| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
HUD Detroit is deliberately attempting to keep information on HUD programs in Flint a secret. At least 2 individuals filing recent Freedom of Information requests were told they had to pay about $1200 each for information. Now they ignore requests until their 20 days are up and then say more information is needed.
Let us look at one request. The first time a request was made for the monitoring reports for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program #'s 1, 2, and 3, there was no insistance on a date being given. The only demand was for $1,197.00. A request for the monitoring reports for NSP2 and NSP3 was ignored and then denied citing the need for dates.
The NSP programs are relatively new nd to the best of my knowledge there has only been one monitoring report for each. To require a date would require "insider" information. Carol Harper-Berry of HUD is adept at games playing. Perhaps we should ask Obama if this is what he meant when he published his Memo on increasing accountability in the Freedom of Information Act.
Freedom of Information Act
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
SUBJECT: Freedom of Information Act
A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency. As Justice Louis Brandeis wrote, "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." In our democracy, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which encourages accountability through transparency, is the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open Government. At the heart of that commitment is the idea that accountability is in the interest of the Government and the citizenry alike.
The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears. Nondisclosure should never be based on an effort to protect the personal interests of Government officials at the expense of those they are supposed to serve. In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies (agencies) should act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are servants of the public.
All agencies should adopt a presumption in favor of disclosure, in order to renew their commitment to the principles embodied in FOIA, and to usher in a new era of open Government. The presumption of disclosure should be applied to all decisions involving FOIA.
The presumption of disclosure also means that agencies should take affirmative steps to make information public. They should not wait for specific requests from the public. All agencies should use modern technology to inform citizens about what is known and done by their Government. Disclosure should be timely.
I direct the Attorney General to issue new guidelines governing the FOIA to the heads of executive departments and agencies, reaffirming the commitment to accountability and transparency, and to publish such guidelines in the Federal Register. In doing so, the Attorney General should review FOIA reports produced by the agencies under Executive Order 13392 of December 14, 2005. I also direct the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to update guidance to the agencies to increase and improve information dissemination to the public, including through the use of new technologies, and to publish such guidance in theFederal Register.
This memorandum does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
The Director of the Office of Management and Budget is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in theFederal Register.
BARACK OBAMA
Last edited by untanglingwebs on Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:00 pm |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
| I've heard from a couple sources that HUD's priority is passing out the money. What happens to it isn't a priority. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Fri Oct 14, 2011 5:23 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
HUD has been severely criticized on more than one occassion for their failure to safeguard the money they give out. They are just now cracking down on Flint for over 17 years of failure to answer monitoring reports. They closed out the Homeownership zone after nearly 14 years, only to keep the penalty in the Smith village project.
You must remember that Walling is a "Blue Tiger" Dem who worked in Washington DC, has ties to the Kildee family and worked on the Obama campaign. Walling claims he has a transparent administration, but he keeps the council and the public in the dark. Democratic pressure and pressure from the Walling administration may be influencing the decision making HUD officials.
Whatever the reason is, I fully intend to fight back, even if it means talking to leading Republicans.. |
|
|
|
Fri Oct 14, 2011 6:06 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
CATO Foundation
Five Decades of Failure Are Enough
by Tad DeHaven
This article appeared in the Washington Times on February 9, 2010.
With trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, policymakers need to scour the federal budget for departments to cut and eliminate. They should start with ones that are not just wasteful, but actively damaging to the economy. Top of the list would be the $60 billion Department of Housing and Urban Development.
HUD's negative impact on the economy is far larger than its multibillion-dollar budget.
HUD's policies played a key role in causing the housing boom and bust and then the recession in its wake. Weak lending standards on HUD-insured mortgage loans helped fuel risky non-prime lending. HUD also put pressure on banks and the failed housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make risky loans to underqualified borrowers. Thanks to those policies, Fannie and Freddie went bankrupt and already have received $112 billion in taxpayer bailouts.
HUD's negative impact on the economy is far larger than its multibillion-dollar budget.
Steady increases in home-buying subsidies in recent decades were motivated by political attempts to curry favor with special interests such as the Realtor and homebuilder lobbies. Politicians justify the subsidies on their claimed civic virtues. But, as we've seen in the wake of the housing bubble's bursting, there's nothing virtuous about putting people into homes they can't afford.
Since the financial crash, the politics of housing subsidies seem to have become even worse. The housing lobby groups continue pushing to expand federal intervention in housing markets, and politicians keep increasing subsides through the Federal Housing Administration and the Government National Mortgage Association, which insure and guarantee more than $700 billion in mortgages and mortgage-backed securities.
HUD's FHA has expanded so much that it is facing the possibility of an expensive taxpayer bailout because of rising defaults on mortgages it insures. As for Ginnie Mae, its portfolio has exploded, and there are growing concerns it could be the next Fannie or Freddie.
Like housing finance, HUD's other activities also are politically driven but economically unsound. The department spends about $10 billion a year on community development programs consisting primarily of grants to states and local governments for economic development and housing development and assistance. Community development funds originally were targeted to large cities in decline, but today, this congressional cookie jar confers largesse on communities rich and poor, large and small. In addition to complexity and bureaucracy, these programs are highly susceptible to financial abuses. Community development should be left to the private sector or local governments, where residents can better weigh the benefits of local projects with the tax costs.
HUD spends more than $30 billion a year on housing assistance, which includes money for public housing authorities and rental subsidies for tenants. Dilapidated and crime-infested public housing is a vivid reminder of the government's failure when it comes to solving social ills. In recent decades, policymakers have moved away from public housing in favor of housing vouchers. However, instead of bringing an end to "concentrated poverty," that has merely spread it around. Policymakers justify these programs on a lack of affordable housing, but state and local governments themselves make housing more expensive with zoning rules and housing regulations.
Tad DeHaven is a budget analyst at the Cato Institute and co-editor of Downsizing the Federal Government.
More by Tad DeHaven
HUD's current failures are not unique. It has a long history of failure and scandal. In the 1980s, HUD Secretary Samuel Pierce's eight-year tenure was so scandal-prone that it led to 17 criminal convictions, including convictions of three former HUD assistant secretaries. In the 1990s, President Clinton's HUD secretaries, Henry G. Cisneros and Andrew Cuomo, helped lay the foundation for the housing bubble with their political strategy of increasing the homeownership rate. And most recently, George W. Bush HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson oversaw the inflation of the housing bubble and then the bust while using his office to reward friends and political allies.
Far from solving America's housing and urban problems, HUD has made them worse.
HUD should be abolished. State and local governments should be left to decide what housing and community development programs they want to fund. Even better, housing should be left to private markets, which produced massive amounts of housing for people at all income levels for many decades before government encroachment.
Also of interest
Financial Fiasco: How America's Infatuation with Home Ownership and Easy Money Created the Economic Crisis
An easily accessible work on the economic crisis, the book guides readers through a world of irresponsible behavior, showing how many of the "solutions" being implemented are repeating the mistakes that caused the crisis.
Studies
Three Decades of Politics and Failed Policies at HUD |
|
|
|
Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:56 am |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
