Council raises HUD questions

Not all of Portland’s City Council members were aware of the performance failures that contributed to the loss of funding for the executive director position of Portland Housing Authority.
At Monday’s Portland City Council meeting, council members aired concerns after a proposal about pay for the mayor’s secretary was introduced. The position was previously structured as mayor’s secretary and HUD executive director, but funding for the latter was pulled last month after accusations of nepotism and repeated performance failures.
Mayor Randy Geesaman made a proposal to change the city’s payroll ordinance to cover the lost pay for the mayor’s secretary — his wife, Carol. The proposed change would set an $18.04 hourly rate for the position, but not specify a set number of hours.
It was then that council member Janet Powers read a prepared statement saying she was not aware of the performance failures HUD officials say contributed to the decision to eliminate the executive director position for the city’s housing authority.
“As of the Oct. 10 city council meeting, I was only informed HUD would no longer be serviced at the city office for the reason of nepotism. I personally did not have any knowledge of any additional issues as reported in the paper,” said Powers, referring to an Oct. 26 story in The Commercial Review. “I’ve had five people from the community question this article and was not able to validate the accuracy of the information contained. I am disappointed that I was not informed of all of the facts regarding this issue.”
Mayor Randy Geesaman said when he told council members about the accusations of nepotism at the Oct. 10 city council meeting, his intent was not to hide or misinform council members about the performance failures. He said aside from the decision to cover the lost salary, the Portland Housing Authority board of commissioners answers to the Indiana HUD field office and not to city council. 
“The question was that there were different things that (HUD officials) were saying that needed to be done. None of the people that was on the board or my wife or either one of them knew that that was something that needed to be presented to them.
“(Portland Housing Authority) asked time and time again for someone to come in and review that with them and see what we were doing wrong, and that never happened and there was always a new person coming in. 

“As far as I know, all of those things they (HUD officials) said in (emails) have been submitted, maybe they were later in the year they were submitted, but nothing was out of hand that was reported or funds went missing or reports that’s not been taken care of. They’ve all been taken care of,” Geesaman said.
But on Oct. 28, Gina Rodriguez, public affairs director for HUD’s Region V, told The Commercial Review via email that the Indianapolis HUD field office has no record of required annual “unaudited” financial statements from Portland Housing Authority. 
“HUD determined that because of the inconsistencies in reporting from the Portland Housing Authority, we could not authenticate the use of operating funds or administrative expenses correctly,” Rodriguez said.
Council member Kent McClung also said he wasn’t informed of the performance failures. 
“I want to agree with councilwoman Powers. I was told the same thing she was. I wasn’t aware of the rest of this,” McClung said. “And if the local HUD board found out in the spring, why didn’t we find out about it in the spring?
“It’s concerning to me, when I had a constituent talk to me and they would try to get questions answered (by Portland Housing Authority), it was always, ‘We’ll get back to you, we’ll get back to you,’ and thought that people might be in over their head.”
“Which I think is true on the local level,” Geesaman said. “The one time I talked to (HUD officials) on the phone, they said, ‘None of that matters, it’s the fact that we didn’t realize Mr. and Mrs. Geesaman was there. We’re taking it away from you anyways, even if you submitted all those reports and stuff.’”
But Rodriguez explained last month that HUD requirements would have allowed Portland Housing Authority board of commissioners to submit a waiver for a conflict of interest.
“Our records indicate that a waiver was not requested and approval was not granted,” Rodriguez said.
McClung went on to say that he felt the information about performance failures was pertinent to the decision to cover the half of Carol Geesaman’s pay that was previously covered by HUD.
“If they’re gonna take the money away because your wife is the secretary, and you made the decision to hire her, and we’re losing $10,000, why is it then that the taxpayers of the City of Portland should make up the difference?” McClung asked. “It’s a net loss at that point for the city. We’re losing $10,000 to pay the secretary, and then we’re being asked to make up for that $10,000 from the city coffers somewhere else. And she was being paid $10,000 to do the job for HUD, and wasn’t able to do that job. What are we paying her the money to do?
“I’m being questioned by constituents, ‘Why should we pay someone who didn’t do the original job?’ … At any other place, private business, if you don’t do your job, you’re out.”
Randy Geesaman told the council that Carol Geesaman and members of the Portland Housing Authority board sought help from HUD officials after learning of performance failures.
“All I’m gonna say is they had been to the office and told me and Carol and the board that we were doing a great job. Then, Valarie (a portfolio management specialist for HUD’s Indianapolis office) took over, and suddenly no one was doing a good job,” the mayor said.
Portland Housing Authority’s performance was assessed annually through HUD’s section eight management assessment program (SEMAP), which scores a housing authority based on 15 performance indicators. According to records acquired from HUD, Portland Housing Authority was given a “troubled” rating since 2011. It scored 14 percent in 2011 and 2012, 36 percent in 2014 and 45 percent in 2015. Anything below 60 is considered "troubled."
Council Mark Hedges, Bill Gibson, Judy Aker, Michele Brewster, Don Gillespie, McClung and Powers tabled the decision on Mrs. Geesaman’s pay, and asked that city attorney Bill Hinkle write up an amendment to specify that the job would only be part-time.