HOW MANY ELEVATORS?
Remember the $385K line item for new elevator flooring at the HHA? To be exact, the one on page 3 of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) Annual Performance Report 2011?
If GA had a dollar for each time I've posted this page 3, I'd be $385K richer.
The line item shows that the HHA spent $385K for "replacement of elevator cab floors" "HHA-Wide."
Then why did HHA Executive Director Carmelo Garcia tell the public a whopper, that blogs were saying this $385K contract was for ONE elevator?
Hmmm...
Truth be told, prior to last week's meeting, GA could only speculate that "HHA-Wide" might mean 20 or more elevators. Nope, the ED told us himself how many elevators were covered in this line item:
That's right- the $385K contract paid for work to 10 elevator cabs.
That's $38.5K per cab.
WHAT WORK WAS DONE?
So what was actually done for $38.5K per cab?
GA's 2 CENTS
The Executive Director is trying too hard to discredit the blogs to an audience that may or may not read them. It's all part of the staging; anyone who asks the 'wrong' questions is a 'Benedict' or a 'Zimmer puppet' or is 'spreading misinformation'.
Sorry, fella.
This is public money and we all have a right to know how our money is being spent and if it's all going where it should be. So when questions are treated like attacks, when contracts are hidden, when the ED fights tooth and nail against hiring a new lawyer and auditor (keeping the lawyer who wrote his cushy contract) and we just learned of abysmal fire inspection results (6 buildings with NO Fire suppression)... these raise questions.
The right questions.
An observation: Executive Director Garcia said the cab flooring was changed to vinyl then caulked so "if anyone urinates" the pee doesn't seep into the sub-floor. So the pee belongs inside the elevator?
How about a ZERO TOLERANCE 'No-Peeing' rule instead of retrofitting elevators with rubber? Maybe it's me, but there is something inherently wrong with adapting an elevator so it can be urinated in. It's a passive accommodation of a gross and unsanitary act in a building that houses families. Simply unacceptable.
The HHA should be clean, sanitary and safe for the people who live there. With working generators and buildings that pass fire inspections.
Remember the $385K line item for new elevator flooring at the HHA? To be exact, the one on page 3 of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) Annual Performance Report 2011?
If GA had a dollar for each time I've posted this page 3, I'd be $385K richer.
Then why did HHA Executive Director Carmelo Garcia tell the public a whopper, that blogs were saying this $385K contract was for ONE elevator?
Hmmm...
Truth be told, prior to last week's meeting, GA could only speculate that "HHA-Wide" might mean 20 or more elevators. Nope, the ED told us himself how many elevators were covered in this line item:
That's right- the $385K contract paid for work to 10 elevator cabs.
That's $38.5K per cab.
WHAT WORK WAS DONE?
So what was actually done for $38.5K per cab?
- The Performance Report cites "Elevator Floor Replacement" in AMPS 1 & 2 ("HHA-Wide")
- Garcia cited floor replacement in AMPS 3, Fox Hills, Adams Gardens, Monroe Gardens, Harrison CCG, 220 Adams AND other work in AMPS 1 & 2:demo and installation of the cab walls, the controllers and the wiring. (He holds what he says is a proposal for this work that was approved to go out for bid on March 5, 2010.)
GA's 2 CENTS
The Executive Director is trying too hard to discredit the blogs to an audience that may or may not read them. It's all part of the staging; anyone who asks the 'wrong' questions is a 'Benedict' or a 'Zimmer puppet' or is 'spreading misinformation'.
Sorry, fella.
This is public money and we all have a right to know how our money is being spent and if it's all going where it should be. So when questions are treated like attacks, when contracts are hidden, when the ED fights tooth and nail against hiring a new lawyer and auditor (keeping the lawyer who wrote his cushy contract) and we just learned of abysmal fire inspection results (6 buildings with NO Fire suppression)... these raise questions.
The right questions.
An observation: Executive Director Garcia said the cab flooring was changed to vinyl then caulked so "if anyone urinates" the pee doesn't seep into the sub-floor. So the pee belongs inside the elevator?
How about a ZERO TOLERANCE 'No-Peeing' rule instead of retrofitting elevators with rubber? Maybe it's me, but there is something inherently wrong with adapting an elevator so it can be urinated in. It's a passive accommodation of a gross and unsanitary act in a building that houses families. Simply unacceptable.
The HHA should be clean, sanitary and safe for the people who live there. With working generators and buildings that pass fire inspections.
If I ever pulled any of the stunts that are tolerated in public housing my landlord would be whipping out those eviction papers so fast for willful destruction of property (yep that a legit legal basis in our state).
ReplyDeletefind out who the contractor was....
ReplyDelete