Every year, the CDBG process is the same. There is a mandated public meeting to solicit project ideas from the community. Then there is a second mandated public hearing to present and receive comment on the project chosen for that year's grant application. The project presented at the second public hearing is rarely one that was suggested by anyone at the first public hearing. The choice of projects is made with the advice of the grant consultants based on what the grant program is "looking for this year." This makes for community development not driven by the community and what residents perceive to be their needs but by whatever is the flavor of the month--or in this case, of the year--at HUD and DCS.
So this year, the first public hearing took place on May 16. Among the ideas articulated at that meeting, there was a common theme: sidewalks. The sidewalks in Hudson, off Warren Street, are deplorable, on both sides of town--a situation created and exacerbated by the fact that responsibility for the sidewalks is foisted onto individual property owners, resulting in sidewalks that are in disrepair and sidewalks of remarkably inconsistent height. Treacherous in a city that would like to perceive itself as a walkable city.
At a public hearing on July 11, the second hearing mandated by the CDBG program, John "Duke" Duchessi explained how the housing rehabilitation grant might work. If the grant application is successful, the City would get $400,000 which in turn would be awarded as grants to low and very low income home owners to make basic improvements to their homes. Upgrades to heating and plumbing systems have been mentioned; so has replacing windows and doors--the former by Duchessi, the latter by Fourth Ward supervisor Bill Hughes. Qualifying properties would be required to be owner occupied single-family and two-family houses, and the maximum grant would be $25,000. Eligibility could be limited to a target area, or it could be citywide. Mayoral candidate Victor Mendolia, who was at the meeting, expressed his unequivocal preference for making grants available to qualifying homeowners throughout the city.
The deadline for submitting CDBG applications has not yet been announced, but Duchessi recommended that the City begin preparing for the grant now by doing the following:
- Create a citizens' advisory committee to establish criteria for owner qualifications and projects
- Identify a pool of qualified contractors
- Do a request for proposal for the administration of the grant
- Prequalify twenty prospective grant recipients
COPYRIGHT 2013 CAROLE OSTERINK
The difference between Catskill sidewalk work (art), and Hudson sidewalk work (a joke) is striking.
ReplyDeleteFor most municipalities, grant writers compete in a bidding process. Is there a new trend whereby communities are appointing their grant writers, as is the case in Hudson?
ReplyDeleteAnd if it is a trend, do these same resident grant writers also serve on the development corporations of the municipalities, as in Hudson?
Wondering about the potential conflicts of interest in having our resident grant writer also direct grant writing for the HDC, I learned that the Hudson Development Corporation has its own, in-house Code of Ethics.
(The Code of Ethics for the City of Hudson [§20-1] specifically applies only to "the Hudson Community Development and Planning Agency" and the "City of Hudson Industrial Development Agency.")
When I went to the HDC website to confirm that "Duke" Duchessi still serves as the staff "Grant Writer and Administrator" for the HDC, I noticed something interesting. I used to be able to access the staff list from the HDC's "About" page. Evidently, the previous link to "Staff" is now removed:
http://www.hudsonfirst.com/about-HDC.php
A list of HDC staff appears at the following page though, which took some Googling to locate. I think we'll check in regularly to make sure that the following doesn't quietly disappear too:
http://hudsonfirst.com/2013site/business/hudson-community-development-planning-agency/
The endless circle of friends and self promotion. Municipal money laundering. If you tried this, you would be charged with racketeering...
ReplyDeleteEvidently the HDC is having mix-ups with its web pages. Well, stuff happens.
ReplyDeleteHere's the line that really got my goat from last Wednesday's Gossips:
"Roehr said it had been determined that there was no better place for the day care center, although it wasn't clear who had come to that conclusion or by what process."
These grant writers are slippery characters.
Sorting out the relationship between the City of Hudson and the HDC-and-HCDPA is made stickier by the fact that in order to save everyone scarce funds, the grant writers contract is evenly split between the two non-profits and the city.
On April 16th, after the the Common Council selected TGW from among two bids ("pursuant to the City's procurement guidelines for professional services"), Messrs. Roehr and Duchessi simultaneously were contracted by the city and the two 501(c)(3)s.
But according to the HDC, these two non-profits are not even quasi-governmental agencies (not technically anyway).
For instance, because the Freedom of Information Act doesn't apply to the HDC, the public must take it on faith that the actions of HDC employees who also work for the city are consistent with the HDC's Code of Ethics:
"Directors and employees must conduct themselves at all times in a manner that avoids any appearance that they can be improperly or unduly influenced ....
"[E]mployees may not engage in any official transaction with an outside entity in which they have a direct or indirect financial interest that may reasonably conflict with the proper discharge of their official duties" (no. 5).
http://hudsonfirst.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/HDC_Code0fEthics.pdf
Could it be said that the grant writers benefit in a long-term way by a proven grant winning average? Not that that's the case, but the HDC website proudly displays the ongoing "Charles William Park Project" which everyone knows is a classic boondoggle. It's celebrated for the sake of careers, not for what the project is in itself. That grant money was wasted.
Could it be said that an employee who finds himself in a position to steer contracts with the state or to pursue easier but less worthy project grants is "indirectly" interested?
Consulting the city code for some idea about what constitutes an "interest," its Code of Ethics defers to the state's General Municipal Law which defines an "interest" as meaning "a direct or indirect pecuniary or material benefit accruing to a municipal officer or employee as the result of a contract with the municipality which such officer or employee serves" [§800 (3)].
If mere self-interest isn't "material" enough, then I guess that Hudson's circumstances slip through the state's generous cracks. But the situation is pretty smelly. It's no wonder New York is such a mess.