Rehabilitation Review Committee

MINUTES OF THE REHAB REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING JANUARY 13, 2010 8:45 AM Members Present: Chairman Rodney Bowie, Joe East, Kevin Lin, Jim Roberts, Alderman Tucker Braddock, and Susan Goldman Others Present: Jennifer Gottlieb, Denise Blake, Alicia Bryant, and Maloyid Perkins, Greg Arpin, Wayne Sharkey and Linda Lee Smith Chairman Rodney Bowie called the meeting to order at 8:47 AM. Rodney Bowie made a motion to suspend the rules and adjust the order of the agenda items so that the homeowner’s complaint could be heard first. All were in favor. Motion was made by Susan Goldman and seconded by Jim Roberts to accept the minutes of the December 9, 2009 meeting. The motion carried unanimously. Old Business Discussion began with the homeowner presenting the complaint regarding work performed at her property in May of 2006. She had a leak in the bathroom that was addressed by the contractor during the warranty period. She claimed the leak had since recurred, and it was noted by committee that no specific request of action was made by the homeowner in her letter of complaint. The committee questioned Mr. Sharkey on the history of the project. Mr. Sharkey referred to two letters that were presented to the Rehab Review Committee regarding the history of the project that addressed each and every claim of the homeowner. Mr. Sharkey stated that all work was conducted according to project guidelines, and all work was approved by Assistant Building Official, Greg Arpin, the homeowner, and Program Manager prior to release of final payment to the contractor. Mr. Sharkey stated that the contractor responded to a complaint by the homeowner while the project was still under the one-year warranty period. Repair of these items was approved by program staff and the homeowner. This new request for repair came 17 months after the contracted warranty period had expired. According to program guidelines, only the Rehab Review Committee has the authority to issue special consideration for additional work under these circumstances. Ms. Gottlieb spoke on the homeowner’s behalf and claimed that no final inspections were conducted by the Assistant Building Official. Greg Arpin countered this accusation citing two code inspections he conducted for both heating and electrical work at the property. Mr. Sharkey added that in his role as Program Manager he conducts nonspecific code related inspections along with the homeowner. These inspections cover all other related items in regard to 1 quality control and homeowner satisfaction. Ms. Gottlieb questioned the integrity of the inspections and Mr. Sharkey’s competence to take part in them. Ms. Gottlieb then proceeded to advocate that the Rehab Review Committee vote to extend to the homeowner additional program dollars to correct this out of warranty problem. Ms. Gottlieb presented this as an alternative to the City being sued or HUD officials being contacted with a complaint from the homeowner. The Rehab Review Committee, upon evaluating the information presented by the homeowner, contractor, Ms. Gottlieb, Mr. Sharkey and Mr. Arpin, unanimously (1 member recused herself) voted against the homeowner’s request and to adhere to standard program protocols. Chairman Bowie made a motion that any application for future work on this particular project is to be denied. Joe East seconded the motion that we do not disregard our eligibility rules and continue with policies as we have in the past. All were in favor [Committee member Susan Goldman recused herself]. New Business The warranty issue previously discussed brought into question the manner in which the CD Office defines warranties. Currently, all warranties are effective for 12 months. The question arose – if a warranty item is corrected, does another warranty then go into effect beginning with the new repair date? Further research is needed and the subject will be revisited at the next RRC meeting. Mr. Sharkey told the committee that there were two new properties to be approved for the Lead Program. They meet the eligibility requirements, including paid taxes and owner share. LP0907 Investor Owner 2 units $26,000.00 LP0908 Investor Owner 2 units $26,000.00 Motion was made by Rodney Bowie and seconded by Jim Roberts to approve the two new applications. Motion carried unanimously. Recommendation was made for a check in the amount of $12,378.00 to be released as final payment for the completion of the Rehab/Lead Program project RLP0811. All were in favor. Mr. Sharkey said that at the next RRC meeting he hopes to discuss reverse mortgages, and determine how the program will address potential applications from homeowners with reverse mortgages. Susan Goldman said that since reverse mortgages are not clear-cut and each comes with different terms, we need to have someone knowledgeable about mortgages to review them very carefully. CD Staff plans to invite Aimee Wickless, from Brown-Jacobson, to attend the next RRC meeting to give the committee some information regarding the legal aspects of reverse mortgages. 2 Jennifer Gottlieb commented in terms of the discussion about elderly people with reverse mortgages. She suggested that it may be helpful to invite Beverly Goulet, Director of Norwich Human Services, to speak to the committee about the social service aspect of elderly homeowners and services available to them. The committee thought this was a good idea. The next Rehabilitation Review Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 8:45 AM, and notification will be e-mailed with the minutes. Motion was made by Rodney Bowie to adjourn, seconded by Joe East. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting ended at 10:20 AM. 3