Well the Housing Authority was as contentious as ever Tuesday night at the City Council meeting where Democrats attacked each other over what should be done about the salaries of the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority.

"You need to do your job tonight and take a vote on this resolution," Finance Commissioner Michele Madigan told Public Safety Commissioner Christian Mathiesen, who was trying to table the vote on disapproving Housing Authority salaries proposed by Madigan.

Mathiesen said he did his job every City Council meeting.

"You're not doing it tonight by asking me to table this resolution," she responded.

Mathiesen was arguing that he needed more information about the salaries before he could vote to disapprove the SSHA salaries Tuesday night.

That was, ironically, the same argument Mayor Scott Johnson used to justify voting for the disapproval, something he said was "not a vote of no confidence" about the SSHA, just a vote that indicated he did not have enough information to make up his mind.

Meanwhile Madigan and Accounts Commissioner John Franck basically said Mathiesen was making their point for them.

They have repeatedly requested information from the SSHA and though some has been provided, the supporting documentation for the salaries has not been among it.

SSHA policy requires that they basically justify the salaries they pay their employees.

"I cannot even fathom how you can justify a public employee's salary doubling in four years," Madigan said (again to Mathiesen).

As an explanation, here's something from a year and a half ago:

"(Executive Director Ed) Spychalski’s 2011 compensation is $151,956, not including benefits, including the use of a publicly-owned vehicle. His starting salary in November 2006 was $74,777 and he has received $77,179 in pay raises since then."

That included two bonuses, so in the fiscal year that starts next month his salary is being proposed as about $145,000.

"Is he overpaid? Possibly," Mathiesen said. "Is he outrageously overpaid? I don't think so."

Mathiesen said he needed more information from the Housing Authority before he would vote on the issue.

"We've been talking about this for 19 months now," Franck said. 

Here's another couple tidbits from past stories:

According to the State Comptroller's audit of the SSHA conducted last year, Spychalski makes more than 93 percent of the housing authority directors in the country.

That includes the directors Plattsburgh, Troy, Schenectady and Albany, each of which handles “significantly more tenant rentals” than the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority.

In fact, Spychslki at his peak made about $45,000 less than the New York City Housing Authority director, John Rhea, who managed 178,882 apartments, 2,602 residential buildings and 334 developments, according to its website.

Anyway, it's unlikely the vote will have much of an effect on the SSHA.

They vote on their 2013-2014 salaries with their budget Thursday and Board member Al Callucci said he expects the budget to pass, as is.

"There's no reason it shouldn't," he said, after the City Council meeting. 

Sources who couldn't speak on the record say the Comptroller's audit of the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority will be out this fall, not, as some people have suggested, years from now.

Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said it would come out some time in the fall, but many people questioned whether that would actually happen, particularly given the years it took for the audit of the Troy Housing Authority.

But I'm told the draft report has already been completed and submitted to the board for review. They were given some amount of time (some time between 30 and 60 days) to turn it around with any comments they would like to add or criticisms they would like to lodge.

I've been trying to get that information on the record for print, but Chairman Eric Weller has not been available (or his phone has been out of commission, as it is starting to seem) for about a week now.

I have only second-hand information on the contents of the report, but I'm told it doesn't address the relationship between the Saratoga Affordable Housing Group and the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority.

Again, that information is not confirmed, but if true, it would seem to have missed a big issue. The "volunteers" from the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority — the SSHA facilities manager, accountant, executive director and others — who all wrote letters saying they only worked off-the-clock on SAHG business was concerning to many.

Also concerning was the potential for co-mingling of funds between the two groups. Of course, authorities at the Authority say that wasn't happening, but the fact that former Chairman Dennis Brunelle justified Ed Spychalski's $150+ taxpayer-funded salary, in part, based on his work with the non-profit SAHG raises some serious questions.

Obviously we'll have to wait and see what the Comptroller's report says, but if that relationship isn't addressed (as DiNapoli said it would be when he came into The Saratogian to discuss some of the issues) I think they may need to do another.

But again, the fact that it isn't included is inconclusive, as I haven't seen the report itself. 

Ok, I guess I messed up and never published this. My bad. I wrote it June 29, the week after I was lambasted for "incorrectly" reporting SSHA Director Ed Spychalski's salary for months. I kept saying it was $152. Here's the June 21 post I wrote about the criticism I received.

Anyway, I was just going to edit a post (typo not content) and I noticed that I never published this post. So here it is. Sorry for the delay and if everyone has lost interest.


I'm sure most people are getting fatigued at the constant SSHA news. I know I am, and that is a bad sign.

However, I finally wanted to set the record straight on Executive Director Ed Spychalski's salary, which I was even a little soft on a definition for as of last week (*that is, last week when I originally wrote this in June).

His salary for 2011, according to the latest figure which I must say makes the most sense, was $144,921. That was base. Then, to get to that $151,956 number, you need to calculate in the one-time 5 percent merit-based bonus, cited in SSHA Chairman Eric Weller's correction to his Compliance and Communication response to the City Council.

At last week's SSHA meeting, I heard Accountant Cindy Gaugler reference "that 5 percent" when I was being attacked for misstating his salary as $152k.

Doing some of the math on my phone, just to make sure I was right, I made sure that would equal roughly the difference between his base and his ultimate compensation and viola!

However, that was dismissed when I asked about it as inaccurate and explained through the terms of mileage, healthcare costs and partial bonuses that I referenced in the blog post at that time.

Now we see what it is, once and for all. Without the bonus, thus, he is being paid $144,921 in the fiscal year starting July 1... unless he gets more bonuses.

And anyway, I still feel comfortable saying he made $152k in 2011, so I will, rather than explain the various ways I've heard it explained that he made $7k more than his salary.

Stay Classy, and sorry again for the delay, Saratoga.

However, that site, located at http://saratogaspringspha.org is supposed to be up imminently, according to the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority Board of Commissioners — in particular their go-to computer guy Kenneth Ivins, who owns (is) Ivins Computer Consulting.

Ivins says he is working on the site, which has been down for months (I heard on the down-low a while back that the site was hacked, though I never saw any proof one way or another). He said it should be up in the next week, possibly by Monday or Tuesday, and that it will have a lot more information on it than the previous site hosted.

That was one of a few loose ends I wanted to report on for the SSHA.

Another is the salary issue. I was berated during the public comment period at Thursday's meeting. First, one resident asked a general question about newspapers, but referred to my Wednesday article about new HUD guidelines. "Why do they have to keep crucifying him in the paper?" she asked.

Spychalski's wife also addressed me, saying "I expect you can print an accurate salary," after pointing out that her husband did not receive "a god damn penny" for his work at the Saratoga Affordable Housing Group.

Anyway, I figured I'd take the time to address what some see as a misrepresentation of Ed Spychalski's salary.

I (and every other paper reporting on the SSHA) write that Spychalski made $152,000 in 2011.

In fact, according to members of the SSSHA Board of Commissioners, his base salary was roughly $145,000 ($144,921 as reported today at the SSHA meeting) in 2011.

However, he took home $151,956 in fiscal year 2011, according to Civil Service records.

The difference of those two numbers still evades me. I was told initially by then-chairman of the SSHA board Dennis Brunelle the difference was due to a $5,000 bonus he was paid for his work with the Saratoga Affordable Housing Group (which some have said is improper to begin with), but adding those doesn't make $152,000.

I was also told it represents salary plus his compensation for mileage, but the numbers I've seen for mileage don't add up either.

Now I'm told that the bonus was spread over two years, that mileage is involved, but only some of it, and somehow his health plan may also be involved in compensation.

Anyway, I've not gone with the $145,000 number because it seemed misleading, since he took home $44 shy of $152,000 in compensation in 2011.

I reported it in mid-March, but I did so briefly and vaguely, again because Brunelle told me the difference between Spychalski's $144k-and-some-change base salary was the $5,000 bonus and that math doesn't add to $151,956.

In the end, I trust the numbers I can check. According to an operating budget for the fiscal year ending in June 2012, Spychalski's salary rate is listed as $151,956, so that is where I am going to stay for that year.

However, I will note that the $144k number is supposedly in the 2013 budget (starting July 1). They told me it is $144,921, but I've heard one closer to $144k than $145k, so I'll need to check the budget when the website is up.

Stay classy Saratoga (particularly in the comments).

Just thought I'd float this little tid-bit out there.
When I was reporting the story in today's paper about the burning bridge between the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority and the Saratoga Affordable Housing Group, I of course had to talk to SSHA Executive Director Ed Spychalski.
During our talk about why the SSHA would no longer be managing the SAHG's (which it created) properties, he said he was done volunteering there.
"I don't want to anymore," he said.
He couched that by saying he just didn't have the time and the SSHA didn't need the money, but there was a touch of bitterness to his voice.
One quote that didn't make the paper because of a lack of space was this little gem:
"There are a lot of people who have managed non-profits and there are a lot of accountants who have done this for years,” he said, “they can do it.”
So of course I had to ask if he was possibly referring to his two biggest detractors, John Kaufmann, the former executive director of the Economic Opportunities Council ("managed non-profits") and Accounts Commissioner John Franck ("accountants").
Of course, Spychalski said he wasn't referring to anyone in particular, but it seemed like a funny choice of words to me...

Last weekend, local resident and Housing Authority critic John Kaufmann e-mailed me (as I'm sure he e-mailed every news agency in the area, judging by the fact that he frequently appears in stories about the Housing Authority in the Daily Gazette and the Times Union) about the Saratoga Affordable Housing Group.

They met Tuesday at Longfellow's Restaurant for their quarterly meeting. Kaufmann was encouraging newspapers to go and he, in fact, went himself to deliver concerns he has raised over asbestos at the buildings that the Housing Group tore down on Allen Drive for the new apartment complex.

Kaufmann, though, did not get to sit-in on the meeting. He was shown the door as soon as he came into the restaurant — by Housing Authority Executive Director Ed Spychalski who at the time was also the president of the Saratoga Affordable Housing Group.

And of course, that was the last meeting Spychalski was president of that group.

To be clear, though, the Saratoga Affordable Housing Group, while it receives public money through the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority and through grants and other avenues (and despite the fact that many of the same people are involved in both organizations), is a non-profit organization and thus is not subject to the same Open Meetings Law standards as the the Housing Authority.

"Ed told him it was a closed meeting," recounted Rocco "Rocky" Ferraro, the non-profit's new president, after the meeting. "He was not a happy person."

Ferraro said "It was felt the meetings were not necessary to be open to the public," but then added "We'll be evaluating alternatives for the future ... we want to have it as transparent as possible."

And he said being the president, he will make sure that happens.

As for the asbestos issue, Kaufmann was saying that it was improperly dealt with at the demolition and subsequent construction, something Ferraro denies.

"As far as I know everything went according to plan and met all of the OSHA requirements," he said, adding he recalls extensive conversation on the board about contracting with a company that specialized in asbestos removal because he remembers how expensive it was. "It was something we talked about a lot," he said. "We knew it going in."

I'll look into that further, just to confirm what Ferraro remembers, but that's what I know now.

That's all for now. Stay classy Saratoga.

According to some accounts, he isn't there more often than he is.
Local rabble-rouser John Kaufmann's numbers indicate Weller missed seven of 12 Housing Authority Board meetings in 2010. Of course, I don't know if that includes attendance via Skype or not.
Meanwhile, Weller was also just appointed to his third term, something Kaufmann also says is illegal because of the bylaws of the Housing Authority.
He called me to tell me he would be faxing this letter to Mayor Scott Johnson this morning after we talked about the issue yesterday:

Mayor Scott Johnson
Saratoga Springs City Hall
474 Broadway
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
March 8, 2012
Dear Mayor:
Following our meeting I reviewed the appointments to the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority. Please be advised that it appears that your appointment of Eric Weller to their Board of Commissioners violates their bylaws. Here is the relevant section of the bylaws:

Under Article II, Section : Five (5) members shall be appointed by the Mayor of the city of Saratoga Springs to staggered five (5) year terms in accordance with Section 30 of Public Housing Law. The terms shall not exceed two (2) terms in succession.
The following is a record of Mr. Weller’s appointments:
Eric Weller
- Original appointment 3/6/01 by Mayor Klotz
- Re-appointed 5/16/06 by Mayor Keehn
- Re-appointed 3/15/11 by Mayor Johnson

The next meeting of the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority will be on March 22, 2012. This will also be the last meeting they will have to stop the automatic extension of the executive director’s contract for the coming year.

I hope you will move expeditiously to fill the vacancy this creates.

Sincerely,

John Kaufmann



Now, full disclosure, I haven't had time to look into the claims he makes or independently confirm them (that's why this is a blog-post and not a story).

Furthermore, Mayor Johnson left me a message yesterday refuting some of that.

First, he said he does not believe Weller served consecutive terms (this was before he received Kaufmann's letter, which again I haven't confirmed the numbers in).

"I think he was on the board years ago, went off, and then went back on," Johnson said.

Moreover, he said that wouldn't matter anymore anyway.

"The old bylaws had a limit on how many terms you could serve," he said. "That was changed years ago, before I even took office."

He said current bylaws have no such restriction.

Update here: The bylaws with those restrictions were adopted in April 2009, so unless there is a newer copy I don't know about that seems to indicate that there is that restriction. I'll need to take that up with the mayor.

Anyway, we'll see. And if no one noticed in the story yesterday, Chairman Dennis Brunelle is probably not coming back to the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, according to Johnson. I'd love to say "According to Brunelle," but unfortunately I haven't talked to him in more than a week.

He wouldn't give me his phone number. (Perhaps he doesn't want to be frequently berated with questions.) Instead, he said when I want to talk to him I should call Housing Authority Director Ed Spychalski, who can call Brunelle, who can call me.

I have made that call — several times this week. Spychalski said he has been calling, texting and e-mailing the chairman, but to no avail.

When I hear from him, I'll let everyone know what he has to say.

I thought I had it in hand.

I FOILed for it along with the financial information of the non-profit group, Saratoga Affordable Housing Group, headed by Housing Authority Director Ed Spychalski to develop properties in the city.

He handed me a manilla folder Tuesday and said it was in there.

It wasn't.

I honestly think it was a mistake. He and I discussed Gramercy's contract, but I didn't look for it in the packet because it was in-and-amongst the financials of the non-profit.

He told me, though, they were making "A buck and three-quarters an hour," which I took for 100 times that. He later confirmed that.

"It was a short-term arrangement," Spychalski said, corroborating Ed Wohlleber's statement about the contract.

However, Eric Weller, a board member on the Housing Authority Board of Directors confirmed the number but not the sentiment.

"It was a short-term contract," he said, saying it had been "terminated." "We were unhappy with the results."

Spychalski, in a meeting Tuesday, said the PR firm had done what it was supposed to do.

"I was getting calls at 9, 10 at night and at 6 in the morning," Spychalski said. "It was interfering with the work I do at the Housing Authority."

He said he hired Gramercy at the behest of the Housing Authority's attorney to field calls and help get info out there about the situation at the Housing Authority.

"We were getting crushed out there (in the press)" Spychalski said. And he said taking on Gramercy "helped a lot."

"I think I had to do it because I could not get the job done I do here," he said.

Spychalski said the Housing Authority hasn't gotten the final bill on the service. So far they have paid out about $5,000 (about 28.5 hours) and he said "there's not much more."

I received a response to my queries as to whether the PR firm had been let go, as was alleged in an anonymous comment on my blog post Thursday.

Here it is in its entirety from Eric Wohlleber, VP of Gramercy Communications:

“Not sure about a rumor, but I can tell you that our engagement does end on Sunday. Our work was limited in time and focused on responding to a large volume of media inquiries and assisting with the dissemination of information to the public. I would like to add that our job was never to ‘spin’ information, and any suggestion otherwise is an insult to a profession we take very seriously. Our company has a long track record of success and is well regarded for our professionalism and our many community works.”

As for the insults he takes exception to, that had me a little confused at first. That is until I received a "friendly" call from Wohlleber yesterday. He was responding to my calling him a "flack" in a blog post yesterday.

We had a "lively debate" to quote Dennis Brunelle when he described the Housing Authority's public meeting last month in which residents shouted about not being able to speak.

Now first off, a flack is, to quote Dictionary.com (which I also quoted to him):
flack
noun Sometimes Disparaging.
1. press agent.
2. publicity.
verb (used without object)
3. to serve as a press agent or publicist: to flack for a new rock group.
4. to promote; publicize: to flack a new record.

Not to be confused with:
Flak
noun
1. antiaircraft fire, especially as experienced by the crews of combat airplanes at which the fire is directed.
2. criticism; hostile reaction; abuse: Such an unpopular decision is bound to draw a lot of flak from the press.

Ok, so I admit it does say "sometimes disparaging," but the post was about him not releasing information as a public relations person.

He was pretty adamant that Gramercy was only on board to dispense information to the public and to help out the Housing Authority that was inundated by calls.

Of course, I reminded him the one thing he wouldn't release was how much he was being paid with public funds, i.e. taxpayer money.

He said the information would be "forthcoming" or would come "in due time" or something to that effect. I said I "eagerly await it."

Then he called into question my journalistic integrity for following up on "anonymous blog posts" which he found — as a former reporter — somehow insulting to the profession. I asked if he had ever responded to anonymous phone calls (you know, doing due diligence as a reporter?) he said he did, but he found that to be different in some way than following up on comments.

I don't know about when he was a reporter, but the internet is here now.

On an unrelated (or possibly related) note, Ed Spychalski responded to my FOIL regarding Gramercy's contract very quickly saying he will get the info to us Monday or Tuesday (and added "Go Giants," so his heart is in the right place).

So we'll get the info after Gramercy stops working with the Housing Authority. If it had come out in the first place, of course, it probably would have just been a line in the original story they were introduced in. Of course now it will likely be a story Tuesday or Wednesday.

I know I'm not in PR (unless you believe what some of the commenters on The Saratogian say), but it seems to me that anticipating questions and coming up with answers is a big part of it.
That's why it surprises me that the Saratoga Springs Housing Authority's newly-hired PR guy, Eric Wollheber, vice president of Gramercy Communications, was so taken aback when I asked what the Housing Authority is paying him.
"I'm not going to get into what our hourly rate is," he said, when I asked him about ten minutes after I found out he was the new flack.
Since then, I have asked him two other times. Once, shortly after I asked him the first time when he showed up in our office with Ed Spychalski and Lillian Miles to give their side of the Housing Authority debacle.
The last time I asked him was outside the meeting between the City Council and the Housing Authority where he was sitting, thumbs glued to his Blackberry while Dennis Brunelle fielded questions from the council via Skype. He was in Florida.
"Did you submit a FOIL for it?" he asked.
"Is that the only way I will get that information?" I asked. I know, question with a question.
"Yes."
Whatever they are paying this guy, you think it would be enough to communicate that fact. I'm sure he knows what it is.