A semi-win: Stepping Forward Produced IG Investigation of Corruption of A.H.

[Sharing Lights]

http://www.ig.state.ny.us/pdfs/An%20...%20Program.pdf

AH - Affordable Housing

This is some of what I have been fighting against and threatened with arrest and retaliation by the corrupt management which, even,

Some eqaullity!...

The corrupt management proceed on a level of organized crime and I am well aware that I am targeted by it
even though my name was disclosed openly in reports to the Authorities and it is in the open to some degree.

Overall, over a million of dollars is at stake and these thugs would do anything to keep their operation going.

but any time, there is some activity not authorized by the management, the thugs think it is me even if I am unaware of the development.

Both sides made their choices.

Who would outlast whom?

I follow law and proceed by rules; they do not!

Yet, I am going all the way as that's the only way I know how and makes sense to me; otherwise,

Either - Or is the venue now.

[Sharing Lights]

IG Report:

p 21

a. Improper Approval of Applications

Although prospective Mitchell-Lama tenants submit applications directly to housing companies,
for most companies, DHCR is responsible for reviewing those applications prior to
the award of the tenant’s occupancy.
(As discussed below, certain housing companies with short waiting lists may be exempt from
DHCR review of applications.)

Unfortunately, DHCR functioned poorly in this area. DHCR failed to implement its
own regulations and procedures, thereby allowing
unauthorized tenants to occupy and remain in Mitchell-Lama apartments.

SL: Let's call it AS IT IS:
managements insert people who pay their extortion fees in exchange for fixing the Waiting Lists.

An that is how I referred to the act - not by euphemism.

[Sharing Lights]

P 22

Twelve exempt housing companies, or 14 percent, were not in compliance with the reporting requirement for two years or more.

Thirty-four of the exempt housing companies maintained waiting lists with a duration of more than a year, a violation of regulations.

.......................

[Sharing Lights]

p 23

Further, because the audit relied solely on a tenant list provided by Bayridge’s housing company that was inaccurate, DHCR failed to detect many of the unauthorized residents in the building. The tenant list the housing company provided to DHCR listed 21 residents who no longer lived in the complex, including four who were deceased.

DHCR likely would have noticed that the tenant list was inaccurate if it had also examined other available records, such as the yearly income affidavits of individual tenants that are submitted to DHCR.

SL: The managements insert outsiders under false claims of them being relatives of the deceased or moved to nursing homes senior citizens, fixing record.
IG chooses very kind words, too kind...

..................

[Sharing Lights]

p 23-24

SL: DHCR reps are, routinely, receiving bribes for filing false reports covering up crimes of the AH managements.

Reality is brief, yet, IG ventures into lengthy wordings...

c. Evaluation of Managing Agents

In addition to conducting mandatory field visits at the complexes, representatives are required to evaluate and report on the performance of the housing companies’ managing agents every two years. DHCR officials stated that reporting problems and non-compliance with DHCR rules and regulations in their managing agent evaluations was one of the primary methods they had to ensure compliance with DHCR regulations. However, as with field visits, these evaluations were not always completed, and when they were, they often failed to provide a meaningful assessment of the managing agent.

For example, of the 12 exempt12 complexes that, for more than two years, had not submitted their Quarterly Activity Reports as required by DHCR’s Application Review Procedures, representatives at seven produced no managing agent evaluations. For the remaining five, representatives failed to report the lack of Quarterly Activity Reports in their evaluations, and two incorrectly stated that the housing company was in compliance with this requirement.

Many problems were not identified because DHCR had not provided representatives with adequate written guidance or formal training regarding the procedures they should have
12 As discussed above, certain “exempt” housing companies do not have to submit tenant applications to DHCR for approval, but must file Quarterly Activity Reports detailing rental activity.

23 followed to evaluate housing companies’ operations or the criteria they should have used to determine if a problem exists. If a problem was found, there was no corrective plan of action required and no monitoring system was in place, other than field reports, to determine if managing agents were rectifying the problems.

When asked for an explanation about why some representatives seemed to only provide limited information about problems they found,

The director added she was “happy to the extent they report on [problems]” at all, evincing the absence of standards and lack of supervision of field representatives.

....................

[Sharing Lights]

p 24

3. Sporadic Receipt and Review of Financial Reports

Housing companies are required to prepare certain financial reports so that DHCR may ensure compliance with regulations. Housing companies have benefited from substantial state subsidies and therefore have a responsibility to operate their facilities responsibly and economically. The various reports required under regulations are designed to allow DHCR to detect potential financial mismanagement or abuses of authority. The section below discusses DHCR’s failure to track or review documents essential to its identification of accounting irregularities, poor financial planning, and conflicts of interest.

.................

[Sharing Lights]

24-25

In 2004, DHCR never reviewed 16 of the 30 financial statements that were submitted, and only two financial
statements were reviewed within 60 days of their receipt.

In 2005, DHCR reviewed only 13 of the 30 submitted financial statements within 60 days; reviewed eight between 76 and 404 days after submission; and never reviewed one statement. Of the remaining eight financial statements, DHCR staff did not indicate a review date.

.....................

[Sharing Lights]

p 27


c. Identity of Interest Filings

SL: Enormous kickbacks are made here!

Because of their responsibilities to manage housing developments, board members and housing company or managing agent employees are in a position to award large contracts.
To prevent waste or abuse, housing companies are required to follow procurement rules when awarding these contracts.

These rules include a requirement to make every reasonable effort to avoid entering into contracts or other transactions for materials or services that may involve a potential conflict of interest.

15 The conflict of interest rules prohibit those who make or who can influence procurement decisions from being in a position to profit financially or gain other advantages from those decisions.

Where conflicts of interest exist, regulations require that they be disclosed to DHCR.

.............

[Sharing Lights]

p 28

4. No Tracking or Response to Complaints
Although a functioning complaint process is an essential component of effective oversight, DHCR handled complaints in a manner that was uncoordinated, undocumented, and nearly useless.

....................

[Sharing Lights]

SL: THE GOVERNMENT AT ITS BEST...

When the People claim that larger Government creates larger problems,
they are looked upon as trouble makers.

Yet, who is the real troublemaker?

The bureaucrats and bribe hunters!

Proof:

DHCR administrators stated that complaints are the primary basis for selecting housing companies for audit, but the agency had no written complaint policy and maintains no record of complaints.

Officials in DHCR’s Office of Housing said that they did not see any reason for logging complaints because they received so many that they did not have the time to log or respond to all of them.

When asked how complaints can be tracked without logs, officials said that they keep copies of all “important” complaints in a file and later follow up on them with the field units. They acknowledged, however, that they
28
had no definition of “important” complaints, and could not produce a single copy of a complaint deemed important.

.......................