5 acknowledging the receipt of the first request, saying it would be addressed within 20 business days.

At a housing authority board meeting last month, Sanders-Garrett discussed an agency realignment that would see workers at the main administrative offices transferred to the individual housing project offices, a move that would allow the authority to decrease their pay.

“In order to stay within the context of our budget and to service our residents more effectively, the push is to allow staff to be at the (individual project) level so that they can respond to resident concerns,” Sanders- Garrett said after the meeting.

Sanders-Garrett declined to provide details on which administrative positions would be vacated or how employees would be shuffled after the meeting. She also claimed that the financial details would not be available until 2016. The preliminary numbers turned in to HUD this summer are current through the end of June.

City & State has repeatedly called and emailed David Rodriguez, the housing authority’s general counsel and point person for information requests, asking about the status of the FOIL requests. After the meeting, Rodriguez said he would look into the status of the requests – before disappearing behind a locked door at the Perry Street administrative offices. The officials have yet to respond.

While the HUD numbers paint a better picture than the rumors that had been floating around town, they still don’t tell the whole story. The score is based on a broad view of the authority’s financial situation and doesn’t include many specifics – including answers to the question City & State has been asking since April: How much is left in the authority’s cash reserves?

It’s clear that the authority has a lot of work to do to get out from under the close scrutiny of HUD, particularly considering that the federal agency’s greater concern is the substandard occupancy rates. The question remains, will the public be allowed to see what the authority is doing as it tries to right the ship?