Friday, March 30, 2007
Editorial: Housing chief stumbles on his own ax
Roanoke's housing authority director exposed a need for greater oversight. He's leaving because that's what he's getting.
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Well.
A mere 10 months after arriving as executive director of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, shaking it up and exposing a serious lack of oversight, Ellis Henry has resigned -- complaining that he was subject to too much oversight.
He calls it micromanagement. But, based on his own explanation, the authority's board of commissioners seems to have been doing exactly what it is supposed to do: maintaining vigilance.
Henry wanted to lay off 10 employees and eliminate their positions, citing orders by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development to streamline operations.
Authority board chairman Greg Feldmann wanted the executive director first to confer with the board and answer some questions: about the authority's potential exposure to lawsuits as a result of the reorganization and about the loss of knowledge and expertise that would result. How would that gap be filled?
These are good questions.
Henry, of all people, should understand why the board would ask -- indeed, was obligated to ask. Soon after he took over as the authority's chief executive, he began questioning past practices and had his staff research contract awards; their work suggested possible preferential treatment and conflicts of interest.
He took his suspicions along with supporting documents to HUD, which did an audit, found problems with numerous contracts, and asked for $2 million, since reduced to $1.3 million, of the public's federal tax money back.
And where, some city council members wondered publicly and vehemently, were the council-appointed commissioners when contracting irregularities occurred? Why hadn't they more closely scrutinized the way the agency was run?
After three commissioners resigned and council named replacements, one thing should have been self-evident: The board would be asking the executive director questions. Lots of questions. As it should.
Any oversight board might be tempted to micromanage, and that can mean trouble. Professional staff must have leeway to handle day-to-day operations and do their jobs. However, eliminating 10 of 90 staff positions, as Henry proposed, is a significant reorganization. Doing it in a way that stirs talk of lawsuits raises concerns for all of an organization's policymakers. The board's wish to confer was sensible.
Henry came to Roanoke as an outsider and shed some needed light on the way "business as usual" was being done. For that, the city can thank him.
Now, an invigorated board should set about finding a leader who can handle oversight and bring stability to an agency that, for almost a year, has been in turmoil.
