The DC Housing Authority picked a Greenleaf Gardens co-developer, but its oversight board shot it down. Here’s why.

In April of 2019, the DC Housing Authority (DCHA) released a request for proposals (RFP) seeking a partner to redevelop the 15-acre Greenleaf Gardens public housing community in Southwest DC. Now, the agency has a co-developer in mind — although it will have to wait before beginning negotiations.

At a Board of Commissioners meeting held October 14, DCHA announced its intention to begin talks with the Greenleaf District Partners team, led by Pennrose, EYA, and Bozzuto Development. Passage of Resolution 20-20 would give DCHA 180 days to execute a memorandum of understanding with the selected development team before beginning formal negotiations.

However, the Board, an 11-member oversight body that signs off on the agency’s big-picture initiatives, voted 5-4 against the passage of the resolution, as questions surrounding the lack of communication between DCHA and residents, stakeholders, and Board members came to a head. Here’s what led to that vote of disapproval.

How we got here

DCHA began outreach about its repair, repositioning, and redevelopment plans for its portfolio in 2018, launching a series of meetings at different communities to give residents a heads up on the plans. This included a few meetings at Greenleaf Gardens, including an informational meeting about the upcoming redevelopment in July 2019, three months after the co-developer solicitation was released, and an introduction of finalist teams in December 2019. It does not appear that any meetings with residents and stakeholders on the redevelopment have taken place since then.

DCHA has stated that they are following the requirements for engagement that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has set forth for its Section 18 demolition and disposition application process, which would enable them to eventually proceed with razing and redeveloping Greenleaf Gardens after a ground lease is executed.

However, that process does not establish a minimum baseline for resident engagement beyond documentation of a “consultation” with residents, “consultation” with a community’s Resident Council, “consultation” with a Resident Advisory Board, and inclusion of any notes or comments residents make with the application — a level of engagement that seems wholly inadequate considering that the Section 18 process involves uprooting and relocating people from their homes. The application process also requires a Relocation Plan for displaced residents, but does not require that Plan to be shared with residents, although DCHA has committed to getting the Board’s sign-off on any Relocation Plan.

Unsatisfactory communication with residents and stakeholders has long been an issue for DCHA, and the October Board meeting was far from the first time there have been complaints about a lack of transparency from DCHA about its plans, particularly where large-scale, far-reaching efforts are in the works.

At a Performance Oversight hearing held in February 2019 by the DC Council Committee on Housing & Neighborhood Revitalization, Legal Aid Society senior staff attorney Amanda Korber testified that, “Legal Aid has been disappointed with DCHA’s unwillingness to solicit meaningful feedback from tenants and advocates when the agency is making important decisions. We hope that in the coming year, DCHA’s leadership will work to build the agency’s relationship with residents and advocates, and instead of just informing us when they have made decisions about the agency’s direction, engage us before doing so.”

At that same hearing, Bread for the City’s Aja Taylor referred to DCHA’s last-minute resolution approval requests, which often leave Board members under-prepared and questioning the conclusions, as a “manufactured emergency” that undermines trust in the agency.

According to some members of the Greenleaf Advisory Committee (sometimes referred to as the Advisory Board or Advisory Council), they were lucky to get last-minute notice that a resolution pertaining to the redevelopment of Greenleaf Gardens was even up for discussion at the October 2020 meeting.

“Our Advisory Board has met several times over quite a few years, but we have not met at all in over a year,” Greenleaf Advisory Board member Rick Bardach testified at the meeting. “We have not only not met, but of course, we haven’t been able to provide any recommendation in terms of the Greenleaf development, and we just learned of this meeting and that the resolution for Greenleaf was going to be put on the agenda, we just learned of that yesterday. We want everyone to understand that we have no knowledge of, and therefore, no recommendation at this point in time.”

Longtime activist, former Arthur Capper resident, and Greenleaf Advisory Board member Debra Frazier echoed this sentiment and expressed wariness about the developer selection process and the resolution. “The master-developer supposedly was chosen in June, and then we hear today, by grapevine, that you all have decided,” Frazier stated. “If the resolution says the Greenleaf Advisory Committee signed off, agreed, or participated, that is patently untrue.” (The resolution does not mention an advisory board.)

While the Housing Authority may have notified some of the Advisory Committee members of the upcoming resolution the day prior to the Board of Commissioners meeting, the agency has acknowledged that they did not notify residents that this resolution was up for discussion. Commissioner Kenneth Council stated his surprise at the testimony from Bardach and Frazier, explaining that DCHA “were literally telling us that they stayed connected to everybody,” and expressing his preference to delay voting.

Dena Walker, president of the Greenleaf Gardens Extensions and Additions Resident Council Board and a member of both the Advisory Committee and the Selection Committee, sent a letter to be read into the record that also registered a lack of communication initiated by DCHA. “I have not heard much recently on the selection of the co-developer for Greenleaf,” the letter, as read by Board of Commissioners Chair Neil Albert, stated. “My hope is that DCHA will put its best foot forward in demonstrating to all that they are putting residents and transparency first. Trust is gained when communication is frequent and can be verified. Residents require such assurances to ease their concerns and trust the redevelopment process.” Overall, the letter expressed confidence in Director Tyrone Garrett’s commitment to doing the project properly, particularly when it comes to build-first.

DCHA senior vice president of real estate development Senthil Sankaran reiterated the agency’s commitment to build-first and explained that the selection committee for the project incorporated feedback from the community that was collected at a meeting last December where the finalist development teams introduced themselves to the community.

“The comments that were collected at that meeting greatly informed our selection, and through the best-and-final-offer process that we ran with the development teams, and the biggest points that we heard out of those meetings were that they wanted to make sure that a team had strong build-first options, that DCHA be engaged as a co-development partner, and then also that the team that was selected commit to a vibrant and ongoing community engagement process,” Sankaran explained at that October meeting.

“Post-selection, we will come to the advisory Board and the broader community and the Greenleaf residents as part of our engagement plan, with the selected developer beside us. I think it’s important to understand this just kicks off that next stage of the process.” Senthil also noted that the community will have opportunities to weigh in “prior to DCHA codifying any legal agreement” and during subsequent zoning processes.

DCHA vice president of public affairs Jose Sousa acknowledged at the meeting that the engagement process has been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but that DCHA has “perfected” its digital engagement process over the last few months and plans to implement this with residents and stakeholders on the Greenleaf redevelopment moving forward. He further explained that the process includes calling each resident to inform them of the meeting and making digital and hard copies of any materials available to residents. Sousa also offered that the agency hopes to do outreach twice monthly.

Albert requested that, at some point in the next month, DCHA provide the Board a “schedule of engagement” for the next year that itemizes which groups will be engaged. Garrett also acknowledged that it would probably be best for the agency to give monthly progress reports on their large-scale projects documenting any engagement activities and results at various properties. DCHA would also give the Board periodic updates while negotiating, and would have to come back to the board before filing Section 18 or securing financing for the first phase.

As for the Board’s knowledge of the deal prior to the resolution, Commissioner Bill Slover also noted for the record that the Board has not seen documentation of the “financial plan” and the “financial offer in consideration” the development team put forth. “You’re asking the Board for approval to negotiate a deal that we have no understanding of where we’re starting from and what our expectations should be at the end of the process,” Slover said.

DCHA staff responded that those items will be presented to the Board before a demolition/disposition application is submitted to HUD. Board Chair Albert also stated that the Board had had three private sessions with DCHA on the terms of the redevelopment, including the morning of the public meeting, and Board members were asked to submit written questions, but that no Board member had done so.

“There’s been plenty of opportunities to clarify the parameters of this agreement, and there’ll be lots of opportunities to continue to do so,” Albert said.

Commissioner Slover replied that not all questions get answered and it is sometimes more productive to ask questions in the public eye.

What happens next with the vote?

DCHA is hoping to bring the resolution back during the November Board of Commissioners meeting and secure an affirmative vote. In the meantime, a rep for the agency shared plans to convene the Advisory Board to update these stakeholders on the co-developer recommendation and next steps.

Seeing how the redevelopment process has begun on an opaque foot, one couldn’t be blamed for having little confidence that DCHA will follow through on keeping residents updated once the inevitable moves begin and raze applications are filed — particularly since this is the first redevelopment under Garrett’s leadership. Only time will tell whether the agency will follow through on initiating and maintaining consistent engagement with residents or whether the endeavor will be another marked by empty promises and blindsided families.

“This is an opportunity for my administration to see a redevelopment project from beginning to end, and we are very committed to engaging and continuing to engage the resident base, advocates, and other stakeholders that are involved in this particular process,” Garrett stated after the resolution was introduced. “I think it’s very important that we get it right, show our ability and our capacity and our professionalism, not only to you, but also the community as a whole.”