Tube City Almanac

July 14, 2011

City-HUD Dispute Threatens $1.2M in Promised Funding

Category: News || By

McKeesport officials and a federal agency are at odds over more than a million dollars in community development money that's been promised to the city.

Hanging in the balance --- besides the activities for which the money was meant to pay --- could be McKeesport's ability to meet its payroll this month.

At issue is whether the city is adequately explaining its activities to the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD has told McKeesport officials that the city isn't reaching out to low-income families, the disabled and ethnic minorities --- claims that City Administrator Dennis Pittman calls "ludicrous" on their face.

. . .

HUD "told us that there are 'concentrations of low-income people' in some census tracts," Pittman says. "They want us to offer housing counseling to encourage people in those areas to move to different neighborhoods."

According to Pittman, the census tracts HUD is targeting include Crawford Village and Harrison Village --- public housing complexes.

"We have 1,100 public housing units in the City of McKeesport, and 485 'Section 8' units," he says. "There are only 11,000 housing units total in McKeesport. Of course there are concentrations of low-income people. But if you took everything and split it among McKeesport's 12 wards, I don't know how you wouldn't have concentrations."

HUD officials have told McKeesport officials that the city's progress installing handicapped access ramps has been too slow, and that the city isn't doing enough to reach out to Hispanics. "We hardly have any Hispanics," Pittman says. "I don't know what they want us to do."

. . .

But Brian Sullivan, a HUD public affairs officer in Washington, told the Almanac this week that the biggest problem is that McKeesport simply isn't explaining itself --- or justifying its use of federal money.

"Truthfully, we've been a little frustrated," Sullivan says. "We've made repeated requests to McKeesport for information, and frankly, it's been like pulling teeth."

Every so-called "entitlement" community that receives federal community development block grants must prove that it's using that money to provide "fair housing choices" to all residents, including minorities and the physically handicapped, Sullivan says.

. . .

McKeesport may indeed be providing those choices --- but it's not telling HUD, Sullivan says. "Communities have to certify that they're taking active measures," he says. "If they are, we want to see the meat on the bones."

Sullivan says that repeated requests for information have gone unanswered by the city's community development director, Bethany Budd Bauer --- a charge that Bauer and Pittman both strongly deny.

The first HUD complaint received at city hall was in April, says Pittman, who called it a "very personal attack" on Bauer. "We were shocked," he says. "We never had a clue that they weren't happy with what happened."

. . .

On some issues, the city and HUD agree that McKeesport needs to do better. The city's zoning ordinance is 15 years old, Pittman says, and is due for a comprehensive rewrite. City officials have just interviewed an expert in zoning regulations who will be advising them on a complete revision.

The lack of handicapped access ramps has long been a sore point. Since 2004, McKeesport has been under a court-mandated consent decree to install new curb ramps at all major intersections by 2012, or risk fines.

Installation of new curb-cuts is ongoing and continuing, Pittman says --- city council last week awarded a $28,000 contract to Joe Palmieri Construction of Ross Township for 24 new wheelchair ramps.

. . .

Poor communications may have occurred because the federal official who acted as the agency's liaison to McKeesport was reassigned, Pittman says. "I think the new person didn't pick up on the fact that there was a problem," he says.

Mayor Regis McLaughlin recently sent two letters to HUD detailing those projects and others that are designed to improve housing conditions, including new homes and housing rehab programs run by McKeesport Housing Corp., McKeesport Housing Authority and other agencies.

City officials have also appealed to U.S. Rep. Mike Doyle, Forest Hills Democrat, to help mediate the dispute, Pittman says. "We agree with HUD on some of these issues, and we're already working to implement the programs," he says.

HUD is working with McKeesport to answer the agency's questions in a way that's "practical and measurable," Sullivan says. "We're in active discussions to reach a consensus ... talks are ongoing and we're anxious to proceed."

. . .

Sullivan adds that HUD isn't really holding back McKeesport's promised $1.2 million in community development grants --- at least not yet. One reason that McKeesport hasn't received its money has been the ongoing wrangling over the budget between the Obama administration and the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

There are 1,200 communities across the nation that qualify for community development money, and many haven't received their funding yet, Sullivan says: "It's only recently that the funds became available at all."

But for McKeesport to maintain its certification as a city entitled to community development money, it needs to be more pro-active about providing information, he says. "At this point, we're waiting on McKeesport," Sullivan says.

You are previewing your comment. Be sure to click on 'Post Comment' to store it.






Feedback on “City-HUD Dispute Threatens $1.2M in Promised Funding”

Color me not surprised. Seems to be a whole lot of “Me? I thought YOU were in charge of that.” nonsense in local government lately.

You’d expect as much from an organization that sends official correspondence in Comic Sans font and somehow manages to keep the downtown municipal building chock full of employees who do little other than scowl and say “That’s not my job” when you ask for assistance with something.
John - July 14, 2011




My opinion is that the only way our city will ever develop into anything more than what it is now is for us to stop being an “entitlement city” altogether. Low income and section 8 housing obviously attracts folks who have low or no income. How does that help develop a city?

Money attracts money. And low income/welfare housing attracts low income and welfare people. And those folks simply do not add to the city’s coffers in a positive way. Frankly, look at the crime numbers and it would seem that those areas tend to be higher crime areas so they in effect cost the city money.

Cities make money from taxes.

And taxes come from people buying homes and building businesses.

People buying homes don’t usually have “next door to public housing” as one of the items on their home-shopping wish list.

Businesses like to build their locations where there is money to spend.

How can the welfare and low income crowds help in either case?

Don’t get me wrong – there are good people who are considered low income or are on welfare. There are also many who are not.

Regardless, welfare and section 8 housing will NEVER attract business or people with money to this city, so why the rush to support it?

I say we should wean ourselves off of the government teet and stand on our own, for better or worse.
shadango - July 15, 2011




rwfrSt asihfpxzrocu, [url=http://oaawpxduozrt.com/]oaawpxduozrt[/url], [link=http://ezfhsrooyvcy.com/]ezfhsrooyvcy[/link], http://ehdegavmsbap.com/
jhoalusgnzc (URL) - May 27, 2013




One or more comments are waiting for approval by an editor.

Comments are now closed.