By By JESSICA SIEFF / Niles Daily Star
NILES – What started as a controversial eviction, followed by a controversial suspension and subsequently controversial termination – came to a tension-filled head Tuesday, at a special meeting between the Niles Housing Commission and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Inside the complex at 251 Cass St., residents crowded the hallways holding paper signs reading "Fire the board! We want Dave!" As tenants and officials including attorney for the city Robert Landgraf Jr. and former director David Martin took their seats – HUD officials Louis Berra, field office director for HUD in Grand Rapids and Robert Nelson, director of the Michigan office of public housing took theirs – squarely across from the board.
Berra started off by explaining to board members the matter at hand – a "conflict of interest" among the board itself.
According to Berra and Nelson, in accordance to the Annual Contributions Contract between HUD and the Niles Housing Commission, board member Georgia Boggs and recent appointee Scott Clark violated the conflict of interest stipulations within the contract. Boggs is a current member of the city council and Clark, a "former commissioner" who previously stepped down – stepped back into the commission within less than 12 months.
That puts the board in the position of executing a conflict of interest, explained Berra, adding, "It appears to us that the housing commission is somewhat dysfunctional."
But that assessment lies amidst a series of unanswered questions. What prompted the visit from HUD officials is unclear. HUD stated the reason for the meeting, once again, as out of concern for the conflict of interest issue. But it comes on the heels of Martin's firing. And according to City Administrator, Terry Eull – the conflict of interest issue was dealt with three years ago – suddenly resurfacing. HUD's claims are in regards to a contract supposedly held with the commission, Eull explained, however "the problem is we can't find that contract. And neither can HUD."
Berra, in a statement to the press, questioned the validity of the termination of Martin – following accusations of intimidation – due to the two members in question. The question that follows is, does the conflict of interest exist if the contract outlining it doesn't? Said Eull, "how do you enforce a contract that you don't have?"
When Clark questioned HUD about the issue of a conflict of interest having come up before – and having been quelled with a letter from HUD themselves – Nelson explained that letter was received before rules had changed and that such letters were "superceded" by opinions direct from Washington.
The criticism continued. Nelson and Berra informed the board that their actions of late led them to miss the initial entry deadline on a capital improvement grant worth $250,000. The board can still apply, Nelson explained, but were now applying for funds that may or may not entirely be available.
Adding even more pressure to the board, he added that certain funding had been locked. "The money is there, you just don't have access to it," he said. The lock, he explained, comes out of a lack of assurance on behalf of HUD "that day to day operations are being protected."
"We were really in the dark," said Clark, commenting on the boards past trust in the former director – who sat in the audience. Nelson's response was stern, saying that board members should have taken it upon themselves to seek out information needed or not known. People "only report what you ask for," he said.
As the conversation continued under a blanket of tension and opposition, Nelson commented, "the city of Niles can get out of the public housing business." Residents, he said, "would be relocated". But that statement quickly gave way to the desire for HUD to remain in the city. "We're in the business of providing housing. We don't want to see it go away."
Having said that, HUD offered a few initial suggestions for action: get rid of the conflict of interest, get an interim director in place and get someone in to direct the commission permanently.
The meeting ended with little outlined resolution – which is almost certain to be seen in the days to come. Clark was quoted as saying an interim director would be named possibly by the end of the week and action by Clark and Boggs are still uncertain – though Eull said they have already offered to resign.
Residents were less than thrilled with what happened at the special meeting. Several said they felt their voices went unheard in their support for Martin – who has received a wealth of speculation after he moved to evict 92 year old Mary Dalenberg which led Dalenberg to file a lawsuit against the commission. "I was very disappointed with this meeting today," said resident Sharon Sarrels who has lived at the Hi-Rise on Cass Street for the past two weeks. Martin was never given a chance to defend himself, she said. And tenants were given a chance to speak. "It's the tenants that live here," she said.
"Dave has done wonderful here," said Helen Benjamin, a tenant for nine years. She added that Martin took care of the grounds "just like if it was his own home."
Martin said little. His presence seemed almost enough. There is a question as to whether he could return to his position, in the wake of the loss of the aforementioned members. Martin stood quietly in the hallway after the meeting and listened as tenants came to his defense. Though it seemed he would make no comments at all, Martin tried to calm upset tenants. "At this point," he said. "I'm really not allowed to say too much." But that didn't stop him from saying just a few minutes later that he needed to make no defense. "I didn't do anything wrong."
As the Niles Housing Commission board tries to reorganize itself, the question of Martin's termination is one to be answered at another time. "These are completely separate issues," said Eull. Separate…but not yet silenced.