Oakland Housing Authority - Concerns re Legal, Regulatory, and Policy Violations

There is currently close to 600 vacant housing units if not more in the portfolio of the Oakland Housing Authority, as of the date of this letter

Consistently excessive vacancy rate

[[[When I arrived at OHA in January 2012, I was tasked with reporting the number of vacancies in the portfolio. At that time, there were close to 400 units; however, that information was not hostilely denied. That number was more than 400 when I left my position on May 29, 2012 (due to the lack of waitlists and thus no referrals), and is currently close to 600, if not more, as of the date of this letter (with at least 10-20 more anticipated due to pending legal action). Vacancies are being reported as significantly less, however, with reports excluding units in “modernization” status. Yet, many of those units are ready for occupancy and have been for some time but the lack of a waitlist prohibits occupancy. As a result, vacancy numbers are being manipulated and inaccurately reported to the Board of Commissioners and HUD.]]]

See email below...


Oakland Housing Authority - Concerns re Legal, Regulatory, and Policy Violations

Wednesday, August 29, 2012 9:59 AM

From: "Shelby Anguiano"
Add sender to Contacts


To: andrew.q.nguyen [at] hud.gov, alison.l.smith [at] hud.gov

Cc: velma.c.navarro [at] hud.gov, tanya.e.schulze [at] hud.gov, chuck.e.hauptman [at] hud.gov, quesada [at] hud.gov, carol.j.galante [at] hud.gov, sandra.henriquez [at] hud.gov, john.trasvina [at] hud.gov, sara.k.pratt [at] hud.gov, george.d.williams [at] hud.gov, nahro [at] nahro.org, rcowan [at] oaklandnet.com, bparker [at] oaklandcityattorney.org, rhall [at] oaklandcityattorney.org, jhodgkins [at] oaklandcityattorney.org, lane [at] ebclc.org, graciej [at] ebclc.org, tenantsrule [at] yahoo.com, jbrunner [at] oaklandnet.com, pkernighan [at] oaklandnet.com, nnadel [at] oaklandnet.com, lschaaf [at] oaklandnet.com, idelafuente [at] oaklandnet.com, dbrooks [at] oaklandnet.com, lreid [at] oaklandnet.com, atlarge [at] oaklandnet.com, dan.noyes [at] abc.com, "greg hartwig" , santana400 [at] aol.com, "Moses Mayne" , "adhi nagraj" , theunit [at] nbcbayarea.com... more

Message contains attachments
4 Files (268KB) | Download All

File: Memo re Vacancy Status.docDownload File


Mr. Nguyen/Ms. Smith:

Please find attached a letter and summary report that I have compiled setting forth various areas of concern that I had while Director of Property Operations for the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA - CA003) from January 9, 2012, and until now.  Please note that I shared my concerns with the OHA Board of Commissioners are their meeting last evening as well as parts of this letter.  Should you desire, I can provide a more comprehensive report, with dates and names; however, I have chosen to keep this as brief as possible at this time for your convenience.

The letter and summary set forth matters that I personally observed and tried to resolve during my time as an OHA Director, which ended abruptly on May 29, 2012.  Prior to that date, I repeatedly tried to bring my concerns regarding the lack of new occupancy referrals, the Agency's excessive vacancy rate, extended unit turn around time, failure to process security deposit dispositions, failure to respond to and/or process Requests for Reasonable Accommodation, systems inadequacies that prohibited accurate work order, vacancy, and tenant accounts receivables reporting, as well as staff disparate treatment, to the attention of  my direct supervisor, Deputy Executive Director, Patricia Ison.  I attempted both in writing and verbally, on frequent occasions, both informally in meetings with Ms. Ison, 95% of which were cancelled with no subsequent discussion or resolution of these matters.  I also informed Ms. Ison of the lack of cooperation by two supporting department Directors (Director of Asset Management, Anna Kayadanovskaya, and Director of Capital Improvements, William Bailey) and how such was affecting the responsibilities of the Operations Department, which she readily acknowledged, even indicating her own conflicts with both individuals, but did nothing about either (although she did inform me that, due to the mentor-mentee relationship between Ms. Kayadanovskaya and Executive Director, Eric Johnson, nothing could be done about Ms. Kayadanovskaya's "incompetence" and "insubordination" (Ms. Ison's words)).

On Friday, May 18, 2012, in response to a direct and previous request from Executive Director Eric Johnson, I submitted to Ms. Ison the attached report memo setting forth truthful answers as to the status of unit vacancies (numbering more than 400 at that time, including 391 OAHPI units, and 250 of which were vacant but ready for occupancy) and my observations and recommendations as to staff response used to create that report.  I did NOT submit a copy to Mr. Johnson as I wanted to discuss the contents and my concerns and recommendations with Ms. Ison first, as requested in that report.  On about about May 22, 2012, I sent Mr. Johnson a copy of another report (attached) which responded to his questions. According to my personnel file on May 23, 2012, Ms. Ison recommended my termination for "failure to perform to the standards of the position", which termination took effect on May 29, 2012.  I believe it was because I accurately reported the vacancies, as the OHA system showed them, as I was directed to count them when I joined OHA, and as reported by staff, which was not what was desired by Mr. Johnson.  This discrepancy (in how to count vacancies) was, in my opinion, due to the previously reported discrepancies resulting from either keeping completed units in "mod" status so that they weren't counted (because they couldn't be filled) and/or lack of knowledge by the Office of Property Operations as to how many actual vacancies there were and their true status prior to my arrival.  Indeed, working in [loose] conjunction with the Capital Improvements Department (CID), it took my staff and me close 5 months to determine approximately how many actual vacancies there were due to the history of discrepancies in reporting both literally and systematically (my understanding is that the number is now an additional 90-100 due to no new vacancies being filled/legal actions).  At one point, I asked Ms. Kayadanovskaya about the discrepancy and she informed me that she "didn't feel comfortable" reporting the TRUE vacancy numbers to Ms. Ison.

I share the above with you as I am sure the Oakland Housing Authority's Office of Property Operations will not only try to cover over and excuse away these matters, but attempt to further mitigate their failures, deficiencies, violations, and incompetence by saying (1), as they did in the termination letter, that I had failed to "perform to the standards of the position; and (2) that my letter and report are nothing more than the result of a "disgruntled employee."  Please note that I would be lying to you if I said I was not greatly disappointed in the outcome thus far, including my termination; however, I am being truthful when I state that I am reporting it because someone needs to and I realize that your office and others who are included in this correspondence might not give the contents much credence coming from a lower level employee.  As a Director I not only have first-hand knowledge of these things but initially participated in some of it in a desire to keep my new job.  For example, falsely reporting when units for Lockwood, Peralta Village, and Palo Vista would be filled:  how I was directed to complete the Occupancy Action Plans was in direct contrast to what could actually occur as there was no active, viable waitlist from which to fill vacancies (and still isn't - applicants are being pulled from the Section 8 HCV waitlist to fill PBV vacancies) due to gross mismanagement and compromise of the OHA Public Housing and OAHPI waitlists under the previous Acting Director, Ms. Kayadanovskaya, and by connection, Ms. Ison.  OHA will say that there are waitlists; however, these include waitlists for unit sizes that don't exist in the portfolio as previous staff accepted applications even where no appropriate unit size existed.  Both Ms. Kayadanovskaya and Ms. Ison were well aware of the negligence and incompetence surrounding management of that list (per written notification from other staff) but chose to ignore it.  Eventually, the Executive Director caught on and the resolution was to reassign oversight of that task to another department entirely (Section 8 HCV).

The waitlist fiasco was only one issue; however, its mismanagement caused delays that led to great problems in other areas, including, again, excessive vacancies and fraudulent reporting of same which directly affected my ability to "perform" (I would not change the data to make it appear differently than what it did).

As an Oakland resident (one of only two on the entire Executive team), taxpayer, and spouse of an Oakland homeowner, however, I am hoping that my letter and summary will serve as a means to prompt an investigation into these matters and as soon as possible as I have been informed that the Agency is now scrambling to attempt to correct these issues right away.  As they well should because many Oakland residents have either gone without affordable housing or may have even lost such housing due to these matters; however, even with such attempts, given the historical incompetency of the leadership of the Office of Operations it will be months before the department stabilizes enough so as to even attempt resolution. 

As a final note and in an effort to be transparent, please note that I did try to negotiate a resolution with the OHA Board of Commissioners to allow me to finish what I had started toward resolving these issues, which I confidently believe I can do; however, I have heard nothing from them and so feel not only that the matters won't be resolved in any comprehensive manner any time soon but that no more time should pass:  all interested parties should be made aware.

Respectfully and with kind regards,

R. L. "Shelby" Anguiano

>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
R. L. ANGUIANO
1801 – 108th Avenue
Oakland, CA 94603
(510) 575-8203 cell / (510) 777-0193 home
sanguiano1801 [at] hotmail.com



August 29, 2012 Via Certified Mail and Email

to Andrew.Q.Nguyen [at] hud.gov
Andrew Q. Nguyen, Senior Public Housing Specialist and Alison.L.Smith [at] hud.gov
Alison Smith, Coordinator, Moving to Work (MTW)
Office of Public and Indian Housing
San Francisco Regional Office, Region IX Hub
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
600 Harrison Street, 2nd Floor – 9APH
San Francisco, CA 94107-1300

Re: The Housing Authority of the City of Oakland (OHA) – CA003

Dear Mr. Nguyen and Ms. Smith:

After long and careful consideration and futile attempts by me as Director of Operations for the Oakland Housing Authority to find resolution to these and other matters, I am writing to bring to your attention various concerns I had and still have regarding the operation the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA) public housing and Oakland Affordable Housing Preservation Initiative (OAHPI), Inc., non-profit housing programs. These concerns involve gross violations of the CFR, the OHA Admin Plan, ACOP, and OAHPI Resident Management Plan, the Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the federal False Claims Act, various civil rights laws, and other state and local laws. I am submitting this information as a citizen, taxpayer, and spouse of an Oakland homeowner first, as well as the former Director of Property Operations for OHA because my personal and professional ethics, morals, and integrity dictate no other choice at this time.

Therefore, I am requesting a full and thorough investigation by your office into the following matters, at a minimum:

• Complete exhaustion of both the public housing and OAHPI waitlists as of October 2011, so that there has been no waitlist and less than 20 referrals since that time, in violation of the CFR, the OHA Admin Plan and ACOP, and the OAHPI Resident Management Plan, due to

• Failure to competently and adequately monitor and maintain the previous waitlist (2006) resulting in compromise of that list, in violation of the CFR, the OHA Admin Plan and ACOP, and the OAHPI Resident Management Plan, resulting in

• Consistently excessive vacancy rate (vacancies currently number approximately 600), resulting in

• Fraudulent reporting of occupancy/vacancy percentages and plans to fill vacancies, in violation of the CFR and False Claims Act, as well as


A. Nguyen/A. Smith - Public and Indian Housing - MTW
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
August 29, 2012
Page Two



• Exceedingly excessive unit turn period (avg. 200-300 days), including work completely abandoned for more than 2-3 years on fire damaged units/buildings where claims have already been filed (insurance provider waiting on scope of work), in violation of OHA OPO Departmental Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

• Failure to adequately and timely resolve former tenant security deposit dispositions or no resolution and disposition at all, in violation of California Civil Code §1950.5 and the OHA Admin. Plan and ACOP, and the OAHPI Resident Management Plan

• Failure to Process More than 100 Requests for Reasonable Accommodation, in violation of the Fair Housing and American’s with Disabilities Acts

• Failure to adequately and/or timely request appropriation of funds approval from the Board of Commissioners in order to ensure timely and adequate maintenance of units, in violation of the CFR, the OHA Admin. Plan and ACOP, the OAHPI Resident Management Plan, and OHA and OAHPI Lease Agreements

• Mismanagement and ignorance by OPO leadership of procurement requirements resulting in the creation of millions of dollars in duplicate invoices to hide theft, a significant amount of “missing” inventory, and circumvention of procurement regulations and policies, in violation of the CFR, HUD PHA Procurement regulations, and OHA Procurement policies

• Intimidation of staff through abuse of authority and abusive behavior, including bullying, harassment, retaliation, hostile work environment, false accusations, and threats of demotion, along with actual demotion or departmental transfer, in violation of Civil Rights, Labor, and Equal Employment Opportunity laws

• Admitted misuse/misappropriation of Section 8 funds by the Executive Director and Deputy Executive Director to create and implement the MOMS Program, in violation of at least the CFR and the False Claims Act, and possibly other laws and regulations related to the use and/or reporting of the use of Section 8 funds

What I share here is based on personal and professional knowledge gained by me during my tenure as Director of Property Operations for the Office of Property Operations (OPO) for the OHA from January 9, to May 29, 2012. My tenure was short, I believe, because of my tenacity in trying to rectify matters as well as report them as truthfully as possible. On becoming aware Ms. Ison either denied the existence of these matters (because she claims to have not been aware of them previously), denied OHA’s responsibilities as to them (prompting me to have to unnecessarily seek outside legal opinion, at significant cost to the Agency, although they are stated in the Admin Plan, ACOP, and OAHPI Resident Management Plan), or made it known to me by implication that she did not want to be aware. My efforts to apprise her, therefore, as well as attempt to resolve them was often met with great animosity, hostility and, on occasion, blatant and irrefutable bullying.

A. Nguyen/A. Smith - Public and Indian Housing - MTW
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
August 29, 2012
Page Three



I am convinced and was convinced for some time, therefore, that there was an intended and focused effort to ensure that I did not receive adequate and accurate information so as to be able to do my job competently, accurately, timely, and in a manner commensurate with my obligations relating to managing the property and funds of a public trust. I believe this effort stemmed from (1) gross incompetence on the part of the Deputy Executive Director, Patricia Ison, and current Director of Asset Management, Anna Kayadonovskaya (“Ms. Anna K.”), and an effort to hide such from staff; (2) related concerns and insecurities on the part of both as to retention of their own positions (the latter of which Ms. Ison directly made comment on while I was in her employ); and (3) a concerted effort by Ms. Ison, Ms. Anna K., and Executive Director Eric Johnson to hide the truth of such matters from the local HUD office, the OHA Board of Commissioners, City of Oakland administrators, Council members, and citizens, OHA clients and applicants, and other interested parties, including local legal assistance agencies.

I have attached a more comprehensive report as to the above and will provide any and all documentation in my possession to help with any investigation that is undertaken, including memos, email, and photographs. I am certain and can prove, by means of the documentation in my possession, that the leadership staff directly responsible for the foregoing items not only failed to meet the performance standards of their respective positions with regard to these issues but did so on purpose and so were inexcusably negligent.

In addition to these matters, such leadership has also shown itself to be incompetent and grossly negligent with regards to the implementation of current Agency protocols and/or development of new protocols, staff training, and staff management, as well as repeatedly and routinely violated the OHA Admin. Plan and ACOP, the OAHPI Resident Management Plan, Fair Housing law, Civil Rights laws, and/or various other federal, state, and local laws. I am personally aware that both Ms. Ison and Ms. Anna K. consistently and repeated abused their authority and engaged in abusive behavior toward staff. I even reported what I felt to be an incident of disparate treatment of a staff member by Ms. Anna K. to the OHA Human Resources Department; however, I received no response or even an acknowledgement of my submission. I personally observed Ms. Ison twice engage in extremely aggressive and hostile management tactics, for which staff expressed to me their fear and/or intimidation. I was also informed by staff of similar intimidating conduct by Ms. Anna K. (i.e., using threats of job loss and/or hostile repercussion/retaliation by Ms. Ison as a management tool), although less violent.

An internal investigation requested by me when I was employed with OHA brought a good deal of Ms. Anna K.’s responsibility for and involvement in these matters to light; however, to date little or nothing has been done to address most of them or the staff concerns. Virtually all attempts by me to work with Ms. Anna K. and Ms. Ison to try and resolve some of these issues, including making suggestions as to how the Agency might proceed and in a way that might expedite resolution but keeping within Agency policies, HUD regulations, and the law were met with disregard (by either Ms. Anna K. or Ms. Ison), and/or hostility by Ms. Ison and Mr. Johnson (the latter I believe due to false accounts given him by Ms. Anna K. and/or Ms. Ison). Because of my own concerns, therefore, that nothing would be resolved I began documenting many of these issues starting in March of this year.


A. Nguyen/A. Smith - Public and Indian Housing - MTW
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
August 29, 2012
Page Four



Please note I am aware that the OHA Executive Office will most likely deny many or all of these allegations and accuse me of “sour grapes” for not being allowed to complete my probation period. While I will readily admit that I do have some chagrin over that issue, the reason I am coming forth is NOT as a result of that. Anyone would take issue with having their employment rescinded/terminated on the basis of “not performing to the standards of the position” when such is not true and accurate. Particularly when that statement actually means, ‘You would not lie, hide, falsely report, or cover my incompetence and errors as I wanted/directed you to.”

I am coming forth because of the time I have dedicated to this industry (close to 25 years) as a result of my desire to live up to my own commitment to the housing industry and the people and community it serves: the City of Oakland and its citizens and potential citizens, including applicants, tenants, and employees of the Oakland Housing Authority. People who need it are NOT being housed by the Oakland Housing Authority (whose very purpose is to house low-income families), because of the incompetence and personal and political agendas of the OHA Office of Property Operations leadership, although the agency has sufficient inventory AND funds ($21 million, per Mr. Johnson to the OHA Board on Commissioners on May 24, 2012) to ameliorate this urgent need.

As a citizen, taxpayer, spouse of a homeowner, and thus resident of Oakland I am personally concerned with the Agency’s failure to meet the needs of Oakland’s citizens who may benefit from these programs but are being denied that opportunity due to the gross incompetence of OHA’s Office of Operations leadership. As a certified housing administrator with 25 years working in the low-income housing industry, I am professionally appalled with the Agency’s failure to not only meet the needs of Oakland’s citizens in such matters, but its blatant disregard for such due to untoward personal and professional agendas.

I am also coming forth because I have been asked by certain Office of Operations staff to do
so because of their fears associated not only with being blamed for these issues but concerns with not being able to do the jobs they’ve agreed to and want to do. As represented and unrepresented employees they feel they have no voice in bringing to light what they are often asked to do or precluded from doing, in violation of the law, housing regulations, and Agency policies and protocols, so as to support the untoward agendas of those who supervise them. Although they have tried to bring these and other matters of concern to light, either nothing was or has been done, they were retaliated against by being demoted or transferred to other departments, or feel they must fear for their jobs entirely. As a result, morale is significantly low, stress is incredibly high, and the issues are getting worse rather than resolved, as a result of staff fear and disillusionment. This has led to compromise, disregard, and apathy, to the detriment of everyone involved, particularly the citizens who should benefit from these programs. Their concern, however, is that they not only are not serving the Agency’s clients (both applicants and current tenants) well and in the manner the programs dictate and were created for, but are often asked to engage in processes that set clients up, disregard them, and/or violate their rights, by means of overlooking federal, state, local, and Agency regulations, which they are then blamed for. What little they CAN do, then, is often forfeited due to fear of being derided and concern for their jobs having left them paralyzed.


A. Nguyen/A. Smith - Public and Indian Housing - MTW
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
August 29, 2012
Page Five



My hope, then, is that, for the sake of the citizens of Oakland who might benefit from these programs, the employees whose livelihoods are dependent upon the viability and continued existence of these programs, and taxpayers like my husband, myself, and others whose dollars FUND these programs, you will concede to look into these matters by means of a full and thorough investigation.

I am available to discuss all of the matters I’ve set forth here, as well as provide copies of documents I have and can be reached at the address, phone number, and/or email contact stated above. In the meantime, please know that your kind attention to this matter will be greatly appreciated. On behalf of the housing-needful citizens of Oakland; U.S., California, and Oakland taxpayers; my husband, a taxpayer and Oakland citizen and homeowner; staff of the Office of Operations of the Oakland Housing Authority; and myself, as a taxpayer, Oakland citizen, and former Director of Operations of the Oakland Housing Authority, I thank you in advance.

Respectfully,

/s/
R. L. “Shelby” Anguiano, JD, PHM, CMH, COS, TCS, FHS

Attachment

Copied to:

Velma C. Navarro, Director
Office of Public Housing, Region IX –9APH
U.S. Department of HUD
Velma.C.Navarro [at] hud.gov

Tanya E. Schulz, Regional Inspector
General for Audit
Los Angeles, Region IX - 9DGA
U. S. Department of HUD
Tanya.E.Schulze [at] hud.gov

Chuck Hauptman, Regional Director
San Francisco Regional Office
U.S. Department of HUD
Chuck.E.Hauptman [at] hud.gov

Anne Quesada, Director
Fair Housing and Employment Office
San Francisco Regional Office
U. S. Department of HUD
Anné.Quesada [at] hud.gov

Copied to – Page 2



Carol Galante, Acting Assistant Secretary
Housing/Federal Housing Commissioner
U. S. Department of HUD
Carol.J.Galante [at] hud.gov

Sandra B. Henriquez, Assistant Secretary
Public and Indian Housing
U. S. Department of HUD
Sandra.Henriquez [at] hud.gov

John Trasviňa, Assistant Secretary
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
U. S. Department of HUD
John.Trasvina [at] hud.gov

Sara Pratt, Deputy Assistant Secretary
Office of Enforcement Programs
U. S. Department of HUD
Sara.K.Pratt [at] hud.gov

George Williams, Director
Compliance Disability Rights Division
U. S. Department of HUD
George.D.Williams [at] hud.gov

Board of Governors
Nat’l Assoc. of Housing and Redevelopment
Officials (NAHRO)
nahro [at] nahro.org

Gregory D. Hartwig, Chair
Board of Commissioners
Housing Authority of City of Oakland
greg [at] hartwigyoga.com

Marlene Hurd, Vice Chair
Board of Commissioners
Housing Authority of City of Oakland

Janny Castillo, Commissioner
Board of Commissioners
Housing Authority of City of Oakland
Santana400 [at] aol.com

Moses K. Mayne, Jr., Commissioner
Board of Commissioners
Housing Authority of City of Oakland
mmayne1 [at] hotmail.com


Copied to – Page 3


Barbara Montgomery, Commissioner
Board of Commissioners
Housing Authority of City of Oakland

Adhi Nagraj, Commissioner
Board of Commissioners
Housing Authority of City of Oakland’
Nags98 [at] hotmail.com

Tanya Pitts, Commissioner
Board of Commissioners
Housing Authority of City of Oakland

Tony Kovaleski, Chief Investigator
NBC Bay Area Investigative Unit
KNTV San Francisco
theunit [at] nbcbayarea.com

Dan Noyes, Chief Investigative Reporter
ABC Channel 7 News I-Team
KGO-TV San Francisco
dan.noyes [at] abc.com


Barbara Lee, Congresswoman (D-CA)
9th Congressional District
U. S. Congress

Edmund “Jerry” G. Brown, Jr., Governor
Office of the Governor
State of California

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
State of California

Phyllis W. Chang, Director
Department of Fair Employment and Housing
State of California

Jean Quan, Mayor
Office of the Mayor
City of Oakland
c/oRCowan [at] oaklandnet.com






Barbara Parker, City Attorney
Oakland City Attorney’s Office
City of Oakland
bparker [at] oaklandcityattorney.org

Randolph Hall, Chief Assistant City Attorney
Oakland City Attorney’s Office
City of Oakland
rhall [at] oaklandcityattorney.org

James Hodgkins, Deputy City Attorney V
Oakland City Attorney’s Office
City of Oakland
jhodgkins [at] oaklandcityattorney.org

Laura Lane, Director of Housing Practice
East Bay Community Law Center
Lane [at] ebclc.org

Gracie Jones, Housing Paralegal
East Bay Community Law Center
GracieJ [at] ebclc.org

Lynda Carson, Reporter
Tenants Rule
tenantsrule [at] yahoo.com

Jane Brunner, Councilmember
District 1
Oakland City Council
jbrunner [at] oaklandnet.com

Patricia Kernaghan, Councilmember
District 2
Oakland City Council
PKernighan [at] oaklandnet.com

Nancy Nadel, Councilmember
District 3
Oakland City Council
nnadel [at] oaklandnet.com

Libby Schaff, Councilmember
District 4
Oakland City Council
lschaaf [at] oaklandnet.com\






Ignacio De La Fuente, Councilmember
District 5
Oakland City Council
idelafuente [at] oaklandnet.com

Desley Brooks, Councilmember
District 6
Oakland City Council
dbrooks [at] oaklandnet.com

Larry Reid, Councilmember
District 7
Oakland City Council
lreid [at] oaklandnet.com

Rebecca Kaplan, Councilmember
At Large
Oakland City Council
atlarge [at] oaklandnet.com


>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>

Inter-Office Memorandum

To: Patricia Ison, Deputy Executive Director of Property Operations
From: Shelby Anguiano, Director of Property Management
Date: May 18, 2012
Subject: Response to Request for Summary of Vacant Unit Status

The following table sets forth responses I received in response to the request to poll the Property Administrators/Superintendents as to the status of vacant units, including:

• The number of units turned by AMP staff
• The number of units turned per month between January and April 2012
• The average time for turns done by AMP staff and CID
• The method for tracking from turn completion to lease up

Status AMP

4 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14


Vacant Units (as of 5-11-12) 25 12 7 90 65 94 67 34 41

Units Inspected (as of 5-10-12) N/A N/A N/A 40 17 92 64 47 39

Current Ready Units 0 0 0* 25 22 41 44 25 25

Units Currently Being Turned

By AMP Staff


23
11
6
8
4
7
5
2
1

Units to be Turned by CID 2 0 0 13 6


Units in Possession of CID** 1 0 0 2 0 0 40 23 0

Units Turned by AMP Staff


January 6 N/A 18 15 1

2

1

February 2 N/A 1


March N/A 3 4 4


April 4 N/A 1 2


Average Turn Time

By AMP Staff 35 to 90 Days <45 Days 6 Months 6 Months 283

Days 236
Days 6-12
Months 6-12
Months
By CID
N/A
N/A
N/A
1 Year
1 Year 333 Days 341.5 Days 6-12
Months 6-12
Months
Turn to Lease Up Tracking
Method

Unk. Unk. Attached N/A N/A N/A

*Awaiting flooring (currently delayed pending new PO issuance by CCGS), blinds, and/or paint – all other items completed
**Per Inspection Log or email submitted by AMP




Summary of Vacant Unit Status
May 18, 2012
Page 2

Please note, the responses vary from AMP to AMP, do not necessarily reflect the actual status of the AMP vacancies as I know them to be or they’ve been previously or otherwise reported, or necessarily respond to the questions asked, which were (verbatim):

• How many of your current vacancies are being turned by the AMP, either by staff or contractor? (Do NOT count those units for which we have bids but work has not begun. Count only those units where work is underway.)

• For January through April 2012, how many units were turned by the AMP (either staff or contractor) for each month?

• What is your average unit turn time for those done by the AMP? Those done by CID? (Please look at your vacancy report and count from unit ready/available date to lease date)

• How are you tracking time from completion of restoration to lease up?

Please provide a copy of whatever report you have to track this.

Please also note that compiling this information was quite concerning, first and foremost because it appears that either some staff didn’t fully understand the questions (although I tried to be explicit), or they did understand yet did not submit the requested and accurate information (which is more concerning, particularly with regard to AMPs 9 and 10). I did not alter or contribute to the information other than to include the total vacancies as of 5-11-12; all other information was submitted by the AMP.

I am submitting this information to you so that perhaps we can go over it together, along with what was submitted by staff. Although I have only been with OHA a short while it is not my impression that most staff are being less than upfront. Rather, my impression is that most staff either (1) truly do not fully understand yet some of the underlying fundamentals of property management as that relates to a rather large portfolio (and specifically with regard to tracking needs for vacancies, unit turns, and related areas) so as to have a firm grasp on what’s going on in the portfolio); or (2) simply cannot handle the volume of work related to managing a large portfolio, cannot keep up with the demands, and so are faltering in several areas.

I personally and professionally believe that it is the former and that with some very specific guidelines, coupled with focused and comprehensive training, this can be overcome. The compilation, training as to, and execution of such guidelines, however, would require such a significant investment of focused time and effort, particularly from me, that I am not certain such a project could (or should) be handled in-house. I would like to request your support, however, in allowing me to develop a training plan for staff that addresses various intermediate property management skills, time management, employee supervision and evaluation, as well as some very necessary interdepartmental tracking systems so as to help them move toward better proficiency as Property Administrators and/or Maintenance Superintendents. Again, such training could be handled by outside trainers; however, a focused plan would tell us what kinds of trainings to send staff to and in what order so as to be most effective.



Summary of Vacant Unit Status
May 18, 2012
Page 3

Should you deem it beneficial to support such an effort, it would help for you and I to meet and discuss the parameters, ideals, goals, and desired outcomes of such a plan, as well as workload priorities during the planning period. Again, while there would be some necessary monetary expense to cover the cost of trainings, the greatest investment will need to be in time, initially, and ongoing for several months.

I look forward to hearing your input and comments as to all of these matters.


>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
Responses in Preparation for PMD/CID Vacancy Turn Plan

• Vacancy report by AMP for each month and period ending May 1, 2012:
Public Housing –
AMP Total Units Available Units Occupied Units Vacant Units Vacancy Rate
104 371 369 344 25 6.78%
107 100 100 88 12 12.00%
108 390 388 381 7 1.80%
TOTAL 861 857 813 44 5.13%


OAHPI, Inc. –
AMP Total Units Available Units Occupied Units Vacant Units Vacancy Rate
109 278 250 160 90 36.00%
110 280 271 206 65 23.99%
111 271 259 165 94 36.29%
112 244 213 146 67 31.46%
113 242 212 178 34 16.04%
114 239 224 183 41 18.30%
TOTAL 1554 1429 1038 391 27.36%


• Number of units currently referred to CID for restoration as of May 18, 2012, by AMP:
AMP Units
104 1
107 0
108 0
109 2
110 0
111 22
112 40
113 0
114 0
TOTAL 65*
*These are the totals of units physically verified and submitted by PAs pursuant to the unit inspection logs; however, the inspection for AMPs 9/10 has not been completed. It is believed that another 15-18 exist between AMPs 9 and 10 for a total of 80-83 units in CID possession.


• Number of vacant unit turns currently being completed by Property Management by AMP:
AMP Units Units
104 23
107 0
108 7
109 8
110 4
111 7
112 5
113 2
114 1
TOTAL 30 27
*Units aren’t necessarily being turned but are cleaned and prepped by AMP staff in anticipation of move-ins and so were reported by staff.

• Number of restored (either by CID or PMD) vacant units awaiting lease-up:
AMP Per PHAMS Per Unit Inspection
104 0 N/A
107 11 N/A
108 0 N/A
109 25 2*
110 20 1*
111 41 51
112 37 44
113 16 25
114 23 25
TOTAL 162* 148*


*PHAMS total does not include 11 public housing units
**AMP 9/10 inspections incomplete


• Number of new vacant units by AMP referred to CID for restoration by AMP and by month
As of February 2012, the Director is aware of only one unit being referred to CID (the merge unit at Lockwood). There are several units in the queue and waiting assignment; however, due to (1) the uncertainty as to the specific number and location of units in CID possession, (2) the extended turn time for those currently in CID possession (up to 83 units, all of which were assigned more than one year ago), and (3) concerns at times with the condition of the unit when returned to the AMP (i.e., not always fully completed), assignment has been suspended pending:

a. Determination of the actual number and location (recently determined by physical unit inspections for units in AMPs 11-14; partial inspection has been done by AMPs 9 and 10 – completion is anticipated by May 25, 2012).

b. Establishment of a reasonable turn timeline (recently established with the 2013 CID annual goals)

c. Establishment of a reliable system to track assignment, turn status and timeline, and release back to AMP (in draft stage pending approval of the tracking software (Access); anticipated to be completed by May 31, 2012).

• Number of new vacant units turned by Property Management by AMP and by month:
AMP January February March April May
104 6 2 4 2
107
108 7
109 18 1
110 15 1 3
111 1 4 2
112 4
113 2
114 1
TOTAL 43 3 11 7 9

• Are we tracking the turn time if so, please provide whatever vacancy turn timing report you have.
To my knowledge turn time is not being tracked by the AMPs and has not been tracked by the AMPs for some time. The AMPs do track the number of days from date of vacancy to date of ready and lease date. The Maintenance Superintendent for AMP 8 (Ramon Canton) has his own tracking form that tracks components of a turn (i.e., paint, flooring, etc.), but not with regard to any specific timeline.

• Are we tracking the leasing time from completion of restoration to lease up, if so please provide whatever report you have.
Due to delays in applicant referrals and thus leasing, this process cannot currently be tracked. To my knowledge, there isn’t an established system for such tracking or any other method (i.e., AMP specific) that has been used by AMP staff previously.

>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>

ATTACHMENT 1 – Summary of Legislative, Regulatory, and Policy Violations by
The Housing Authority of the City of Oakland – CA003




• Failure to competently and adequately monitor and maintain the previous waitlist (2006) resulting in compromise of that list

Due to the lack of training and knowledge by staff assigned to oversee the maintenance of the waitlist as of June 2011, applicants who were on the previous waitlist who are or may have been eligible for housing have been wrongfully denied, and still are being wrongfully denied, housing. Such denial is related either to determination of eligibility or actually being housed after being determined eligible. The former is the result of inadequate maintenance and lack of routine purge of the waitlist; the second is due to the unavailability of ready units to house approved applicants, although deposits may have been placed months in advance. In either case, applicants were never apprised of the status or progress of processing at any time between October 2011 and April 2012, and may have only been recently notified that they even still have an application on file. It is quite possible that all or some of them have been illegally removed from the previous notification without proper processing or notification of such removal.

• Complete exhaustion of both the public housing and OAHPI waitlists as of October 2011

From the period of October 2011 to date, virtually no referrals for occupancy have made, because, from that time and to date, there is and has been NO public housing or OAHPI waitlist. Until very recently, there was no purge of the most recent waitlist (established in 2006). As of now, there has still been no establishment of a new waitlist; and thus, no new referrals for occupancy. All of this has resulted occupancy of less than 30 vacant units since October 2011, in spite of the significantly large number of vacant units within the agency’s portfolios. (NOTE: The few units that have been occupied since October 2011 was due either to transfers from other units (leaving the units transferred from vacant so that no real change in vacancy rate is seen), or applicants whose eligibility was determined back in June-October of 2011, and who placed deposits on units, but whose units were not ready for occupancy until after March 2012.)

Although I brought the matter of no waitlist or referrals to the attention Deputy Executive Director, Patricia Ison, during my second month of employment, her response was one of denial and disbelief. Initially, she accused me of being mistaken; however, after another few months the numbers became undeniable. All attempts made by me to remedy the matter, however, including offering suggestions as to how the Agency might proceed and in a way that might expedite a remedy but keeping within Agency policies and HUD regulations were met with hostility by both Ms. Ison and Executive Director, Eric Johnson.

• Consistently excessive vacancy rate

When I arrived at OHA in January 2012, I was tasked with reporting the number of vacancies in the portfolio. At that time, there were close to 400 units; however, that information was not hostilely denied. That number was more than 400 when I left my position on May 29, 2012 (due to the lack of waitlists and thus no referrals), and is currently

ATTACHMENT - The Housing Authority of the City of Oakland – CA003
Page 2



close to 600, if not more, as of the date of this letter (with at least 10-20 more anticipated due to pending legal action). Vacancies are being reported as significantly less, however, with reports excluding units in “modernization” status. Yet, many of those units are ready for occupancy and have been for some time but the lack of a waitlist prohibits occupancy. As a result, vacancy numbers are being manipulated and inaccurately reported to the Board of Commissioners and HUD.

• Fraudulent reporting of vacancy percentages/plans to fill vacancies and purposeful miscount of vacancies.

Prior to January 2012 and to the present false reports are being made to the Board of Commissioners and HUD (by means of the Occupancy Action Plan) with regard to the number and status of vacancies. Starting mid-February 2012 I was tasked with reporting to HUD that vacancies for three (3) public housing sites (i.e, Peralta Village; Palo Vista Gardens; and Lockwood Gardens) would be filled by certain dates; however, a view of such reports will reveal that the dates were continuously extended with no decrease in the number of vacancies. The contrary, in some instances the number of vacancies increased. I was not able to state the reason why on the report, however, but was directed to fabricate anticipated occupancy dates (because there was and is no waitlist and thus no referrals from which to fill vacancies), which resulted in a fraudulent report.

Unoccupied but turned units are also going unreported by holding them in “modernization” status (although they are ready for occupancy) to avoid inclusion in the vacancy count. They are kept in this status, however, because they can’t be filled because there is no waitlist to pull applicant referrals from.

• Exceedingly excessive unit turn period

Currently, the average turnaround time for ANY unit, including a “quick-turn” is more than 200 days by site staff. Units requiring renovation (completed by Capital Improvements Department, either by staff or contractor) average close to one year. Several units have been vacant for more than 4-5 years, although NOT requiring major renovation, and several buildings, although consisting of only 8-16 units, have housed no more than one tenant/family for more than a year (and, in some cases, more than 2 years). There are several reasons for this, including lack of vacancy tracking within either department, Property Operations OR Capital Improvements. It took me approximately four (4) months just to determine a close proximity to the actual number of vacant units (staff was unable to verify the true number of vacancies and I was denied opportunity to inspect and review personally so as to obtain an accurate count as well as determine the status of each vacancy), as well as their status. When I left my position the status still wasn’t accurate as another 16 vacancies were reported by the Capital Improvements Department as being in their possession (for renovation by them versus by site staff) just days prior to my leaving.






ATTACHMENT - The Housing Authority of the City of Oakland – CA003
Page 3



Many units that were with damaged by fire or are situated in buildings with units damaged by fire have been vacant for more than 2-3 years. This is because, although processed by the Risk Management Department, there had been absolutely NO Operations/Capital Improvement inspection, review, or follow-up as to the status of any insurance claim or adjustment for 2-3 years or more. These and many other vacant units/buildings are boarded up and/or often broken into and used as shelter for transients, hiding places for drug dealing/use and other crime, and/or storage. Some have been repeatedly vandalized and others contain such items as new cabinetry, tubs, toilets, etc., that were placed in them more than 4-5 years ago, but never installed. Thus, some of the “new” cabinetry left in these units is just sitting on the floor. I was told by the Capital Improvements Director that some of these items will need to be discarded as they have sat so long they are now outdated and not in line with the current fixtures being installed in renovated units.

• Failure to adequately and timely resolve former tenant security deposit dispositions or no resolution and disposition at all

Currently, security deposits requiring a tenant refund are not being resolved at all due to limitations related to the Agency’s accounting systems’ software; however, many have not been resolved and/or refunded for years, long before the current limitations arose (some dating back more than 20 years). In several instances I was told by the Deputy Executive Director that deposits would NOT be refunded, although the timeframe within which to retain had passed, because she was “sure” the former tenant had “done something” in/to the unit that warranted no refund. This was without proper post-occupancy unit inspection and/or deposit disposition review. At her request (due to my insistence that the policies, protocols, regulations, and laws required timely processing) I obtained a legal opinion from counsel which urged the Agency to resolve the deposit dispositions. Rather than comply, my recommendation was met with more hostility.

• Failure to Process More than 100 Requests for Reasonable Accommodation

During my time as Director of Property Operations I found that tenant requests were either not processed for several months (if not years), not processed at all, or wrongfully denied due to lack of sufficient staff training and knowledge. In most events, tenants were not even informed of the status of their application (or that it had been denied, if that was the decision). Rather, applications were misplaced, discarded, or just ignored. In once case, a post-brain surgery tenant who required an additional room for medical equipment was denied her request because staff failed to follow-up with her physician to determine the basis and validity of the need. It was just determined that since only she and her husband occupied the unit, and no attendant was needed, no additional room was warranted.

Regarding failure to process ADA requests, several residents have requested transfers to one-story units; however, they are consistently being told that no such units are available (which is true, given the exorbitant amount of vacancies. The Agency has also failed and continues to fail to renovate units where such can be done to accommodate tenants with ADA needs in spite of the fact that it has ample funds to do so (more than $21 million, per the Executive Director, Eric Johnson, to the Board of Commissioners’ on May 24, 2012), ample contracting capabilities, and/or sufficient staffing to do so. One such instance involves a mobility-impaired tenant who resides on the 2nd floor of his building and has been ATTACHMENT - The Housing Authority of the City of Oakland – CA003
Page 3



waiting for downstairs ADA unit for more than a year. I was precluded from effecting either a transfer or unit renovation to accommodate this tenant due to agency protocols that require units to be renovated in-house the through the Capital Improvements department (versus by a contractor). Although tasked with the renovation staff in that department have made no progress on it for more than year nor would they provide updates as to the status.

• Failure to adequately and/or timely request appropriation of funds approval from the Board of Commissioners in order to ensure timely and adequate maintenance of units

On many occasions AMP staff and I were precluded from paying bills and/or ordering maintenance materials due to insufficient funds appropriations. For example, although funding was requested and approved by the Board of Directors in the budget, purchase orders to effect the appropriations were severely under-funded. As a result, utility and other bills go unpaid for months and maintenance is indefinitely deferred, effectuating untimely response to maintenance needs, including requests made by tenants.

• Mismanagement and ignorance by OPO leadership of procurement requirements resulting in the creation of millions of dollars in duplicate invoices to hide theft, a significant amount of “missing” inventory, and circumvention of procurement regulations and policies

While Director of Operations I had serious concerns regarding purchases made by staff of other departments (specifically, Capital Improvements); however, when I inquired (because I often had to sign off on the purchases and/or tried to ascertain the financial status of the property), my inquiries were met with hostility. It has recently come to light, however, that one of the CID staff involved, whose purchases were questionable was involved in theft and misappropriation. To date, OHA cannot account for approximately $2 million in duplicate invoices, as well as an extensive amount of “missing” inventory.

• Intimidation of staff through abuse of authority and abusive behavior, including bullying, harassment, retaliation, hostile work environment, false accusations, and threats of demotion, actual demotion or departmental transfer

During my tenure I personally observed Ms. Ison berate, denigrate, and intimidate subordinate Property Operations staff in reaction to the status of these matters and other matters. Such conduct included loudly berating staff with regard to the waitlist fiasco (for which she later called me and personally apologized, stating that this was unusual conduct for her, which I came to know what not true), loudly slamming her hands down on tables (just after “counseling” staff that been subjected to gunfire the day before), “reminding” staff that OPO was her “kingdom” and “serfdom” and that staff were her “subjects.”

I was informed of intimidation tactics by Ms. Anna K by staff who asked me to intervene when she informed one staff member that she “was in trouble” for attending a meeting called by Ms. Ison, that Ms. Ison would be very upset with her and retaliate (although I had received written permission from Ms. Ison for the person to attend), as well as when she attempted to recruit staff to assist her in creating a false report against a co-worker in an effort to create a situation where she could not be fired (due to retaliation laws).

ATTACHMENT - The Housing Authority of the City of Oakland – CA003
Page 4




• Admitted misuse/misappropriation of Section 8 funds by the Executive Director and Deputy Executive Director

During a meeting in May 2012 with representatives from the New York Housing Authority, who were visiting to learn more about the MOMS Program, Mr. Johnson and Ms. Ison openly admitted to misusing Section 8 funds to create and effectuate that program. When asked by NYCHA “where” the funds came from (as these stated they were having a hard time procuring funds for their agency to create a similar program), Mr. Johnson informed them that OHA had taken Section 8 funds “under the radar” and that HUD was “welcome to try and do something about it now” but that there was nothing HUD could now do as “the statute of limitations had run”.

During that conversation, however, he intimated that that was not the last time such had been done and that the “MTW was now [making it easier].” Regardless, reports submitted regarding the Agency’s Plan as to MTW funds, in support of its recently renewed contract are inaccurate, perhaps even fraudulent.

End...