City Council Ousts 5 on Housing Panel but Director Stays

Hoping to clear the air of controversy over San Diego City Housing Commission activities, the City Council Tuesday took direct control of the agency by voting to oust five appointed commissioners and replace them with council members.

The coup came at the request of Mayor Maureen O’Connor, who said the drastic action was needed to restore “credibility” in the City Council and the commission, which has been buffeted by accusations of fiscal mismanagement and extravagant expenses.

“There are problems right now with this organization. It’s not working and it’s very apparent it’s not working,” O’Connor said. “We have to exercise, in my opinion, more policy control. This is the best way to do it.”

The council voted 6-3 to accept O’Connor’s takeover plan, with Bill Cleator, Ed Struiksma and Judy McCarty dissenting. It will go into effect in 45 days.

Under the plan, five of the seven housing commissioners can be replaced by council members nominated by O’Connor. The other two commissioners--low-income tenants of Housing Commission projects--are exempt.

By replacing the commissioners, council members will have a direct hand in shaping the city’s housing policy and monitoring the Housing Commission staff, O’Connor said.

The vote changes a system that was established by the council in 1978, when it created the quasi-independent Housing Commission. Oversight for the housing staff was delegated to council-appointed commissioners, who were in turn held responsible to the council members sitting as the city’s Housing Authority.

The hands-off approach seemed to work until recent years, when the commission and Ben Montijo, its executive director, came under fire for alleged fiscal irresponsibility.

Critics lashed out at Montijo and the commission for a 1984 real estate deal in which the agency used millions of dollars in federal monies to renovate and lease its headquarters at 1625 Newton Ave., on the edge of downtown.

The commission loaned developer Robert J. Lichter $1.5 million at low interest so he could buy the office and warehouse, then agreed to lease it from him at $221,000 a year. It paid $1 million to buy the land on which the buildings sit, and agreed to lease it back to Lichter for $100,000 a year.

In addition, the commission spent $645,000 to convert the warehouse into an office.

At the request of Rep. Jim Bates (D-San Diego), the U.S. General Accounting Office examined the purchase-lease and issued a report in April saying it could find nothing criminal with the deal. But the GAO said it was made without adequate review by the commissioners and the City Council.

There has also been criticism of Montijo’s travel. And in recent months, the executive director startled council members when he submitted his department’s budget for approval but forgot to include a page that showed he had control over a “discretionary” fund of more than $1 million in federal money.

Montijo said before Tuesday’s meeting that the omission was an oversight and that the agency uses the federal money if there is a “cash flow” crunch.

He also said that repeated audits, reviews and investigations of the commission have turned up no wrong-doing in the housing agency, which has helped construct or controls 11,800 low-income units in the city.

“I wish the thing people would focus on is that every single one of these 48 audits and reviews have never found anything,” Montijo said. “I don’t think there is anyone else who they’ve gone over with a finer tooth comb than they have with us.”

Montijo acknowledged that the federal grand jury has asked the commission to supply documents for a current probe, but the grand jury has indicated that the commission “ought not to assume that we’re a target of the investigation.”

In July, council members asked City Manager Sylvester Murray to study the commission’s budget and assess whether it should become a city department. His report, released last week, recommended keeping the Housing Commission independent but placing the executive director under the council’s control.

“Most of the current problems of the commission stem from administrative actions of the executive director and the lack of controls and approvals of his actions,” Murray wrote.

But the suggestion didn’t go far enough for O’Connor. According to one council insider, Montijo’s budget gaffe gave her enough political leverage for the full takeover.

Council members acknowledged in passing the motion that they had not been doing their job. Usually, votes on the commission passed routinely without much discussion.

Two of the appointed commissioners--Max Strobl and Dorothy Leonard--appeared at the meeting, but neither pleaded for their jobs.

“I believe it’s their prerogative,” Strobl said after the vote. “We work for them. If they had wanted to ask us for our response or input, we were prepared to offer it. But I don’t think it’s our responsibility to promote what we may believe is self-interest or what might be perceived as self-interested, because ultimately it is a city program. It’s not our program.”

Montijo said Tuesday he isn’t thinking about resigning and that he interpreted the council’s action as a “very positive approach.”

“I welcome the involvement that they’re going to take,” he said. “I was really pleased with that.”

Asked if the action Tuesday was directed at him, Montijo said: “No, I don’t feel that it was a slap.” Moments later, he approached O’Connor in the hall and said he would be happy to work with her and the other council members.

“I’m a little concerned about some of the things I’ve heard about your staff and what they’ve been saying,” the mayor responded.

Mel Shapiro, a member of the San Diego Housing Coalition who has been a persistent critic of Montijo, said he believed the council’s action was a “step in the right direction.

“Funny, the commission’s gone but Montijo’s still here,” he said. “He’s really a survivor. He was the cause of all this.”

O’Connor told reporters after Tuesday’s meeting that she hasn’t decided who among her colleagues to nominate as commissioners, but she expects to be one of the five to take over when the change goes into effect in 45 days.