Rev. Tom Stone would like one thing to be clear: the East Bluff Neighborhood Housing Service is not a governmental body.
I got a chance to talk with East Bluff NHS President Stone on Friday and ask him about some of the criticisms that were leveled at the organization during Tuesday night’s City Council meeting. He’s heard them all. He believes they boil down to a fundamental misunderstanding: The East Bluff NHS is a private, non-profit, 501(c)3 organization — not a governmental body. Thus, it doesn’t have to abide by the Open Meetings Act, but is free to act like any other private, non-profit organization.
Looking back at my notes of the public hearing Tuesday night, that did seem to be a recurring theme. “There’s no accountability; EBNHS keeps its meetings closed,” one speaker said. “There needs to be notification of the meetings, and neighbors should be allowed to attend the meetings,” said another. That would be true if this were a governmental body, like the City Council or a city commission. But private organizations such as Catholic Charities or Children’s Home of Illinois are not required to have open meetings or invite the public to attend their executive board meetings. The East Bluff NHS is just that sort of organization.
Apparently past officers thought that, since the organization gets grant money from the City through a special service district, that made the EBNHS a quasi-governmental organization, and so they conducted the meetings that way. That’s why residents, some past officers, and other interested parties think it’s supposed to be subject to the Open Meetings Act (OMA), according to Stone. Legal counsel has since affirmed that it is not quasi-governmental, and new officers are no longer abiding by the OMA. Naturally, some people are feeling left out now.
Stone sees freedom from the OMA as a positive thing for the neighborhood. He explained that the belief by previous officers that they were subject to the OMA caused the organization to be slow to respond when needs arose. For instance, when a tree limb fell on a structure owned by the EBNHS, Stone said, the officers believed they couldn’t do anything about it without first having a regularly-scheduled, properly-noticed public meeting. Meanwhile, the limb and structure were a danger to residents in the neighborhood. By not being “hamstrung” by the OMA, Stone continued, the EBNHS can be more responsive and take quicker action on matters.
Another criticism from the council meeting was that one property the EBNHS has rehabilitated is being rented instead of sold as an owner-occupied property. Stone said that they did try to sell that property initially and couldn’t find a buyer, but they were continuing to pay all the utilities on the property as it sat vacant. They felt it would be better for the neighborhood to rent it to a good tenant than to have the property remain vacant. Besides, he explained, 50% of the residents in the East Bluff are renters, and there is a legitimate need for decent, well-maintained rental property as part of the housing mix.
After the Council meeting, concerns were expressed to me over the fact that the EBNHS was changing its bylaws. Stone confirmed that they are doing that, but the reason is because past changes to certain parts of the bylaws had put those provisions in conflict with other portions of the bylaws. So, the changes are designed to make the bylaws consistent. While he didn’t mention it, I imagine (this is pure speculation on my part!) that parts of the bylaws that required compliance with the OMA were probably removed, and this was upsetting to those who thought the EBNHS should be subject to the OMA, as discussed earlier.
One last criticism I didn’t talk to Stone about was the claim that there isn’t enough accountability. This criticism also shows up in Third District Councilman Tim Riggenbach’s comments to the Journal Star:
Riggenbach said the council likely will ask for the group to submit minutes from its meetings or provide the city with its quarterly financial data. “We are expending taxpayers’ dollars on this, so we need to hold them accountable,” Riggenbach said. “Ultimately, the council is responsible for it.”
While it’s not quarterly, most non-profit agencies have to complete IRS form 990, which is open for public inspection through services such as GuideStar. Form 990 lists the officers, financial information, and the mission statement of the organization. I wondered if the East Bluff NHS had been completing and submitting these forms, which would indicate whether it’s being as accountable as other non-profit ventures. They have. The most recent form posted is for the 2007 tax year, which was filed in November 2008.
Whether there needs to be more accountability is debatable, but it does appear that they’re doing everything they’re legally required to do at this time. The City can attach whatever legal strings they want to the grant; in fact, they could make it so unpalatable that the EBNHS decides not to take it and pursue private funding instead, such as through NeighborWorks.
But all this controversy is a mystery to Rev. Stone. He points out that the EBNHS has done next to nothing the last couple of years and hardly any residents have attended the heretofore open meetings. Yet he didn’t hear any complaints about the lack of progress. Why all the criticism now that they are moving forward to improve the neighborhood? Why would the residents want to stop the City from reinvesting in the East Bluff? And why haven’t any of the critics contacted him to discuss their concerns?
It sounds to me like George Jacob has the right solution:
At-large City Councilman George Jacob said all parties involved in the issue need to come together and talk.
“I think it would be an idea for the groups to get together and air out their concerns and see if there is a constructive way we can resolve people’s concerns,” he said.
