Laserfiche WebLink
aware of this plan or its consequences until a notice (required by HUD) was <br /> posted and a meeting held by the Executive Director Mr. Parsons on May 1st. <br /> The residents were told their rent would be lowered by $8.00, $10.00, or <br /> $14.00 per month depending on their unit and that they would have to pay <br /> their own gas bills. Needless to say most of the tenants were confused and <br /> upset. Many of the residents felt that this would mean a higher cost of <br /> living. I also attended this residents meeting and heard that this was a <br /> HUD mandated program (which it is not). The residents were told that they <br /> could respond in 30 days by writing the Housing Authority or HUD Offices <br /> in San Francisco. <br /> <br /> It was at this time that I suggested the Council review the Housing Authority <br /> actions. <br /> <br /> In the middle of May, half way through this 30 day reply period, contractors <br /> arrived on the scene to measure and commence installing water heaters. In <br /> the studio units they were going to install water heaters in an inside <br /> closet some 6-8 feet away from the beds (there had been no mention at the <br /> earlier meeting that the work could begin before the 30 day notice period). <br /> It took calls by tenants and Councilman Kephart and myself to find out that <br /> no City permits had been issued. The City Inspector had not seen the plans <br /> and in fact after his review he would not issue a building permit for the <br /> work. At this point several residents filed a law suit and obtained a <br /> temporary restraining order to prevent further action. <br /> <br /> a. Not mandated <br /> b. Takes up one half of two existing closets-showing little concern for <br /> residents <br /> c. Unnecessary waste of taxpayers money ($25,000) <br /> d. Plan to double deposit fees for existing tenants <br /> e. Limited use of recreational room-few planned activity programs <br /> f. Harrassment of some residents by staff when they complained <br /> g. No encouragement for community support, financial or othen~ise <br /> <br /> This list is not all-inclusive but clearly adds up to the fact that there <br /> is a great need to create a more healthful and helpful attitude towards <br /> Kottinger residents. <br /> <br />"Although i have grave reservations concerning some of the actions of the Housing <br />Authority Board and in particular the Housing Authority staff, I believe that the <br />system itself (i.e., the line of accountability) is responsible for many of the <br />problems. It is my conviction that if the care and concern of the Senior Citizens <br />at Kottinger Place is of a high priority within our community then the ultimate <br />responsibility should lie with the elected officials (i.e., the City Council) and <br />the City staff (i.e., the City Manager). I believe that there should be a Housing <br />Authority Commission that has a status similar to all other existing City Commis- <br />sions (i.e., Planning, and Park and Recreation). <br /> <br />"It is my recommendation that the City Council restructure the Housing Authority <br />accordingly. <br /> <br />"Mr. Fmyor, it is my further recommendation that the City Council hold a joint <br />public meeting with the Housing Authority, allowing public input, before any <br />action is taken by this Council. Therefore, I hereby move that such a public <br />hearing be set." <br /> <br /> 7. 6/27/78 <br /> <br /> <br />