NEW ROCHELLE, NY (January 4, 2023) — Four former Commissioners of the New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority have penned a detail response to their termination Friday by Chuck Strome, in his final official act as City Manager.
SEE: In Final Act, City Manager Fires Entire New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority Board
The letter, widely circulated over the past 24 hours, blasts HUD for an “unwarranted, unjustified, unfair and unethical” attack on the Board, for misleading the Board “down a dark alley with no end” and “unequivocal defamation of character, which we do not take lightly”.
Supporters of the former NRMHA Board members are expected to address the New Rochelle City Council, and incoming City Manager Kathleen Gill at the Citizens to be Heard portion of the next City Council meeting next Tuesday.
The former Board members say they worked diligently with NRMHA to reach the goals as outlined in the Recovery Agreement. They say the Board had no knowledge of the failure of the NRMHA to adopt a 2021 budget until receiving the HUD letter; no knowledge of the Housing Choice Voucher Program’s financial issue; no knowledge of the non-compliance issues raised in HUD’s letter.
The former Board members blame Executive Director Angela Farrish and NRMHA staff for each of these failures.
“We fail to see where HUD’s allegations bear any relation to the Board’s failure to properly discharge its duty,” the former Board members wrote. “The majority of its complaints bear a direct relation to the ED and internal staff who are charged with management of the day to day operations–which is not a function of the Board.”
The letter was signed by Sheila E. Small (former Chairperson), Rev. Dr. Harry A. Dawkins III (Vice Chairperson), Haslyn Howard (former Commissioner), and Michael Yellin (former Commissioner). Timothy Clark (former Treasurer) did not sign the letter. Commissioner Anea Benjamin and Secretary Ryan Landrine, both elected resident representatives, remain on the NRMHA Board.
Angela Farrish remains as Executive Director of the New Rochelle Muncipal Housing Authority, according to a City spokesperson, who added that Farrish will be sending a letter to tenants soon. As there are no immediate plans to appoint new Commissioners, the next NRMHA Board meeting planned for January 9th will be rescheduled.
Dear Mr. Strome,
We received and reviewed your letters concerning NRMHA. We are surprised and disappointed that you would take such sweeping action after the relationship we have been nurturing and preserving with you and your office for the past several years. Further, in our individual and collective experiences as Board members of other entities, we have no knowledge of entire Boards being replaced or disbanded, specifically in New Rochelle—where there was no evidence of fraud or other malfeasance. Needless to say, the timing, on the eve of your last day(s) in office, was distasteful and not in character with the level of professionalism displayed throughout your tenure in office.
We also do not agree with HUD’s rationale that the Board, that you appointed, “does not meet the requirements needed to govern and oversee the NRMHA.” Each Board member that you appointed is a professional in their own right, which I am sure you considered in your decision to appoint. While some of us may not have a background in public housing, we are savvy enough to secure professional guidance and advice to assist us in fully supporting the needs of the housing authority. It is extremely troubling that for the past years we have been consistently meeting with HUD, and seeking guidance and direction only to be met with this outcome. It truly feels like we have been misled down a dark alley with no end. Ironically, for every other entity from whom we have sought advice, guidance, and direction, we have received it. But, the one entity, (HUD) from whom we would expect the same response or more, who claims to have only NRMHA’s best interest at heart, we received the worst responses, no responses, delayed responses, unconstructive criticism, or what feels like constant badgering. It is the most unprofessional behavior that we have had to deal with from an entity—a governmental entity at that.
We have worked diligently with NRMHA to reach her goals as outlined in the Recovery Agreement. To have satisfied over 33 of those goals, with approximately 2 remaining is a major accomplishment, which HUD has acknowledged both verbally and in writing. The last 2 items had to do with financial management for which we immediately began to rectify by putting into place the necessary protocols for resolution–which included hiring a CFO. Unfortunately, our experience with HUD has been that no matter what NRMHA does, it is either never enough or never good enough.
The reasons for HUD’s determination as outlined in its letter to you of December 21st, amounts to an unequivocal defamation of character, which we do not take lightly for the following reasons:
A. Under this Board’s guidance, NRMHA was delivered from troubled status to a Standard PHA Performer.
B. HUD required that we hire a CFO to resolve our financial issues as outlined in the Recovery Agreement.
- The Board hired a CFO – The Bonadio Group (Timothy Doyle)
a. Issue: Mr. Doyle was highly recommended by the City of New Rochelle, and NRMHA had no influence in that decision even though Mr. Doyle, by his own admission, had no prior experience working with housing authorities and stated that his expertise was in working in the Education system. Although, the Board expressed its concern about this major issue, HUD had no problem with NRMHA hiring him and expressed no pushback on this issue. However, Mr. Doyle’s lack of housing experience eventually caused the NRMHA to expend additional funds to hire another financial professional to clean up Mr. Doyle’s mess.
b. Prior to the expiration of Mr. Doyle’s contract, NRMHA conducted and paid for its own professional employment search of a CFO. Upon identifying a viable candidate, HUD, expressed concern about the candidate’s educational background, etc., and created such a delay that NRMHA lost the candidate.
c. Subsequently, the NRMHA requested that the fee accountant be allowed to act as CFO–to which NRMHA received resistance, no response(s), or unclear response(s) from HUD.- The Board did ESTABLISH a proper internal control environment.
a. In November 2019 the NRMHA established an Internal Control Policies & Procedure, a 53 page document.
b. November 2019, an Internal Financial Controls Policy was established and edited by our CFO, Timothy Doyle.
c. LIn January of 2020 CFO, Timothy Doyle was instructed to provide full training on the financial policy to the NRMHA staff as required by the Revised Action Plan (p.4).
d. The Board has no knowledge of the failure of the NRMHA to adopt a 2021 budget as we reviewed and adopted budgets for each year of our service. The Board never received any communication from HUD of the NRMHA’s failure to develop and adopt a budget until this writing.
e. The Board has no knowledge of the Housing Choice Voucher Program’s financial issue as stated in HUD’s letter and was never made aware of this issue (which is a direct function of the ED and NRMHA staff) until this writing.
f. The Board has no knowledge of the non-compliance issues raised in HUD’s letter and outlined as 1), b), i), ii), and iii), as these are intricately managed, operated and reported by the ED and NRMHA staff.C. The Board DID take sufficient steps to oversee, guide, and track implementation of Action Plan results for Financial Management
a. The Board approved NRMHA to hire a CFO, Fee Accountant, and several other consultants for which the ED expressed need in order to comply with the financial management requirements of the Recovery Agreement. On one occasion, HUD even inquired why NRMHA needed so many consultants. The Board has properly discharged its fiduciary duty by hiring financial professionals equipped to provide the necessary services and report to NRMHA and the Board on a monthly basis. Hence, HUD is not warranted in its allegations against the Board.
b. The Board approved the implementation of a new financial software system–suggested and approved by HUD–which was guaranteed to alleviate many of the internal financial recording and reporting issues—on which all of the staff would be trained.
c. The Board made consistent requests for financial reports including payables, and inquiries regarding staff size and salaries, which the ED told us met with HUD’s satisfaction.
D. The Board does NOT lack fundamental knowledge of HUD programs resulting in Violation of Fair Housing Laws
a. Apparently HUD lacks knowledge of what is discussed at our meetings even though it has a representative present at each meeting. We have discussed Title VI issues at our meeting regarding limited English proficiency and disability issues wherein we had direct guidance from our legal consultants. We pay our professionals to research, guide, direct and advise on these issues. They report to us and ensure compliance with the applicable laws and regulations as this is a daily function of the ED and the NRMHA staff and not the Board.
In view of the foregoing, we fail to see where HUD’s allegations bear any relation to the Board’s failure to properly discharge its duty. The majority of its complaints bear a direct relation to the ED and internal staff who are charged with management of the day to day operations–which is not a function of the Board. For example see Par. 4) a) i), ii), iii), iv) & v) of HUD’s letter. Further HUD’s attack on the Board is unwarranted, unjustified, unfair and unethical. It appears that HUD would be satisfied if the Board were in house, full time running the agency, but then, that is not our responsibility as a Board, and based upon experience with HUD, we doubt if that would even suffice.
Sincerely,
The (former) Board of Commissioners
New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority
Sheila E. Small
Rev. Harry Dawkins
Michael Yellin
Haslyn Howard
One thought on “Fired New Rochelle Muncipal Housing Authority Commissioners Fire Back”
Comments are closed.