| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
| * Relative to NSP1 there exist eight complaints by families for the mishandling of HUD family Homeownership guidelines. DCED altered the guidelines consistently and erratically. The procedures are documented. |
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:56 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
* Documentation will substantiate the intent to destroy NSP1 and NSP2 because of the predated dissension between the former City Administration and the women removed from DCED because of OIG findings prior to O.U. or Smith Village/ Charles Young Jr. NSP1 and NSP2 was awarded to O.U. and Smith Village/Charles Young Jr. by the mayor and former City Administrator.
* Communications and meetings between the Community Justice Department, Flint City, and O.U. Smith Village Charles Young Jr. recorded statements fro the Emergency manager as such. When asked why he reused to communicate with the service providers who held contracts worth 18 million dollars? He stated, "I came to kill the project".
* Documentation supports the predated dissension and meetings held prior to the award of NSP2. Documentation supports the disputes that ensued between the former City Administrator and Influential Organization in the City of Flint opposing African American fro becoming developers. |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 4:12 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
*Documentation supports the first Developer was mandated to secure bonding of 1,000,0000.00 dollars and the African American Developers (Charles Young Jr. Group) was mandated to secure bonding of 10, 000,000.00 resulting in Charles Young Jr. being forced to seek an investor that he might be granted the opportunity to serve as a Developer in the City of Flint.
(Note: The first developer was Smith Village Developer. Mark DeMaria had a history in the construction industry and had a prior successful business building homes costing a million or more. The contract called for a $10 million bond. In response to my Freedom of Information request for the contract data of Smith Village Construction ,the only bond information was for Champion Homes for $10 million. Champion issued a press release that the Smith Village Homes were purchased by Brett Russell Building Company.
A second request produced a bank document for Bret Russell indicating his bank balance. I never received any information for Charles Young.
The lawsuit indicated Brett Russell was an investor in the original Smith village developer and eason indicated the Smith Village Construction was Russell and Young.) |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 4:34 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
* Documentation will support the financial stability of O.U. and Smith Village/Charles Young Jr. before the emergence of the Emergency manager.
(Note: I have written extensively about the allegation detailed in Steinberg v Young et al. regarding the financial difficulties of Young with his OU Group and his Detroit corporations. The court reported Young stating he was "robbing Peter to pay Paul".) |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 4:43 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
* Before NSP2 was awarded or released. Pre-selected Contractors had access to the specs of NSP2.
(Note: I am not sure what this references. NSP2 guidelines allowed communities to select their own developers without a bid because of the short time to implement the program, Metro Housing had a successful history as a developer. They selected Smith Village developer and used a rigid mechanism for approval. Young was the company agent for Flint. Somehow Russell and Young became the new developers. See the thread involving the lawsuit) |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 4:52 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
* In the history of Flint HUD (Government) awards has been afforded to a minimum of two African Americans. Charles Young Jr. being one.
* Relative to Smith Village NAP2 (sic)and prior to the Emergency Manager 23 mortgages had been secured with Citizens and Chase bank. Ultimately, families chose to buy elsewhere because of the perception of Racial Discrimination.
* The abrupt termination of Smith village resulted in the homes being without Warranties. Charles Young Jr. was not allowed to complete nor warrant the homes and the new developer refused to warrant the work.
* Smith Village/Charles Young Jr. were informed that a RFI was being requested to gage the direction of NSP 2 phase 2. However, unethical and illegal procurement procedures were executed by Flint DCED in obtaining new Developer.
* Smith Village/ Charles Young Jr. offered a proposal to complete phase ! and ensure warranties. DCED refused this and any communication.
* Contractual violations of the termination process for Smith Village/Charles Young Jr. were not executed in compliant with the contract A written notice or citation was never granted by Flint City DCED.
* Smith Village was comprised of 51% African American and 49% White male, this was the result of the bonding terms being altered. Ultimately, Flint DCED refused to speak with the majority owner and opted to converse with the white male investor. |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:28 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
* Documentation supports O.U. and Smith Village/Charles Young Jr. being guided by consultants throughout the development. The direction of both contracts was orchestrated by Consultants.
(note: The NSP2 came through the Michigan State Housing Development Association (MSHDA). MSHDA hired a consultant. Also Eason went to HUD and requested consultant assistance.) |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:39 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
* O.U./ Charles Young attempted to resolve before legal ramifications. Again, and with legal representation they were disregarded and not paid.
* Court records substantiate Flint City stating it did violate the contract by nonpayment.
*. Court records substantiate Flint City Emergency manager, stating his Department head did not inform him of the invoice for 1.4 million owed to O.U.
*Documentation supports Flint City filing a restraining order prohibiting O.U. fro the sale of NSP1 homes and also granting an excuse to HUD for their intentional delays and mishandling NSP1. |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:49 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
In April of 2012 HUD Community Planning and Development Specialist Kathleen Hines made a monitoring visit to Flint in regards to NSP 1 (contract # B-08-UN-26-0005 for $4,224,021) and NSP3 (contract # B-11-UN-26-005 for $3,076,522).
"During our review, we found evidence of noncompliance with the CDBG and NSP regulations that will require program modification and repayment of disallowed costs. There are four findings and one concern noted in the attached report, three of which will require repayment of NSP1 funds back to the US Treasury. We discussed the resulting findings in our exit interview with the Community Development Director and others on April 26,2012."
At the time Emergency Manager Mike Brown was in control and Tracy Atkinson was the Director of DCED. The document is signed by Keith Hernandez, Director Community Planning and Development, Detroit Field Office.
Last edited by untanglingwebs on Fri Apr 04, 2014 7:20 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2014 6:45 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
| Under NSP 1 a total of 18 units were to be acquired, rehabilitated and sold to homebuyers. As of March 31, 2012, 17 homes had been acquired, 3 completed and 0 sold. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2014 6:50 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
"INTRODUCION
The City of Flint has undergone a significant leadership change with the appointment of an Emergency Manager by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder in December 2011. The Community and Economic Development Department has also had significant restructuring in the past year.
The department's primary efforts since then have been in restoring Flint's federal programs. Nearly one year behind in compliance with submission of NSP performance reports, the city has been working toward resolving outstanding HOME Program findings. The city's completion of CDBG contractual requirement for FY2011 is ongoing while attempting to meet FY2012 Annual Action Plan submission deadlines. In addition the grantee is negotiating failed contacts with the primary developer for the NSP 2 (MSHDA funded) activity.
The City's NSP! & 3 Activities also show limited success. Except for the demolition program, all activities were halted in December 2011 while program management staff reviewed existing contracts with developers and housing counselors. As agreements expired, management monitored activities and spending comparing invoices with rehabilitation progress in order to ascertain whether completion of activities will occur with existing budgets. Modifications and negotiations are ongoing." |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2014 7:36 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
INTRODUCTION (continued)
The City's NSP3 activities are idle as the grantee completes a Substantial Amendment to comply with Special Conditions and the proposed Memorandum of Agreement Technical Assistance is being provided by HUD and is expected to result in improved compliance with administrative controls and in meeting deadlines. Program performance and increased spending should also improve.
Previous NSP Monitoring took place April 27-30 2010and again May 24-27, 2011 where four findings were noted. They are:
1. Failure to adhere to rehabilitation standards.
2. Lack of oversight of subrecipient monitoring.
3. Failure to follow procurement regulations; and
4. Failure to solicit women and minority owned business enterprises.
As a result of the city's lack of progress an NSP Needs Assessment was completed in 2010 by ICF International but no technical assistance was provided. Along with the NSP 3 agreement, special contract conditions were imposed at HUD headquarters. At the time of this writing, the City has been approved for and is receiving NSP Technical Assistance. Emphasis on restoring NSP2 activities will be the primary goal with NSP1 and NSP3 to follow."
2. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2014 7:52 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Finding 3 was for disallowed costs because the City failed to follow their own procurement procedures when seeking a Program Management Consultant. The city used an accelerated (7) day Request For Proposals (RFP) and failed to solicit a significant number of qualified sources to ensure free and open competition. Also bid packages were to be sent to qualified organizations and this did not occur. There were no cost comparisons and firms that could have performed the work were not contacted.
"This became a sole source solicitation without justification."
The company hired was CIG, Inc. and all money paid to CIG had to be reimbursed from non federal funds and the money awarded had to be reallocated. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2014 8:23 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Finding #4 Failure to comply with applicable laws, codes, and other requirements relating to housing safety, quality and habitability.
Salem Housing sub-contracted their housing rehabilitation services to Operation Unification. Construction oversight and project management was to be provided by CIG.
The home at 1650 N. Grand Traverse was noncompliant and led to a stop work order because of improper installation of the roof and incomplete lead based paint abatement. Operation Unification was paid for incomplete and unqualified work. Other problems identified were trip hazards in the driveways and sidewalks and damaged fence hazards.
The developer (Operation Unification) "failed to provide adequate oversight to the project."
The property management firm (CIG) "allowed payments for substandard work."
The grantee (City of Flint) "failed to properly monitor the activities".
"The work already paid for will have to be re-done. The house remains incomplete and the budget for the project has doubled without the support of sufficient funding. The contract ith the developer has expired without project completion. Resale cannot occur and affordable hosing will not be provided as specified by NSP." |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2014 8:40 am |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Rental and/or Property Resale
HUD visited several properties acquired for rehabilitation b Operation Unification.
Three properties were rehabilitated and were rented out and not sold. There was no documentation of proper lease-to-own and/or an eligible rental structure based on tenant income criteria. Operation Unification owner stated he leased to prevent vandalism and theft of completed homes.
"The plan for the disposition of the remaining properties remains unclear; the development agreements have since expired without the benefit of project completions. Marketing and resale of the NSP homes has yet to be successful." |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2014 8:49 am |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
