Not a Great Idea: Regional Housing Authorities a Disservice

January 16, 2013
By

Everything in life has its pluses and minuses.

But in our view, whatever the pluses may be of Gov. Deval Patrick’s proposal to eliminate the 240 local housing authorities and consolidate them into six regional offices are far outweighed by the negatives.

The front page story outlines the views of our local officials and we will not reiterate those viewpoints here. We simply would note that it has been our experience that corruption and inefficiency are just as endemic at the state level as at the local level. Gov. Patrick and his bureaucrats at the state may look down at those at the local level because of a few bad apples, but the state has had more than its share of political appointees who are useless or worse (for example, the woman who was named by the governor to the Highway Safety Council who had a horrendous driving record and who smashed her state car.)

However, another big motivation behind the move is that regionalization will save money. On that issue, does anyone doubt that whatever the projected size of the regional boards may be today, within 10 years they will grow immensely because that simply is the nature of state bureaucracy, and thus the savings will be largely illusional?

But more important, it is clear that even if there is some money to be saved, it will come at the expense of the tenants and prospective tenants for whom a local housing authority provides both convenience and excellent service. At some point, we have to acknowledge that providing services is worth the cost, and we believe that to be the case here.

Regionalization in some areas of government may be a good thing, but in our opinion, this is one regionalization plan that does not make sense.

  • jim

    As a tenant i am in favor of the Governors proposal.There is Politics in all PHAS.Things can not get any worse.PHAS are run like a dictatorship.The elderly are scared to speak up ,for fear they may lose their little apartment.Most people have to know a politician to get to the top of the list We need change.What are you afraid off.

  • drensber

    Nice to see the Journal’s continued attempts to validate Revere-style nepotism.

  • CharlesW

    Patrick should show us the detailed cost savings that he claims are in his proposal. If the State hasn’t had enough funds to maintain public housing units for many years, how can they justify spending $10-12 million on administration, when some of the units barely meet the minimum health & safety standards? The residents deserve to have repairs made quickly & they should be treated with respect. I hope the residents across Mass. get together & fight for their rights.

  • CharlesW

    There is much more politics at the State than at any LHA. So you’re supporting creating another layer in the State bureaucracy, that is estimated to cost about $10m, that is money that could be used to improve living conditions at units. I’ve never heard of elders that fear that if they speak up about a problem, they might lose their unit. The only dictatorship is Deval, who’s paving his way for a presidential run.

Search the Journal

Recent Activity

Full Print Edition

Get Adobe Flash player