Gov Patrick proposing eliminating Housing Authorities
By Shawn on Jan 10, 2013 in Community, DHA
The fallout of the McLaughlin scandal continues.
We hear from the Boston Globe that Gov Deval Patrick is proposing six regional housing agencies to replace the 240 separate public housing authorities across the state.
Managers and maintenance workers would remain in each of the communities, but the local boards of commissioners would be eliminated. Decisions and responsibilities would move up to the regional agencies. The residents would see little change.
The agencies would be led by 9 member boards who are appointed by the governor some of which are recommended by the local communities in the region.
Some work needs to be done to clean this up.. as it looks like we would be growing the government by 6 agencies, as well as one central one to oversee them all. These could quickly grow to another large group of employees (manager, purchasers, accountants, auditors, etc).
Growing government is the last thing I want, but history has proven to us that the housing boards of commissioners have proven to be incapable of managing their employees and unaccountable to the taxpayers.
Perhaps some sort of compromise could be made, with an elimination of the boards and yet oversight of the authorities by one agency at the state level (maybe with a regional office in the western part of the state).
This is not the old days of pony express. Communications, money transfers and information management is all instant and easily distributed.
Options exist. I don’t see the need for a new large growing burocracy, but I also agree that what we have doesn’t work to protect the taxpayer.
Loading ...
george boag | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
This is a terrible idea and a power grab. Just a few things from the Globe story.
1. Will cost $3-7 million to set up, but will eventually save money because the state is so efficient at running large bureaucracies. As Rocket J. Squirrel tell Bullwinkle “That trick never works.”
2.Tenants will apply for public housing statewide. Does that mean if a Dracut resident is next on the list and a unit opens up in Somerville they are obligated to take it or lose their spot on the list?
3.”Tenants will experience very little changes”. That can be interpreted 2 ways-
a. Public housing is generally pretty well run already and we won’t screw it up or
b. Some authorities are really screwed up and we won’t improve them very much.
4. The Chelsea Housing authority was an all appointed board. The controversy in Dracut revolved around the governors appointment tipping the balance on a divided board of elected commissioners. How about instead of abolishing local control we make all housing authority boards comprised of elected members. Well run towns, like Dracut will generally have well run housing authorities. Cities like Lawrence will have housing authorities run as kleptocracies, as the whole city is.
Shawn | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
In a town such as Dracut, why not make the housing just another department of the town?
Why have another set of elected people to have to watch. Its tough enough keeping up with the selectmen and school committees.
The regional authorities.. I’m not sure about. I usually don’t like regional agencies. One town/city always takes control and others pay the bills.
George boag | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
Chelsea’s board was made up of mayoral appointees. I believe electing a board is a better option.
Rich Cowan | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
Does the Gov. proposal address how local cities and towns will control the tax funds raised for housing under the community preservation act?
warren | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
Hey .. we need to learn from the corruption that we have seen first hand!
Get rid of Housing Authorities all together and let the town/city manager appoint the executive director.
You don’t reform government by hoping that things change, you have to break the old models
Shawn | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
He’s a big D democrat, I would assume confiscation and redistribution.
Shawn | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
I guess I would ask why housing is the responsibility of a town.
This should be a county or state issue, and run there. I just don’t want it to grow into a huge mess of more government.
Some towns are too small to be held responsible for this, it would overwhelm even the schools.
Eric J. | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
Yes! By all means let’s have Gov. Patrick clean up the local housing authorities by shifting local control over to State oversight. Then our patronage riddled but largely functional housing authorities can be operated with the same “efficiencies” the state brought to, say pharmacy supervision or drug lab operation.
And maybe Gov. Patrick can find someone to head this new agency who was a failed contractor whose buildings collapsed on their owners. You know, like the Highway Safety Director who had a 4 page record of traffic violations.
Oh yeah!! Once Gov. Patrick gets done cleaning up the local housing authorities we’re going to be begging to have McLaughlin back!
Shawn | Jan 11, 2013 | Reply
We’ll be talking about this tomorrow morn on 980 AM. Be sure to listen in.
Barbara | Jan 19, 2013 | Reply
Keep in mind that this would be only state-funded units in an Authority. It cannot include federally funded units thus dividing many Authorities that are funded by both.