Report rips Housing Authority

Sito Negron

Wednesday, Feb. 11, 2004 | 11:15 a.m.

A federal report that calls for an accounting of $3 million within 45 days also contains strong accusations of mismanagement and poor practices at the Las Vegas Housing Authority, including maintenance issues that left 40 percent of the housing units studied with major deficiencies.

Housing Authority board chairman Bobby Gronauer declined to point fingers at the administration or his fellow commissioners Tuesday, saying most of the problems stemmed from prior management. Administrators at the authority did not return telephone calls seeking comment.

Gronauer said it will take time to digest the 150-plus page report done by Housing and Urban Development at the request of Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman, which was distributed to board members last Friday.

"We have 45 days to respond to it. We've only had it for four or five days," he said. "Trying to talk about it is almost fruitless. What I'm trying to do is figure out where do we go from here.

"Please understand, I think the report is serious. I don't know if it's fatal," said Gronauer, who also is the elected Clark County constable.

The report included findings that:

"This is an opportunity for the board ... to find out where their housing authority is now and develop some strategies about where they want it be," said Las Vegas HUD office director Ken LoBene.

He said the issues that involve management are crucial "because it's those that will ensure the efficient and proper operation of the housing authority long-term. Any time any (government) organizations operate, they operate in the public trust. You want to make sure those are used in the most efficient manner possible."

The Las Vegas Housing Authority, more than 50 years old, has an annual budget of around $65 million and serves about 15,000 people.

Last summer, Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman replaced four of the five LVHA board members and asked HUD to provide special training to the new board to prevent similar future problems.

Around that time, an inspector general's review questioned $158,705 in spending, including a public relations contract given to former Clark County Commissioner Dario Herrera in 2001 that was labeled ineligible expenditures of federal funds.

Following that review, Goodman requested HUD examine the authority, which led to the report issued Friday.

The report outlines 36 violations of federal, state or local regulations; 10 conditions or practices that may result in violations; and 26 recommendations.

Goodman said Tuesday that he had heard about problems in the authority before the summer, and "I kept saying they had to work things out amongst themselves, and when they weren't able to do that it's when I intervened."

He said his power is limited to appointing and replacing board members when their terms expire, barring a blatant violation of rules that would cause someone to be replaced.

"The only authority I had was to bring an order to show cause as to why someone may not hold a position," Goodman said. "That's a heavy burden and the reason I handled it the way I did, and as a result of this investigation we're better off for it."

Gronauer said much of the trouble stems from the fact that the executive director, Parviz Ghadiri, does not have a contract and has been on shaky ground since 2002, when previous director Frederick Brown died.

Brown has been the target of much of the criticism, and many of the problems cited in Friday's HUD report go back to when he was in charge. For example, the report states that there was no documentation for a $21,000 consulting contract for Brown's former assistant Joyce Roberson in 2001 and 2002.

Gronauer said Ghadiri is working without a contract and without direction from the board, and has since 2002.

"It's up to this new board now to give Mr. Ghadiri a contract," Gronauer said. His hope is the five-member board will give him "goals and objectives and a contract holding his feet to the fire. Maybe a nine-month review -- I can't make that decision without the rest of the board -- but my idea is a nine-month review to hold his feet to the fire."

Gronauer also addressed a portion of the report that questions whether he might have a conflict of interest between being constable -- with the responsibility for evictions -- and a member of the authority board.

He said he had nothing to do with the process of evaluating cause for evictions. "After due process the judges make a decision and I carry out the decision," Gronauer said.