Among its findings: Grant money was used to repair code enforcement violations in Tarpon Springs, though federal rules don't allow it.
By CANDACE RONDEAUX
Published September 20, 2003
CLEARWATER - Each year, Pinellas County's community development department distributes millions in federal funding to combat neighborhood blight.
Local communities receive thousands of dollars in community development block grants from the department and use the money on projects ranging from repairing cracked sidewalks to creating affordable housing programs. In 2001-02, federal community development block grants distributed by the county amounted to more than $3.7-million.
Over the years, the money has helped rejuvenate dozens of county blocks and eliminate eyesores.
But a new audit concludes that the county does not adequately monitor how the federal funds are used.
A Sept. 18 report by the Clerk of the Circuit Court's internal audit division raises questions about county oversight of money used to improve low-income neighborhoods. Auditors identified "numerous weaknesses" with some programs and noted disorganization in others.
"On an overall basis, community development is doing a good job," said internal audit division chief deputy director Robert Melton. "But in some areas they do need improvement."
Auditors said one program the county needs to watch is the Dansville Redevelopment Area, an unincorporated neighborhood near Largo. The community development department misstepped when it used $62,000 in federal grants to move a church and put a new facade on it, the report said. Federal guidelines prohibit the use of block grants for cosmetic changes to structures in program areas. The money was only supposed to be used to move the Holiness Church of Jesus Pentecost to make room for a neighborhood retention pond, the audit said.
Carol Seaman, the community development department's assistant director, said she agreed with many of the audit's findings. But, she said, strict federal regulations and neighborhood needs sometimes clash, forcing her agency to make tough choices.
"Did we spend a little more money than was absolutely necessary to move this building? Yes," Seaman said. "But I would say it was appropriate in this case."
Seaman also blamed departmental staff turnover in the last year for the lack of oversight of block grant money distribution.
"We had to make some choices on what got supervised and what didn't," Seaman said. "We fund the same agencies year after year after year so we're pretty comfortable that we know what they're doing."
But the community development department was not always aware of how the Tarpon Springs Housing Authority used block grant funding, auditors said. The department failed to properly monitor the agency's demolition program.
The county department erred when it authorized the authority to spend more than $3,100 to demolish a city-owned building, auditors found. The report did not say where the building was or what it was used for. City buildings are not eligible for demolition under federal funding rules.
Tarpon Springs Housing Authority demolition program files were also found to be incomplete, and grant money was used to correct code enforcement violations though federal rules prohibit such use, auditors said.
County community development staffers disagreed with those findings. The department said auditors had "misinterpreted" federal regulations. Federal housing and urban development program representatives backed them up, community development staffers wrote.
"Although we agree that the federal regulations are not as clear as they could be, correcting and/or eliminating various types of code violations is entirely consistent with the purpose of the grant program," the department wrote in its response to the audit.
Melton acknowledged that compliance with federal programs is sometimes difficult because regulations can be complex. But he said the county's community development department is ultimately responsible for making sure city revitalization and housing programs spend the money properly.
"Without adequate monitoring there's no assurance that the monies are being used appropriately," Melton said. "Any time federal funds are used the government can request those monies back."
