Author
|
Post |
|
|
shintz62
F L I N T O I D
|
I tried to find on the net why a city as poor as Flint would return Hud money.
Does anyone know? |
|
|
Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:32 pm |
|
|
Josh Freeman
F L I N T O I D
|
Because the Mayor wouldn't spend it. |
|
|
Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:46 pm |
|
|
Steve Myers
Site Admin
|
Johnnie Coleman, Mark Horrigan, Scott Kincaid, Ed Taylor, Carolyn Sims and Josh Freeman wouldn't let the Mayor spent it the way he wanted to.
So rather than come up with a plan B, they just let it go back to HUD and blamed the whole thing on the Mayor. |
_________________ Steve Myers |
|
Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:16 pm |
|
|
shintz62
F L I N T O I D
|
BUT, didn't the citizens go crazy with anger? Is Don Williams close to the end of his term? He doesn't sound too smart.
It's so hard to see Flint go downhill. I am 68. It was once a great little city. We even had an amusement park. |
|
|
Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:43 pm |
|
|
Josh Freeman
F L I N T O I D
|
I believe the plan was to buy $70,000 to $80,000 homes in the City of Flint for victims of Hurricane Katrina. I voted against it.
The administration, having no plan B, was unable to expend the money in a timely fashion. Having been continually warned since July 2004 that they were in danger of loosing HUD money, they decided in late 2005, to bring this crazy proposal of buying homes for homeless and jobless people.
In our form of government the Mayor has the responsibility to bring proposals forward to the Council so that they may be debated on their merits and then either voted up or down.
The City Council had, through public hearings and investigative hearings, suggested to the administration that the groups that had been awarded the money by the Emergency Financial Manager should be the groups that spend the money. If the Mayor was interested in changing the focus of the allocation then the best opportunity to do that would be during the next program year. Under this scenerio, the City of Flint would have met its timeliness deadlines and the Mayor, during the next year, would be able to fund his cronies the way he wanted to. Unfortunately, the Mayor decided that no one was going to spend the money because they were all crooks under indictment by the Federal government. And we lost the money.
Frankly, the money going back to the Fed was a better use than spending it on buying $70,000 to to $80,000 homes for jobless, homeless people. |
|
|
Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:51 pm |
|
|
shintz62
F L I N T O I D
|
Can't HUD funds be used to subsidize rent for the poor? |
|
|
Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:55 pm |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
Here are links to HUD audit reports issued in 1997 and 2005. The paragraphs below are a brief synopsis and the PDF files linked are in detail. When you visit the HUD webpage see links on the sidebar for grant requirements and the types of programs. Hope this helps answer your question.
HUD AUDIT REPORTS FOR FLINT, MICHIGAN
http://www.hud.gov/offices/oig/reports/mi.cfm
Issue Date: September 23, 2005
Audit Report No.: 2005-CH-1017 [ http://www.hud.gov/utilities/intercept.cfm?/offices/oig/reports/files/ig551017.pdf ]
File Size: 659.04KB
Title: The Commission Improperly Managed Its Section 8 Program; Flint, Michigan
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Inspector General audited the Flint Housing Commission’s (Commission) Section 8 housing program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2005 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon a risk analysis that identified it as having a high risk Section 8 housing program. Our overall objectives were to determine whether the Commission managed its Section 8 housing program effectively and followed HUD's requirements. We determined whether the Commission had adequate procedures and controls over its inspection of units, abatement of housing assistance payments, and rent reasonableness determinations.
The Commission did not effectively manage its Section 8 housing program. Our inspections noted that 52 of 56 units did not meet HUD’s housing quality standards and/or local housing code. We determined a total of $80,457 in housing assistance payments and administrative fees were improperly paid for units not meeting HUD’s standards and/or local code. The Commission also did not abate $50,506 in housing assistance payments based on units that failed inspections performed by the Commission’s inspector. In addition, the Commission did not properly complete rent reasonableness certifications and maintain adequate records of market rate units for rent reasonableness comparisons.
We recommend that the director of HUD’s Public Housing Hub, Detroit Field Office, require the Commission to reimburse its Section 8 housing program for the inappropriately used funds, and implement procedures and controls to correct the deficiencies cited in this report.
* * * * *
http://www.hud.gov/offices/oig/reports/mi.cfm
Issue Date: January 24, 1997
Audit Case Number 97-CH-241-1005 [ http://www.hud.gov/utilities/intercept.cfm?/offices/oig/reports/files/ig751005.pdf ]
File Size: 58KB
Title: Flint Hope III, Flint, MI
We concluded, with the exception of the unsupported expenditures identified by the City, Flint Neighborhood Improvement and Preservation Project, Inc. adequately supported its expenditures; however, the use of funds was not always according to HUD's requirements. Flint Neighborhood: (1) did not complete rehabilitation work timely; and (2) made ineligible sick pay disbursements of $2,669. During our audit, the City of Flint reimbursed HUD $27,049 for the unsupported expenditures identified in its review.
* * * * * |
|
|
Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:10 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
So if I'm reading this correctly. It's getting worse not better? |
|
|
Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:08 pm |
|
|
Bossman
F L I N T O I D
|
Thank God there are some watchdogs on the council. It is bad enough we have the four automatic votes for the mayor on there now. Gonzales, Buchanan, Hill, and Nelson. |
|
|
Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:55 pm |
|
|
|