Busted! Feds Audit Jax After Kim Scott Demolition Spree
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Urban-Issues/Fed-Audit-of-CBDG-Grants/i-3CKVQ8k/0/O/money.jpg)
Following the hue and cry surrounding the lightning demolitions of several historic properties in the historic Northside, a group of historic preservationists looked into the source of funding for Kim Scotts apparently unappealable decisions to demolish dwindling historic stock. What they found was unsettling, and the result was a federal look into the way that Jacksonville has been handling federal funds. What they found can only be described as widespread mishandling of procedure as well as expenditure of monies and we have copies of the actual report back to the City. Join us for compelling details after the jump.
Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-jun-busted-feds-audit-jax-after-kim-scott-demolition-spree
No comment from Scott? :o
Quote from: stephendare on June 12, 2014, 09:38:55 AM
From todays Times Union, Steve Patterson Reporting: Read the entire article, its great.
http://members.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2014-06-11/story/hud-jacksonville-owes-feds-160000-rules-violations-when-demolishing#cxrecs_s
"I'm really appalled to know this," Councilman Johnny Gaffney said when a reporter asked him about the money the city would have to repay.
The city can't afford to lose money because it's not on top of its game, said Councilwoman Lori Boyer.
"It's just so unacceptable that we have one instance after another where we are failing to perform," she said, a day after council members fumed over extra costs the city faced to manage the loss of water taxi service.
The final cost of the HUD findings isn't clear yet.
Sadly, it would seem our esteemed Council is only concerned about the monetary losses to the city, not the historical losses.
I think they are going to use what we label as demolition by neglect as an excuse to protect the interest of the public which is horse caca in my opinion.
What are the possible ramifications to the city if they are found to be at fault?
As to the demolitions, they have been found at fault. First, they were forced to admit they did not follow proper procedures for two emergency demolition now HUD has officially found 13 demolitions that must be paid back. Preservation SOS knows of 164 demolitions that the city could also be on the hook for. However, I suspect HUD would much rather leverage this to insure the city cleans up it's act so here's hoping the city cooperates better with HUD than they typically do with anyone at all.
Quote from: strider on June 12, 2014, 01:04:16 PM
As to the demolitions, they have been found at fault. First, they were forced to admit they did not follow proper procedures for two emergency demolition now HUD has officially found 13 demolitions that must be paid back. Preservation SOS knows of 164 demolitions that the city could also be on the hook for. However, I suspect HUD would much rather leverage this to insure the city cleans up it's act so here's hoping the city cooperates better with HUD than they typically do with anyone at all.
Awesome information thank you!
"Demolition by Neglect" should even not be a term that is used. Neglect doesn't demolish houses. To my knowledge, historic houses in the National Register Springfield Historic District (and anywhere else for that matter) aren't simply falling over by themselves. It takes hours of an excavator gnawing at them piece by piece.
This term is used by demolition happy people at COJ to blame the owners for their decision to demolish an historic home. The owners may be responsible for neglecting the property. They are generally not responsible for the demolition.
In fact, when an owner requests a demolition within the Historic District, the request is generally supposed to be denied by the Historic Preservation Commission.
At times, MCCD has been doing an end run around HPC by calling their demolition activities "emergencies" when no emergency existed. (2nd and Liberty - house had been reframed inside.) And throwing their activities in the face of HPC by refusing an HPC request to simply stabilize a gable instead of demolishing a house on E. 2nd Street. The MCCD rep told HPC no, the house was coming down. And they demolished it 12 hours later as an" emergency" refusing HPC's request to simply stabilize the gable (the only safety issue) instead.
wow this is obscene.
Through my work with Preservation SOS I have solid evidence of almost $500,000 in NSP1 funds used to demolish historic structures without following the federal guidelines. Money that will have to be returned to the Federal Government. I have the list of properties and written verification from Florida's State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) that no Section 106 reviews were completed. There was $1M in NSP1 funds...and $400,000 in NSP3 funds...and God knows how much CDBG funding...my research continues.
I've spoken about this in front of City Council numerous times. I spoke at the Rules Committee meeting AGAINST Kim Scott's promotion to Director of Regulatory Compliance. Asked them how they could possibly promote a woman into a position of complying with federal regulations when she has not been able to follow them as they relate to demolition. They did not want to hear it. All they had was praise for the mighty Kim Scott. We have shared the information with the media. All the information shared by myself and other members of Preservation SOS have fallen on DEAF EARS.
Well guess what...Sheclown and I went to the federal funding source - HUD. We sat down with them and told HUD what the City of Jacksonville is doing with the Federal grant funds. And they listened...intently. And then HUD performed an audit, the results of which you see on this thread. Mind you, this is only the tip of the iceberg. They did a very small audit. The mis-use of Federal tax dollars, which by the way is OUR (citizen) money, extends way beyond the realm of demolition.
Quote from: strider on June 12, 2014, 01:04:16 PM
As to the demolitions, they have been found at fault. First, they were forced to admit they did not follow proper procedures for two emergency demolition now HUD has officially found 13 demolitions that must be paid back. Preservation SOS knows of 164 demolitions that the city could also be on the hook for. However, I suspect HUD would much rather leverage this to insure the city cleans up it's act so here's hoping the city cooperates better with HUD than they typically do with anyone at all.
Will there not be a more thorough investigation to find out exactly how much federal money the city needs to return? I would think there would be an obligation to do this, whether or not the more important end goal is to ensure the city learns from its mistakes. If there are indeed 140+ more demolitions that broke the rules, that's a hell of a lot of free federal money the city gets for bad behavior, if HUD doesn't fully investigate this.
Quote from: stephendare on June 12, 2014, 04:16:17 PM
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on June 12, 2014, 04:15:11 PM
Quote from: strider on June 12, 2014, 01:04:16 PM
As to the demolitions, they have been found at fault. First, they were forced to admit they did not follow proper procedures for two emergency demolition now HUD has officially found 13 demolitions that must be paid back. Preservation SOS knows of 164 demolitions that the city could also be on the hook for. However, I suspect HUD would much rather leverage this to insure the city cleans up it's act so here's hoping the city cooperates better with HUD than they typically do with anyone at all.
Will there not be a more thorough investigation to find out exactly how much federal money the city needs to return? I would think there would be an obligation to do this, whether or not the more important end goal is to ensure the city learns from its mistakes. If there are indeed 140+ more demolitions that broke the rules, that's a hell of a lot of free federal money the city gets for bad behavior, if HUD doesn't fully investigate this.
I think its like 30 million or more.
ouch!....
on a separate note great work preservation sos on Getting this matter the attention it deserves! I do admire Gloria as an activist and person in general I'm sure all the people she has on her team are of the same caliber. You guys rock.
It's a shame the city didn't take down twice as many homes as it did. If the city had perhaps Springfield could finally become a viable investment area. I guess what the residents of Springfield prefer is to continued throwing good money into large square footage pretentious money pits.. Thirty years ago I said Springfield would be a viable investment five years down the line..How wrong I was thirty years later it still a mess...
Quote from: funguy on June 12, 2014, 06:19:48 PM
It's a shame the city didn't take down twice as many homes as it did. If the city had perhaps Springfield could finally become a viable investment area. I guess what the residents of Springfield prefer is to continued throwing good money into large square footage pretentious money pits.. Thirty years ago I said Springfield would be a viable investment five years down the line..How wrong I was thirty years later it still a mess...
{sliding behind my chair out of the line of fire.....}
Quote from: JaxUnicorn on June 12, 2014, 03:45:01 PM
Through my work with Preservation SOS I have solid evidence of almost $500,000 in NSP1 funds used to demolish historic structures without following the federal guidelines. Money that will have to be returned to the Federal Government. I have the list of properties and written verification from Florida's State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) that no Section 106 reviews were completed. There was $1M in NSP1 funds...and $400,000 in NSP3 funds...and God knows how much CDBG funding...my research continues.
I've spoken about this in front of City Council numerous times. I spoke at the Rules Committee meeting AGAINST Kim Scott's promotion to Director of Regulatory Compliance. Asked them how they could possibly promote a woman into a position of complying with federal regulations when she has not been able to follow them as they relate to demolition. They did not want to hear it. All they had was praise for the mighty Kim Scott. We have shared the information with the media. All the information shared by myself and other members of Preservation SOS have fallen on DEAF EARS.
Well guess what...Sheclown and I went to the federal funding source - HUD. We sat down with them and told HUD what the City of Jacksonville is doing with the Federal grant funds. And they listened...intently. And then HUD performed an audit, the results of which you see on this thread. Mind you, this is only the tip of the iceberg. They did a very small audit. The mis-use of Federal tax dollars, which by the way is OUR (citizen) money, extends way beyond the realm of demolition.
+1 The Feds do listen.
The Feds do not want Jacksonville to lose any funding -- nor does anyone I know want this to happen. What would we lose? After school care for children at risk? That hardly seems a goal worth pursuing.
What we all do want is the respect which is due our older homes. In and out of the historic districts. A recognition that the craftsmanship and the materials are far superior to what is available today. And an understanding that in this "sustainable" conscious world, a house already built is the greenest of all.
What needs to happen with this respect is a willingness to MOTHBALL all structures 50 years or older. Additionally any action taken against a house 50 years or old should have to have some sort of sign off from the historic planning department, IMHO. Which means more staff for that department.
Save the houses.
QuoteCity vows changes after HUD review
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- A federal review found the city of Jacksonville violated regulations when it demolished homes in Springfield. It owes the federal government more than $160,000 and may have to pay more in fines, if certain issues aren't addressed.
City staffers halted demolitions using federal funds last year, after it was revealed that certain policies and procedures were not followed.
"Based on our review, this lack of communication and compliance resulted in the demolition of fourteen (14) properties that may have been eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places," the team with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development wrote in the report.
Activists said they weren't surprised by the findings, as they had alerted officials to the issues over the past few years.
"Across the board, the city needs to a better job of spending federal money," said Gloria DeVall, with Preservation S.O.S. "There's a lot of money that comes into the city every year, hundreds of millions of dollars. Jacksonville has a duty to be good stewards with that money."
Elaine Spencer, Housing and Community Development Division chief, told Action News she met with HUD officials on Thursday to discuss the findings. She said most of the issues, especially those involving environmental reports, predated her tenure.
"All the technical experience disappeared from the division so we did not have that capacity now we do," Spencer said. "And so we're doing everything that we can to conform to the HUD requirements and training is very fundamental in that."
Three of the home demolitions happened during Spencer's time as head of the division. She said her staff moved aggressively to address that issue after determining rules were broken. Five staffers have received training related to environmental reporting.
Other issues found in the review have already been corrected, Spencer said.
"Knowing what we know now, we can be certain that that will not happen again," she said. "We should not have any recurrence."
The city has about two months to file additional reports relating to the demolitions, or else it will face additional fines of $545,000.
Spencer said she is confident her staff will address the issues so that the fines would not have to be paid. She also said that amount may be reduced, even if all of issues aren't addressed in that time frame.
Copyright 2014 Cox Media Group, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/topstories/story/City-vows-changes-after-HUD-review/HeOZJyDcvU28yFsQYBx8kA.cspx
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on June 12, 2014, 04:15:11 PM
Quote from: strider on June 12, 2014, 01:04:16 PM
As to the demolitions, they have been found at fault. First, they were forced to admit they did not follow proper procedures for two emergency demolition now HUD has officially found 13 demolitions that must be paid back. Preservation SOS knows of 164 demolitions that the city could also be on the hook for. However, I suspect HUD would much rather leverage this to insure the city cleans up it's act so here's hoping the city cooperates better with HUD than they typically do with anyone at all.
Will there not be a more thorough investigation to find out exactly how much federal money the city needs to return? I would think there would be an obligation to do this, whether or not the more important end goal is to ensure the city learns from its mistakes. If there are indeed 140+ more demolitions that broke the rules, that's a hell of a lot of free federal money the city gets for bad behavior, if HUD doesn't fully investigate this.
Interesting you'd mention that. The answer is YES.
Probably the biggest consequence would be the threat in the audit that if measures are not taken, the city will LOSE its federal funding.
That would mean the end of life as we know it in Jacksonville.
100s of millions a year.
Don't get me wrong....I do not want the City of Jacksonville to lose Federal Funding. As sheclown implied, that would be devastating for us. What I DO want is that the City take responsibility for ALL the mis-use of Federal dollars....take their lumps....straighten up and fly right!
As I posted earlier, there are many, MANY other properties that were demolished without following the Federal rules, and as we've now discovered via the HUD Audit, projects not involving demolition did not follow the rules either.
The improper demolitions took place under Kim Scott's watch. And now the City has promoted her to Director of Regulatory Compliance where she has the responsibility to make sure regulations are followed. Someone please tell me how that makes any sense whatsoever.... :o
I would also like to add this.
Clearly Springfield was targeted after the audit by code enforcement.
Federal audit date: March 17-21
Code sweep through Springfield: March 28
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,21163.0.html
City of Jacksonville. You are on notice. Here and on all social media.
Any heavy handed action against Springfield will be met with as much force back as humanly possible. And will be witnessed by all those who read Metrojacksonville and Facebook.
It will be GAME ON.
And if the city should have to answer for anything -- it should have to answer for how it treats its URBAN CORE.
Quote from: sheclown on June 13, 2014, 10:23:27 AM
I would also like to add this.
Clearly Springfield was targeted after the audit by code enforcement.
Federal audit date: March 17-21
Code sweep through Springfield: March 28
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,21163.0.html
City of Jacksonville. You are on notice. Here and on all social media.
Any heavy handed action against Springfield will be met with as much force back as humanly possible. And will be witnessed by all those who read Metrojacksonville and Facebook.
It will be GAME ON.
And if the city should have to answer for anything -- it should have to answer for how it treats its URBAN CORE.
YES! I am 1,000, 000% on board!! (Anyone notice the significance of that percentage? )
City Council backed her promotion to COMPLIANCE OFFICER this past April!
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2014-04-14/story/jacksonville-council-panel-backs-kim-scotts-promotion-compliance
Considering the FED's stated every file had issues of non compliancy , is this women capable and does she deserve 88K thousand a year when she cannot do the job. How about claw back the fine from her salary?
http://news.jacksonville.com/govtsalaries/index.php?id=326644
...and every member of city council knew about these issues BEFORE they approved the promotion, PSOS members informed them BEFORE they approved the promotion - so for any of them to act "shocked" is really insincere and says what they all really think of all of us who vote
With Metro Jax's relationship with Channel 4 don't you have an ear over there with someone that will tell the real story and blow this up day after day with news reports? That may get Ms Scott canned if tied to Skipper Brown as we all know the only time he does anything is if there is a camera or he starts getting bad press that may now bring down his reelection.
^^ excellent! Bring her down! :)
It didn't surprise me that the city council clowns still voted to approve the promotion of Kim Scott...with Denise Lee singing her praises. Then the report comes out and they have the audacity to act surprised...really? It's not like PSOS hasn't been shouting out about all of this. This just shows the lack of real leadership and integrity of COJ.
Springfielder,
Noticing in your signature that it's been 358 days since a demolition. If still accurate, will there be some celebrating on the 365th day? Nice number to see! :)
Maybe the 365 milestone will be a good time for another Kent Justice piece.
Ann Schindler on First Coast News.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/local/2014/06/16/hud-report-slams-city/10637305/
Whoa. So all cases randomly reviewed had compliance issues. That's pretty damning. There's a good chance all the demolitions were in violation. What's the Mayor's Office response to this growing fiasco? Paying back the feds for not following the rules is basically a tax increase.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 16, 2014, 07:42:06 PM
Whoa. So all cases randomly reviewed had compliance issues. That's pretty damning. There's a good chance all the demolitions were in violation. What's the Mayor's Office response to this growing fiasco? Paying back the feds for not following the rules is basically a tax increase.
We have not found (in reviewing 170+ cases of demolition using federal funds) where a single one was done correctly. Add in the asbestos issues (improper notification to the authorities to ensure public safety) and you have a regulatory compliance division which lacks the "capacity" to understand how to do their job in all areas.
And these are HUDs words, not ours.
City's response--head in sand. If we don't acknowledge it, maybe it really did not happen.....
Quote from: thelakelander on June 16, 2014, 07:42:06 PM
What's the Mayor's Office response to this growing fiasco?
Quote from: mbwright on June 17, 2014, 10:08:36 AM
City's response--head in sand. If we don't acknowledge it, maybe it really did not happen.....
I thought their official response was the promotion of the person in charge during this entire debacle?
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on June 17, 2014, 10:45:26 AM
I thought their official response was the promotion of the person in charge during this entire debacle?
Exactly. They'll recommend her for a performance bonus next.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 16, 2014, 07:42:06 PM
Paying back the feds for not following the rules is basically a tax increase.
I'm sure the Mayor would not say that. I've heard him recently say "I have balanced 3 budgets without raising taxes"...seems to me that this year's budget was balanced through a tax increase by Council that he chose not to veto.
look at the story from 2010:
News
Follow This Article
Housing audit leaves Jacksonville on the hook for $2.7 million
City must pay U.S. back for housing program mismanagement.
Posted: June 14, 2010 - 7:04pm
J
View this story on the All-Access Members site
Audit findings
Jacksonville's Housing and Neighborhood Department has to pay back the federal government $2.7 million because of mismanagement of a housing program. An audit conducted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development of the City's Home Investment Partnership Program, among other things, found that:
- The city approved a $900,000 loan for a company to purchase an affordable housing complex, despite the fact that company already owned the complex for more than two years.
- Three loans given for the purpose of buying or renovating affordable housing complexes were used on properties that ended in foreclosure.
- Because of the foreclosures, the three properties did not meet key requirements of the program.
- A $500,000 loan was given for the purchase of an affordable housing complex, but documentation verifying that purchase was lacking.
By Matt Dixon
Jacksonville's Housing and Neighborhoods Department is paying $2.7 million back to the federal government because a housing program was mismanaged, according to documents reviewed by The Times-Union.
A little known 2008 audit said that the Home Investment Partnerships Program, administered by Housing and Neighborhoods, provided money for the purchase and renovation of two affordable housing complexes - Ashley Tower Apartments and Magnolia Point Apartments. Those complexes ended up in foreclosure and did not complete key requirements of the program....
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-14/story/housing-audit-leaves-jacksonville-hook-27-million#ixzz34v1Y4wTx
I just found an undated Memorandum from Calvin Burney and Elaine Spencer to City Council regarding the HUD audit. Based on the 6/11/14 date referenced at the end, I'd have to assume it was sent on or after that date.
I do not have the attachments referenced in the memorandum.
(http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii36/JaxUnicorn/HUDAuditofCOJ2014-05-21CityResponsepage1.jpg)
(http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii36/JaxUnicorn/HUDAuditofCOJ2014-05-21CityResponsepage2.jpg)
(http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii36/JaxUnicorn/HUDAuditofCOJ2014-05-21CityResponsepage3.jpg)
160K for three demos? Hardly.
The report says 13 demos
Have we gotten access to the attachments yet? It sure seems like Mr Burney and Ms Spenser are trying to spin the Demolition funds as being already paid back in some fashion and that it was only the three from a Historic District. Makes me wonder if those two still are acting on the belief that 106 reviews had to be done only on the Historically designated houses not every house that is 50 years old and older. Maybe those two should have attended those classes they talked about. It would also be interesting to see if they sent Ms Scott as well since all of those demolitions and the 164 others we know about all happened on her watch.
I've got a request in for a listing of the property addresses....
I also find it odd that 1204 Walnut Street is not listed on the list of properties demolished using NSP1 funds. And Bryan Mosier with MCCD is telling me (through a public records request I submitted) that there were NO DEMOLITIONS conducted with NSP3 funds or CDBG funds. Things that make you go hmmmmmmm....
And to be clear, below are the costs associated with the three properties listed in the memorandum:
129 E 2nd - $10,495 (this from a journal entry from City)
253 E 2nd - $16,995 (this from a journal entry from City)
1204 Walnut - demo permit for DEMO 2ND FLOOR FRONT PORCH ONLY MCCD PO#120282 for $6,248
Also interesting is the amount listed as the project cost in the building permits pulled:
129 E 2nd permitted cost of $2,475, but the City paid over $10k? And current lien is $12,644.45
253 E 2nd permitted cost of $2,475, but the City paid over $16k? And current lien is $19,825.67
Both the above permits were pulled by the same company, P&G Land Clearing. Interesting still is that both projects cost is just slightly under the maximum that would require the recording of a Notice of Commencement.
That's a total of $33,738. Where's the rest of the $126,887????
(http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii36/JaxUnicorn/NSP3FundsreturnedtoHUD22ndStproperties.png)
You want details ? Kim has the details.
:)
QuoteJacksonville resolves CDBG environmental documentation issues, repaid $160K
June 8, 2016 By A.G. Gancarski
+
In good news from HUD, Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry received written notice that monitoring issues from previous mayoral administrations' reports in 2014 and 2015 had been resolved for Community Development Block Grants and the HOME Investment Partnerships Program.
Four problems in total have been resolved. But here's the bad news from HUD: one of them cost the city $160,625.
The $127,000 problem: the city failed to complete compliance reviews for activities related to CDBG, HOME, and Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants.
This required repayment of $160,625 for demolition of 13 properties, which incorrectly was paid with HUD funds. With $33,739 paid as the result of a previous monitoring visit, the balance of $126,886 had to be paid ... and was.
The other issues lacked hard costs:
The first: environmental review records lacked adequate documentation to demonstrate compliance. A variety of forms were used, and project descriptions were inadequate.
Staff members, as mandated, were trained appropriately, and policies have been revised to meet HUD's standards.
The second issue involved using an incorrect form to submit its reports, failing to "adequately" aggregate its projects, and incorrectly completing environmental assessments for individual sites instead of projects.
This issue with environmental assessments has been resolved.
The final issue: inadequate documentation of compliance with Acceptable Separation Distance guidelines set up by HUD, relative to properties within a mile of a "thermal or explosive hazard."
As required, the city confirmed that above-ground storage tanks adjacent to the Norwood neighborhood contained neither thermal nor explosive leaks or gas.
http://floridapolitics.com/archives/212539-jacksonville-resolves-cdbg-environmental-documentation-issues
I find it interesting that many within the city calls the issues nothing but environmental issues. I asked someone recently how giving property that was supposed to go to home owners but went to investors instead was "environmental". Just as one example and an example that was not addressed in the article above. Nice way to spin things though.
People lost their jobs, got demoted, moved around and lots had to be sent for new training. New people were brought in and some amount of money had to be paid back. I personally am not surprised it was not much worse because frankly, if it was, local HUD folks themselves would have been found culpable as well since they were supposed to be monitoring what goes on.
Meanwhile, the worst offender from the article above, the most costly part, was the demolitions and yet nothing has happened to the folks in MCCD nor their leader, Kimberly Scott. Interesting fact that she had been not only left out of this but promoted as well. This should concern all of us. It does not bode well for the future actions of her, her departments and the city leadership overall.
Quote from: stephendare on June 09, 2016, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: sheclown on June 08, 2016, 04:45:57 PM
QuoteJacksonville resolves CDBG environmental documentation issues, repaid $160K
June 8, 2016 By A.G. Gancarski
+
In good news from HUD, Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry received written notice that monitoring issues from previous mayoral administrations' reports in 2014 and 2015 had been resolved for Community Development Block Grants and the HOME Investment Partnerships Program.
Four problems in total have been resolved. But here's the bad news from HUD: one of them cost the city $160,625.
The $127,000 problem: the city failed to complete compliance reviews for activities related to CDBG, HOME, and Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants.
This required repayment of $160,625 for demolition of 13 properties, which incorrectly was paid with HUD funds. With $33,739 paid as the result of a previous monitoring visit, the balance of $126,886 had to be paid ... and was.
The other issues lacked hard costs:
The first: environmental review records lacked adequate documentation to demonstrate compliance. A variety of forms were used, and project descriptions were inadequate.
Staff members, as mandated, were trained appropriately, and policies have been revised to meet HUD's standards.
The second issue involved using an incorrect form to submit its reports, failing to "adequately" aggregate its projects, and incorrectly completing environmental assessments for individual sites instead of projects.
This issue with environmental assessments has been resolved.
The final issue: inadequate documentation of compliance with Acceptable Separation Distance guidelines set up by HUD, relative to properties within a mile of a "thermal or explosive hazard."
As required, the city confirmed that above-ground storage tanks adjacent to the Norwood neighborhood contained neither thermal nor explosive leaks or gas.
http://floridapolitics.com/archives/212539-jacksonville-resolves-cdbg-environmental-documentation-issues
How on earth is the City getting fined a shit ton of unnecessary money and being forced to retrain an entire cadre of people 'good news' from HUD? just the fact that the bleeding caused by Kim Scott has stopped in this particular case?
Stephen, quit asking....because no one will answer. :( In case anyone has forgotten, I have proof that the MAJORITY of the $1M in NSP1 funds used to demolish buildings was used improperly and should be paid back to the Federal Government. *** ALMOST ALL OF IT ***
Paying $160k vs. $1M is probably why they're calling it "good news".
Maybe Pam Bondi will help, LOL. :P