HUD Officials’ Bids for Funds Violated Rules, Inquiry Finds
The federal Office of Government Ethics has found that U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development executives violated conflict-of-interest rules by raising money from private contractors to pay for a promotional tour by their boss, HUD Secretary Samuel R. Pierce.
Among those singled out for criticism was the manager of HUD’s Los Angeles office, Benjamin F. Bobo, who, the ethics office said, last year personally solicited more than $15,000 from a local Board of Realtors that does business with HUD.
Bobo’s fund-raising activity “goes well beyond HUD’s guidelines and violates the prohibition on using public office for private gain,” concluded a report prepared by Frank Q. Nebeker, a retired federal judge who heads the ethics office. The report did not elaborate. But there was no suggestion that Bobo or the other executives had personally benefited financially.
The ethics office inquiry was triggered by an article in The Times in December that detailed how top HUD officials solicited funds from developers, real estate interests and other private contractors doing business with the agency to pay for a publicity campaign arranged by Pierce’s top aides.
The so-called National Campaign for Public/Private Partnerships was staged in eight cities between 1983 and 1985 and featured press conferences and parties promoting the nation’s fair housing laws and boosting Pierce’s public image. Pierce had been criticized by fair housing advocates for docilely accepting budget cutbacks made by the Reagan Administration.
In Los Angeles, developers and bankers doing business with HUD were solicited for minimum donations of $3,000, according to a review of letters they received. When one builder gave just $100, he was chastised in writing by a businessman recruited by Bobo for sending such a “ridiculous” amount and informed that, “with your involvement in housing and benefits from doing business with HUD, you should want to make a better impression.”
Pierce and HUD attorneys have defended the publicity and fund-raising campaigns and the involvement of HUD staff as within the law.
Conclusion Disputed
But Nebeker flatly challenged Pierce, saying, “We disagree . . . with the conclusion that there were no violations of the standards of conduct.”
Federal officials are prohibited from soliciting anything of monetary value from someone who is seeking business with their agency.
Nebeker informed several members of Congress in a letter this month that he does not have the power to discipline HUD employes, but said he has asked the agency to consider taking unspecified administrative action against them. Furthermore, he has directed the agency to publish new guidelines governing future fund raising so that “repetition of questionable conduct will be avoided.”
At Bobo’s direction, the Los Angeles event featured thousands of billboards carrying Pierce’s picture, as well as newspaper advertisements, a luncheon, and an elaborate balloon show costing $4,500, HUD documents show.
The campaign ended with a deficit that prompted Bobo in March, 1987, to seek a donation of more than $15,000 from the Southwest Los Angeles Board of Realtors.
Board officials declined to comment last week. According to a report by the Office of the HUD Inspector General, Bobo went to a meeting of the Board of Realtors on March 17, 1987 to pick up the check, only to discover the members were meeting and debating whether they should pay the debt, because it was twice as much as they had thought it would be.
‘Strictly Voluntary’
“Bobo . . . advised them that it was . . . a strictly voluntary contribution, but that he would personally appreciate it if they would pay the debt as agreed,” the inspector general’s report said.
When Bobo returned later to pick up the money, there was an error in the check’s amount, a board officer told investigators. She recalled that “Bobo was anxious to get a correct check” which required the signature of a board member who was not present. So Bobo “hand-carried it to the other member’s personal residence for her signature.”
Nebeker said that Bobo’s solicitation of the Realtors was one of four instances that raise “serious standards of conduct questions because of the employees’ direct involvement in fund raising.”
He also cited an instance where the special assistant to Pierce, David Turner, directly solicited a contribution from a developer in Riverside, and where Deborah Gore Dean, then Pierce’s executive assistant, solicited $2,000 from a group in Philadelphia.
In another instance, Nebeker pointed out that another HUD official in Washington, Susan Zagame, advised HUD staff to solicit money from the National Assn. of Home Builders in a memorandum that stated: “You may request either a cash donation or the donation of other appropriate resources.”
Workday Inquiry
The ethics office investigation was the second inquiry into Bobo’s conduct in two years. In 1986, records show, he was investigated for failing to work an eight-hour day. The case was closed without any reprimand after HUD investigators said Bobo told them he would do everything he could “to relieve the perception that he may not be putting in full time.”
HUD investigators attempted in 1986 to determine whether Bobo was working a full eight- hour day. While the official workday at the Los Angeles office is from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Bobo was reported by witnesses to arrive at the office as late as noon.
According to HUD reports, Bobo acknowledged to investigators that his hours “could be irregular,” but he said “he did not look upon his job as an ‘8 to 4’ job” and that he often worked late and on weekends.
Bobo, 43, has worked at HUD since 1981.
He said Friday through a spokesman, Scott Reed, that he was unaware of both the investigation of his punctuality and the ethics office report.
