Worrisome conditions found in some Long Island public housing complexes -- from black mold and roaches to exposed electrical wiring and nonfunctional smoke detectors -- remain a vexing problem for area housing authorities, the federal officials who oversee them and, most important, the residents who live in the facilities.
The specific shortcomings must be addressed. But a recent Newsday investigation exposed a series of broader concerns regarding maintenance, oversight, financing and communication that demand a larger spotlight.
Public housing has long lacked the funding and attention required to ensure it is adequate and safe. Residents of such facilities are among the region's most vulnerable with salaries of about $23,000 a year, according to federal data. Newsday's analysis, which showed five public housing facilities on Long Island failed their most recent U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development inspections, highlighted the impact of the lack of scrutiny, oversight and money.
More regular inspections -- and shorter lag times until findings are reported -- are needed to make more timely repairs and keep up with problems. But these facilities, some of which are aging and in general disrepair, also need more upkeep and maintenance. Often, that requires additional staffing or funding, as it's clear capital needs aren't being met. A more thorough analysis by HUD of each facility's needs and limitations, and of the housing authorities that govern the complexes, would help. Understanding the lapses in staffing, financing and oversight is essential.
Such analyses, and the changes that must follow, require HUD to play a larger role beyond rudimentary inspections and reports that few ever see. HUD should have better data regarding waiting lists, facility needs and resident complaints. Also key: improving communication with residents, including the public posting of inspection reports. Individual town and village housing authorities also must be held accountable for their failures, with public reporting of errors and fines or other penalties. It's troubling, for instance, that the Glen Cove Housing Authority didn't respond to queries or public records requests.
These issues aren't limited to public housing authorities. Advocates note that Long Islanders who rely on Housing Choice Program vouchers and other federal subsidies face similar concerns at their places of residence, which also must be addressed.
The volume of problems also encourages a larger rethinking of public housing. Just last year, a partnership between the North Hempstead Housing Authority and developer Georgica Green Ventures, with the help of state and county financing, led to the redevelopment of Laurel Homes, a dilapidated public housing complex in Roslyn Heights. Old buildings were replaced and the complex was expanded; families and seniors can now live in 74 upgraded units. It was a success story touted by state and local officials alike. Public housing authorities and individual facilities should embrace such alternative approaches.
Nothing should be off the table when it comes to ensuring that Long Island residents have safe, well-maintained places to live.